The Charlie Kirk Show - Charlie's Global Fight for Free Speech with Dr. James Orr

Episode Date: September 24, 2025

Charlie's death wasn't just a tragedy in America. Christians and national patriots all around the world are mourning the loss of a man who has become a global icon to free speech and courage. Charlie's friend Dr. James Orr of Cambridge talks about the reaction in Britain, a country Charlie badly wanted to save, and they dive into the free speech debates that have erupted around the world. Tom Homan updates on a new left-wing terror attack against ICE.Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I don't know. ...he... ...hean... ...and... everybody welcome to the charlie kirk show this is andrew colvette executive producer this show and that empty chair reminds us of charlie's legacy his memory and the fact that police political violence took his life and assassination did. And this morning we awoke to more news of political violence targeted at ICE in Texas. And to start off the show, and we had a whole show plan, but I thought it was important that we do this. Simply it hits very close to home for this

team, I can tell you. And so I wanted to have Bordersard Tom Homan kick off the top of the show with us. So Borders R. Homan, thank you for joining us. What can you tell us about what happened in Texas? Well, this morning, a long gunman was targeting a nice facility in Dallas, Texas. It's where aliens are processed, either for removal or transfer to a facility. And again, it's a third shooting that's occurred in Texas against immigration officials. And we had a shooter show up in a Border Patrol facility and open fire trying to kill Border Patrol agents. He was killed by agents.

Then we had a group of people show up with weapons at an ICE Detention Facility in Elvralla, Texas, and tried to kill ICE agents. And they did shoot one officer, a local police officer, who was also responding to the scene. And now we have this today where a lone government stood at Perch and opened up on ice during a transportation transfer. And we know we have police two dead, and officers are uninjured. And it later was announced by Cash Patel that one of the bullets had an anti-ice slogan on the bullet. So this was clearly a targeted attack against ICE. Well, Borders R, I just know that Charlie, this is his show. He was such a supporter of yours and was worried for our brave men and women in law enforcement

that were doing what the voters had voted for very, very clearly to remove illegal aliens. from this country. And we've seen these stats that the targetings are on the increase, that assaults against ICE officers. Are we still seeing a ramp up? I mean, this instance is awful. Thank God no law enforcement were harmed or injured, but our prayers are with the families of the detainees that have lost their lives. But are we seeing this continue to ramp up across the country? Are we still seeing it go up? Are we seeing any calming down of the violence and the attacks against ICE officers? First of all, you're right.

I've had, I had many discussions with Charlie, and he always ended the discussion to be safe, and that ICE officers should be safe. Because the rhetoric has continued to increase. Assault on ICE officers are up over 1,000 percent, and know that rhetoric has stopped. And I said months ago, months ago, that the hateful rhetoric didn't decrease.

It's going to end in bloodshed. Someone's going to die. And, of course, I was called a fearmonger. And the left says I was making irresponsible comments. Unfortunately, I was right. And just this past weekend, we saw protests turned criminal in Chicago and in Boston. I mean, in Chicago, the ice facility is under attack. Portland, in Portland, Oregon, the ice facility there has been under attack for months.

So, you know, no, it hasn't slowed down. Either has the hateful rhetoric from some up on hell, some are congressional representatives. and other people who are in a position where that small fraction, I would say, on the left. Not everybody on the left is a bad person. Most of them, you know, aren't. But there's that fraction that listens to this rhetoric and they feel empowered to take action against ICE.

If you got a member of Congress comparing ICE to the secret police, which is a direct affiliation with the Nazis, or calling straight out Nazis to terrorists, or Governor Newsom just recently said the secret police, I mean, he just passed legislation about secret police. I mean, bottom line is that rhetoric is causing some of this violence. And I've been calling for people who stop the hateful rhetoric

because it's more are going to be hurt. And in that fact, when we talked about the person that was shot at the Elvrova City, and we talked about the gunman that was killed at a border patrol facility, I said at that time, there's going to be more if the rhetoric doesn't stop. I've seen this game before. I've seen this story before, and I just hate to see it right now. I hope, you know,

between what happened to our officers across the country, what happened to Charlie and what's happened today, I mean, you know, at what point do people just, you know, stop the hate. You can disagree what ICE does, but taking those sort of actions, it's just, it's unbelievable, there's no excuse for it. I want to show you a graphic.

I'm going to put up a graphic. It's basically who, Which groups justify violence based on age and political affiliation? If you could put up 141, this is the question, is it ever justified for citizens to resort to violence in order to achieve political goals? And this is the percentage responding yes. And you can see there, Tom, at 18 to 39-year-old liberal progressives, that's 30 percent believe that sometimes violence is just. justified to achieve a political goal. And I believe, you know, that matches with what happened to Charlie. I don't know the, you know, the age of this particular shooter in Texas, but we are

seeing an alarming rise. And by the way, it's worth noting conservatives 18 to 39 are the most peaceful node on there besides moderates over 60. So we're doing our part on the right to quell the violence, to quell the rhetoric, to say, lean into Jesus, do not give into hate, forgive your enemies. We have to find a solution here. And yet that one node, you can see it, it sticks out like a sore thumb there, Tom, 18 to 39, 30 percent of them believes violence can be justified. Your thoughts? Well, it's not the country I grew up in. I mean, you never heard of this. When I went to college, you never heard of kind of this. It's justification for violence ever. I really think many of the colleges have failed us, you know, and also think that the negative

publicity being pushed by 90% of the media, 90% in the media, constantly attacked this administration and the work we're doing. And I've said it before. I think there's groups out there that hate President Trump more than they love their communities or more than they, you know, have any common sense. There's no reason for it. I mean, it's just, it's out of control, and you're right. The last four years on the Biden administration,

everybody was angry about the border. Everybody was angry about what the number of Americans dying from fentanyl, the vast increase in sex trafficking, the cartels having placement in this country, killing millions of Americans with poison. You didn't see that counter-protests that turned criminal. So it's mainly on one side. And again, I'm hoping today,

at top of everything that's happened. in the last few months. Let's stop the hate. Let's have a meaningful debate, which Charlie was all supportive. Let's have a debate about the issues. Let's get back to talking rather than putting bulletin and firearm. Tom, I want to make this personal. About one minute remaining, I know that this kind of rhetoric has directly impacted your

life and your family. Whatever details you can share, I want the audience to know what the real impact is for real people like yourself. One minute. I have a 24-7 security detail because of the threats against me. I don't live with my family because I don't want them around danger as much as I can. So, you know, it's tough, but I'm not going away. I'm not shutting up. I'm going to continue fighting to make this country greater green.

President Trump made a promise to American people. He brought me to help them, and I promised to make America safe again. And we're going to continue working to remove the war. Worst to the worst, illegal animismous country to make our community safer. Hard stop. Well, God bless you, sir. Thank you for joining the show. I thought it was important to lead with that.

And on behalf of a grateful nation, Tom, thank you for your service. Thank you for your courage. Thank you for your voice. And thank you for the results because this is what the American people voted for. And we will not be deterred. The truth will be the truth. And we cannot be cowed by these vigilantes. And we've got to do something about it.

But we will not be cowed. I'm home, and thank you so much, Borders are, for the Trump administration. Thank you, sir. I am joined by Blake Neff, one of the producers, as well as the great Dr. James Orr. An honor to have you, Doctor, on the show. I'm candidly of all the conversations I've had, and we've had some amazing guests and some amazing conversations over the last couple of weeks. this is probably the one I'm most excited about because of the way that you and I got to meet. Charlie was there.

You met Charlie when he went to Cambridge and Oxford, Oxbridge, as you guys, I guess call the grouping. But we then spent a weekend together in Aspen and we shared some just truly amazing moments. And you also sat down with Charlie for an interview, which will now sort of, in a haunting way, but in a beautiful way, because I know how much Charlie loved you, your interview with Charlie on that Aspen trip was actually the last episode that went on the Charlie Kirk Show broadcast before he was assassinated. So it's a weird thing, I'm sure, to hear that from me. It's weird for me to say it out loud, but it's true.

And I just knew Charlie so well that, again, it's sort of fitting because you were like this academic, ideological, spiritual, just shining light for Charlie, so much so that I was jealous when we got back from Aspen. Charlie looked at you and he was like, can you hang out with me on Sunday and just like be my professor for a day? And as far as I know, you guys hung out on Sunday and you talked about the classics. and about the canon of Western civilization. And I love that because I know that that was basically the happiest you would ever see Charlie Kirk. So thank you so much for giving him that day, so close to the end, and for just being somebody that he deeply, deeply loved and appreciated. Well, Andrew, thank you.

It's just so good to be with you, despite the circumstances. And gosh, what a surreal few days it's been. What an extraordinary achievement you. you guys pulled off. I was so thrilled to have been able to make it to the stadium on Sunday for that extraordinary day. And just so many thoughts going through my mind. But, you know, I've been teaching undergraduates, graduate students at Oxford and Cambridge on and off for 15, 16 years. And I can say, you know, hand on heart, I had never come across a young person with that thirst for knowledge, that thirst for intellectual formation, spiritual wisdom. You know,

I spent weeks trying to get him to call me James, but it was always Dr. Orr. It was always this sort of extraordinary respect and humility that he had. And you're right, that last afternoon, just before I was getting off to the airport, I think that morning a car was supposed to pick me up to take me to his apartment,

and Mikey, Charlie's chief of staff, rang me and said, I've cancelled the car. I said, how am I going to get to Charlie's apartment? He said, no, no, no, he wants to. come and pick you up from the hotel so that he can have more time with you and uh you know we had we had a day together we had a wonderful morning and uh went into his apartment and yeah two three hours of just philosophy just grilling me on it's with that big big whiteboard he wanted me to you know map out moral philosophy helped he was just prepping preping prepping what if i get this

question what if i get that question it was just extraordinary and uh absorbing it all taking notes grilling me yes i understand that point but how do i make it accessible and there was always the sense of this the audience that he wanted to reach and and and not and not be in conflict with not to not to not to sort of uh dunk on them at all but to but to but to inform them to educate them to to to to enlighten them just extraordinary and then got back to london i'm getting texts from him bible verses from him and then a text on oh that that that that lecture by Jean-Paul Sartre you mentioned on existentialism in 1946. Can you send me a copy? And can you explain to me that point? Okay, let's do it. I did that. And then on the first, my last text from him

was on the 1st of September saying, can you send me a lecture on natural law? And God help me, I never got back to him. It was, yeah, it was, it was a busy week. And I thought, I've got to sit down and do this properly. And then, you know, by the time things had calmed down. it had happened and yeah I never met anyone like him and you know you meet people you know that there's just you're going to be friends for for years and years and years and you're going to learn so much from each other and we had we had great plans he was so excited about Britain he loved it so much was staring out this photo of Winston Churchill and was so excited about what was happening on the right in in Britain and wanted to know exactly what all the kind of all the polling dynamics were and

how he could help extraordinary you were a really important bridge for him and he was an anglophile begrudgingly but he he genuinely was i don't think that many brits maybe appreciated that because he came into england and really lit up the leadership lit up the current zeitgeist in the country but it has become clear to me that charlie and i've said this a bunch of times and i'm just going to say it again, for the sake of this conversation, that Charlie was a modern prophet. And he was going around campuses, this country, calling our leaders to repent, calling our citizens to repent, to remember themselves. And he went straight into the belly of the beast in Oxbridge and called on Brits to remember themselves. Stand up, man. Put your shoulders back. Remember who you are. You're a great people.

like wake up and just like they do with profits not only is charlie dead but in england they rejected him tell me about your perspective on that well i i think it was it i think it was jordan peterson who first connected us about a year ago i think and so he was charlie had been on my radar for a while we had a lot of mutual friends but he was very excited about his trip to england and started peppering me with texts and requests like what will the audience be like what are the kinds of questions that i should be thinking about what are the topics you know he was just prepping prepping prepping and um he so he came to cambridge i went to to the cambridge union to just give him some moral support uh with my with my son and uh half a dozen students and we were the only one

supporting i mean my goodness it was and blake and blake you were there of course and the team you and you and you and the team were there and uh and it was it was impressive i mean I mean, it was, he was combative, he was quick, he was, I don't think anyone, any of those students. And they were bright students. I was quite, you know, in a funny way, proud of those students. I mean, they were, you know, off the cliff progressive on a whole lot of, on all the issues. But I thought they, they stood their ground well. And then we went for this meal afterwards and just, again, two, three hours of just talking and talking stats.

And I got a call from one of the, this big media platform, GB News, just desperate to get. half an hour of Charlie's time, but it was down in London. It was just awkward to get to. I said, look, I know this is difficult, but if you could just, you know, would you consider this? And he said, absolutely, no problem. And you managed to fit it into that very tight schedule. That was with Ben. Yes, that's right, with Ben. That clip went viral. It was a good thing he fitted in. It's great. He did it. And it was much appreciated. And so, you know, I think it was, it was great. And I sat in that debating chamber and thought, this is a proper debate.

you know this is what this place was designed for and and this is really puncturing the group think in a way that is is pretty rare these days on elite campuses on both sides of the atlantic and uh it was we're fortunate to have him and uh images and there we've got some we got some images there yeah yeah the bouncy britt yeah oh bless him yeah he he uh that was charlie found that's so funny we look because he looks like a harry potter figure like characters ass you know that's it he was uh Yeah, quick on his feet, just jumping up and down. And yeah, amazing. I remember that so well.

And it was just great to see. And as I said, it punctured the group think. And, you know, I've said this before, the trouble with group think is that wrong thing becomes evil think. You know, when there's just this tiny minority opinion, then it just becomes subversive. It becomes something that is threatening. It's so easy to demonize. and what we saw on both those debates was Charlie's ability to put across cases and positions in a winsome, civil, respectful way.

And, you know, I think the assassination has just, it's triggered off a whole lot of very interesting debates on the free speech side of things, of course, and Charlie's great free speech warrior. We've been fighting a lot on free speech battles and university campuses. and but you know if this is if this is how it ends if one side is so quick to resort in the end of lawfare or warfare or violence what do we do where does that leave liberalism where does where does that leave before we move on i don't you know we've seen the reaction around the world but those Cambridge students who came out to support charlie last may how how they reacted to this well they've i tell you they've been in they've been in pieces they've they've it's been very upsetting for them and my son in particular who've

just worship Charlie and Charlie recorded a little video from actually when I was here at the offices a month ago. It's been very hard and even those who didn't know them at all. I mean we gathered the two days after it happened Friday, it was the Friday evening outside Downing Street a pretty spontaneous vigil, thousands and thousands of people around the center top and Whitehall

just so moving. It's this very kind of, very unusual to see that in London. It just sort of, it was, there was a sense of a great, great kind of peace and love. And you welcome Charlie to the UK. You helped get these debates set up for Charlie, which would be one of his last big trips. And it's hard to think about that.

He loved that trip. He loved meeting you. You are so dear to him. And I know that you guys had great plans to keep learning from each other. And you are yourself becoming, sort of known politically in the UK, and I know that you enter into that with fear and trembling and a great weight on your shoulders. And we can get into that a little bit later. But I love what we're talking about. You were witnessing the immediate aftermath of the assassination,

and there was huge vigils throughout the UK. And I said something that before that profits are rejected. That is sort of the model. And he was a prophet taking the truth around the world, even to the UK, but there was a remnant that heard what he said. And then you had Tommy Robinson lead this huge march. Elon Musk called in. They talked about Charlie. I saw so many people with Charlie's picture and they were chanting Charlie, Charlie. It was really beautiful for me to see this outpouring of love for Charlie, even across the pond. What was that like? Take us into that moment. Yes, well, I didn't go on that much, but I know that over the summer there was a lot of anxiety in the press within the establishment about it, and I remember talking to Charlie about it

last month, and, you know, there were just sort of, you know, premonition people thinking that this is going to end violently. It was, it was, it was demonized. And I think, you know, one silver lining you might say is that I think the march from what I can tell was broadly peaceful. I mean, there were about 100,000 people marching through the streets and I think there are something like 25 arrests which I think, you know, you compare it to similar kinds of events. It's not out of the ordinary at all. And it was from what I could tell from just looking at the footage, it was peaceful. And I'm sure that that sense of it being a vigil for Charlie, it being a sort of witness, to Charlie. As you say, his face was all over, you know, posters everywhere of him.

And I think that would have had a calming effect on the march. And I think, you know, there was a great atmosphere from what I could tell. It was broadly demonized in the mainstream media afterwards, as far as I could tell. But I think it went off a lot better than many people were worrying about over the summer. Yeah. Well, and I, to the point about violence, and I know that that there's an establishment press that is even more entrenched in the UK than there is in the U.S. And they still have more power to sort of set narratives and things. And so that's certainly something that needs to be addressed in the U.K.

But the point is, you had all these people that have a lot of reason to be upset about things, but they are largely peaceful. And that's the actual truth. The actual truth is that it was sort of beautiful and really respectful. And we got a note yesterday. I can't divulge who this is from. but this note was passed along. So just got off the phone with a friend,

won't say the name, who is SWAT and was tasked with working the memorial for Charlie here in Glendale, Arizona. He said they were all briefed to 100% expect something major to happen. And the whole event came and went without one arrest between Peoria, Mesa, Glendale, and Phoenix, PD, all assisting. A complete anomaly for an event even 10% this size. Even the Super Bowl would have someone get drunk and, like, punch a guy. Yeah.

They didn't have one arrest. And the power of prayer, you know, I keep saying this over and over again. The first time of my life that I can feel the prayers of strangers. Just sustaining this whole team through turning point, turning point action, the Charlie Kirk show. You can feel it, and you could feel the prayers inside the memorial. And you were there. You actually made it back, which is a whole other saga, which is incredible. And I think such a honor, Charlie would have been just.

so honored to know what you went through in order to get like plane strays and automobiles for you in that trip. But I want to do, I do want to stay on the UK. Do you think, you know, a lot of people are talking about this as a revival moment in the U.S. A lot of people are talking about this is the turning point. This is a politically galvanizing moment. Do you feel like this is having at least some sort of the same effect in the UK? It's had extraordinary reverberations all across Europe, I think, and definitely, definitely in Britain, I'm having conversations with people about, about faith, about family, about freedom, about loving your country, that I simply, you know, was just very, very difficult to have before, and he's unleashed something extraordinary.

A lot of people didn't really know who Charlie was, I think, in Britain. It was only, you know, when the news broke, people started. know, you know, the framing, I think even on the BBC, the BBC to start with, at least was saying this is a far-right character. Some of the press were just, we're demonising him, but very quickly that shifted, and it was just obvious. He was, you couldn't mistake it. He was an extraordinary husband, loving father, civil, respectful,

in his engagement with young people. And that came across very, very quickly. And so it's been remarkable, the kind of conversations that have, opened up. And I think his legacy is going to be a remarkable one. I think, you know, we're having these big debates in Britain at the moment around exactly these kinds of issues and all of those, all of those great sort of four cornerstones, I think, of, you know, the faith, family, flag and freedom that would just celebrate in that extraordinary way in the stadium on Sunday. And it's very difficult still in Britain to have conversations around those. But something,

things shifted and I'm sure that Charlie's legacy will be to catalyze that and to put those issues back on the table and they're going to be right, you know, front and center of the British political landscape over the next five years. I just want to make sure you're getting it

because you and James, you were in England with James, so I just want to make sure I'm giving you. Blake has views on what's happening over there. Of course. You know, before we move on too far from the debate, I know this is I followed this. You've definitely followed it, but I don't know that a lot of people in the U.S. know about this, that one of the Oxford

Union people that Charlie met when he debated there, he posted something about Charlie's death that was pretty bad, and there's been a backlash to that. Yeah, absolutely. So the incoming president of the Oxford Union who debated Charlie back in May, I think said something. I can't remember the words. He said, yes. He said, yes. He, so president, to like George Aberronier who there is an image of them debating I'll get that loaded to our team so they can put this up

get that ASAP guys so he posted he debated chart he was one of the people who debated him he was actually really respected to sell he shared multiple celebratory remarks about the shooting on WhatsApp according to the Oxford student one message said Charlie Kirk

got shot let's effing go and the other said scoreboard FN I I don't know what that means. I think Ryan would probably be able to tell me what that means. But basically, I mean, it's like basically put a point on the board

because we took one down. And you can probably tell us more about what happens. Has he been punished for this? So there was a big debate that kind of blew up afterwards. I, to be honest, I was so upset at the time. I was just trying,

I was tuning out of the negative reactions and I was trying not to dwell on it too much. But I was getting a lot of texts from people who were signing a letter of, effectively a letter of no confidence, and I think the threshold is, I think it's something like 150, so if you were an officer of the Oxford Union in the past, you could, you could force a resignation. I'm not, I think they've hit about 70 signatures and we are, I mean, it's a very damning, yeah, I mean, I think it's, it's touched a nerve because, you know,

the worry is, is this, you know, is this legitimate speech? Is this, is this, is this, is this, Is this, he was, you know, should he be, should he be expelled for this? Should he be rusticated? Okay, but hold on. That, this is one of these stupid academic cul-de-sacs that people that are, you know, educated but beyond their intelligence get themselves into. And this is like, I'm sorry, Charlie Kirk was murdered, assassinated. Do you think it's okay that Martin Luther King or JFK or Lincoln or whoever was assassinated? Do we think that this is okay?

Do we think political violence? Okay, listen, I understand. of some fringe character on some discord chat thinks that it's, you know, is gleeful. But that is, that person does not represent Cambridge or Oxford that is supposed to be a premier institution. I'm calling, I hope this gets clipped. I am calling on you sane, left-wing students that are still, you know, advocates for civilization to sign that petition, that letter, whatever it is. Get it to 150. That is not okay. Even if you disagree with Charlie. Charlie was a fundamentally good and decent, loving husband and father who believed in the

building blocks of Western civilization. He did not deserve this. And for somebody to represent your school that would celebrate his death is shocking that you cannot get 150 people to put their name to disciplining or at least, or whatever. I don't even know what this, but the fact that that can go unchecked is abysmal. It is such an indictment of the moral character and the lack of moral clarity that exists at the UK's elite institutions. I just have to say that. Get it over 150. Absolutely right. You know, language like that, it lays down the enabling conditions for violence. It dehumanizes conservatives, that if you are a conservative, you're less than human, you don't deserve to live. And by the way, if you, if somebody kills you, you had it coming.

To be clear, the unanimous reaction on left and right in Britain was one of condemnation and anger. Good. And so just... Apparently not unanimous. But, yeah, why are there not 150 signatures? When somebody actually has to put their name to it, they get weak in the knees. Yeah. What is there to be weak in the knees about political assassinations? No, I couldn't agree more.

I mean, two days later, I remember we were... I was having lunch with Nigel, Nigel Farage, and people, there's this group war. walked out and screamed fascist at us and I just thought to myself you know and he gets that all the time of course but I just thought to myself just you know Charlie's blood had barely run cold and still they would have known exactly what had happened they would have known the kind of rhetoric and the demonizing that can lay down as it were the conditions for uh for for for violence on the left and I just you know I don't see I don't see how we come out of this you know I I don't see what solutions liberalism has.

You know, I didn't mention this, but it's worth mentioning that that go up and go ahead and put up 141 again. You can do it on the screen. And this is this poll about political violence being justified, 141. And you look at the date that this was conducted, September 12th through September 15th, Charlie was murdered on the 10th. This is a poll conducted after the assassination of Charlie Kirk. and 30% of young liberals still believe that. That is extraordinary. That'll make, yeah, that should, that should be a sobering, sobering stat for anybody.

Time is flying with you, by the way, Dr. James Orr. It's truly amazing. We have actually Charlie's debate with the, it's coming. I don't know that we have it yet, with the new incoming president. Yes. so we'll play that before this segment ends but I mean give us

I don't know you're you're just sum it all up Charlie England the UK free speech wherever you want to take this because we have actually we're just discussing in the break all these other things we're going to get to but I think we need to put a capstone on this hour I once made the mistake of asking

Charlie what part of the motherland he he was from his family was from he said my surname's Kirk where do you think I'm from I said, yeah, okay, right. He's a, so he's proud of his Scottish heritage. He loved Britain and he had this sort of, you know, I think sometimes in our country,

we get a sense of a note of almost kind of a smug contempt from America's to what's going on over here, but it's just not true. And I think Charlie sort of personified that. Charlie was somebody who he loved the country. He was sort of heartbroken at what he saw was. happening to it, the fact that it was just losing, you know, that it was no longer the cradle of those founding values that he believed made America great, that gave America its DNA. And, you know, he was so passionate about, about us. And not just, you know, not just recently. I mean, I can't

remember when he set up Turning Point in UK. He must have been 2017, 2018. I don't know if he's done that and did that in any other country. I mean, he had a, you know, a fierce desire to kind of connect that sort of Anglo-American access and I think it's been pretty successful TPUK. They're the ones who organize that vigil outside Downing Street. They've got a good social media follow. Absolutely right. And so it's something we talked about it a lot actually last month

and how to help ramp it up and how to kind of develop this sort of, you know, a youth movement on the right in Britain. And so he was passionate about it and I think felt, you know, the rights and a little bit of chaos at the moment in some ways, I think it's kind of fruitful chaos. We talked a lot about it. There's all sorts of emerging movements. There's a lot of vitality now, I think, on the right, a lot of philosophical energy, a lot of political energy, and you're

seeing that now reflected in the polling. Do you think that reform, do you think Nigel Farage is the likely next prime minister if things hold? Yes, I do. I think he is set to be the next prime minister of the United Kingdom. One of the election is going to be held. I think the latest it could be held is August 2029. That's a long time. That's a long way. That's an eternity in politics. Was it Adam Smith who said there's a lot of ruin in a nation? Well, I just don't know how much ruin there is left in ours with the current government, certainly. But yes, I think if you were, the betting markets and the polling would suggest that the Niger is set. CIR is very unpopular. Extremely unpopular. Yes, absolutely. I think he's just this week. His approval rating sank to

below what I think Boris Johnson had at his very, you know, at the Nader. Exactly. And so it sounds better. There's a lot, you know, there's a lot of maneuverings now on the left, which is now fragmenting into the kind of the Rainbow Caucus, the Crescent Caucus, the Star, the old school, socialists. And it's, it may be that he gets, almost very likely that Stama gets unseated. I mean, we're good at ditching prime ministers.

Yeah, I was going to say, what triggers it? Well, so we're a parliamentary democracy. So what that means is you've got, you know, the party that can command a majority and command the confidence of the House of Commons is the government. And now, Starmes got a majority in the, I think, 154.

And so turkeys don't vote for Christmas, even if the turkeys really, really hate each other. And so it's very likely, very likely that the government will survive in some form till, you know, till the end of the electoral cycle. But I suspect Starm is not going to be that long. in Downing Street and one could hope so Nigel's well positioned by the way I we were going to play sweat pants bro but I actually like this better let's play

the clip from the UK of Charlie paying you quite the compliment Blake 162 Blake is like the smartest person I know we're gonna we're all plenty prepared to like that was a sorry I just had to do that for you you know Charlie Charlie was very impressed by Blake's intellect and by your memory and that was you traveling with your travel but you guys were international travel buddies at the end I mean it really it really was something I picked up on that reverence for for Blake over our dinner in Cambridge and whenever there was this kind of difficult moment difficult discussion or we needed some facts of Charlie would turn turn to his left say Blake and you'd always have the answer well it's true

you do have a weird weirdly photographic memory for history maybe it's not photographic whatever it You have a great recall. You have a great recall. Our good friends at Angel Studios, I love Angel Studios. Amazing new film this Holy Week. As I think about Charlie's life and how much of a supporter was of Angel, it's hard not to feel so grateful for what he did. He supported us in our darkest days and in our brightest hours as a company.

Jeff and I and Charlie were doing lunch together. We asked him, he said, are you at all worried about one of these kinds of? college campus, and he just said, there was so much peace in his eyes and so much peace in his heart. If that's how God takes me, then that's how I'm supposed to go. And I feel like that was a clear message that Charlie's life is a testimony to Jesus Christ, his Lord and Savior. And his relationship with him was the most important thing that he would want the world to remember about his legacy. Man, are we grateful to have gotten to be a little connection in the multitude of connections that he made throughout his life because it was so impactful to us.

Thank you, Charlie. Love you. We miss you. We're going to continue to drive forward to good news. This is Andrew Colvitt, your executive producer. I am joined by the great British patriot, Dr. James Orr, who was interesting actually when we hung out in Aspen. there had just been this piece that came out about you calling you the mentor of jd vance and you are friends with jd we are friends with jd he actually hosted this show the monday after

september 10th and it was a great honor great tribute but you you took umbrage with that didn't you that framing of things because jd hung out he went on vacation or something and he went in the cotswolds yeah i've known him for a few years he had a trip to england over august it was supposed to be a family holiday but it just worked the whole time it turned into a media circus and he had to cut it short he did some golf up in up in scotland i think and um no yeah i took umbridge at the description this idea that i'm somehow mentor to the vice president of the united states is not true to i've learned a great deal more from him than than he's ever learned from me uh but the last time i saw him in washington must have been just a few days before it happened i think it was about a week

before it happened and i just said i look i was out in arizona and uh spent some time with Charlie and his team and it's my goodness, you know, you're in, you're in good shape for 2028. That machine is going to be, is roaring and with energy and enthusiasm. We hope he dives in. I mean, every indication you would think a vice president would be primed for that, but he's very coy about it. Yes, of course. He's being very respectful and of course we appreciate that. It's still the era of Trump and we're into that too. But yeah, tell us about your relationship with him. I think that's interesting. Well, we met, gosh, I think, yeah, few years ago, I think summer of 2019, I think it was through mutual friends. And yeah, we hit

it off. He was a private citizen at the time. I'd read Hillbilly elegy when it came out, I think in 2016, a Texan friend of mine, I think it was end of October 2016, the press to copy into my hands and said, Trump is going to win and this is why you need to read this. And I read it, loved it. So he was on my radar early on and then had the chance to meet him in 2019. We hit it off. We talked a lot and not actually very much about politics at all, although, you know, we did a lot of philosophy. He talked about, talked about faith, talked about theology. And I thought, gosh, this guy is promising.

He could be a congressman one day. Congressman. Looks like he's got a bright future. Yeah, everybody, by the way, you know, I usually don't share numbers, but him hosting Charlie's show, and I hope people understand there's a difference between a million views on YouTube and a different, and a million downloads of a podcast. I've never seen a podcast.

Let's just say it's true. It's our most downloaded podcast episode. It's the most downloaded podcast episode. And I will just say that ever of all time. And J.D. does such a magnificent job. And I was thinking about that this morning, what he said on his episode when he hosted. He said, yes, we want unity, but first we have to have truth. And I think that is really relevant to something that's happening in our own news cycle right now.

And the truth is, and I think we're going to discuss both this hour about this both sidesism. It's a lie. But also Jimmy Kimmel said that, you know, he essentially inferred, stated, I think very clearly, that the shooter came from MAGA. And that really upset me. And I'll explain why. Because if you can lie about something so fundamental where this, you know, this individual had a trans boyfriend or, whatever however you're supposed to say it i think that's probably the right way to say that that he was into all this weird stuff he was writing all of all of these notes on these

these bullet casings and things like that and his own parents were worried about his radicalism and then to go on the air and say no actually it was from maga maga killed him what that means to me is that you can lie with impunity that there is a machinery in place that will defend you your life is not important that i'm i'm free to desecrate your memory because conservatives bad and what you had it coming

and more should you know it's basically a license to say we're going to support you guys if you guys go do this stuff out in the real world and that's not okay and so we have clips Blake I don't know which clip it is

the Jimmy Kimmel in response to the backlash you receive I yeah uh we can just play one of these I mean it doesn't matter 132 I don't think what I have

to say it's going to make much of a difference. If you like me, you like me. If you don't, you don't. I have no illusions about changing anyone's mind. But I do want to make something clear because it's important to me as a human. And that is, you understand that it was never my intention to make light of the murder of a young man. I don't think there's anything funny about it. I posted a message on Instagram on the day he was killed, sending love to his family and asking for compassion. And I meant it. I still do. Nor was it my attention to blame any specific group for the actions of what it was obviously a deeply disturbed individual. That was really the opposite of the point I was trying to make. But I understand that to some that felt either ill-timed or unclear or maybe

both. And for those who think I did point a finger, I get why you're upset. If the situation was reversed, there was a good chance I'd have felt the same way. So what I'm lacking there is that I'm sorry. I lied. I misrepresented the nature of who the shooter was. I'm sorry. I will do better. My sincerest apologies to Erica Kirk and to the Kirk family. And James, you're a Christian. Explain the difference between what he did, sort of parsing words, never kind of owning it. It was sort of, I'm sorry if you were offended. Explain what a Christian, what Christian contrition looks like, what it looks like in scripture, historically what it means and what that was lacking. Yeah, I mean, look, I could hear some contrition in his voice as clearly emotional,

whether the emotions has been driven by what had happened to him. You know, the fact that his career looked like it was on the precipice. I don't know. I mean, I think, you know, true contrition expresses itself in actions, and, you know, I detected that of a hint of a politician's apology there, just deeply, deeply, so. sorry that that offense has been caused. But, you know, repentance, you know, the Greek, the New Testament is metanoia, which means a complete transformation of one's mind, of one's intellect, one's understanding, one's heart.

And, you know, the Latin translation, I think, is Pinetamini, which is kind of not just repentance, but due penance, and there's a lot of debate about that in the Reformation, about, you know, his sort of repentance is something not just of the heart, but you've got to do it. you've got to do stuff that shows that there's kind of the outward working, the outward expression of inner contrition within one's heart. And I don't know, look, I don't have a window into men's souls. I don't have a window into Jimmy Kimmel's soul.

I just hope that this incident, this whole sorry saga has made the left, has made the kind of American liberals think a lot harder about the language that they're using. And just being aware that, you know, spinning the, kind of conspiracy theories that are completely fact-free, as it seems to be the case with this extraordinary charge, that the killer was motivated by, by, by, but was, was part of the MAGA movement, just simply absurd, not a shred of evidence for it. I just hope that this will give them, you know, pause for thought and it'll just slow things down. And, uh, yeah, I mean, you know, we, we just, there cannot be civil discourse if it's, you know, if one side is constantly

paying the consequences for indiscreet speech or violent rhetoric and the other side effectively gets a free pass and that seems to be what's happening not just in America but all across the landscape of Western culture Western politics yeah and I mean Blake I don't you have kind of a contrarian take here because you think this we should just sort of move on from this topic

I want the I want more well so I what's frustrated me about it is They went and due to sort of how it unfolded, we allowed it to become that like Jimmy Kimmel was this free speech martyr against like, you know, because we had Brendan Carr at the FCC. He stepped out. And he basically said, you better take him off the air or we're going to like investigate ABC and Disney and they're going to have to answer for all these things. And you took what it should have been, which is Jimmy Kimmer said something disgusting. And there was, there really was this big organic anger against them. And that. got tamped down, and it turned into, oh, this guy in the Trump administration is silencing Jimmy Kimmel, who is also lame and not funny, and it took something that was good, and it changed it. And it also colored, and unfortunately, what we also saw, which was the very organic anger against all the other people who said disgusting things. Yeah. Keep going with that, though, Blake. And I mean, I know there was, I will say one of the things that I noticed, and you saw this with

the Pam Bondi, I think, I think it was a misspeak on Pam Bondi. I think it was a misspeak on Pam Bondi's behalf because she kind of clarified her point after she was she was talking about incitement she meant to get to incitement she said hate speech but but I would just say there was a lot of voices that on the right that said we don't agree with the way she said that yeah that's not

that's not our and that was also frustrating that's not Charlie's POV we've had to endure now we've had to endure all this stupid nasty fake stuff on the left we're like oh the left the right doesn't care about free speech at all they want to crack down no the backlash to Bondi saying the hate speech thing was immediate it was basically

unanimous it was dial this back right now and she did thankfully but it is a similar it was a similar issue here where I think there is a huge amount of genuine backlash to what Kimmel did I think he probably would have gotten suspended in fact we got reporting from the Wall Street Journal and others that suggested he was going to be suspended at minimum even without what Carr said and I think it put the wrong color on it that there was that kind of overt threat and then the the way he was, if you go to Carr's Twitter account, he was like posting all these memes and just like bragging about what he did. And I understand the impulse. It is a way there is an element where the Trump movement made the movement more assertive, more, you know, more bragging. And we've seen it with like the ice stuff where they're like, we're deporting people. And here's a meme of this person who is also a, you know, a child predator getting deported. And it's great. And people have liked that, but you do have to be careful because we do want to make sure that this is about that, you know, Charlie, who is a martyr for free speech, a martyr for Christianity, and we don't

want that to turn into Charlie is ever considered some sort of like justification for an anti-speech crack. Charlie would reject that, by the way. Completely. He was a basically a free speech absolutist. I mean, I think, I say basically because, you know, I'm just hedging in my mind, maybe some sort of incitement he would draw a line at but you know he believed in ugly speech he believed in vile speech he believed in the freedom to say evil things i mean that does cross the line into incitement which is illegal when you're calling for violence for somebody but i mean i struggle with asking the question you know when we think about some of these ugly reactions people celebrating you think about the oxford kid sweatpants sweatpants bro you know where you're

celebrating the murder of somebody is that not incitement in a in a certain way? I mean, I think the spirit is certainly the same. Legally, the barrier, you know, is different. So one of the things that makes American free speech so exceptional, even compared to other Western nations, is we have kind of the

Brandenburg standard for speech. It's a Supreme Court case. And it's basically like, it is in fact only incitement if you are directly calling for some criminal act and like in a specific way. So if someone were to say, someone should go to the Utah

Valley event and shoot Charlie Kirk, that is incitement. But even saying someone should shoot Charlie Kirk isn't by itself. And, you know, that leads, that enables a lot of ugly speech. As Charlie himself said, I think he has a tweet where he says, like, there is ugly speech, there is deranged speech, but there is not hate speech. And the thing with incitement, what's good about that strict standard is that gives us so, it means that an authoritarian government, like the Biden administration, has so little ground to come out and say, And the left loves to do this, where, oh, this thing you said, you know, that was actually inciting hate against migrants. That was inciting hate against trans people.

That was inciting hate against minorities just because you say, oh, I don't want more immigration. And certainly Dr. Orr can tell us all about how that's been abused in the U.K. That's where we're going next. Which they'll claim, they'll claim that's a free speech country. But it's clearly not anymore. But this is the distinction. And I think it's really important for us to remain morally very clear on this. what I was trying to say was that celebrating the vicious murder of our friend is vile it's ugly it's nasty 100%

and it is in a it is from the same demonic spirit that I think somebody would you know this incitement legal so I'm talking there's two distinctions there's almost like the demonic spirit that I would call it versus the legal standard and I'm not conflating the two I'm saying so you know if you're going to if you're going to celebrate that certainly maybe you didn't a law, but you are participating in the same demonism. And I would just say, I am not fully internalized that other than to say that may you live a life so remarkable, so courageous, and so true that the demons celebrate when you die. And may your enemies, your enemies celebrate because that means you have done something. You have been so extraordinary that you live rent free in their heads and they know not they don't know anything else to do other than to say

you know thank goodness that extraordinarily effective person is off the board and and and but you know in so in the soren kirkagard's words uh that's really just the beginning when a martyr dies and so dr or charlie was a free speech absolutist and one of the themes of his trip to the uk was about this issue of free speech we've heard that in the uk it's 30 arrests are made a day for people criticizing immigration, basically. Just this sea of human, and, you know, we have a ton of immigration into this country, which is one of, you know, my pet projects, is to limit that. But we also have a country that's much larger, and it sort of can absorb the visceral feel

or the visual feel of it can absorb it a little bit differently than the U.K., which is, remind me, what are you, 60, 80 million? I can't remember. So if you have a couple million migrants come into the U.K., I mean, it's instant. very visible it's very it impacts the daily life of a lot of britons really quickly tell us about the state of free speech in your country did this 100,000 person march pushed back against that was that a theme of it explain yeah yeah sure well of course you know just go back to your earlier conversation we don't have anything like the sort of sort of you know the jurisprudence that's built up around

the first amendment over you know in over the last 100 150 years but I think up and until, you know, at the end of the last century, there was no sense that there was a kind of, you know, there were free speech problems in Britain. It's really been the last 25 years, I think, you know, intensifying of the last 10 to 15. And I don't think there's any real doubt that it is connected to the rapid demographic change at scale that we've witnessed in the last 25 years, but particularly in the last five to ten years. And what happens there, I think, is that the sort of sense of a kind of high trust society, a moral community that is, you know, basically shares the same universe of norms and standards of speech.

That kind of gets fragmented. And silos begin to open up, and there's really just a dialogue of the death between, you know, different blocks within different demographic blocks and so that's sort of that sense of being a you know in a shared enterprise is starting to kind of unravel and what happens there is the state increasingly has to police these fragile boundaries between these different these different silos and that's what we've seen in the last 10 to 15 years we've seen it under a labor government left-wing government we've seen it under the conservative government the last conservative government government brought in something called an Orwellian phrase, non-crime hate incidents, where police can

record your name, whether they accept that no crime has been committed, that you're exercising lawful free speech, but they make a note of it. It goes on your record until recently, I think that was on your, on your record forever. Now, it's just this database, the state, the Leviathan is just collecting this. That's right. The police, you know, they, they, they are. are policing tweets, not streets, and it's getting, it is getting worse. Can Nigel fix this as prime minister? Well, I think one of the central focuses, one of the kind of guiding, one of the north stars of the reform sort of philosophy and policy agenda is without question free speech.

So there's a lot of debates, I think, internally as to what that's going to look like. Isn't that just, I mean, isn't that just politics? I want fewer immigrants in my country. Yeah, so look, you're not going to get. well, you may well get a knock on the door if you say that in the wrong way online. I mean, it wouldn't surprise me. But yes, I think

that there's, you know, there's this thing about this this sort of dominant left-wing orthodoxies become this sort of, you know, become the moral universe. Yeah, it's like a puritanical, like, a purity spiral. Exactly right. So that any dissent, you know, as I said earlier, it's any wrong

thing is evil think. You know, it's something that is, you know, you've got to demonize. So it's this is old point that seen made it many it's you know on the left the idea is that you're not just wrong you're morally wrong on the right you know that maybe it's not always the case but i think generally speaking on the right we do just think that you know the left uh honestly and sincerely mistaken we don't there isn't the same rhetoric widespread rhetoric of demonizing and and and at which and a kind of name calling that okay maybe it's not direct causal incitement maybe it doesn't

meek the Brandenberg standard, but it's certainly, I think, shifting the conditions. It's, it's laying down the enabling conditions for violence. If you call somebody, you know, public figure, Hitler, fascist, often enough, then you shouldn't be surprising that, uh, that crazy people will do violence against them. It's one of the most frustrating things where we've had the left is certainly pushed in the last couple weeks to try to argue, actually like there's more right wing violence than left. And one, it's false and we'll get into that and the rest of the show. But I'm just I'm looking at these tweets. Matt Iglesias, that like fat guy from Vox, he was like, people remind themselves of things he said a while ago. I'll read this one quick and we can go

back into it. But he said it was when Tucker Carlson got harassed at his home in like 2017 or 2018. People were trying to like kick in his door basically and like terrorizing his house. And he was saying, I'll read the full tweets later. But he was basically saying, this is a good thing. Like you should do this to right wing people. And now he's going to come out and be like, oh, I oppose violence against the right. No, you just are trying to read the wins, Matt. Dehumanization. Otherization.

Yeah, I mean, it is this theme where, and this is why I keep harping on this Kimmel Apology, it is not contrition unless you take full accountability. And I remember Tucker actually said this once to me, because you just brought up Tucker. Tucker said that he was taught at a very early age that your, that your apology must be earnest and very, very contrite. And he said he's practiced this discipline his whole life. When he's sorry, he's like really sorry and he'll look you in your eyes and he'll say, I'm so, so sorry.

I'm so sorry for what I've done. And that there is something powerful that I think that unleashes in the human spirit. And what that also does is it confers the humanity of the person that you've wronged. it says, you are worthy of me swallowing this and owning it and being humble to it because you are worth it. And when you refuse to do that, you're essentially communicating, you're not worth it. I don't believe in your inherent value. And, you know, so what? I'm going to just move on because I can. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely right. And I think, yeah, we have lost that sense of, you know, moral sincerity, the importance of, of contrition, and apologies just so quickly just become, you know,

defensive statements, you know. I have a question for you. It's a bit of a, you handle it as you must. You are treading, I know you sort of have your hand in many pies right now. So can the West be saved without Christianity? Well, the West is built out of Christianity, not only Christianity, not only Christian, but Christianity is the life force that fuses the Hellenic and the Hebraic engine rooms of Western civilization. It also and also harnesses the sort of power of Roman civilization.

And so, you know, to ask, can the West survive without Christianity is to say, well, you know, the West just is. That is its DNA. And all of our moral reflexes, even our atheism. even our moral indignation against the wrongs of institutional religion is driven by a Christian impulse. The reason we know what bad is is because we've been told what good is, right? And yes, there is sort of a natural law, I think, baked into all of us, right? But we are, as a civilization, increasingly unable to get very obvious moral truths, unanimity around them.

Charlie Kirk was brutally murdered and assassinated. we didn't have unanimity that that was a bad thing and that is terrifying men are not women that is a basic human truth lived experience teaches us this we can't get unanimity on that now i think we're probably like 90-10 on that at this issue at this point but can we remember the straight line as charlie would say versus the crooked line without a moral judge over all of us, something that we all ascribe to, because that was what built the West. You're talking about the engine

room. This is from which all of our values flow, all of our morals, our laws, our politics have historically all flowed from a center point that, and his name is Jesus. And so I'm like Anglicans, you know, I don't even get me

started on Anglican. I don't, I think you said in your quote, you're hanging on by your knuckles or something, by your fingernails. You're still in an Anglican. man. You're still a good Brit. But, you know, my hope is that this galvanizing moment, even in the UK and throughout Europe, is going to restore this sense of moral centeredness. And that's what Charlie would want. And you saw that outpouring at the memorial. It was almost like revival means that, yes, it's new converts, but it's also old converts or cultural Christians that are saying,

I want to get more into this. I want to embrace these ideas. I hope we see that in the UK. And there are signs. There are signs. I mean, I, I saw just about a month ago, I talked about it with Charlie's, some data that suggested in Britain, 18 to 35-year-olds, you're seeing a tripling of belief in God over the last five years. You're seeing massive spikes in Bible sales. Now, it's from a low, you know, from a low base. And, you know, religious adherence and revival is notoriously difficult to capture. But something I think is staring, yes. There was a tweet the other day where I think it was, it was Michael Tracy, who's done stuff. stuff we like, but he was reacting to the rally where he's like, they're saying there's a spiritual

revival, but how do you measure a spiritual revival? Well, here's what I would say is that Christians are called to be salt and light. We are the preservers of society. We preserve the truth. And I don't think we need to have all of us, or the whole culture buy in, to preserve the food, the good, the nourishment for society. So something to keep in mind. And what is your official professorial title. They're always so long. Yeah, so we've actually switched to the American system now. We used to have nice old kind of Dickensian names like junior lecturer, senior lecturer, reader. The reader was baffling. If you were basically one-off from a professor, you were a reader, which, well, in the end, Oxford and then Cambridge decided that this was

just too confusing. Like a reader, when you're one-off, you know, just one-off a professor, it makes it sound like you just sit in the library and that's all you do. So I'm an associate professor. I'm not a professor, so I'm one off a one of a full professor. And what is my title? Associate Professor of Philosophy of Religion. And so philosophy of religion is my area, but I, you know, that covers

a very wide range of different topics. There's a lot of moral philosophy, what we've been talking about just now, political philosophy, philosophical theology. In fact, one of the things, one of the reasons I was always, you know, coming over to Arizona was to record, to film some a series for Peterson Academy, one on philosophy of religion, one on

philosophy of mind, consciousness, AI, the soul and those kinds of questions. And I'm doing, the third one is an introduction to Aristotle

from logic to life. Wow. So, so quick plug there. And yeah, no, he was so hungry for all of that.

Wanted to know, just wouldn't stop, you know, asking me for things, you know, lecture notes. And, you know, I hope I,

I hope I sort of did him proud with my responses. And you could just, just see how seriously he was taking the tool. as it was coming up. In fact, I think he said,

we were putting plans in place for me to go with him to the University of Missouri, I think, on the 29th, it was on the 29th of September. And he said, you know, that's going to be the tough one. You know, that's where it's,

it's risky. Well, that was Ferguson. Yeah. He said, that's the one that's going to be the most dangerous. I said, well, I hope you got a lot of good security. He said, yeah, it's all sort of,

don't worry about it, but, you know. By the way, can I make a point of that just in defense of our security team? People need to understand that they do not have, jurisdiction on the rooftops or the surrounding area their only jurisdiction on a campus is Charlie's physical proximity and they were coordinating with local PD and campus PD to make sure all of those venues but ultimately we don't

have counter-snipers we don't have the secret service right well exactly but in many campus PDs do not have drone programs which is a big problem I'm actually working on that because it's something they should all have it should be mandated by some sort of law. And so anyways, I just, in quick defense of the security, they're only allowed to protect his immediate vicinity. They have to rely on PD to secure the larger perimeter. So anyways, our, our team, I said salt and light.

And they just like, they're like, here's Charlie on talking about salt and light. So why not? It's either 168 or 103. Play the clip. Jesus called us to be salt and light. What does salt and light have in common? They change the environments they come in contact with. They don't conform.

They don't affirm. They transform what they come in contact with. My question for you, are you transforming the environment you come in contact with? Your place of work. Are you transforming your family? Are you trying to lift people up? Are you trying to reject evil? It says in the Psalms, Psalm 9710.

What do you want to be caught doing upon Jesus' return? Do not allow eschatology be an excuse for you not to fight evil. Do not allow the signs of the times for you to be paralyzed, static, to not engage in the culture. We must challenge people to be greater, to reach higher, to be biblical, to be Christ-like. And I'm telling you, this generation cannot just be the most conservative generation, but the most Christian generation, as we continue to be salt and light in every single walk of our life. Oh, amen. Extraordinary.

I mean, just going, I find it difficult to look at old footage. And, you know, I've tried to just screen it all out because it's, makes me too emotional but he had this extraordinary gift to talk about faith in a way that was just so accessible to it just grounded everything he said all of the all of the politics all of the sort of neurologic issues in this kind of non-negotiable you know moral foundation and there was just such authenticity and sincerity there and it's you know something that the right really needs to to remember that it you got to be anchored in clear moral foundations. And I think, you know, without faith and without that sort of, you know, without

that framing that Charlie was always so insistent on, it unravels. It unravels. And we get towards a sort of, you know, Nietzscheanilism or actual racism. And it's just amazing to just to be reminded of what he was like in full flight. And I've never, never seen him using notes, never seen him reading from a speech, but just extraordinary fluency and extraordinary sort of having just raw rhetorical flair for someone that young. The story of how Charlie was discovered is, I think, very telling. And actually, something that Ben Shapiro, because he had come in on the Tuesday after it happened, and he said, you know, Charlie wasn't charismatic at the beginning.

And Ben said wonderful things about Charlie. Please don't take this the wrong way. but it's actually a bit of the opposite of that is he was gifted from God without any training with this rhetorical flair. And the story was that Bill Montgomery was at some sort of tea party rally. And Charlie was 18 and he was going to be one of the speakers because he had, I think, gains a little bit of local notoriety for organizing. So they invited him to be one of the speakers. 18 years old and the story that was conveyed to me is everybody's asleep

It was actually Bill told me this story Actually many years ago He said everybody was kind of sleep and dazed and bored And then all of a sudden Charlie took the stage And Bill said it was like he looked at everybody In the audience all of a sudden Charlie starts speaking

And everybody goes Head up Ears perk up Because Charlie just had this way of his words Would pierce Like they would pierce your your mind in your heart and I think this is he he was his moral clarity was so strong that he did he was sort of like a dividing line like his words were a sword and they were they were sharp and they would cut

through and it would force you to pick aside one he didn't leave you any ground to sort of remain in the mushy middle he would say things so and and he took a lot of flack for that he took a lot of heat took a lot of slings and arrows because he was so morally clear and he would say it with such force that you had to sort of wake up and perk up out of your seat i actually forgot that bill told me that was the first time i ever met bill montgomery and may he rest in peace he died in 2020 uh but you know that was that's that was that's that was charlie from the start it's easy to think you know obviously after 2016 on both sides at the atlantic you know there was you know there many many more people are coming through and the sort of the new media emerged you know

you started to see a lot of incredible conservative voices coming through. But Charlie, at 18, we're talking the Obama years. This is the early 2010s when it was extremely costly and very rare for people of any age to be coming out. That, you know, to have that kind of trenchant, clear moral horizon and that clarity. It's just remarkable. And it must have been, you know, Kirk Contramundum in 2012. And I can't, you know, I wasn't tracking American politics. that closely back then, but, you know, I would have thought within the GOP, that would have

been very unusual. And he was, I don't know what's sustained. I don't know where he got it from, you know. God. It was straight from God. I mean, God had a plan from Charlie's, for his whole life, but that 18 to 31. Charisma like that's difficult to explain. He packed so much into it. And you saw it up close in those last trips, but he, his schedule was truly to manage that schedule that he kept, especially at our conferences, it was booked from 6 a.m. to the time he put his head down on the pillow. It was truly remarkable how much he disciplined it took. And I want to say, you talk about his fluency, and this is something that Blake and I talked about. I actually had a line in my speech at his memoir, and I cut it just for time. But this show was how he got

battle ready. And everybody kind of reflects how Charlie leveled up over the years. And I do think it was the show because every day he was forced to come on this show and defend his values or his political takes or how he was reflecting on the current news of the day. And it just gave him repetitions, repetitions. And originally the show was a three-hour show. So he was doing a three-hour show. We didn't move to a two-hour show until January of this year, which was really wonderful for his schedule because he could get more done. But it did really make him bad already. And some of the arguments we'd have before show, I mean, that was really special moments. Right, Blake?

Yeah, no. Just, I mean, it was your line. The battle ready was your line. So I was trying to give you credit for it. And it was, it was a good line. But let's talk about both sidesism. Yes, let's do that. Are both sides equally guilty of political violence?

So this is, we've seen this a ton in the past, well, since this happened. So this came out. It was obviously the most spectacular, the most damaging assassination in the U.S. since RFK probably 50 years ago and actually almost 60 years ago now and so it's been and so people are like

well this fits into you know and it came right after you know there was this apparently racially motivated stabbing on that bus in Charlotte and people are saying okay there's a lot of left doing violence out there and so these experts trotted out with some charts that were in the economist or in Cato or whatever where they're like

Actually, actually, left-wing violence isn't common. It's right-wing violence. That's way more common. I even heard them mentioning J-6. Yeah, J-SX. They have DHS. You know, DHS was made that a huge priority under Biden. They always like to make it a priority because, you know, that's who works at a lot of D.A.,

who was doing a lot of that work at DHS or at the FBI. You know, remember when they were investigating pro-life, like Catholic churches, because this was going to be this terrorist nexus. And so finally, people are saying, you know what? Let's actually look at the numbers. What is the real deal with these numbers? because they're just getting pushed. And so one of these studies that went really popular,

it was literally just compiled by an Antifa person. An Antifa person made a study of what was more common, left or right wing. And if you dig into the numbers, there is so much lying about it. So I'm looking at this thread by Tim Carney, where he just looked at some of the numbers in what they were using for this database. So, for example, a suicidal young man made a hit list that included Trump on it. He then later killed two strangers who were both white. This was counted as right-wing political violence, according to an ADL study, because the shooter had a swastika on his gun.

There was a felon in New Hampshire, Jesse James Sullivan, in 2024. He murdered his half-brother, who was white. But they counted it as a right-wing political violence because he had joined a white prison gang while he was in prison. By the way, that's what happens in prison. You have to find somebody that will protect you. There's someone I found where someone like sent anti-gay. made a harassment call to George Santos and said that he had like hurt the gay community

with what he did and that was like right wing anti-government threats all right well keep going Blake because this George Santos so this guy calls him and makes a threat to him because George Santos made fools of the gay community so that must be right-wing left a threatening voicemail for George Santos and said he felt he had undertaken under anti-gay acts

and that was right-wing government-focused violence and then another one was a home man, broke into a hotel and attacked someone and used a racial slur. It was later put in a mental institution. Oh, that's right-wing racially motivated violence. And so this happens over and over. And there's even a chart that was in, I think this was in the economist somewhere, but it shows that, you know, over time and how they allegedly,

there's all this right-wing violence that peaks in 2018, 2019, and then it goes down in 2020. And that's how you always know. All this stuff is BS. whenever they put out these studies, they don't count what was clearly the biggest outburst of politically motivated violence in our lifetimes, which is in 2020, George Floyd died. We had gigantic riots in Minneapolis where they burned down a police station. We had gigantic violence in, sorry, one moment there. We had gigantic violence in Minneapolis. We had gigantic violence in D.C.

And they're counting this all his right wing? I think they're just not even counting it. They're just like, oh, that's something else. This is mostly, though, it's mostly peaceful protests. Or they'll say someone has to be convicted and life hack. It don't convict people. Which one? This is the prosecution project.

So the prosecution project, this is one that was getting shared a lot that was supposedly tracking what violence occurs. And what they'll often do. So, for example, in this chart, they say resulting in a guilty verdict. So if they have clearly hundreds or thousands of people going around, smashing windows, doing graffiti everywhere, terrorizing the public, but oh nobody was convicted of this right this is a great point this is a great point because nobody was convicted of anything as a matter of fact the cities ended up settling with many of the protesters and giving them money giving the money or st louis st louis a mob terror like braze and terrorizes that family

was that the um mccloskeys yeah the mccloskeys the mccloskeys bring out empty guns to have these people not storm their house and attack them and i bet that's probably counted as nothing or it's going to be counted as right wing violence. Sure. You know, anti- anti-protester, anti-racial justice. And it's just a total sham. Yeah, it's a total sham. They besiege a courthouse in Portland for that, oh, that was another one. One of the

data sets that was getting shared around, it did not count a member of Antifa taking a gun, shooting a Trump supporter, in the head, in a murder, and they didn't count that as left-wing political violence. Probably because he wasn't convicted, because he was killed by the police before he actually

arrested. Well, and this is why it's such a a salient point you're making is because we saw in the aftermath of what happened to Charlie we didn't riot we didn't burn down buildings we didn't it is a silent we need to learn the talking points we did not loot

businesses we prayed and like everyone knows this nobody is like nobody actually you know was prepping their stores or anything or nobody was doing excess preparations like oh we have to be ready nobody you know after Charlie Kirk

there's no one was worried about the Charlie Kirk riots. Nobody was even worried about that. We might have worried about other violence happening, but nobody was worried, oh, all of those conservatives who like Charlie Kirk are going to go and burn down, you know, Salt Lake City, burn down Phoenix. No one was worried about that. We do worry about that all the time with Antifa, with BLM, with causes that are on the left. This is what the reality is. And we are just BS about this. You can trade statistics and studies all you like, but the true character of a political movement comes out in moments of crisis and of tragedy. And I'm sorry, but the contrast is as clear as day between what happened in May,

the aftermath of the Floyd killing in May 2020 and Charlie's death. I mean, what you were saying earlier, Andrew, just not a single arrest. You know, 100,000 people in that stadium. And, you know, we were all there. It was just so peaceful. There was nothing. There was almost 300,000 people in and around the stadiums. Right. Yeah.

And so I think the floor is yours, my friend. Like end this, end this hour as you see fit. And I mean, maybe it's remembering Charlie. Maybe it's what you hope to see come from this and whatever it is. The floor is yours. Thank you, Andrea. The checks in the post later. That's so good of you to say.

And it's so strange to meet not just Charlie, but you and to his team just a few months ago. And yet, you know, felt like just, you know, lifelong friendships. were emerging and we just had these these great plans and i i learned far more from charlie than i think he learned from me because you know i i think i was joking earlier i was i spent months trying to get him to call me james but it was always dr or that incredible kind of right humility it's ironic that he's known to be sort of anti-college and all this stuff but yet when he met a true scholar how much reverence he actually had and that came across i thought in larry Arne's beautiful tribute to him in the stadium.

And I've never, never seen Larry, you know, deeply kind of, you know, moved like that. He's always very good at keeping it together. But it was just such an extraordinary testimony. I think he mentioned at one point that, you know, he said to Charlie, you know, you've got to learn. And it's going to take suffering. It's a great bit of wisdom from East Galus's Agamemnon, pathematar, mathemeter. You have sufferings, learnings. And that idea is that Larry's just instills.

that in his in his uh in his uh in his cohorts at hillsdale and then just charlie goes off and does all 31 hillsdale courses available then you know comes back comes back for more and uh just extraordinary and i i think you know it's hard to hard to you know hard to replace somebody with that that kind of package of powers and skills and abilities and aptitudes and you can't replace them not but but i felt on sunday you know something had shifted and that all the though he could not be replaced, there was something, something stirring, something that is, something that is peaceful, something that it is, you know, that is kind of recovering the ancient, the ancient vision for the West of hope, of faith, of love, the great, you know, the great

trinity of theological virtues. And it was just extraordinary to witness that. And there's a kind of envy. I remember that that last show we did that was aired as his last show. We recorded it back in August and I think I opened it by saying, I don't normally like watching things I do, but I wanted to watch that because I wanted to be reminded of him and of our time together. And I think I just started by saying, look, you know, young people are always saying, we want to change the world. And I tend to think that the world would be a much better place if you're young people trying to change it. But in, but in Charlie's case, I said, you know, you really are changing the world. You are really shifting things in in in in in in in in in in in

ways i think i said at one point we need to we need to we need to bottle some kirk juice and bring it back to bring it back to the mother country and uh but i think i think i think there's going to be a a lot of kirk juice in britain now it's been better than bottled it's been unleashed that's right that's right and that's going to be there's a there's a there's a torrent of it all over uh all over the west now and and and he what what a role model he will be what an exemplar he will be uh in in in in death to to so many, many

who'd never really come across him before. It's true, as I said, in Britain, he's being discovered for the first time by millions of Brits. And in France, I've heard similar stories about France and Italy and even Spain. Especially among the young. I've lost count of the number of people saying,

like, I've never heard of this guy, but my children are talking about it, my children are incredibly upset, and it's just an extraordinary legacy. I count it of just such a high honor to have got to know him in the last few months of his life and we must honor him

in the months and years ahead, honor his legacy. You and he's shared a mission to save the West. And we must do that. We must. It's worth saving. It's beautiful.

And that was his passion. It's just been an honor to have you here, Dr. Orr. James. I don't know. Thank you. At last. At last. Yeah, Dr.

We'll see you tomorrow. Thank you, Andrew. Thank you, Blake. Thank you.