The Charlie Kirk Show - The Stuff That Has To Be Said: Live Special with Andrew Wilson

Episode Date: August 20, 2026

Last week, Andrew Wilson went to Candace Owens's home for a three-hour debate. Now, he joins the show for a simulcast special where he takes questions on the debate, then responds with some questions of his own for Blake and Andrew. The show reveals the real contours of what Charlie thought of Candace, and describes an interesting threat Candace made in private just a few days after last year's shooting. Watch every episode ad-free on members.charliekirk.com!    Get new merch at charliekirkstore.com!Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

My name is Charlie Kirk. I run the largest pro-American student organization in the country fighting for the future of our republic. My call is to fight evil and to proclaim truth. If the most important thing for you is just feeling good, you're going to end up miserable. But if the most important thing is doing good, you will end up purposeful. College is a scam, everybody. You've got to stop sending your kids to college. You should get married as young as possible and have as many kids as possible. Go start a turning point USA college chapter. Go start a turning point you would say high school chapter.

Go find out how your church can get involved. Sign up and become an activist. I gave my life to the Lord in fifth grade. Most important decision I ever made in my life and I encourage you to do the same. Here I am. Lord use me. Buckle up, everybody. Here we go.

Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of the Charlie Kirk Show, a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals. Learn how you could protect your wealth with noble gold investments at noblegoldinvestments.com. That is noble goldinvestments.com. All right, we're back, everybody. The one hour special with the one, the only, Andrew Wilson. You might know him from debate fame after last week. Andrew, welcome to the show. It's good to have you. I think we're doing some sort of simulcast. Hopefully the tech is working. It is. It is. If I put it up on screen though it'll show the uh the the like block that tells you how much time there is until

commercial break we maybe our team can pull that down for you if if if that helps uh so well well well um i have been looking forward to having you on um you are of course our our horse that we've been riding into the debate if you believe the rumors i think that's where i want to start here Andrew um maybe just as the because and i think just so for the audience knows we're going to ask you questions at the first part of this hour and then you get to ask us some because you agreed to do this if you got to ask us questions as well. I said, okay, sure, we're an open book. Because we were negotiating for this. Yeah, that starts with part one. I'm a little upset. We didn't get paid for having this interview, but that's fine. We have to take it in stride.

So, Andrew, why don't we just start there? Why don't you establish the seven thousands in the mail? Yes, exactly. Yeah, well, you know, according to Candace, I have a much higher price tag than that. So let's start here. What is your relationship with turning point? I went down and did some help with a debate course. That's the entirety of the relationship as far as I'm aware. Yeah, and that was the one time I've met you. You were on campus. You were teaching some debaters.

I thought you were very nice. Much, much to my surprise based on your public persona at times. I'm kidding. I actually think I actually really appreciate the way that you kind of handle your business, but I haven't known you. It's not like a thing that, that, you know, we know Andrew Wilson really well. Like, as far as I know, you said some things that weren't exactly super positive and nice about us, but you have been on a, a dogged. I was more, hang on. In my defense, I was mostly mean to Blake. Okay. In my defense, I was mostly mean to Blake. Same here. That's, not as mean. Yeah. So, I mean, if I, if I can make a defense for myself. But anyway, Well, hopefully we could Blake's sitting there going like... I don't actually don't even know what he's referring to, but whatever. Yeah, what did you say about Blake? I don't remember.

I was doing it. I know what it was. This is water under the bridge. Water under the bridge. Yeah, I was doing a review. This was a while ago after Charlie had passed away. And during the review, I said, one of the problems, I think,

with the show is that these guys are just too nice. Like, they're really nice guys, right? I actually was pointing this out. And then I'm the nice one? I know. He's flipped his red. There's a misread on this one here. Yeah.

Well, I thought that it was going to get pretty brutal because the left was out in force and they were weaponizing everything that they possibly could against the legacy of Charlie Kirk. He had become a martyr overnight to the entirety of the right. And he was everybody's martyr. It didn't matter seemingly if you were a person who hated him or didn't hate him. Suddenly, he had martyed him. status. And so I think one of the critiques I was doing a video on, and it wasn't, it wasn't particularly bad, by the way. And I've always said that I thought TPUSA was more of a force for good than it was for bad. But one of the criticisms was, I don't know if these guys know what's coming

for them, you know, like, I don't know if they know what's going to be coming their way. Because I knew that the left was mobilizing. I knew it. So let's get into that in a bit, but I want to start with the debate because this is the way, again, it's structured. I have so many questions for you about how you conducted the debate. I saw that you gave yourself a score of like seven out of ten. I'm genuinely curious, and you gave her a score of three out of ten, or seven point five, I forget what it was exactly. Well, if I could take the lead on this, just what were your immediate feelings getting in that room,

engaging with her directly in person like that for, I believe, the first. time. Same, same. I was going to ask them the same question. I'm just going to be really blunt with you guys. I thought that she was actually quite stupid. I was shocked. I was actually quite stunned. I didn't think that she was a very smart person at all. I had a good reason to believe that going in, but I didn't think that she was a particularly good interlocutor. She never made any points at all. She would just kind of ramble. It was just kind of incoherent babble and ramble. and any time I would get to the point or make her address an actual point, she would go back to rambling incoherently.

She didn't understand what inductive reasoning was. I even spelled it out in a very, very simplistic way. Inductive reasoning would be like if, then, and or. So if I'm 20 minutes away from my job, you know, and I'm supposed to be there in five minutes, then I can assume I'm going to be late, right? That would be an inductively reasoned out position. When I explained that to her and then asked her to give me her induction for how we get to Israel,

TPSA, France, and all these other people who are involved in the conspiracy to murder Kirk, she actually didn't even understand what I was asking her. And so, you know, from my perspective, it was, that was the toughest part of the debate, was that she actually didn't even understand half of what I was saying. explain that actually because you do a ton of these debates and it's is it sort of like one of those things i have a good friend who's a professional tennis player he said it's really hard to play against bad tennis players because you can't actually serve in volley like you're like you've been training for years to do you actually it gets easier if the quality of the opponent you're

anticipating where a pro would hit it back yeah they just hit some other yeah exactly is it kind of like that where the person of aside across from you is not even keeping up with the basic blocking and tackling of a debate, it gets, it's almost more challenging for you in that way? Well, here, actually, I'll demonstrate it for you. So you just asked me a pointed question. What your pointed question was is, hey, Andrew, if somebody doesn't know what they're doing on the other side of this thing, does it actually make it more difficult to do this thing, right? Now, I could just say, well, yes, of course, and then we would move on with the conversation. But if I was going to be Candace Owens, I would say, well, what we're talking about here is

how I feel and about how I feel about the various things that I'm talking about when it comes to debate. And you say that I'm not a very skilled interlocutor, but we have evidence of me being a skilled interlocutor. You can look back at all the times that I've done interlocketing with other people. And I think that we can all see what's going on here. Yeah. So you see how that doesn't, that that's completely unhelpful to moving, moving a conversation on

or getting to the point of a conversation. because it's just incoherent rambling. And so what my whole job there was, and I knew that that was what it was going to end up being, was to make sure that I could get her to, with her words, make those claims. And then I knew she would. And the reason I knew this is we'd had a pre-debate summit,

I guess you could say, with Patrick Bet David, where I talked with her briefly. And she was a prattle machine. Like I would just be very pointed and say, well, actually, this is probably the better idea, because A, B, C, and D, very quick, 30 seconds, and she would prattle for like three minutes straight about just nonsense. And so I knew going in that that was likely what it was going to be.

And so my job somewhat shifted in that debate from the idea that I could just kind of inquire towards those positions to get good faith answers to. She was going to have to let her prattle and then point out the inconsistencies. And that's exactly what I did. Yeah, and I've heard you describe it as sort of Operation Letter speech. kind of thing because I guess your your strategy was that she was going to sort of concede debate points all on her own and you didn't necessarily have to do too much work to make that happen I I do she walked back every single claim she made and had no

evidence whatsoever for any of the things she was saying now I knew that she wouldn't because I had been looking through kind of the body and catalog of the alternative evidence and you know what I found out there isn't any so if you're a very skilled debater, the first thing that you do always is you move to falsify your position first. You always move to falsify your position. So the idea there is if I'm going to defend a thing that I believe, the thing that makes me so good at defending it is because I know it's true because I've tried to falsify it and I can't. These people never did that. They never attempted to falsify any of their own positions or falsify any of their own evidence. And so

The holes in it are just miles wide. It make absolutely no sense. And so the inferences don't make any sense. They get blocked immediately. You say, well, I think that Israel killed Charlie Kirk. You go, okay, well, why? Well, because we have a text message where he said that I may leave the pro-Israel cause. Okay, I understand that.

But how does that actually lead towards Israel killing Charlie Kirk? Answer, nothing. There's no answer, right? It just leads nowhere. These are all, so they're never attempting to fall. the claims, right? That should lead to the next claim, to the next claim, to the next claim, until we get to the claim of, no, Israel killed Charlie Kirk or France killed Charlie Kirk, and we never get to any of that. It just stops immediately. Well, it just stopped at feels and

opinion, and you can't tell me how to think and all this stuff, which, right, and you said, I'm not telling you how to think. Yeah, it was interesting. So I predicted that this debate, that you were going to win it because the truth is on your side, right? And as somebody who's lived this firsthand. I know all the garbage when they, when they continually drone on about this stuff and how many lies are continually laced in and just repeated ad nauseum so that the internet begins to believe them. So I knew that, but I knew also that she has a bigger following, bigger followers on YouTube, whatever. So I knew that immediately there was going to be this rush to say who won, who won, but I predicted this. I said, this will age really well. Because what I was watching is,

is that she conceded the whole debate very early on multiple times at every different point in juncture. She kept conceding the point walking things back and that as the commentary, it kind of comes in that has, you know, an IQ above room temperature and pointed that out for people that it was going to then be this kind of finishing effect after the debate. Is that what you have seen? Oh, 100%. So essentially what happened here was really interesting. the Baron Coleman's of the world and the sort of law tube picked all of this up and just started tearing her position to pieces immediately. And the commentators in the debate sphere are making a mockery of her. They think that she's a lunatic, has no idea what she's talking about.

And then on the flip side to that, too, you even have Main Street coverage. And even on the Main Street coverage, it's the same thing. They're like, well, where's any of the evidence for any of these supposed claims? and we never got to any. So not only will it age well, but what I thought that it would do more than anything else to be as candid as possible, I thought that it would up the pressure of people questioning the questioners.

And I've seen a lot of that now moving on social media, people saying, hey, wait a second, where is the actual evidence? I got hundreds of DMs, for instance, from people who didn't know that the Steakhouse receipt was a complete phony fraud, that the whole thing is a fraud. They had no idea that that was the case.

Can I just say something? So we have Andrea Burkart. She's going to join us on the show tomorrow. She is apolitical as it comes. Like she is not like on a side at all. And I asked her, I said if they had exculpatory evidence, whether it's the parents that actually, you know, think he's innocent or they have some steakhouse receipt, would they not present that at the preliminary hearing. And she was like, absolutely they would. No, duh.

No lawyer. if they have exculpatory evidence that proves the timelines wrong, that proves the parents don't actually think it, would not use that evidence because those lawyers are then basically binding their client over for three years in prison for something that he didn't actually do. They absolutely would have presented that evidence at preliminary hearing, okay? And there's the same thing my attorney friend. Yeah, the same thing my attorney friend told me who was one of the fact checkers at the debate that I brought with me. He said the same exact thing.

You said if there was real evidence of conspiracy like that, that would falsify anything that the prosecution had. And that is a thing that you would bring up. Absolutely. Because it would completely crush the opposition. Yeah. And they have the cell bright data from the phone. They know exactly where he actually was based on digital evidence, the whole timeline. Anyways, I want to get to this because the claim was that Tyler Robinson is a patsy.

and your claim was that the evidence actually supports that Tyler Robinson's guilty, okay? Yeah, the claims are actually comparative. So they were comparative claims. Is there more? Is there more evidence that Tyler Robinson murdered Charlie Kirk than there is evidence for him being a Patsy? So these are comparative claims. So the idea here is in the comparative claim, which one actually has more evidence for it? Now, you can say that you don't.

particularly care for the evidence of the state or that there's problems with it. And that's a fair enough argument. But as a comparative claim, there is nothing to compare. One side has evidence. The other side has no evidence. It's really that simple. It's not very complex. Here's from Milkbar TV. He puts together these compilations on, you know, kind of a lot of things. But he tends to focus on Candace and kind of the contradictions that she makes often. She's kind of a contradiction and queen here. So let's go ahead and play the Patsy claim Sot 2. Candice's belief that there's overwhelming evidence that Tyler Robinson was a Patsy and didn't kill Charlie Kerr. Why is it that we should go with this idea that it was a Patsy?

I'm not saying that we should go with the idea that it was a Patsy. I am saying that there is Oh, I thought that was the whole defense, your whole claim. Tyler Robinson, they're going to convict them, right? They found their Patsy. They're going to make it work. The alleged shooter, you think they're a Patsy. Of course. They're a Patsy, which is what Tyler Robinson is. See, we're going to convicton. which is what Tyler Robinson is. Which is what Tyler Robinson is. So I didn't edit that together, so, you know, I didn't do the slow-mo.

I wasn't trying to take a cheap shot. But that's how the Milk Bar TV did. So basically, she contradicted her original claim that you guys went into the debate almost immediately. Am I missing something? Well, yeah, she contradicted her claim very early on. So I played this clip. You can actually find it during the debate at right about the 50. one minute mark. And what she what she says there is is a comparative claim, there's a hundred

other just as likely explanations as Robinson is a Patsy. Her answer in response to that is, yes, there is. And then she further qualifies it by saying that not only is that the case, but if you keep moving ahead in the timeline on that particular clip, she concedes the entirety of it, which is what he's showing there for the for the Patsy. She's. He says there's no good reason that you should actually believe he's a patsy. So you have two comparative claims that you can make right there. But that just completely annihilated her position. And I knew right then and there that I'd won the debate.

And you can actually, if you pan, they didn't do it because she was speaking. But if they were able to pan over, you actually would have seen what I call the Wilson smug look. It looks something like this where I'm kind of just get a little bit smug because I know for sure that's it, right? once I get that concession match right there. Yeah, you know what's interesting, by the way, one of the more, I will just say, on a personal level, infuriating moments of the debate, was when you guys were talking about complicit.

She said, I never said Erica Kirk was complicit. You put those words in Charlie's murder. You put those words in my mouth. I didn't do that. Did you consider asking her to define the word complicit? I did actually. You know, if you watch, if you watch what I said to her specifically was, what did you mean when you said complicit then?

what does that actually mean? And what she said is, that means that you believe Tyler Robinson shot Charlie Kirk. And I said, wait, that's it? You just, all you mean by complicit is that Erica believes that? Yes. And then she, I went a step further again and said, so are you just saying that she doesn't believe that? And then Candace says, yeah, I absolutely don't believe Erica Kirk believes that. I just couldn't believe it.

It's like, we'll play the clip. This is again from Milkbar, Sop 3. There is why it is impossible for me to think that Erica Kirk is not complicit somehow. That Tyler Robinson was 100% responsible for the death of Charlie Kirk. Let's say she believed it with every fiber of her being, believed all the evidence, because she did. She just actually did. Would it then follow that somehow she's complicit in his death? I didn't take implicit in death.

You added those two words. By the way, I just want to say, I don't know Milkbar TV. The team just pulled these clips. We don't pay him because that'll, you know, I don't know what the allegations are going to be. But that, so I'm sitting there going like, wait, your whole thing is that you've basically set it up that Erica Kirk is complicit in Charlie's death somehow for months. And you're going to sit there in a debate across from Andrew Wilson and say, you added those words. I never said that.

I meant she's complicit in like the framing of. Tyler Robinson or something like I and I was like I'm sitting here going like well thanks for all the death threats because you just think we we we believe the wrong guys guilty that like thanks for all of the harassment and all the death threats really cool well well not only that but the the massive slander campaign the unethical campaign that has been going on so one one there's two kind of primary reasons that I even got involved in any of this to begin with the first was because of a a person who has been in my chat for years challenged me because he said, I don't really believe this official narrative.

And you always tell us to falsify, try to falsify your own claim. So that was what I set out to do. I'm going to see if I can falsify my own claim. And I couldn't falsify it, right? I mean, and I tried. I went into X-Space after X-Base, talked to tons of these people with their alternative theories, talk to attorneys, talk to everybody, I couldn't get it falsified.

That was the first issue. And then the sort of second issue is that what I see is a power dynamic problem. I think that people get the motivation of Owens and a lot of these people incorrect. They attribute it to things like jealousy. They attribute it to this type of thing. I don't really think it has much to do with that. I think it has to do with power. From the perspective of the Owens and Owens orbiters, they have license to do whatever horrible thing that they want to anybody because they're running, quote, an investigation.

That's what they're doing. So at least from their end, that's what they say they're doing. So if they want to dox you, if they want to harass you, if they want to harass your family, they want to dox your family, they want to do all the things which are normally against all Internet protocol, right, the things that people would normally come down hard on you for doing. They're allowed to because they're, quote, investigators. And so what that does is it gives them carte blanche to do whatever horrible thing they want to somebody because they're searching for the truth, you see.

And that's one of the major issues that I saw going in was like, these people have given themselves license to do whatever horrible thing they want to anybody that they want. And then the way that they justify it is, well, they're part of this conspiracy. So therefore, if we destroy their life, if we docks their family members, if we viciously attack them,

if we slander them, if we demean them, if we stock them, horrible things to them. That's completely justified because all we need to do, the wine moms of the world, is unify and say, well, you're part of the conspiracy. So we're justified in doing this to you. I'm reminded of the one time I did meet you when you came to HQ and I asked you about, I was like, why, you know, I'd seen a debate you did with, I think it was Zach Costello, something I've never heard about before. And I asked you, I was like, why did you do this? And you said, like, you know, I expect us to fight for ourselves, but, you know, I didn't necessarily expect

somebody like you, who again, we didn't know each other. You had criticisms, fair enough, whatever. I didn't expect somebody like you to kind of get into the midst here. And your answer was actually pretty good. You said, I feel like they're in league with the left. And this is something that I've heard from you. In league with the devil, maybe. Well, you've been really on that. Wait, you just said the same thing. That's the same thing, right? And I, maybe just, I just wanted to ask, because, because, I mean, we, we don't pay you. We're not working together.

We didn't coordinate this debate with you. All of that is just like her nonsense that she wants to put out there. But when I did meet you the one time when you came to campus to teach debate course and stuff like that, you told me that that was a deep motivator for you to, that you think they're in league with the left. Explain that. I had noticed for a long time that there was correspondence, very public correspondence, going on with the former stalkers of Charlie Kirk. And you might remember the former stalkers of Charlie Kirk. They called themselves the unef America tour.

And they're headed by a socialist, and this particular socialist, has received tons of money through basically being processed through Act Blue. We knew all of this when we checked her out because she was. She has been behind many harassment campaigns towards right-wingers, doxing campaigns and various things like this. And she seems to be very proud of it. In fact, she says she just said recently to Max, a kid that I know who is going towards the pick-up the mic tour, can't wait to find out what skeletons you have in your closet, right?

So her whole thing is to do this. And I noticed that she was corresponding with other accounts like Project Constitution and other of these orbitors who also correspond. respond with Baron Coleman, who corresponds with Candace Owens, et cetera, et cetera. And I thought that that was a very odd linkage and suspected that there might be some kind of coordination going on there. So I'd never directly accused Candace of coordinating with these people or Baron Coleman. But I did say that I thought Project Constitution was definitely coordinating with them. And then it turns out post-debate, they're all retweeting each other, including the NF America tour. They're directly correspond.

bonding with each other, and that basically confirmed all the suspicions. And I've always thought that leftists have pushed this narrative. And Z has now basically come out and admitted that she has been pushing this narrative as hard as possible. And so did Hassan Piker, he's pushing the narrative as hard as possible because instead of the right-wing unifying and throwing these people in jail for being, you know, terrorist, which is exactly what should have happened as the federal government had declared to Antifa to be a terrorists. The right wing had all the momentum. And then what happens, these leftists began to also

spread and propagate these theories, which divided the right. Husson Piker actually put it very succinctly when he pointed this out. Yeah, that Husson Piker clip is pretty infuriating. Hi, folks, Andrew Colvette here. I'd like to tell you about my friends over at Y Reefi. You've probably been hearing me talk about Y Refi for some time now. We are all in. with these guys. If you or someone you know is struggling with private student loan debt, take my advice and give them a call. Maybe you're behind on your payments. Maybe you're even in default. You don't have to live in this nightmare anymore. Why Refai will provide you a custom payment based on your ability to pay. They tailor each loan individually. They can save you thousands of dollars and you can get your life

back. We go to campuses all over America. We see student after student who's drowning in private student loan debt. Many of them don't even know how much they owe. Why Refai can help. Just go to yrefi.com. That's the letter why then refi.com. And remember, why refi doesn't care what your credit score is. Just go to why refi.com and tell them your friend Andrews sent you. I have a couple more questions for you on the debate here. I noticed you didn't bring up Egyptian plains. You didn't bring up Fort Wachuka, or as I like to call it, some fort in Tucson, because I didn't actually know I'd never heard of it before. Fort Wachuka, you didn't bring up any of these kind of hairbrained, debunked claims, right? You got this Mitch Schnoe character who says his dad is

a Zodiac killer that claims he saw people at Fort Wichita. This stuff is so loony-tunes, but you didn't go there. Why? I wanted to go after the strongest claims. So, If I was in Candace's seat when I'm kind of gaming this out, which way she would go. If I bring up Mitch Snow, she'd say, yeah, I brought him on. I never said that he was credible, right? I'm investigating every lead. You can't hold me responsible for his position. And that wastes a lot of my time.

Remember, I'm only going to get about three and a half hours here, and I only get an hour and a half. So what I wanted to do was go after the much stronger claims that she can't just point at and say, oh, I was just messing around, or I was just following up on leads, but claims that she has really tied herself to, like the Patsy claim, the Steakhouse claim, the French Foreign Legion claim. These are things that I think are much, much stronger to give opposition to because when she can't actually demonstrate any of this, it makes her look terrible.

As opposed to like Mitch Snow, if we were doing Mitch Snow, she would just say well he's just a guy I had on the show you know who and I didn't tell anybody they had but the Egyptian planes thing Andrew she for months was saying this is like this is the thing that is going to crack everything open and then and then I think it was a Kena Koa the Great did a big deep dive tracked the planes realized it was like 70% wrong even like I think it was two thirds of the time the plane was on a different continent than then they had it I mean it was trivial because you look at it and it had one we should point this out that there are

multiple times in the spreadsheet where she just repeats the same plane. So that's not in a lot of attention to detail. But a lot of it is like all these times where Erica and these Egyptian planes, they're both flying through Wilmington, Delaware at the same time. And I don't think Erica has literally ever visited Wilmington, Delaware in her life. Yeah. So, I mean, but so anyway, I just think that there's so much that has, so much has transpired, so many different stories and so many different threads that we forget and that the average person forgets.

and oh, she's just asking questions. She's just on a, you know. But when we actually, I was actually Blake, I was off that day, sort of invited her to have a debate with us. She ended up pulling something like this French Foreign Legion thing where she thought there was some cartel guy here in Arizona that was going to try and assassinate her. And so we couldn't do it in Arizona, actually.

That was like, I don't know if people know that story or not. I can't remember what's public and what's not. That was the excuse. There were multiple layers that she was paranoid. Oh, there could be. you know, assassination threat when I'm approaching the HQ, and then there's like a cartel danger, and then there was a new danger that came after that.

Like, endless excuses. And, you know, we saw this where she was insisting you had to go to her place. Yeah. Oh, and that's my other question. Andrew, so there's been much made about this earpiece. And you did question at some point if there was information being fed both ways. I think we have a clip on that, actually, if I'm not mistaken. So this is PBD talking about this, Sop 5.

What is that? What is that? That's an earpiece. Was that legal? It's not like I'm out there saying big lie. You see how he's touching his earpiece? Yeah. Was he wearing an earpiece?

100%. He was. Wait, a minute. What do you mean he was wearing an earpiece? Are you ready? Okay, go. That's Candice's earpiece. What does that mean?

They gave that earpiece to all of us. So everyone, oh, they had it. No, no, no, but wait a minute. Watch what just happened. The market believes she had an earpiece of things being fed to us. That was an earpiece that Candace's producers gave. Candice gave him. To hear everything.

You guys behind the scenes. Is she going to say that on air? She would easily. I don't think she would have a problem. I think she will. I don't think she has a problem with that. But that is their earpiece. So what's the story with the earpiece?

Because I asked my tech team, I said, could you, if I had you in studio with me, could I route it in such a way that I feed different sources to different people? We don't have it routed that way, but you could. And they said, yes. Of course. Of course you can. The thing is, though, is like, I can't make that claim because I don't know if it's true or not true. It wouldn't surprise me if it was true.

I didn't like the idea of having that your pieces in. What we were told was you have to have them in so that you know the cue for we're going to bring up this evidence or we're going to do this. or we're going to go to an ad break. That's why you need to have it in. But it wouldn't surprise me if she was being fed through her earpiece at all. But I can't say that for certainty. All right. Blake, Andrew has questions for us, too.

Just so the audience knows, we are going to stream. If this takes longer to get through the whole interview back and forth, like we'll just go longer. We're going long. We're going live. I've asked a bunch of questions. I want to make sure you have a chance to ask any questions. that you have about the debate.

I just, I guess, I've speculated, and like, this might be the only time she ever agrees to any debate like this. Well, it's unprecedented, just so you know. Like, nothing like this has ever happened on the internet before, as far as I'm aware. The entire thing was unprecedented. The fact that I had to pay for access

just to ask basic questions in a way that she couldn't evade, that's probably never going to happen again. Can we just pause there for a second? One of the parts of this that is, I haven't heard nearly enough people bring up again. It's the fact that you offered her $300,000 to do the debate. And she counters you.

She tries to a debate. Oh, 500,000. 500,000. And then when you guys do the debate, she's running ads. I just, I couldn't. Okay. Fair enough. Well, if you saw the contract correspondence, like, these people were just insane to deal with.

But my thought process was, like, who cares? Just make the whatever concessions they want and get in the room, because I know once you, once I'm in the room, I'm going to be able to expose that there's no evidence for any of these claims at all, and there never has been. So that was my whole thought process, was like, whatever. Just concede to whatever crazy stuff that they want so that we can get there.

Yeah, I have another question. Do you feel there was any unfinished business to the debate? Is there anything you really wish you'd gotten to, or is there anything if you had a round two without spoiling what your strategy would be, should that round two happen, that you feel it merits more. exploration.

Yeah, I think. You rate yourself seven and the regrets. My biggest, yeah, my biggest critique is that I think it would have actually been better if we had done timed rounds so I could hold her feet to the fire better because she would just

filibuster, right? If you look at the debate time, she got twice the speaking time that I did. And you can't be particularly aggressive. It's in her house with, you know, she's pregnant. It would have been terrible optics if I had been as aggressive as I have been in the past in different debates. I had to take a different strategy here.

Ultimately, though, yeah, I think that she needed to be hammered even more on a lot of these questions until she actually gave even more concise answers and reconciled some of the contradictions, but that just wasn't possible in that format. But I think ultimately we got exactly what it was that I set out to do, which is we got the answer, right? that there's no evidence. That's what everybody in the world got. They got the answer.

There's no evidence of any kind for these claims. Well, and I think that's why this is going to age really, really well for you, Andrew. Because I knew that she had the bigger following. It was going to be like, you know, Candice won, all that stuff immediately. We knew we were going to get ZERG. And if it wasn't the clip that they picked, it would have been a different clip. It doesn't matter. We knew that the ZERG was going to happen.

Anytime I've debated with much larger creators or media talent, the ZERG happens. There's not much that you can do about. it but they only get about 48 or 72 hours and then when other people start picking it up and picking it apart they go whoa wait a second there's serious problems here yeah well and so did you were you concerned she was just going to get up and walk out if you pressed her too hard or if you got too aggressive in fact she wanted to make it very clear in the contract that once we're seated in the studio essentially her contractual obligation is fulfilled and so that that was she was trying to make that, you know, part of the agreement of the initial contract. And that was, in fact,

I'm sure in case she did decide that, she was getting pressed too hard and then rage quit and then said, but that now I can keep all the money, right? Because we fulfilled our contractual end. Did you put the money in like an escrow account or something? Like, where did the money go? I'm sure you had some stipulation of what it would take to release it, right? Well, my attorney said, send it to his attorney. Because if they, they don't fulfill their end of the contract and he releases it, they get disbarred. So, you know, send it to him and direct to his escrow. It's their attorney, right?

Like if their attorney won't release it to them, then they got a problem, you know what I mean? So that's how I set it up was we'll send $300,000 to your attorney. I mean, you know, I'm reminded of something that Charlie told us, something Blake and I have reflected on. You know, he said if you want to understand Candace just know all she cares about is money. Which I think he's actually was mistaken about. I think we've, I think we've seen that that. It's money. It's influence. I don't even know what's power. I think it's money. Attention. She loves attention. Yeah, we can speculate more. But it, you know, the money thing just thing just thing is. I think it's just about being able to destroy a person's life and then saying that you're justified in doing it because you're running a quote investigation. the fact of the matter is is that these people have run for essentially a year a massive campaign of slander,

doxing, harassment, every sort of horror that you can imagine conducted on other people. And if you even dare disagree with them in a public sense, they move to report your channel. I can show you hundreds of these various messages saying go to Andrew's YouTube, right? he promised people who remembers he was going to release information and didn't that's a violation of TOS go report him when they knew it wasn't true right well let's address that tons and tons of these people focus on de-platforming doxing operations and then justify it through quote we're running an investigation and the internet usually frowns on that in a big way but because they claim that it's an open source investigation they've thus far been able to get away with some of that but I'm hoping that we're going to start putting a stop to it well and they're They all got their own group chats. And I notice I can see it on my like on X if I make a post and you can see it raises their, it catches their attention. They all brigade it and they try and get a community note put on it. You see this kind of coordinated efforts a lot actually.

And they made a big deal about this group of 92. Let me say for the, you know, the Internet's record here, I didn't even know this group chat existed. I didn't, nobody was paid, nobody was coordinated. These are people doing it organically. to defend against what they see as a smear campaign, a character assassination against Erica, against Turning Point against Charlie's legacy. We don't have to pay people to do this.

There are still good people out there that see it and see it for what it is. And the hypocrisy is crazy because they're doing this themselves. And we can see it in the way that they brigade the comments and they attack your channel. Well, there isn't any justification at all for you to just say, this group of people disagrees with me. So everything, all bets are off. If we just make the, imagine having the power to just make the claim, well, this person could potentially be in on it.

And just by saying that, you now have given Car Blanche power to people to run massive doxing and harassment campaigns. Look for private data. Look for private medical records. Private emails. Private papers and effects. Private conversations. various things like this, they now believe that they have car blanche to all of that on private

individuals by just giving the nod, oh, they might have been in on it, wink, wink. That, by the way, gentlemen, is extraordinary power for one single person on the internet to have its extraordinary power, to be able to just mark an entire mob, to go and destroy a person's entire life by just saying they could be a part of this thing. I mean, um, that's that's, and I think that a lot of people miss that that part that they're been able to justify this by claiming it's an open source investigation.

You'll hear Stu Peters say this. You'll hear these guys say this all the time. And what that does is it justifies the horrific behavior. I mean, we've seen this. I just, we know people around here. It's like, it's like they just circle around their, they're predatory. You mentioned how they like the idea that when you claim you're an investigator, it lets you do anything to people. But I think a deeper psychological thing is it is addictive to people to be wantonly cruel to someone.

And then if you can tell the person who's doing that, actually, this is morally righteous. That's an incredibly addictive thing. It's what drives the French Revolution, these Maoist struggle sessions. Like every great frenzy in history has had itself driven by this sort of behavior. and egging on this cruelty. Are you saying that this is a leftist movement? I'm thinking it is. I've called her followers Cantifa for that reason.

They act like Cantifa does. It is. Actually, Blake makes a very astute point here that if you look at color revolutions of the past where they say it's us versus them, you'll see a lot of this in the posting as well. It's about the elites. It's about the oligarchs.

It's about the dividers at the top trying to keep us down, right? these are all it's all very very communist and by the way feminist coded if you're if you want to know the truth's very feminist coded language the idea of well we're just being divided not because of world views but because the quote rich powerful elite want us to be divided no we actually normal people have completely different worldviews from each other they're going to be divided on political issues across the board that is the state of affairs has nothing even to do with the elite. While I'm sure that there's some people who exacerbate certain problems in order to get

visionary responses or rage bait or what have you, people have very different worldviews. But it's very, very feminist coded language, very communist coded language. I do actually agree with that because I see it over and over and over again. And you'll hear this in that particular movement all the time. There's no right-left paradigm. The right-left dialectic is false. The right-left paradigm is false. It's like, no, it's not. It's not false. I don't know how you think that I'm going to just like suddenly unite with 90 million abortionists. How do you, how do you think that works? Like I'm just going to go, oh, okay, well, you're right. The elites are keeping us down. I'm going to go over there and unite with 90 million abortionists who want abortion legal and want

to continue to murder children, you know, for the next, you know, however long the rest of my existence, right? No, I don't think so. I don't think I'm going to do that, actually. Yeah, which is why your observation that they're partnering with some of these Act Blue Groups, I think, is really apt and was a keen insight that you injected into the discourse, because it completely, it is feminist-coded. It is left-coded, and it's horrible. And I just want, you know, people watching to understand that we've had, like, low-level staff had to have, you know, cops parked out in front of their homes because they got docks.

And I mentioned, you were mentioning that power to just, you know, sick a giant mob on people that I was talking to a member of our staff who was featured in one of her recent episodes and he had not seen the episode and didn't know what it said and he just goes like Blake was I was I the topic today because I can tell because I get the unsolicited Facebook messages I get the unsolicited the text messages start to come in like it all floods in so he knows when he's been a character in the stuff that they're doing soap opera this this drip drip drip drip drip drip drip and I do want to actually address that, you know, because before the debate, you reached out, and this is one of the

reasons that Candace has said that you were our horse or whatever. Again, Andrew did this of his own accord. He's been on this since before. I even knew he existed. He was debating people about this before. I even knew who you were. But you did reach out before the debate, and you said, hey, I've got some questions. Do you have any evidence about some of this stuff? Now, some of the stuff, we didn't even know about internally because it was like on Charlie's phone and you know, Erica looked on the wrong apps. It was this text exchange and you read it at the beginning in your opening comments. You have not disclosed it publicly. And I have told the team that it's yours to disclose at the timing that you wish. And you've said you're going to disclose that on Friday.

But that was something that I wasn't even fully aware of the language that Charlie used, which was he was, he was, he was, he was, concerned about the left. And he was very specific about it. Now, the thing that was interesting, it didn't shock me a bit because when I went back and looked at all of Kirk's public tweets and when he would do public speaking and interviews, if you're talking about Bill Maher, for instance, where he calls them the purple-haired Taliban, if you look at his tweets where he says that he's concerned that leftists are attempting to kill and murder him, that doesn't surprise me at all. Why? Because I receive tons and tons and tons of death threats from leftists. And it's constant. Now, they've gotten smarter about coding it. They'll usually say things like,

I hope you want to live yourself or I hope you get what's coming to you. What's coming to you is coming soon. But it's all coded language for threats. Let's not kid ourselves. And so the interesting part here is like it didn't shock me a bit because Kirk's entire pattern when I went back and reviewed it was he was really, really, really. concerned a leftist was going to kill him and then it looks at least appears at the moment based on all the evidence that one did that that's exactly what happened that his fears were completely justified Andrew we have stories specifically about this the only time I ever saw Charlie remove somebody because sometimes security somebody's acting up and we didn't even hear about it until after the fact security will remove somebody or whatever from an event the only time I ever

saw Charlie say that person needs to go was when he personally felt unsafe around a trans person at one of the events. And he was like, I don't feel safe. That person needs to go. And he sensed this for years. Shortly after I started working with you guys, Spring 23 was the Covenant shooting Nashville. And Charlie said, like, this is going to be the first. There's going to be a lot of these. And I was skeptical. I was like, shootings are rare. And I was like, shootings are rare. And it's, you know, if they're taking. feminizing hormones that's going to make you less likely to do shooty type stuff and I was totally wrong because there started to be more of those there was one we were I remember him saying like a trans person

might do it this is not a text otherwise I'd show it but it was in person because a few days before September 10th there was one up in Canada I believe where again it was one of the I think it was an MTF and they went nuts and shot up their school or some sort of function like that and I think the family. Anyways, yeah, and we were, so before we do these tours, we would put together these binders. The team would work on binders, different people would get different topics. And it was for him to study, right? Talking points, stats, new surveys that came out.

And for the fall semester, his express direction to the team was, don't put trans stuff in the binder. And he wanted to go easy on that subject after the election, didn't feel like he wanted to hit it. We're winning the bear. We're winning that one. And he was legitimately worried about that specific topic. So there's like, and yeah, there's actually a, there's actually a major part of this that you guys may not actually know about.

For that justifies Kirk's fear of this even more. And I don't know if you knew about this or not, but it did happen. Once upon a time on Twitch politics and on YouTube, there was a lunatic named Keffels who was utilizing the, T-Mob to de-platform any creator who spoke out against T-hormones and things like this towards children. They were referred to as the T-Mob, right?

They called them the trans-mob for a reason. And that's exactly what they did. And they would de-platform. They would silence all opposition. And it was bad. Like, they didn't even want to say a word about it because they would just instantly mass report. You'd be deplatformed.

That would be the end of you. So these people were beginning their approach for these kind of mass-case. campaigns against right wingers before it ever even turned into the violence that you saw. It started online with the platforming and unpersoning. So there's actually a lot more to give that credit than you might even think. No, and we, by the way, that's how we ran Charlie's YouTube, just so everybody's clear. We're never allowed to go into that topic because he did get demonetized. I believe the team can fact check me on it, but I believe it was over that topic.

Different things for different platforms like Facebook. It was climate change. YouTube. It was always the trans stuff. Anyway, so we were very, very careful about that specific topic. So just another piece of evidence behind what you're talking about here. Andrew, so an hour has gone by very, very quickly here. And we're going to sign off for our Real America's Voice family here in just about a minute and a half.

But, you know, I think to wrap this up and then we're going to transition, we'll keep going. and you get to then ask us questions because that's what we agreed to. And we're an open book, so you can feel free to ask. And if you would like, I can always, you know, if you want to keep it within the time constraints, we can always come back next week and I can ask the questions that. No, I think let's just keep rolling. Let's just keep rolling. You sure?

What about the drip, drip, Andrew? Don't you want to do the drip? No, I'm kidding. We could do the drip, drip. Go ahead. We could do the drip drip. By the way, the team confirms we were demonetized and Charlie was demonetized and had his account blocked on YouTube because of trance.

So that has been confirmed. Well, that doesn't surprise me because you were dealing with the T-Mob for a long time. One of the fact-checkers I had there, Rob Noor, a very close friend of mine, he was the same gentleman who went out and insisted me with the debate prep for the pick-up the mic. Very, very, very nice guy. And he was demonetized for several years on and off due to the fact that he was refusing to back down from the T-Mafia and was making fun of them so much. So he dealt with that himself quite a bit.

What we ended up having to do on YouTube was just take it off YouTube and go to alternative platforms if we even wanted to discuss it. That's how powerful that lobby became until right-wingers began breaking it up. We stopped streaming Charlie's show on YouTube. We would only edit out clips and then post them after the fact. That's how bad it was. He was going to get banned. Midterm elections are coming up and control of Congress is on the line. If there's one thing, financial market.

It's hate, it's uncertainty. And uncertainty is exactly what the next few months are going to bring. In 2024, if it taught us anything, it's that uncertainty breeds volatility. Between now and November could be one of the most volatile stretches for the stock market and the economy. So you owe it to yourself to have a plan. Here's the good part. There's a simple way to protect what you've built, and that's gold. Physical gold and silver let you hedge against that volatility.

And there's no better partner for it than noble gold investments. For over a decade, Nobel Gold has helped everyday Americans protect their wealth with precious metals. They make it simple. They make it easy and they make it safe. You can trust them. Give them a call 877-646-5347. That's 877-6-4-6-4-3-47 or visit them online at noblegoldinvestments.com slash kirk and find out how to protect yourself, your wealth, and your family. Noblegoldinvestments.com slash Kirk. Election day is coming. Don't let it arrive without a plan. And here's the best part. To celebrate America's 250th, just mention the Charlie Kirk show when you call Noble Gold, and they'll send you a free 10-ounce silver bar when you open a new qualified account.

Mentioned the Charlie Kirk Show, that's all you've got to do, and they'll do the rest. All right, Andrew Wilson, we continue with him. It feels kind of like we're transitioning over to your... Oh, wording. praising. Whoops, to the crucible. You're going to drive, and I guess we're the... were the the guests here so that we we are men of our words so the floor is yours yeah i i

i the one of the reasons that i agreed to do the interview is because my own audience has had many questions about this since i began discussing these uh these these these these lunatics online essentially and that's that's what i consider them to be and i thought that maybe if they heard a lot of what i had heard that they would kind of understand my thought process and how got to some of these inductions. And so I'd like to start by going all the way back. And maybe you can tell us actually what the relationship was between Candace Owens and Charlie Kirk.

What actually was it? Yeah. I'd like to go first there. Even though you have far more to say, Andrew, because I can just speak from my perspective as someone who arrived late 22, moved out here in 23, that I have never met Candace Owens and don't know her. Maybe I saw her in person once at a distance. maybe I shook her hand.

I've never had a conversation with her to my knowledge. And I think that speaks to something because I was with Charlie for close to three years. And I feel like I met most of the people Charlie was super close with. I met donors. I met his family members. I met his team. I met a lot. And I don't know Candace.

So I like to use that as a preface. But you have more that you can say about that. Yeah. And Blake, you have that great video that every plays of you reacting to Candice. Oh yeah, where I'm kind of like raising my eyebrow. It's fair to say Blake was early on the being suspicious train. Yeah, if you go back far enough, I mean, that's why, I mean, I put out that tweet basically saying, you know, Candace, your central foundational lie is that you and Charlie were friends. You were not friends, right?

Show me something from recent, you know, the end of Charlie's life, the last 12 months or whatever. And I think she's, she, and then I said 18 months, 24 months. I think she showed something at 22 months and so I got community noted, right? Okay, whatever. What I can tell you is that I think Charlie and Candace were friends back in 2018, part of

2019. That did not end well at all, actually. Could you get more details there? Even I would like to hear that. What caused her to depart if we can say? Well, I mean, there's two things, really. And part of it is you got to give credit where it's due. She was a rising star. She was growing really

fast. You know, Charlie famously sort of offered her a job. What did you, sorry if I missed something that you said, Andrew. Oh, okay. Oh, you're good. Yeah. So she was, you know, Charlie offered her a job, basically right on meeting her, kind of saw that she was, uh, somebody that could help turning point, help the movement in his opinion. And then they, they, they, you know, she explodes onto the scene, you know, Kanye had that tweet, uh, whereas like, I like the way Candace Owens thinks. And it was, it was kind of like a rocket chip, right? And then they had, but she became more and more difficult to work with, more and more issues with the team. And then she had that moment where. When you say difficult to work with, what do you mean? I think, you know, she was very aware of her rising star power. And so she started exerting more demands on timing, on where she could be deployed, what schools. So she was becoming like a prima donna? You could use that word.

That's what I've heard. I've definitely heard complaints from people who have. worked with her. Yeah, and that that continued on after when we started working with her later on. Just, you know, I think she canceled an event with us and our event team still tells this story, you know, like the day before. And we had to scramble to get it replaced because, you know, she ended up in like France with Kanye or something the next day. And so, so anyway, so the point is that it was just an ongoing kind of growing frustration. And then she had that event where she basically said,

Hitler was great if he just would have stayed, you know, in Germany. State in Germany. Which, you know, there's a lot of problems with. Now, to be fair and charitable here, right, just to be as unbiased as possible. I did go back and review that clip as that seemed like it was the turning point for turning point was that actual clip. Sure. It didn't, it seemed to me that she wasn't actually trying to make any sort of. like apologetics for Hitler, but rather she was trying to make a comparison to nationalism and saying that as a nationalist, she thought he did a good job.

And that was, and then, you know, she basically just kind of misspoke and buried herself with that, that particular lead. But obviously it became a massive PR nightmare for turning point, right? That's how that ended up playing out. Well, I think it's one of those statements where you can defend it and then, you know, in isolation. And then events afterwards, I think, lend greater clarity to it. Yeah, it was part of a hole. Yeah, like the defense you could make is, oh, she just meant, oh, he wanted Germany's economy to grow. He wanted to undo Versailles. She didn't mean the weird, kill all the Jews, except then 2023, 2024, she actually becomes obsessed with the Jews all the time.

Yeah, I would say it was part of a hole, though, to your point. Yeah, if that was a one-off, you probably could have defended it. But then we had a bunch of chapters that were really up in arms about it. And then you had this, I think it was a Christ Church shooter in New Zealand that, like, said she was, this guy was inspired by Candace. It was like a whole bunch of stuff. And so it didn't, it didn't leave on good terms. And but, you know, Charlie being a gentleman, uh, wanted to make sure that the transition happened in a,

uh, I guess you would say like a, uh, kind of a soft landing sort of way. Tyler Boyer helped her start blex it and file the paper. I think the paper, the original paperwork was filed at Tyler's house at the time is the story I've heard, but who knows the details. And, you know, provided her with some donor money and donor contacts and there was some issues there as well. You know, anyways, the point is there was a lot of, I think, hurt feelings. It didn't end well. But Charlie's always a guy that is willing to sort of let bygones be bygones. He was always focused on the greater mission.

the movement. It was not a guy that... Yeah, it's a coalition builder, right? Yeah, it's a coalition builder, and he wouldn't focus on internet feuds. He never got into that. One of the reasons that we were probably slow to respond to some of this stuff is because we were trying to emulate what Charlie would do,

which was he would all... I mean, people would attack him all the time, and he would just kind of be like, hey, we're going to rise above it. We're going to keep doing good work, and that's the way... That's the way forward. And, I mean, eventually, at some point,

it becomes impossible to do that, right? And it's... It's genuinely sad in that I think she and others were able to take advantage of Charlie's own goodness as a person, that if he has differences with someone, he's usually going to operate privately. He's not going to speak about it. I mean, we know plenty of other cases where Charlie had drama with donors, and he wouldn't even necessarily share it with other people in the organization, because he wasn't a guy who was just spewing out his problems, his beefs, his concerns, his feuds.

And that was the reason he was a good bridge builder because he would repair things with people later. Yeah. Well, these things would be essentially counterintuitive. If you're trying to have this massive reach of coalition building for the purpose of winning elections, and nobody takes away from Charlie Kirk or Turning Point USA that they likely assisted a great deal in Trump's election, which means that this coalition building that they did actually worked quite well. So I don't think that there's anybody's. you know, anybody's disputing any of that.

The main question just becomes this. One of the, the kind of landing pad for these people is they start with the assumption that Candice Owens and Charlie Kirk were besties. They were great buds. They were the besties of all besties. They were great friends. And they always were great friends. And she's just trying to find out what happened to her friend.

But that narrative, as I learned when I was there, actually is not. in fact, true. And so that's what I'm asking you to speak to is, uh, it, you know, is there any real truth to that narrative at all? No. And especially at the end, um, I would say, you know, okay, maybe 22 months was the cutoff. I don't know what the cutoff was exactly, but no, I said online and I'll say it again, Charlie was basically managing that relationship. He saw what she did at the daily wire. She saw that, you know, that that was became a, a spat where he originally sided with her. Yeah, he did. He did. Because in our, our history with Daily Wire was, you know, mixed, right? We had differences of opinion politically. We weren't always sure, you know, where that relationship sat. But Charlie, it's a great example,

though. Charlie was the one who invited Ben to speak at Amfest in 2024 and 2025. He personally invited him. And so he was willing to kind of say, hey, what's in the best interest of the movement? Do we have 80% agreement and 20% disagreement? Okay, cool. Let's do this together. And so, yeah, they were not in any way, shape, or form, friends in any traditional sense. But I think what would happen was, you know, for example, I would have to have the hard conversations with Candace. So that was, that would, that would fall to me or Justin on the team saying, hey, you can't speak at our events because you, you've been like juice burging too much.

Sorry, you know. And then you'd talk with George and all this stuff. And he would send her like a nice text about, hey, I see, you know, attendance at Catholic churches is going up, right? So that was kind of basically the way the relationship worked. But she didn't come to his wedding. She, you know, she didn't come to the memorial. I did actually invite her to the memorial, but she didn't come.

I invited her and George not to speak, but to attend, right? And that was before everything got really crazy. But I will tell you, you know, Charlie, this is another proof point. Charlie, she called at some point, I believe it was February, 2024. Things were getting going bad with Daily Wire. and she needed her own PR. And Charlie said, Andrew, you need to do this and help Candace. I was like, I don't know about that.

I have some misgivings, some pretty serious misgivings. And he was like, you know, he wanted me to keep her, you know, close to help protect the organization. You know, and that was one of the one of his strategies. And so and I hate sharing this stuff because I like to keep Charlie's private stuff private. But like when it, when you are constantly confronted with these allegations, at some point you just what do you're you're backed against the wall and i i remember the truth is it was a gradual process so charlie was taking candace aside that that video you mentioned where i uh you know kind of have a funny look on my face that's happening where candis was on her way out of the wire

and he was siding with her and i was telling him charlie i don't think candace has gone beyond the pale yet but i think eventually she will i've seen this process play out it tends to not go part way and then stop. Blake, Blake kept predicting, like, she's on a bad trajectory here, Charlie.

Like, this is not going to end well. And I love that about Charlie. Charlie was always sort of, like, hoping for a redemption arc, hoping that he could pull somebody back in and get them into the fold. And he always held out a little bit of hope in that way.

And so you saw this where it's like stuff breaks down. So I think even in spring of 24, she was doing events with us. I think that was her last one. Yeah, the standard where Charlie's west of the Mississippi. she's east of the Mississippi, that goes away because she's going to nuts. And, you know, the communication is becoming less.

The appearances are becoming less. And he's still, he's not going to go out and say, Candice is terrible now. I'm going to dump on her. That was just not the nature of what Charlie was doing. He would never do that. I don't know if we've answered your question, but, I mean, there's a lot there. But it was, I think you. I think you did.

The team, the team, you could ask anybody on the team, by the way, like from the events team to the field team to like senior people to lower people i did i did ask around when i was there i was curious right you know me i can't help myself i'm uh i didn't actually see you asking that but i wasn't there the whole time but i i'm it's fascinating that you did so yeah i always uh you know i'm always trying to dot my eyes and cross my teas i'm a curious person by nature but i do i do want to ask this too uh so moving forward um um In September, these attacks didn't seem like they were all that prominent yet. She didn't seem like she was moving over to kind of a vicious attack of TPSA until slightly later than September.

October. Yeah, the question becomes like, what happened in that period? Did you have communication with her? Were you talking to her? Were you concerned about her safety, this type of thing? Yeah. What was the interim there? that caused her to move into, we have to destroy TPSA.

Like what actually happened there? Well, that's, man, you're tempting me to share something I haven't shared before. But so I immediately was in touch with Candace. So again, reminding you in the audience, I was one of the people tasked with sort of, you know, being her point of contact with the org for a number of years. And I, so, you know, when everything happened initially, you're sort of, it feels like the whole slate is wiped clean. You have new beginnings. This terrible thing has just happened. And you're reaching out to people and talking to people. They're reaching out to you. And it's just an overwhelming sense of like, we're all living through this tragedy together. Bygones be bygones. Water under the bridge. Okay. It's been tense. We've had our differences. But we just lost Charlie. And.

You know, I think they're, you're operating under a place of hope that, you know, we're all in this together. And so I was very happy in those immediate, in the immediate aftermath to communicate with, with Candace and share what I knew and share what facts were coming in. And I was, you know, really worried about her safety, especially that day of. There was rumors floating around that I was later told were disinformation that they were maybe targeting her and Tucker and maybe even Megan Kelly. and apparently that just turned out to be misinformation, presumably may be Russian, I don't know. But people were picking stuff up, send it to me. I wanted to make sure she was aware of those potential threats. And then we just kept talking.

And I think that we stopped communication in October because it just became extraordinarily clear that this was heading in a terrible direction. and she was no longer operating in good faith. But I remember one conversation, it was probably like five or six days after. And I remember I had flown to D.C. We had J.D. Vance hosted Charlie's show on that Monday after. So Charlie was killed on a Wednesday, and then J.D. hosts the show on the Monday. So I remember I flew back, landed in the airport, and I believe I was talking to Candace. And she said something that I've not publicly communicated yet, but basically it was,

it was that if the wrong people take over the organization, and she said this, I'll never forget it. She says, I will burn down that organization. I swear to God. And you mean turning point? Turning point. If the wrong people. And I just assumed because she was very obviously anti-Jewish. There were rumors at this time. Like there was chattel of online, six days after whatever it was. She said, I'm going to burn down that organization. I swear to God. I just thought she meant if the Jews take over something like this. Ben Shapiro. Let's just saying the name. People were throwing out because Ben Shapiro had appeared on the show. Some people ran with like Ben Shapiro has now taken over turning point of USA. I don't know if he had appeared on that. I think he was actually

going to show up the next day on the Tuesday because it went JD, the Daily Wire guys, Glenn Beck, Megan Kelly, Tucker Carlson, that first week. I don't think that you even know what you just said there and how much of a bombshell that is. Can you repeat that again? Did you just say that Candace Owens told you that if the wrong people take over TPSA, she's going to burn it to the ground? Yeah, like five or six days after Charlie's killed. And then what did, and then what did you say in how to your life? I said, I told her because I knew that Charlie had told me multiple times.

And multiple, I'll say two, maybe three times I'd heard it. Then I was at Aspen when I repeated it. And I've said it was a miasma. This would come up in conversation and our own would say. We all just knew if something happened to Charlie that Erica would take over. But we didn't think that hard about it because we just kind of assumed Charlie's going to be with us for the next 56 years. But at that point, I told her before it was public information, you know, Erica, I think, is going to take over. And, you know, she's very conservative. She's Christian, you know, like, this is what Charlie wanted. The board was informed about this when Charlie was alive. Like, this is what's going to happen. Like, you don't have to go there. I remember because like a chill went down my spine. And I said, don't say that, Candace. Like, Erica's going to take over it. And you kind of heard her react like, oh, okay. Okay. Like, like, Like it kind of caught her off guard.

It takes on a different, it takes on a different meaning over time, I think. Yeah. And in the moment, she's going to burn it. She's reassured. She's going to burn it to the ground. But now it gets back. A thing I've said is I think the nature of, this is a speculation on my part. And again, I don't know her.

This is just kind of my read on her behavior. And I've been around a lot of people and in media and so on. I think Candace is narcissistic enough and kind of delusional enough. We mentioned we would do these campus tours. We're Charlie's west of the Mississippi. She's east of the Mississippi. I think Candice was able to tell her a story of I was Charlie's equal. I was the other person who did campus events just like Charlie did.

I am the natural successor or replacement to Charlie. and I think she managed at some point to convince herself that she would get a call and be asked to take over Turning Point USA and when that didn't happen, she experienced it as a colossal ego injury and a lot of things flowed out of that. That's what I personally suspect. To be fair, to be fair here,

I'm going to try to keep the speculation to a minimum as people are often always speculating about other people's motivations. They often get that incorrect. I'm not sure exactly what the motivations are. But I can tell you that there's a huge, like what you just said there is incredible. She said that early on that if people took over that she didn't like, she was going to burn it to the ground. That's an incredible statement. Well, and you think about how early it was.

That it was immediately on her mind by extension. And then I, yeah. And so, you know, I remember the first time. she mentioned me on her show and I go and I experienced the wave of like comments and you know searches. I can actually see it because, you know, immediately afterwards we, I took steps to protect my family's personal information online. So we had we had like a company that, you know, helps with privacy and stuff like that. And I just actually got the year in review kind of like, you know, report. And it shows this huge spike in early October.

But I think the first time she. like people trying to get people trying to access private stuff and doing all these like weird searches on you or whatever and so i i remember i don't know if it was late september or early october but i text i go did you just bring up to bring me on the show and she goes yes i did i said did you say good things or bad things and she says good things i told the truth she's like you've always been so good things i told the truth she's like you've always been so good things i was always really nice to her and she even some of the tweets said that about you yeah yeah and it's like and i told me anything like that she's always been so good to me and she even some of the tweets and she that are text, a group chats, texts that she's shared, you know, we're being supportive and we're being in good faith and we're, we're proceeding on as though like, like we can work together and things can can be harmonious in some way, shape, or form. And again, we didn't want her to turn on the org like she did to Daily Wire. So we always had that in the back of our heads. But so I was always nice to her. I'm actually a nice guy, as you said. Like, it's probably actually one of my flaws. But I was trying to proceed in that, in that vein. Especially after losing Charlie, you're hoping everything like blank slate, like I said, we're moving forward together. Like the movement needs to coalesce. All of this in good faith. And then, you know, the rest is history now. Well, let's move backwards a little bit if you guys don't mind.

So shortly after Charlie Kirk's assassination, your first day back at the office, right? What is this like? What is the actual atmosphere like at turning point? USA, not just the founder in figurehead, but also close friends and in at least one case, family member, is now murdered. He's been assassinated. What is the atmosphere there like at this time? Like horrible.

Like it's like that scene in saving private Ryan where like the bombs go off and just ringing, you know, it felt like you were walking through a cloud, you know, everybody crying, hugging a lot of that comforting each other and at the same time the way it's a there's so much activity

because everyone's there who's normally not there there's hundreds of people outside thousands actually it became like a kind of a I don't know like a shrine outside and people

it was like people were making pilgrimage which they can still do by the way if anyone is in Phoenix people do still come people do still come up and just pray lay flowers still to this day. But yeah, so there was just

so many people around and then like all these friends of the org throughout the years just wanted to come and so there was just people that aren't normally here they were here. And there was a lot of distraction

into activity because so many things needed to happen. Yeah. So Erica delivers a statement from the studio here. I believe was that Thursday night or Friday night

but it was very quickly. Friday night was so we came back so So here's what I say. So I flew from California to Salt Lake with my, or I'm, I guess, provo, with my wife immediately. Then J.D. Vance takes all of us back down on Air Force to Phoenix, which was like I still, he still has my so much appreciation and gratitude.

I extend to him for that gesture. And I think on Thursday I did Bannon, Steve. Bannon flew to Salt Lake or, you know, and he actually wanted me to do a show and I remember I just sobbed like a baby. I still think about that. Like, I'm a, I'm not one to really show emotion in public, but that day I just couldn't help it. And we were reading this tribute to Charlie. And I kind of just lost it on air. Then J.D. flies us back down to Phoenix. And then on Friday, we all, all the team got together and we were like, we really want to do the show and just remember, Charlie and that was just like a really heavy day. And I remember Friday night, Erica, that's where she gave her first speech, actually right behind where Blake is sitting right

there is where we set up just a podium, a podium lectern. And she gave that speech that was, it just felt like the whole world needed to hear from us somehow. That was just this like collective feeling. Well, so let's, let's back up a little bit here too, again. And it is completely fair to say that this environment that you find yourself in, besides the fact that everybody, of course, is sad, depressed, everything else because Charlie's assassinated. It sounds like this was complete chaos as well. Just total chaos. It was so busy. It was quiet in like a heavy way, but we still had to keep doing stuff, which was extraordinarily hard.

Think about everything that happens in the following week. We have guests hosts who are big names themselves. Each day, we have some stuff that happens out of the White House on the Monday with Vice President Vance. So you have getting a team to D.C. to do stuff with the Vice President of the United States. You have super high profile guest sales Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. You have the memorial, which is a full, like the most massive event turning point has ever done. So it's just madness. It was just madness. It was absolute madness.

It still blows me away the way the team pulled together to pull off the memorial. Like, that shouldn't be possible. Hi, folks, Andrew Colvett here. I'd like to tell you about my friends over at Y-ReFi. You've probably been hearing me talk about Y-ReFi for some time now. We are all in with these guys. If you or someone you know is struggling with private student loan debt, take my advice and give them a call.

Maybe you're behind on your payments. Maybe you're even in default. You don't have to live in this nightmare anymore. Y-Refi will provide you a custom payment. based on your ability to pay. They tailor each loan individually. They can save you thousands of dollars and you can get your life back. We go to campuses all over America and we see student after student who's drowning in private student loan debt. Many of them don't even know how much they owe. YREFI can help. Just go to yrefi.com. That's the letter why then refi.com and remember why refi

doesn't care what your credit score is. Just go to why refi.com and tell them your friends. friend Andrew sent you. So is it fair to say then that you guys were leaning very heavily towards friends and influencers to help you guys get on track and figure out where you were going and what you were doing? Of course, yeah. And so it stands to reason one of these influencers perhaps was Owens, right? That makes sense for why you would contact her. She contacted me.

I contacted her. It was both both. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So that makes sense. So in a way, some of the. these influencers that you are contacting to kind of help you get through a very dark time in

turning points history, the darkest time in turning points history. And then one of them used this to their advantage to later leak these various messages and this type of thing in order to utilize that against turning point. Is that a fair statement to say? I think that's a fair statement to say. Doesn't that seem diabolical? Like that, like that. I've seen. I've seen. I've seen, I've seen some horrible things, but it seems overtly diabolical to take advantage when it's the case that there's absolute chaos and a emotional turmoil in order to integrate yourself into that to later be used for the purposes of profiteering and to, quote, burn down this organization. So it's interesting. This is part of the reasons why I asked the pointed question, and forgive me, I'm not very emotional by nature. I just want to get to the actual facts.

It does seem that some of these people took advantage of this because it was a dark time. And if you think that that's fair to say, were there other creators that came in to support you who you never thought in a million years would have? You would be one of them. You know, I mean, I try and I try and keep things private. Like, I genuinely, there's a part of me that's so disgusting. I have to discuss any of this stuff because my my nature is to you know use discretion and and keep private conversations phone calls private right and so I'll do that here but yeah there was absolutely a bunch of people that you know from the wider movement you know turning point had

a lot of connections and still still does obviously but with a lot of people right but not everybody there were some people like yourself that we weren't connected with or you know you insert name here that we're not really close to, but a lot of those people came out of the woodwork and just reached out and wanted to help and have continued to do so, actually, which is one of the, you know, people often ask Blake and I, like, how did you get through this? How do you get through it? Well, first of all, our faith in Jesus Christ. I, like, our faith is so foundational. And that was something Charlie was, I mean, he said he wanted to be remembered for courage for his faith. And, you know, he surrounded himself with a bunch of people that are Christians and Catholics and devout people.

Secondly, my marriage, my wife and I, like our relationship has been closer than ever. My kids, my family. But thirdly, it was the larger community rallying around us and continues to. And despite the attacks, that's what's been actually pretty encouraging. There's a lot of people out there that are saying that don't, you know, maybe they haven't gotten into the fray, but they have our backs or maybe they have gotten loud, you know, but the people I wouldn't have expected. I will tell you. Doesn't it seem to be, I mean, real quick, I'm sorry to cut in. Doesn't it seem to be an unrealistic.

This is one of the problems I had when I was going back to falsify my own claim was realistic expectations. So, first of all, Kirk wasn't just a figurehead. My understanding is that Kirk was very, very invested in the daily runnings of TPUSA. Is that correct? Yeah. Yeah. He was really hands-on, certainly, but he also had it set up in such a way

that if he had to go travel, do these tours, that, like, you know, the people he put in positions of power. They know what they're doing. Charlie was a supremely talented manager in the sense of being involved in everything, but not micromanaging everything because he recognized that was impossible.

I do want to address what thing with that. So then isn't it unrealistic the expectation that while all this chaos is going on, and emotional turmoil as TPUSA is trying to find its legs again while all this is happening. Isn't it an unrealistic expectation that everybody is going to say all of the proper things, they're going to do all the proper things, are going to have the best foot forward with every public image event? Doesn't that seem unrealistic on its face?

To me it is, but you're also looking at this in good faith, right? You're applying some amount of sympathy to us. what's been amazing. So you talk about this first week, first two weeks, you have people running all over the place. It was not even controlled chaos. It was just chaos, right? Because, you know, one of the things about Turning Point when Charlie was with us was,

you know, it's like I had the title of spokesman, but Charlie was the spokesman, really. You know what I mean? Charlie was the drumbeat at the front that would, you know, go do the interviews and things like that. So, you know, now you have all this media attention. You have all these people that are coming to you because they want to help. They want to do something nice for you. So you want to also meet them where they're at and try and, you know, fulfill the request. So you had that times like 100, 150 people just running around like crazy for the first couple of weeks.

And it took us a little while to kind of like rain everything back in and get some like protocols in place. You know, so it was complete, complete chaos, I will say. Yeah. Yeah, I understand. that you had wanted to make a point just before. Oh, yeah, because so much had been made at least earlier stages about this like Doge audit and stuff like this. Well, I just want people to understand Charlie, we talk about him being hands on. Charlie, I don't know the threshold, but it was like a thousand bucks or like 500 bucks or something.

If there was an expense going out the door that was over and it was like around that, but like 500 or 1,000 bucks, you had, he had to review it first. Charlie knew where all the money, like, of the org was going all the time. And he was a stickler for it. So these accusations, like he was somehow a dupe or he was naive about these sheisters around him. And this has gotten insane over time. There was an episode maybe a month ago or so where Candace ran with the idea that Tyler had like progressively replaced everyone at Turning Point to turn this evangelical org into a Mormon mafia. And every single person she named as part of this Moran mafia had been at Turning Point longer than Candice had been. that, you know, okay, yeah, our camera guy who was Mormon,

took your headshot when you came here. Yeah. So anyways, but the point is, like, Charlie just loved Doge. She was a big fan of Elon. He thought it was like a cool, like, you know, internal messaging, hey, where, you know, it's just. I think it was literally on par with your high school. Like the idea is like, find ways to be more efficient here because.

Yeah, it was just driving internal excellence, iteratively excelling and getting better. That's all that was. It wasn't some, like, untoward thing where he's trying to hunt down, you know, people that are, you know, I guess laundering the money or something. You know, so just many things like that have been misconstrued, portrayed wrongly, and just with like so little grace or understanding or credit to Charlie for actually knowing how to run an organization. So essentially disgruntled former employee.

Disgruntled former employee gets upset. Let's keep going. This is great. Yeah. strategy. There are a lot more questions that I do have if you guys will humor me for just a few more. Let's go. Let's go.

Let's go. Why not? All right. Well, let's fast forward now. We kind of went backwards a bit. We're going to fast forward to when these attacks really began to escalate, especially from the various people all over the internet. Many of these people who I've looked into have been at this for many years, attacking various organizations, attacking various content creators, anybody who essentially doesn't

go along with their whatever it is that they believe, you know, this month. They're going to be ruthlessly attacked. You had mentioned earlier before we started my end of the questioning that TPSA really didn't have any sort of online defense mechanism from this type of thing, nor was it expected, obviously. Could you dive into that a little bit more? What do you mean like the, like an online defense mechanism? Sorry, just be a little bit more specific.

In other words, you said that Kirk stayed away from internet beefs. He stayed away from kind of the online drama sphere. He stayed away from that type of thing. So when these attacks escalated, were you just kind of caught by surprise that this was even going on? Because it wasn't a thing that TPUSA traditionally had never had to deal with. Yeah, we would definitely not geared probably, I would say, to fight that type of war. certainly the unceasing nature of it because turning point had been attacked before Charlie had been used about a left though by the left or by more you might say more moderate I don't even want to say more moderate factions of the right he we had the griper war way in the past and those guys would go after Charlie and sometimes you'd get uh I mean we'd been through a few rounds of people trying to say Charlie was anti-Semitic and I think that usually had some sort of factional struggle to sure sure sure and so he'd been attacked before but I think what was

special about this one is Charlie had never been the subject of conspiracy theories before which by the ways you're seeing with the Lindsay Clancy stuff it's like there's no reasoning with some of this stuff and you're just like blown away at the I think you called it the fallacy of the gaps where people just like fill in the gap like that

it's the evidence of the gaps when we say we've never been faced with conspiracy theories a few natures of that is if someone okay if someone calls Charlie an anti-Semite or says he's bad or say he's a racist or whatever even if it's an unfair attack it has a certain concreteness and substance to it that you can

engage with once or twice and it can't really just go forever and ever it's like a one-off thing you respond to it or you don't it is a successful attack or it fails whatever move on but what we never had was when I say we never had a conspiracy theory we never had one of these things that they truly can just decide to push endlessly it was like they'd come up with something new

almost every day if you're like how the hell did you get like the evidence of the gaps fallacy is like that when I heard you

explain that fallacy which is a new one I hadn't heard before I was like bingo that's what it is like because every day it was kind of like

a new thread that would get pulled and I'm like how the hell would anybody even like we're not smart enough to pull off whatever the hell

they think we're doing here like nobody well one of the dangers one of the major dangers of using that sort of fallacious thinking because it's not just fallacious argumentations.

It's a fallacious form of thinking. You just shouldn't think in patterns that way. It's because it's heads you win and then, you know, or heads I win, tails you lose, right? So the idea here is either you have to spend all of your time endlessly addressing those things or you don't bother addressing them and then your silence is an admittance, right? Right. So there's actually that set up in such a way to make. create a no-win situation for a person. If you address it, that's bad. And if you don't address it,

that's bad. So ultimately, that's why the evidence of the gaps is a fallacious form of thinking. Now, it's self-destructive, ultimately, because people come to absurd conclusions. But while somebody's being victimized through that methodology or being attacked by that methodology, it's very hard to defend against it because either you have to waste endless amounts of time trying to defend yourself from the attack or it is the case that if you're silent about the attack because it has no merit that then your silence is an admittance of set attack right well it's totally right and i would add a couple things here too you know when charlie died we lost our biggest megaphone right we lost charlie having millions of followers to set the record straight on x y z so so we're just

we lost a very practical, you know, function right there. And, you know, so there was that. Also, we were trying to keep up with this explosive growth of the org and all these kids that want to start chapters. We had real, and we were still doing the tour in the fall tour to pay tribute to Charlie, which went extraordinarily well and all that was great. But it was like, we had real stuff to do, you know, and so you're faced with the, you know, do you, you know, I'm kind of, I'm kind of, I'm kind of reminded of Michael Knowles while he turned down, you know, doing your, your debate, moderating your debate. It was, he was sort of saying, like, I don't choose to engage this.

Now, you can disagree with that logic, but there was a part of us that were kind of going, like, this is so absurd and it's so insulting that I choose not to sort of, like, even engage it, because, like, I don't owe you anything. I don't have to dance monkey dance when you tell me I owe you some piece of information here or there. And so there is that kind of thing. And then ultimately, you know, obviously Blake has become more outspoken. I've become more outspoken. And I think the other thing that was interesting about this time is that people assumed that what Candace was saying about her relationship to Charlie and her proximity to the org was actually true. They were also assuming she was a conservative.

And I think that that has been, both of which have been, I think, proven untrue. And, you know, she'll deny that and she'll say that we're besties or whatever. But it wasn't true. Okay. And the point is those lines have gotten clear in the month's sense. And I think that's been helpful too. So people kind of understand where the two sides are at. When so just moving backwards very quickly back to Charlie and Candace's relationship. Was he pawning her off on other people? Is that what was going on just to kind of maybe not get her to not freak out? What was going on with? Yeah. I mean, it's a soft landing. Yeah. I mean, I don't want to, I don't want to be overly specific because there are. friends involved and things like that. Yeah, but it was a soft land. It was like, hey, you know, you've, you know, we're not, you're not, we're not trying to like fire you and humiliate you. We're trying to do it graciously and everybody can still be friends and all that stuff. So, yeah,

it was, but that that's basically what happened in 2019, I guess, early 20. The typical you're fired, here's the handshake on the way out and I, good luck to you. Kind of. Yeah. And then that that iterated, right, when, you know, we turning point took over, Blexit, you know, at some point. I think Charlie again, Charlie was glass half full. Charlie was always trying to, trying to do things that were useful for the movement. And Charlie was always like very bullish on outreach to minority, urban communities and thought that thought that with turning point organizational might behind it, Blexic could turn into something, you know, really powerful. And, you know, it ended up being the wrong bet in that direction for many reasons. But so Charlie was always looking to

future always trying to build and that's one of the things I love about him but ultimately you know in this instance it was a massive backfire gotcha and then I'm I'm not going to waste too much more your guys as time I hope we can do this again in the future but I do have two quick questions that I want to cover before I end my my end of the questions that you guys have been very gracious with the first is what's on everybody's mind my chats asked about this a million times the crucible chat what's so what's in store for t p u s a what's what's uh what's actually going to go on going forward yeah well i mean we've got i mean we've got a lot nothing has stopped from what we did while charlie was with us of course yeah so we just had chapter leader summit was had last month

and that was twice as big um twice as big as the 2024 chapter league more than twice as big it was massive massive massive thousands of people thousands of people these are all all young people, all people involved with chapters, all people who are really engaged with Charlie's message, really inspired by him. So that still is going. Young Women's Leadership Summit, that's going. We've got our first men's summit. So new events are being rolled out. I like the Men's Summit idea. Exactly. I love that. I love the Men's Summit idea. Yeah, and I think it's very cool. They're keeping the list of speakers secret, which I think is a very cany marketing play. I don't even know who the speakers are actually. And then America.

America Fest still happens. Everything that Turning Point has done or did while Charlie was with us continues to the extent that the outpouring of love and revival and support happened after the shooting, turning point is doing its best to harness that for the good of the country, for the good of the movement, for the good of the Christian faith, all of those things. We've got Amfest coming up. There's going to be a lot of debates, by the way, because, you know, we'll. debate data centers flock cameras you know foreign policy all that stuff so it's going to be huge amfest is going to be massive and we've got the pick up the mic tours going around all over college campuses by the way high school campuses have exploded almost 200 percent since and those take a long time

people don't understand how long a high school campus takes to become an rSO right it took us like three years to get charlie's high school at rso status that didn't happen until i think after he died So we're over 3,500 official Club America chapters, over 1,500 college chapters. We have a million students involved now with Turning Point in one way, shape, or form of the other. We had 400,000 churches in our network. Now we have 12,000 part of TPSA Faith. We've got over 1,200 employees across all the Turning Point organizations, massive, massive support from grassroots donors that are like small dollar donors.

So everything's moving and chucking. along and you know as I think as you say like stories of our demise have been wildly exaggerated by people that want to seed that yeah it's it's it's crazy and I will just tell you when you meet our the kids the students man these are like the best kids in America I really genuinely believe that they're smart they're hardworking most of them are really serious Christians and they they love this country they want to fight for this country they want to bring people together these are not the people that are like dooming and glooming and they're not trying to rip people apart and tear people down they're great i mean i just loved we had a we had a chapter leader on who got

accosted by this hag in indiana who was about blasting her on ticto on ticot and just the level of positivity she had about it and it would take an army to make me uh feel bad it was so great i'm looking at other stuff uh you know staff is sending me other stuff that's going on turning point education is bigger so they have a they have a gap your program for students who maybe aren't sure what they want to do in college yet or if they want to go to college, that has its second location. More people are signing up for that. We have the Great Americans Hillgate Tour.

I don't even know what that is, actually. I should learn more about that. We've got communities that are launching. So we had a bunch of these, like, alum that wanted to stay involved in their communities. We should hike that up, Turning Point communities, because we would get endless emails that say, I'm 38 years old. Can I go to Turning Point campus events? And I'd say, you know, not all of them are closed, but it is a student organization.

Well, now you could have a-25 or 26. Now you could have a turning point chapter that is just families in your neighborhood. We've got military-affiliated, first responders. Yeah. All of that. And so all of those people can now have a turning point chapter effectively, which means more events, more ways of getting the message out. By the way. So you're going to continue the mission of Charlie Kirk.

Yeah. So this is the key here, too. I want to make sure that's all on the C3 side, but that doesn't count all of the vision that Charlie had, like on actual chasing ballots. And so think about like turning point action. We're light years ahead of where we were in 2024 as far as our ballot chase program.

So that we call it Chase the Vote, where we hire actual full-time employees and now we've launched it in three different states. We're in Arizona, Nevada, and New Hampshire. So we're building the red wall, which would make it very hard, even if in 2028 the Democrats sweep the blue wall, they couldn't win a national race if we hold the South

and we add New Hampshire, Nevada, and Arizona. And the growth here is massive. We have field offices in all those states. We have thousands of employees already right now. And they're all trained up. They're mobilized. They're knocking on doors, sending text messages. That's happening right now.

Because that was Charlie's vision. We need the ground game. The ground game is the most important. And that was always where TPUSA came in. is not just about influencers. That's only the minor part of that job. I always saw TPA USA as a giant. Turning more action for that, just to make sure we don't have anything that I'd said.

Yeah, but that's the, I mean, that's the mission that people support more than anything. Can I just ask a last question before I let you guys go? Can you give me your word and commitment to this chat who's watching and the many, many thousands who will be watching this later, that you will commit to stopping the left? you'll do everything in your power to stop the left. Blake, don't say it how you really said. I just think it's a bizarre question because, like, to the extent if people say they're not answering every single bizarre theory and question we have,

it's because our priority always is combating the left. So here's our vision. We want young people to be able to get married, to have babies, to own a home, to experience the American dream in an affordable way and not have to go die in some foreign war and to love their country, to believe in it, we want to restore the social compact.

We have a vision for young people that will buy in and have skin in the game in America. That is like fundamentally the vision of turning point. And in order to do that, yes, you must defeat the left because the ideals will kill and destroy this civilization not only America, but Western civilization. So yes, a thousand percent. And when you asked that earlier question,

were we really equipped to fight this kind of war? No, because we, we are you know you hear about think tanks no we're a battle tank that's what charlie always used to say that is designed to defeat the left and we're not a we're not a drama entity like we don't exist to just have oh endless drip drip revelations in whatever soap opera thing that has nothing to do with the next election that has nothing to do with the actual lives of american young people or american families there's a couple rules there was a couple rules that charlie had no black pilling there's no black pilling Okay, so we got headwinds in 2026, maybe even in 2028, whatever.

The polls are one way or the other. We got a lot of tough races, no black pilling and be a happy warrior. And so, listen, we're going to keep doing what we do as best as we can. And, you know, we ask for people to not believe the lies, to believe in what Charlie built and, you know, have our back because we have this country's back. And we crush the left, gentlemen. And we crush the left. You got to crush the left. They're the most dangerous.

Charlie, I'm now, you. Blasted back into my brain a line Charlie had in one of our telegrams, or he was just, I think he just said that, I will never stop wanting to own the lips. Yeah, because, yeah, well, much I could say. Well, gentlemen, I appreciate your time and allowing me to ask these questions. I know that we're constrained a bit by time. It was very kind of you to take a little bit of extra time for this chat, and I hope both of you have a wonderful day. Likewise,

thank you for taking the time, letting us ask about your debate, and it was great. Honestly, we're open books, and I knew this is part of the deal, so happy to do it, and we'll do it again soon. All right. Sounds great. You have a wonderful day. You too. Thanks,

Andrew. For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com.