The Trish Regan Show - FCC CRACKS DOWN on The View! FBI Expands Charlie Kirk Case + 11 Dems ARRESTED for Blocking Ice

Episode Date: September 19, 2025

First Kimmel… now The View ! The FCC launches a bias probe that could shut down the talk show. The FBI uncovers a wider network tied to Charlie Kirk’s assassination — while 58 Democrats refuse to back a resolution in his honor. And, chaos in NYC as 11 Democrat lawmakers are hauled off in handcuffs for blocking ICE. SUBSCRIBE for the daily Trish Regan Show! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

And here we are, happy Friday. This is some interesting news to report. You know, I told you this was going to happen. I could see it coming a mile away. Yeah, yeah, I'll tell you why, because it was one of those things that was just absolutely so positively obvious. If you're the view and you're continuing to poke the bear, so to speak, and you're continuing to put just nonsense on the air all the time after Brendan Carr, head of the FCC, has already sent your boss over at Disney two letters calling you guys out. He's gone on Fox. He's called you out specifically. You didn't see this one coming? Oh, then you're just, well, even dumber than you look, right? I'll tell you this. They are under investigation right now. The Federal Communications Commission is launching an investigation

into the view, which means in a pretty short order of time, you can anticipate that they may be going just by-bye the way of Jimmy Kimmel. And before everybody freaks out and says, oh my God, Gosh, this is the end of free speech, et cetera. I'm here to tell you no, it's not, because the view is actually held to a different standard, believe it or not, than say, Rachel Mather, over on MSNBC, or even Joy Reid was over on MSNBC, or Sean Hannity is on Fox News, totally different standards, because one is broadcast and one is cable. And you can go all the way back to the 1934 Communications Act to see how this one all works out. Anyway, let's go straight to Brennan Carr, who's head of the FCC.

Here he is speaking with Scott Jennings on his radio show saying, yeah, we're looking into the view. We're going to launch an investigation into the view. And the reason they're going to do this is because what they have discovered is that all those local affiliates all around the country, they don't like the view any more than they like Jimmy Kimmel. Listen. Jimmy Fallon and Seth Myers at NBC. Just wondering, do you have comments on those shows? and are they doing what Kimmel did Monday night? And is it even worse on those programs, in your opinion?

Well, if you can be unfunny, that's fine. And a lot of people are sort of saying that, well, people are punishing Kimmel because they don't like a joke that he told. But, you know, we don't need to rehash it here. But obviously what he said was not a joke. It wasn't presented at all that way. But when you look at these other TV shows, what's interesting is the FCC does have a rule called the Equal Opportunity Rule. which means, for instance, if you're in the run up to an election, you have one partisan elected official on,

you have to give equal time, equal opportunity, to the opposing partisan politician. So far so good. But there's an exception to that rule called the Bonafide News exception, which means if you are a bonafide news program, you don't have to abide by to equal opportunity rule. And over the years, the SEC has developed a body of case law on that and has suggested that most of these late-night shows, other than SNL are bona fide news programs. And attention, I would assume, you could make the argument that the view is a bona fide news show. But I'm not so sure about that.

And I think it's worthwhile to have the FCC look into whether the view and some of the programs that you have still qualify as bona fide news programs and therefore exempt from the equal opportunity regime that Congress has put in place. Got about 30 seconds. You hear that? So what they're looking at is whether or not the view actually falls under basically existing legislation going all the way back to 1934 in that you have a responsibility to your community because right this programming is coming into the homes of all these communities all across America to be a public service in some way, shape, or form. And so if you're a news, program, you have to be part of that public service. If you're a broadcast program, you're part of that public service. That's what it was designed for. Now, cable totally different story. They could go

take the view and they could go put it on MSNBC and they could run that all day long. Of course, that's partly why MSNBC is being spun off. Don't forget from Comcast and NBC because they don't want the network, which is governed by the FCC, to have any taint to it or stink around it as a result of MSNBC. But for whatever reason, you had Jimmy Kimmel thinking he was Greg Gutfeld, right? The liberal version of Greg Gutfeld over on broadcast television, that can't happen. It can't exist. That actually is something that would be against federal law. And this is why this new head of the FCC, Brendan Carr, is taking this so seriously. I mean, think about the misinformation that has been put out there over and over and over and over again, to the

point where they had to read these, quote, legal notes, right, because it was just flat out wrong facts that they were putting on the view day in, day out. Oh, there was that time that who said, they're going to be deporting all the gays, all the non-whites. I mean, crazy talk, right? And yet this is treated like it's gospel. This is what's coming into your home. This is what is being piped in over federal airwaves. All of this. He's not going to be, he's not going to, you know, say, you're with a white guy. I'm going to keep you from being deport. No, he's going to deport you and put the white guy with someone else. The man is out there. He's also, can I. Mm-hmm. He's out there.

Oh, he's out there, all right. You know what? Did you notice that they didn't say anything about Jimmy Kimmel yesterday after the news had come down? They were absolutely silent. I think they're a little bit scared. Just a teeny tiny bit right now on the view as they should be. But the big news coming their way is that the FCC is confirming they're looking at launching an investigation into the view. This comes as they launch already an investigation into Disney and to ABC for.

its DEI practices. This comes amid multiple warnings from one Brendan Carr for none other than ABC, specifically that network and specifically that show. So, you know, they don't seem to be able to take a hint, but don't forget what Brendan Carr told Fox, maybe this is about a month, month and a half ago. Watch. And this is what they said. Joy Behar is an irrelevant loser suffering from a severe case of Trump derangement syndrome. It's no surprise that the view's ratings hit an all-time low last year. She should self-reflect on her own jealousy of President Trump's historic popularity before her show is the next to be pulled off air, end quote.

Is the view now in the crosshairs of this administration? Look, it's entirely possible that there's issues over there. I mean, again, stepping back this broader dynamic, Once President Trump has exposed these media gatekeepers and smashed this facade, there's a lot of consequences. I think the consequences of that aren't quite finished. And look, the views got a lot of challenges there. It wasn't that long ago, I think one episode, one show alone, they had to stop, interrupt the show, and read four separate legal notices to try to avoid legal liability. So I'm not surprised to hear people saying that their ratings are struggling.

Wow. Sir, where does this end then? Look, I think we need a course correction. You know, it's time for America's legacy broadcasters to return to promoting the public interest. And just recently, you know, Skydance, which is looking to acquire CBS, wrote letters to the FCC, committing to serious change, to trying to root out bias, to putting in place an ombudsman that would address these issues, to returning to unbiased, trustworthy journalism. That's where we have to go.

And I think we're getting some wins along the way. It's trust but verify at the end of the day. You know, we're not where we need to go. But I think this legacy media really need to reorient or they're going to continue to run into issues like Colbert, where it just doesn't make economic sense to run a partisan circus. Okay, so there's the economic argument, right? You're just not making that much money. Colbert was draining them of something like $40 million a year over at CBS. And then there's the partisan circus, which keeps coming up over and over again. And then there's this sort of, you know, public duty that you've completely ignored.

I'm going to tell you. So I used to work in network news, and I had worked for CBS Evening News, and I also worked for NBC Nightly News. But this was like years ago. This is pre-Trump. It's like there's a real big distinction, pre-imposed Trump. And I can assure you that one of my goals always, when I was on the air at those networks was, you know, I may have had my thoughts on a particular story, but I did try and put that aside. And I would very religiously try to make sure we always had both sides, right, in the story. So I remember being very conflicted with this once when I to cover the Duke, remember the Duke lacrosse story and I just had this instinct that those kids

were innocent and I'm like, oh gosh, you know, like how do I? And still, I was careful. I was careful to give both sides. Why? Because you know what? The FCC actually looks at that stuff or it used to back in the day. And for whatever reason, after Donald Trump got elected, everything became chaotic. I remember going to cable for the first time at CNBC and being like, woo, I'm home free. This is fantastic. I can actually give a little bit more of a viewpoint. You could. You could because you weren't governed by the same set of rules. You were no longer on the public airwaves.

Totally different business. And hey, hey, hey, over here, you know, it's like one big party. I get to say whatever I want to say. Now, don't I? We have a good time. Do we not? I mean, we're over a million subs. I'm going to wait on the party.

We'll have a big party next week. But out of respect for my former colleague and friend Charlie Kirk, who has a funeral, a big funeral coming up this week. weekend, of course, I kind of want to hold off on that. But anyway, it's remarkable what we've been able to accomplish here. But we don't, of course, have the same rules governing us as the broadcast channels do. Again, remember, big difference. Okay, you've got the Communications Act in 1934 that says, hey, you have to have some obligation, right, to the community. They also have what's known as the Fairness Act in terms of, forgive me, equal time act. So you've got to give everyone equal time.

So if Kamala Harris is going to get three minutes on the evening news, well, then guess what? Donald Trump's going to get three minutes on the evening news. The only problem is, you know, it's three minutes of how much we love Kamala, how she's the greatest thing in the world since sliced bread. And then it's, we hate Trump, we hate Trump, we hate Trump. And so what has happened is the American people have lost trust and faith in these news organizations. You see that, of course, reflected in the ratings.

But in terms of where the regulation comes in and whether or not this is restricting speech. The answer is no, it's not restricting speech. Jimmy Kimmel can go take his show over to MSNBC or over here to Streamingville, and he can do that all day long every day of the week without a problem. But when it comes to broadcast news, you cannot do what Jimmy Kimmel did. Jimmy Kimmel flat out lied. He presented misinformation. And for those of you that, oh, you know, it was all in the spirit of a joke. Listen to me, it was misinformation. And at that point, you are really not fulfilling the duties of the affiliate requests for those licenses, because you're providing the public with misinformation.

He did say, and we knew very well by this point in time, because this was Monday night when he said this, we hit some new lows over the weekend with the Maggie Gang, desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it. I mean, that's a heck of a thing to say, is it not? And it's flat out wrong. We know it's wrong. For goodness sakes. Good old Larry Tribe. Oh, yeah, that big deal Harvard lawyer, right? He tried to spin that one over the weekend. He wrote, and this was on the 12th of September, so a day before, Kirk's apparent assassin seems to have been ultra MAGA, exploding the GOP MAGA attempt to pin the blame on this tragedy on liberals like that is just wrong. So he quickly had to take that back. There were big articles actually written about it, about what a hack Larry Tribe is from Hart. Harvard, this like super-duper constitutional law scholar that's generally not well-regarded,

shall we say, in his older age because he has become such a partisan hack. Anyway, he wrote again apologizing, saying, you know, regarding Charlie Kirk's murder, grotesque murder, nothing could possibly justify it. Then he went on to say my reaction saying that he was on the right, that the assassin was on the right, was premature and I am sorry I reposted a tweet to that effect before. Leading my repost. Okay, I just point this out, because it was all out there, meaning Jimmy knew darn well. He knew darn well what was going on.

And yet he and his producers, I mean, like all 40 of them, maybe there are 50 of them. It's a big run show. They're all writing up the copy. They're looking at the copy. And somehow they think it's perfectly fine for him to tell something that is flat out untrue, to say that this was a MAGA person that assassinated the wonderful, my friend Charlie Kirk. That is disgusting. And you know what else is disgusting? The fact that the liberal media,

they're still perpetuating this idea as recently as yesterday, that guy who really doesn't belong on television, who is totally a partisan hack. His name is Brian Stelcher, otherwise known as I get him confused between Mr. Humpty Dumpty or Potato Head, but both fit. Anyway, here he is trying to convince you that there's some confusion over just exactly. who this guy was, and therefore Jimmy Kimmel, who's perfectly within his right to say such a thing. Watch. Other liberals say in recent days that the motives are unclear

and that maybe the suspect in this case was a Republican or was some sort of far-right fringe figure. Of course, there has been a lot of discussion about that in recent days. There's a lot of evidence pointing in other directions about the suspect. But Kimmel was on the air talking about this, making a very serious commentary

amid his jokes in his monologue Monday night. Here's where it became interesting, earlier today. The FCC chairman, Brendan Carr, went on a far right webcast and condemned Kimmel and urged ABC to suspend him. He also talked about possible regulatory punishments of Disney. I want to go back to what Humpty Dumpty Potato Head just said. I don't mean to be mean, but let's face it, he's kind of mean, okay? So he deserves it. So the guy is like trying to say, oh, we don't know. We don't know. No, no, we knew. All right. And the FBI, came out and it was very clear that this guy had very left-leaning politics. In fact, when we're

going to get to this story, the FBI is investigating some 20-plus suspects that he was associated with. We're going to get to that, as I said. But I just want to point out, Jamie's going to go bye-bye. Like, they're going to negotiate an exit. He's done. Nobody wants to see his face again back on the air. You have people calling up their affiliates from all over the country. Okay, so Sinclair's like, what is it? We're pulling this. Next door. It was like, we're a problem. We're pulling this. And I know people, oh, you know, next hour's up for some approval on an FCC deal. It doesn't change the fact that what happens when all those people start emailing and calling up the local channel and they're like, what just happened and they're upset? The affiliates respond to

that. I know I've worked at an affiliate before. When you start getting phone calls in because of something the network did or something you did, they actually pay attention to that. And so it makes all the sense in the world. The country's in a raw point in time, like everybody's grieving, and Jimmy Kimmel tries to go on and promote a whole bunch of misinformation, disinformation. You might be able to get away with that if you're Rachel Maddo on MSNBC. Although that's getting increasingly debatable, we will discuss that. You might be able to get away with it there, right? You can talk about all the crazy things you want to talk about and not be held accountable by the FCC. But if you're on, you're on,

broadcast TV, ladies and gentlemen, you can't have a blatantly political position, even if you think it's funny. You can't be Greg Gutfeld. You can't be the liberal answer to Greg Gutfeld. I mean, Greg knows that. Right? You know, Jimmy ought to try and he'd get completely creamed by Greg, but I'm just saying he ought to go up against him on MSNBC. See how that one works out. I know who's going to win that game all day long. But anyway, let's hear from I'm Greg, my former colleague over there at Fox. ...of-the-air. Now, as much as I'd like to take credit, his demise was caused by another

tall, one named Jimmy Kimmel. He's gone indefinitely, which is like saying Amelia Earhart's flight is delayed. Turns out you can't blindly lie to a million viewers and say Charlie Kirk's killer was MAGA, especially since the shooter appears to be a lefty, meaning he's more in line with Kimmel than Kirk. Perhaps that's why Kimmel said this. We hit some new lows over the weekend, with the Maga Gang desperately trying to characterize

this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it. Censorship? I don't think so. After all, you do have a right to be wrong, but your boss also has a right to suspend you when you deliberately do so. And Jimmy meant to mislead his viewers at the worst possible time to do it.

And the FCC's job is to oversee the three networks, which are finite public goods, so it's a privilege and not a right. And he can always peddle his bile elsewhere. Absolutely. He can peddle it, as I said, on MSNBC or on a podcast or somewhere else. But you can't actually peddle it on a broad. broadcast network. And that's what the left keeps missing. And by the way, even some conservatives keep missing. I've talked to some very, very smart conservatives. And they're like, oh, this is kind

that's taking it too far. It's taking it too far. And I'm like, here's what you guys don't understand. Like, there is, there's a law in the book, right? Like, you have to serve the community interest. It's not serving the community interest when you're promoting misinformation and disinformation. This is not about free speech. He can go do this show over on cable all day long. morons on the left, they either don't understand this or they're manipulating, manipulating facts to serve them. They want, oh my gosh, this is the end of the First Amendment. No, it's not.

No, it's not. He can work at CNN if he wants because, you know, they lie plenty over there. Watch, Swallow. Yeah, Congressman, I see you are wearing a hat. What does that hat say? You're damn right I am, John. I was a guest on the Jimmy Kimmel show. he every night has a right to come into any house that wants to watch and entertain Americans.

No, he doesn't, okay? He doesn't have that right. He absolutely doesn't. Not if he's promoting misinformation, disinformation, or if he's consistently 99.9% of the time going after one person and one person only. If he suffers from massive TDS, he needs to go to CNN or MSNBC or go over to YouTube. Huh. I'd like to see that.

No one will watch, okay? No one's going to watch him. He's not that funny. Anyway, yeah, I'm not a Jimmy Kimmel fan, but I'm definitely not an Eric Swal fan, and I think it's moronic of these people to try and present this as anything other than it is. There are rules.

There are. And by the way, Trish Regan got fired, Tucker Carlson got fired, on cable networks were actually, by the way, we had the ability to say whatever we wanted to say because it was cable. But, oh, it turns out. you know what, Fox has all those affiliates.

So they don't like having this sort of threat, right, of, say, somebody breathing down their back. The Democrats saying, hey, you really shouldn't be doing this because they have all those regular affiliates. So the PurePlay cable or the Pure Play streaming network actually is where you're going to have the most freedom. But we continue on with Fang Fang's BF. This Greg Gutfield on Fox has a right to be not funny and go on his network and entertain Americans.

It's a part of who we are, John, and frankly, it should shake every American that the president of the United States is out there firing comedians who make fun of him. That is not who we are, and every American should care and stand up to this. And the CNN guy, who I think is a pretty decent pedigree from some decent schools, he's like, yeah. I mean, like they're just buying it. They're like little lapdogs. They're soaking it all up instead of saying, well, gee, actually, don't you think, and that guy worked at ABC, so he ought to know this better.

Don't you think the broadcast and cable are two totally different animals and how they're governed is actually extremely different because the cable companies don't have to go and say, hey, FCC, can we have a broadcast license? Totally different business. And this is what Brandon Carr has been trying to communicate. For whatever reason, the last 10 years, I'm telling you, ever since Donald Trump walked down that elevator, right? Ever since then, they've just gone off their rocker and they've been completely crazed and filled with TDS. And somehow that's been allowed on network television, which is weird. I get it on cable. Okay. So you have Fox and Newsmax on one.

one side and CNN and MSNBC on the other. But you can't do that in network TV. You know, when you look at the conduct that has taken place by Jimmy Kimmel, it appears to be some of the sickest conduct possible. As you've indicated, there are, you know, avenues here for the FCC. So there are some ways in which I need to be a little bit careful because we could be called ultimately to be a judge. on some of these claims that come up.

But I don't think this is an isolated incident. I mean, you go back to Representative Swalwell, you know, emphasizing that Charlie Kirk's Killer was a straight white male from a Republican family that voted for Donald Trump. In some quarters, there's a very concerted effort to try to lie to the American people about the nature, as you indicated, one of the most significant newsworthy

public interest acts that we've seen in a long time. And what appears to be inaction, in other words, if you're going to lie like that, don't do it on broadcast media. Larry Tribe was caught. Brian Stelter's caught. Eric Swalwell's caught. The difference is, you know, Larry Tribe's over there on Twitter. He takes his thing down. You've got Eric Swalwell lying and Brian Stelter lying on CNN.

They can do that there. You can lie all you want, but you can't lie on broadcast television. And so this is the same that goes for the ladies on the view, who love to lie. And so now the FCC, they're rolling up their sleeves. They're digging in. They're not done. They are going after the view. And that is one, I've said this for a while, okay?

And some of you guys are like, when is it going to happen? What isn't going to happen? I'm telling you, just be patient. It's happening. Like, they can't keep that show on the air, not in its current form, because it's just back. Trump, bash Trump, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, put all the Democrats on. I think Media Research Center did a study, and they found that, I don't even think they put one.

Don't quote me, maybe they had one Republican. Does Arnold Schwarzenegger count? He, like, stunned him, right? Because he had a different view on immigration, say, than one Joy Behar or Whoopi Goldberg, but they haven't been putting any conservatives on. They have some never Trumpers on, right? But I don't think they count. So what are you actually putting forth into people's homes?

Don't you think that maybe the affiliates would be better off and better serve financially and also publicly, like from a social standpoint, putting their own shows on the air, talking about their own community issues. Take the time back, for goodness sakes. Again, this is what car is trying to tell you. There's a difference between cable and network, and you have a responsibility. Apart from the idea that you have national programmers that create the show, including the Kimmel Show, and then they're given to and distributed over licensed TV stations.

It's the licensed TV stations that have the public interest in it, including those TV stations that Comcast and Disney own. So FCC regulatory action focuses on those individual stations. Yes. One thing that we're trying to do is. And because they're looking at those individual stations, and because those individual stations are very vulnerable to lawsuits because of the misinformation that's being piped into the homes of everyday Americans every day, the FCC has the right.

I mean, I know it's difficult, right? Let's be honest. It's not an easy thing to do to just revoke an FCC license. But it could happen. I mean, a lot of things that are kind of difficult to do are being done by this administration. And this, ladies and gentlemen, this is the reason Comcast wants to say bye, bye, bye, bye, by, to Rachel Maddo. They want nothing to do with her.

They are like, stay away, lady. Don't come near us. In fact, it's so bad, we're actually going to separate you into an entirely different company. And that spinoff, it's being called Versant. I like to say Versant, you know, because they're kind of French over there anyway. Versant is going to be spun off sometime before the end of the year. So sometime within the next few months. And Comcast is like, we can't get away from this.

lady fast enough or her colleagues over there. Why? Because they own a network called NBC. And that network has to stand on its own two feet and has to be able to keep its FCC licenses. But if you've got Rachel over here and Chris Hayes and a few others, the one that I can never remember the name of, oh, but we have a soundbite of her. She's got a four o'clock show. I remember she used to go up against Neil Cavuto and sometimes I'd fill in for Neil and we'd always beat her. Anyway, let me see if I can find her because she's the one, oh, here we go, who spouts all kinds of hate all the time, apparently, apparently it's totally fine for her. The permission structure for violence, you've got polls about political violence.

Democrats don't think is a good idea. Only Republicans. Only people inclined to consume conservative media are now, I think, upward of 50%, say that if necessary, violence is okay. you've only got the conduct on one of the two sides. Yeah, right. Well, we get some statistics actually proving that quite wrong. And unfortunately, the tragedy of what just happened to my friend and former colleague

Charlie Kirk, whom I worked with both at Salem Media and at Fox. It's really, really, really sad stuff. But, you know, they keep repeating this and they keep perpetuating this. That in itself is misinformation, but they get away with it. why they get away with it because it's cable. She can't say that on broadcast television, even though broadcast has been trying to go down these various rabbit holes. And Jimmy's an example of that. The view is an example of that. And this is why you got the boss as a Comcast coming out and saying, oh, my gosh, we're firing the guy. I mean, this woman who's the president of

MSNBC firing one Matthew Dowd who made some really pathetic comments about our friend Charlie Kirk while he was, you know, still alive, but had been shot. I mean, it's a political assassination and they think it's fine to talk the way they do. I don't think so, guys. I don't think so. So this is why when you look at this Versaunt thing that's coming about and this spinoff that's happening, it's because they want to get away from the very, very dangerous rhetoric that is not only bad for the country that they're calling out, the boss.

I mean, they all, Mike Kavanaugh over there, Brian Roberts, they're all calling it out. They want to get away from that rhetoric and they want to get away from Rachel. The bottom line of this dossier, the bottom line allegation, the point of it, is that the Trump campaign didn't just benefit from Russia interfering in our presidential campaign. The point of this is they colluded. They helped. They were in on it. This is kind of a real story. The connections between the Trump servers and the Alpha Bank servers were real. they were covert communications that someone was trying to hide,

that the Trump organization and Alpha Bank appear to have been trying to hide. Lie! Now we know that the vaccines work well enough, that the virus stops with every vaccinated person. A vaccinated person gets exposed to the virus? Yeah, that turned out not to be true. The virus does not infect them. The virus cannot then use that person to go anywhere else.

We cannot use a vaccinated person as a host to go get more people. We and other news organizations have generally stopped giving an unfiltered live platform to remarks by former President Trump. It is not out of spite. It is not a decision that we relish. It is a decision that we regularly revisit. And honestly, earnestly, it is not an easy decision. But there is a cost to us as a news organization of knowingly broadcasting, true things. That is a fundamental truth of our business and who we are. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

There is a fundamental cost as Jamie Kimmel just found out. But you guys actually are able to say crazy stuff. And, you know, unless an advertiser decides to pull the plug, which they may, you're free to keep spouting your craziness, okay? So, you know, you taking Donald Trump off the air, I mean, it's akin to, well, we got to, well, we got to. get rid of his Twitter account. We got to take that one down. Then we got to get rid of the Facebook account. Can't allow that, right? I mean, the Ayatollah, fine. Let's keep him coming all day long, but not Donald Trump. Oh, the laptop. I'll never get over that one. The darn laptop. Hunter Biden's laptop. Oh, that's misinformation. Just spoon fed to you, the courtesy of Rudy Giuliani and the

Russians. Yeah, right. And you had like really important people from Brennan to Comey, who was behind, that one, helping to organize all of that alongside the former Secretary of State under Biden. A lot of good he did us. Look at the mess we've got on the international front. I mean, blinking disaster. And all of these people were in on that. It's stunning. It's shocking. So you know what? This investigation into the view is a long time coming. And I'm glad to see it's finally here. And if it took it. took, you know, it should never take what it had to take for people to reach this point. But I think Americans are waking up. And they're saying enough is enough. And you know what,

we loved Charlie. A lot of people who would never ever seen Charlie before, they're watching Charlie for the first time. And they're like, wow, this guy was good. And I agree with everything. This guy is saying, which is why it's even more gross, right, that the Democrats are refusing to honor his legacy, his memory. I want to just remind you about my company, I want to encourage you guys to go over to 76 research right now, sign up, you can get my newsletter, dollar a month for the first two months, and it goes to $9.95. It's about investing because I really believe every single one of you needs to take ownership of your future. And part of that is investing in your future. And this is a good time to be investing in my

opinion. And we write at length about this because I like the economic policies that I see coming out of this White House. So 76 research.com. It is a reason, the reason we're 1776, right? You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out why I called it that. But 76 research.com, it's my company. Please go check it out. Here's a question. Here's a question for you. And by the way, we, this is not the question I want and on the lower third. So we will try this again. Here's my question for you. Why is it that Democrats are refusing to honor Charlie Kirk. Does it really cost them that much?

Is it that hard? I mean, this is pretty despicable stuff. 58 of them decided they didn't want to vote for a resolution to honor a young man 31 years old who was doing nothing but trying to engage in peaceful debate, and yet they don't want to pay their respects. 310 to 58. I mean, you did have 95 Democrats joining,

all 215 Republicans in voting yes, on the non-binding resolution. But 58 no votes came in and they were all from Democrats. They were mostly members of the Congressional Black and Hispanic caucuses. And another 38 Democrats voted present while 22 Democrats did not vote. Let me just tell you, Charlie was a great guy. Charlie deserved to be honored by everyone unanimously. Our country deserves that. I want to show you what Cardinal Dolan out of New York had to say, comparing him to a saint. This is, this is very, very touching. Listen. But this guy's

a modern day St. Paul. He was a missionary. He's an evangelist. He's a hero. He's one, I think, that knew what Jesus meant when he said the truth will set you free. And to do it, now, I understand he was pretty blunt and he was pretty direct. He didn't try to avoid

any controversy. He didn't even try to avoid confrontation. The difference is the way, the mode, the style that he did it, always with respect. And not only was that a gracious, kind of virtuous thing to do, it's effective. Because when your opponent's see, this guy kind of respects me. We kind of disagree here, but he kind of enjoys me. And he's thanking me for being here. And he's telling me he appreciates

the trust I have in him and sharing my views. I thought this guy can teach us something. I've been spending the last week reading about him. Yeah, a lot of people have. A lot of people have just discovered him for the first time or are rediscovering him for the first time. I can tell you, I first came across Charlie, I want to say it was like 10 years ago because he was on Fox. And at some point, we had him on my show. I used to host a 2 o'clock show there. And then by the time I was on the 8 o'clock show, I think we had him books like once or twice a week because I just couldn't get enough Charlie Kirk. I was like, this guy is so good. And I remember saying to my producer, wow. Like, this kid is good. Like, he's really good. Too often in this business, you'll have a guest on, and they have their political talking points that they get from their party, and it's like one, two, three, four, five,

and they can only go back to those. Charlie could think about things with such depth in different ways that always caused you to take a step back and say, wow. And so to think that these Democrats are out there trying to trash his memory like Representative Ilhan Omar out of Minnesota, I mean, wow, she's just awful. She's got that progressive caucus. She decided to get all outspoken, and she said that it's really just effed up that

people have described Kirk as just wanting to have a civil debate. Wow. Wow, lady. All right. You are just gross. I mean, your language alone. She's really taken to the swearing thing. You wouldn't heard that kind of language.

out of Charlie, mind you, but she loves to swear. And she seems to love to just hate on one side all the time. And she doesn't do it in a respectful way at all. So there's Ilhan Omar who said some pretty disgusting stuff. And then you have this one. This is a woman out of Florida. If you can see on the screen, she says, as a black woman, the verbal assault on so many black women coming out of his Miles stunned me. Oh, you know, because maybe he didn't have a lot of respect for Letitia, Tishie Baby James, or Fannie Willis, or, um, well, there's a few others I can think of. La Monica! Who's facing 17 years in prison? La Monica McGuiver, we're going to talk about her later because, you know, 11, 11 New York lawmakers.

We're just arrested a few hours ago in New York City. We got video of it and everything. Wait till you see that. But anyway, she's doubling down on all this race stuff. And she said, how dare he have cited the Supreme Court Justice Katanji Brown Jackson is possibly not being qualified? By the way, like, he didn't need to do that. Sonia Sotomayor, in a recent opinion, just completely whacked.

Katanji Brown Jackson because she's like, you know, this is not how we write things. This is not how you. Katanji is all about her feelings instead of the law. And, you know, if you're a Supreme Court justice, you are supposed to talk about the law. Yeah. Anyway, these people are pretty darn sad. Cardinal Dolan said it right, and you know who else said it right? Charlie himself, there was not a racist bone in his body.

Listen to him in his own words. Take this on. I want to ask the question of you. What does it mean to be an American? Is it an idea or a history? a shared history, or is it a skin color? Well, I mean, you could go back to the original founding fathers, the Immigration Act of, I believe it was 1812.

What does it mean to be an American? Is it a skin color or something else? So there's the current idea of what it means, according to the Hartzeller Immigration Act and all this bullshit that you guys spew. But if you go back to the original founding fathers, they intended this to be a European nation for white men of good stock and character.

So, can you show me, let me, let me answer the question. Can you show me where in the United States Constitution it says that? It wasn't in the Constitution. It wasn't in the Constitution because they didn't believe it. You, sir, they did not put it in the United States. Let me answer another question. Let me ask you another question, since you support, allow them to have the mic. Let me ask you another question, sir.

What does the phrase, sir? its constitution and they made it explicitly clear what does the phrase e pluribus unum mean what is the phrase e pluribus unum means why is that relevant because it was on every founding document and presidential seal from our founding which means out of many one you sir and your ideology is not conservative it is right wing identitarian it has no place in the conservative movement my friend Get out of long. Get out of the law. Gosh.

Wow. He's so good. USA. USA. He's so good. He's so good. I mean, he just took that guy down. He's like, listen, there's nothing racist about our Constitution.

It's for everyone. Okay. So, you know, Ilhan Omar. Gosh, darn it, you're lucky. You're lucky I came to this country, right? You'd think you'd see some appreciation. Can go back to, oh, that taken down of the view host, Joy Behar, when Arnold Schwarzenegger told her straight to her face. Listen, if you're an immigrant in this country, you've got to actually have some manners and some respect and give back to your community in a positive way.

But no, Ilhan, she can't even give Charlie this to. What a terrible, in my opinion, terrible, terrible, terrible person and a terrible role model. really I mean she's she's in the minority on this one when you look at how many Democrats did vote in favor of a resolution for Charlie Kirk Steve Scalise who went through an attack himself but made it made it to the other side speaking about how terrible this is the Democrats

yeah let alone the ones that voted present I mean what a profile encouraged that is I mean no reason it should have been unanimous You know, at least it surely was on our side. And there were a lot of Democrats that voted, yes. The ones that voted, no. I mean, you know, open up your heart. And then just think about Erica and those kids.

And, you know, the millions of people who are heartbroken over Charlie's loss. And look, this movement's not going to go away. Charlie started a movement. But this movement's only going to grow. You can see over 50,000 young people have reached out to turning point and said they want to start their own turning point chapter on colleges. or high school campuses, that's a sign that they have woken a sleeping giant. You bet. You bet. A big sleeping giant. 50,000. Think about that. 50,000 kids are reaching out.

I want to start a turning point chapter. I'm going to like tear up again. I've been crying, okay, ever since last Wednesday. I was crying with you live on the air last Wednesday. I was taking my kids to school yesterday. And I think I told you that song, Don McLean's Miss America Pie, you know, bye-bye, Miss America Pie, and there's that line in there about his widowed bride, and I just started bawling because I'm sad for our country. I'm sad for Charlie, I'm sad for Erica. I'm sad for the beautiful kids, those two little kids. I'm sad for all of the young people in America that looked up to him, including my own children. I am sad for the position we are in when you have Democrats, 58 of them that won't do the right thing. That's wrong, okay?

I spend a very, very, very emotional time for all of us. And we got to root out this evil because this evil exists. And it's trying to manipulate and hurt our kids and turn them into people they aren't. All kinds of examples. All kinds of examples. For goodness sakes, you know, you can't say BC anymore before Christ. You can't say that because they don't want to recognize. Christ in academia as having been sort of a turning point in the world. So, you know, they got

BBC or whatever it is before common era, BCC. That's what it is. I mean, I was a history major at Columbia University. My mother was a history major at the University of New Hampshire. I had a call her one day because I'm looking at the kids' paper and I have no idea what this BCC thing is. So I call her, I'm like, you know what this is? I mean, I'm a history major. This is, but that was a lot of years ago, right? That's 25 years ago when I graduated. So this is just something that's kind of sprung up in the last few years. Like the last 10 years, the left has totally gone wacko crazy. And now it has to be before common error because we can't acknowledge Jesus Christ is having been a monumental force in the world. Because that would be prejudice to, oh, I don't know,

Ilhan Omar or somebody else. I mean, give me a break, okay? This is what they're doing to us. And This is what they're doing to our kids, and this is what Charlie was fighting for, guys. And we need to stand together, and we need to back him up, and we need to honor his legacy and his memory and keep it going. For the future of this country, we cannot allow for the corruption that has scept in. And I'm telling you, this kid got corrupted, the one that did this heinous act, Tyler Robinson. someone turned his heart into coal. And it is believed by our own FBI that it may have not just been one person,

but multiple people. I talk to people. You know that. I've got sources everywhere. It's my understanding that this roommate that was in the process of transitioning and it was also the alleged love interest of the shooter that this person

is very much being looked at, even though this person seems to be, quote, unquote, cooperating. I'll tell you, I don't buy the text. Do you? Let me make this bigger so I can read it with you. I don't think that somebody who is as smart as this person was supposed to be, right? Like, and he was smart. He was definitely smart because he had like a 36 on his ACT equivalent. I've said this before, but I like to translate it just because I'm not that familiar with the ACT.

into like 1,500, 1550 on the SAT, 1600, right, is the perfect score. So that's like, that's a really good score. You had a 4.0, we got a presidential scholarship for $38,000. He only lasted one semester. What happened to him? Was he radicalized in school? And if you're that smart, why do you send text messages like this? I mean, he's going on about admitting the guilt.

And it almost seems to be deliberate, to me anyways, I look at this, because the roommate is like, wait, you weren't the one who did it, right? And the guy says, I am, I'm sorry. The roommate says, I thought they caught the person. No, they grabbed some crazy old dude. Then they interrogated someone in similar clothing. I had planned to grab my rifle from the drop point shortly after, but most of that side of town got locked down.

It's quiet, almost enough to get out. But there's one vehicle lingering. The roommate says, why? And Robinson says back, why did I do it? I mean, like, what, don't you think you'd be like, why, right? And like lots of exclamation points. And this is like a very calm response from the roommate. Yeah. Well, he said I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can't be negotiated with, negotiated out. If I am able to grab my rifle unseen and they starts going back about how they're not going to have any evidence. Well, again,

like a smart person wouldn't really do that. So it leaves me, thinking that this doesn't add up. It just doesn't make sense. At some point, the roommate does say, I'm much more worried about you. He says, you're all I worry about love. The roommate says, I'm much more worried about you. This is just weird. This is very, like, it feels very scripted. It doesn't feel normal. So this Lance Twigs, again, who was living with Tyler Robinson, is one of the people very much still under investigation, as I understand this, but he's not the only one. There's a whole broad network, and there's concern that the broad network is being somehow sponsored indirectly or directly by foreign actors that want to see us taken down.

This came up the other day. Serner Kennedy, Cash Patel, talking about this very issue. Listen in. Did Mr. Clark's assassin act alone? As I've said since the beginning, Senator, it is very much an ongoing investigation, and I can't speak to the state charges. That's for the state to address on their own, but we are providing them with the same investigatory findings we're parting the department. And as I noted to Senator, I believe it was Cornyn or Holly, that there are a number of individuals that are currently being investigated and interrogated and a number yet to be investigated and interrogated specific to that chat room. so we are very much in our ongoing posture of investigation.

So others could have been involved. Yes. Did you hear that? He said, others could have been involved. And Cash Patel says, yes, sir, they have at least 20 that were in the chat room. But there are a lot of questions. There were some funky groups like out in the mountains there. And Salt Lake City, I guess queers for Salt Lake City is what it was called.

So they wiped clean all of their social media after this happened. There's been some reports. of people talking about this ahead of time. Don't forget, we talked about this. Maybe Thursday of last week, there were songs written on accounts that had come out of Salt Lake City about how Charlie was going to die on that particular day and how that Charlie Kirk's death would not be enough. So these things were out there and they were out there before this happened. So again, this is why you have senators asking these questions like Josh Hawley. Of course, it suggested that the FBI is investigating a broader network of groups that may have had

some knowledge of the shooter's plans. Can you give us any details on that following up what you already said in public? How's the FBI working to find other potential accomplices, folks who may have known about the shooter's plans, folks who may have encouraged him, any update on the event? So in terms of what we do for an interrogation perspective, we go and reach out to the family and community immediately, and we've conducted those investigations and interrogations with local law enforcement, and we're continuing to do that because those, closest to the suspect are going to hopefully know the most about the suspect and his beliefs and his

ideology. On top of that, unfortunately, it has been leaked that there was a discord chat, and for those unfamiliar with it, it's a gaming chat room online that the suspect participated in. So what we're doing we've already done is sort of legal process, not just on discord, so that the information we gathered, is sustained, and held in a evidentiary posture that we could use in prosecution, should it be decided to do so. And we're also going to be investigating anyone and everyone involved in that Discord chat. Okay, very good. I see the public reports that the Discord thread had as many as 20 additional users.

It sounds like you're trying to run down all of that to see if that's accurate. Who else may have been on that thread? What they may have known, is that fair to say? It's a lot more than that. We're running them all down. It's a lot more than 20. Great. You guys heard that, right? It's a lot more than that. So more than 20. So Tyler Robinson, of course, charged. He allegedly admits it, right? There, in that text exchange with the roommate, I don't fully buy it. Curious to see what you guys think on that as I look at these comments here in real time. But I would also say that, and this is what upsets me so much, this sort of growing anti-Americanism that is sprouting up in a really, massive way where increasingly, especially if you go to some of these elite college campuses,

there's some kind of acceptance of, you know, maybe you do need violence if you can, you know, if you can take out the person with the different opinion that you don't agree with. It's a UGov study that just came out the other day saying that most Americans say it's unacceptable, like most Americans, right, to be happy about public figures death, but younger and more liberal Americans are far more likely to call it acceptable. And by the way, you've seen all the horrible, horrible stuff online, right? You've seen probably not on my show because I just refuse to show it, but, you know, I see it because I see what comes through on TikTok, et cetera, and I see it all on X, and it's bad. There are people that are celebrating this. And then there are people like those

Democrats, 58 of them, that don't have the common decency or kindness in their heart to actually pass this resolution and want to somehow tear him down and his family down in this moment. And he need like Jimmy Kimmel, right? Like it's all coming full circle here. Jimmy Kimmel is part of that crowd that just can stand to think that maybe there is this violence out there. But take a look at this you gov study, okay? Political ideology, those that are very, very liberal, guess what? 24% of them say violence is always or usually acceptable. What the heck is that? You got 20% that are very liberal saying, well, not sure, not sure. You get the liberals, again, 10% say always are usually acceptable to use violence, 17%, maybe, you know, not sure. I mean, and again, it's dominating

amongst the youth. If you compare it to the conservatives, I mean, the conservatives want no part of this. They would never say that violence is acceptable. And then when you go over to the mainstream media. This one got me the other night over on CNN, some woman hosting a show there, is again trying to echo this narrative that they couldn't possibly, possibly be coming from liberal extremist groups like Josh Hawley and Cash Patel and Senator Kennedy are investigating, our FBI are investigating. That couldn't possibly be happening. And I love how she gets shot down with cold, hard facts like the ones I just showed you. Watch. This is about punishing them, them being the left, them being his political opponents.

That actually, I think, is surprising to a lot of Americans, because that's not typically what you would expect to hear from the White House. Well, let's talk about some polling that he used to justify those comments before he made them on TV. Ugov came out with a poll three days ago, talking about how each side feels about violence and support of political deaths. liberals, 16% believe it's okay to feel joy when your political opponent is killed. Liberals, very liberal, 24%. Conservatives, 4%, very conservatives, 3%. Justifying violence.

Very liberal people have 25% answered, yes, it's okay. You justify to issue to do violence against your political opponents. Liberals, 17%, conservatives, 8%, very conservatives, 3. That means it is 6 to 1 times more likely in response to this poll on the left. not saying there's exclusivity on the left. I'm not saying that. But there is certainly a problem where six times the amount of Republicans believe that it's okay to feel joy when your political opponent is killed, murdered, whatever, attacked, and that six to one believe that they are okay in justifying violence against political opponents. That's a problem. That's a cancer

within the movement. Absolutely. It's a total problem. It is a cancer within the movement. And you know what, Donald Trump knows this, recognizes this. And so the Democrats are trying to manipulate and spin and turn the facts, and they turn to Jimmy Kimmel to help him do it. But guess what? The new FCC's not letting that go down. Here's the president saying, you know what? These left-wing organizations, they have to be called out.

He's looking at labeling Antifa for what we all believe it to be. Take a look. Your FBI is investigating the potential role of left-wing organizations and the assassination. I'm wondering if you think if Charlie Kirk's assassin worked alone or he worked with it? I don't know. I mean, I can tell you he didn't work alone on the Internet because it seems that he became radicalized on the Internet. That's just by watching the same things that you're watching and hearing. It looks like he became radicalized over the Internet.

And it seems like his wonderful parents brought in a wonderful neighborhood, smart guy, great boards, great marks, great sports, great social. student. And then something happened to him over a fairly short period of time. It looks like he was radicalized over the internet, and it's radicalized on the left. He's a left. A lot of problems with the left, and they get protected, and they shouldn't be protected. But as you understand, I think, very well from the tone of your question. Thank you very much. So the president is now looking at labeling Antifa as a terror organization. and he wants to do so because it is believed that Antifa is being bankrolled by foreigners outside of this country

that are trying to hurt us from within. I remember talking to Charlie Kirk back in 2018. He personally had been attacked. He was leaving a diner and he was attacked in Philadelphia. He had about 50 Antifa people around him. There must have been like one Antifa person inside the diner, started yelling at him. He goes outside and they had like radio signal to 50 people. And his point to me at the time was that this is getting really serious. The violence is getting bad. And it was shortly after Maxine Waters had been calling for everybody to just, you know, be explicit with somebody who worked for the administration or was a Republican.

And I think we've all been through it. I can remember being at my parents' club once and walking in for a Fourth of July celebration, a girl that I grew up with that I had known some of the time I was like five years old, physically turned her body on me, gave me an up-down, look of total disgust, physically turned her body away from me. Because somehow that was okay. I had a grade school teacher who had been a mentor to me. Start lashing out on Facebook.

I mean, I didn't do anything because, you know, we're 600,000 strong over there on Facebook. If I wanted to get everybody worked up and, like, take on the music teacher, I could have. I'm not going to do that. I'm not, you know, like, I'm like, what is it? Like, these everyday people, like, now want to go after me. Charlie had it bad where they were attacking him to the point where he had to get security. And I'm told by sources very, very close to him and close to this event, he had six security

people there. Nobody did a drone. They should have done a drone. Okay, that was a mistake, because maybe they would have seen the sniper on the roof if they had done the drone. But listen, we've got to do something about these groups. Look at what I've got, I'm pointing to right here. A global web of Chinese propaganda leads to U.S. Tech mogul. Okay, this is, a guy, Neville Sigmund, okay, who basically is being called up by the New York Times as well as the Daily Beast for having funneled a ton of information, misinformation, and money into these misinformation campaigns. This just came up this week in Congress. They're also looking at Soros and some others. Like, who's funding this stuff? Do they even know where their money's going?

Maybe they do. Maybe they don't care. I've always said, we follow the money. And whether it's tax based on ideology or taxed on institutions of faith or people of faith, someone's paying for it, and we are reverse tracing those steps. We are not stopping at the perpetrator themselves. We are reverse engineering to hold those accountable in our investigations to who funded them and knowingly funded them, and we will bring the appropriate steps against them with our partners at DOJ. So it could mean someone like this. I mean, Congress has launched an investigation. They have issued a subpoena on a Palina Luna being a big part of that out of Florida. They say that this guy is involved in what China tries to call a smoke.

smokeless war. He, on the other hand, is professing his innocence saying, I categorically deny and repudiate any suggestion that I am a member of, work for, take orders from, or follow instructions of any political party or government or their representatives. But, you know, if you look at what the New York Times is alleging, if you look at what, even Daily Beast, so we got this across the spectrum here with a lot of liberal publications, they seem to think that he's had a hand in some of the radicalization. This also can't. up on Twitter recently where they were talking about this armed queers of Salt Lake City being one of these groups that may have actually received funding from possibly Cuba. This is the logo

of the group out of Salt Lake City. And so this is a group that it is believed is being looked at and is being scrutinized by the FBI in terms of whether or not they had some involvement here. Meanwhile, you also have to recognize that this is, this is, this is, this is a something that's happening like all over college campuses everywhere. Here's a guy, David Collick, I think, is his name, and he put this up on Twitter. I wanted to share it with you. He went out to Georgia Tech. This is days after Charlie's gone down there, and he's looking at all kinds of really angry, anti-fascist stuff. But of course, they all think he's a fascist or a dictator, because that's what MSNBC and The View, and Jimmy Kimmel, keep telling you. Here we go.

Georgia Tech University in Atlanta, Georgia. And the first thing, I see when I come to the campus is the fall of the Trump fascist regime, beginning November 5th, 2025. Refusefascism.org needs to be investigated. 2028 is way too late. Trump must go now. If you walk with me here, we have another sign. This is the scary part. The time has come for the fall of the Trump fascist regime, beginning November 5th. No, in the name of humanity, we refuse to accept a fascist America all over the campus similar signs no in the name of humanity we refuse to accept a fascist america refuse fascism.org followed by a sign that we already read this is

happening all over this campus so you got to ask yourself when you see posters like this non-stop what are they advocating for are they inciting certain events that we have seen recently the time has come for the fall of the Trump fascist regime the time has come I want to say that again the time has come that is what left-leaning organization on college campuses at Georgia Tech are propagating to college students. So when I walk around and I ask students, do you condemn the murder of Charlie Kirk? And they say no, it's most likely because of stuff like this. Yeah. So that has to change. Okay, that has to change. And so we need this full investigation

to figure out who exactly is pushing this because I don't think it's coming from good, wholesome Americans. I think it's coming from some foreign sources that want to do us harm. And then, of course, you got liberals trying to take a political advantage of all this. I mean, for goodness sakes, they clearly can't see the force for the trees because these lawmakers in New York getting themselves arrested because they want to defend illegals. It's like, what about the people who are here legally? Like, do you care about us? Apparently not.

Take a look. They're out there causing all kinds of commotion there in New York City today. President, we shall not be moved. I should be out of New York. I am here to ensure that we protect all our fellow constituents. We shall not be not documented. We shall not be moved. We shall not be moved.

So they're saying we shall not be moved. We're not going to be We're here. We're not going anywhere We shall not be moved They have like the lamest of songs, right? And that's what they did And so eventually they had to arrest them To get them out of the way.

One of them included Bradlanders Who's, you know, basically Mamdami's sidekick. Here's some more video of it. A lot of yelling. Okay, that's the reality. Like you got to move were you going to be placed under arrest? They just wanted to create this commotion. So 11 of them were arrested. And I guess plenty of people were also arrested outside. Here they are chanting

bordered walls have to go. Okay. So we had more arrests going on there in New York City. And again, this harkens back to the question we keep getting at, which is what the heck are these people doing? Why aren't they looking out for actual Americans here in this country? Don't forget, look at New York, what they were getting, the Roosevelt Hotel, which was a beautiful hotel. at one point, Midtown, East Side. They turned it into a shelter, basically, for all of these people, except it wasn't really a shelter because you still got maid service daily. I mean, hey, I'd like daily made service. Thank you very much. And they gave you little credit cards with over 300 bucks a week so you could buy ethnically appropriate food because, you know, you just can't give

people peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. Forget about it. No, we're going to give ethnically appropriate food. We got to give daily maid service. We've got to hand out cell phones. What is going on? And then, you know, La Monica, she's the queen of this. La Monica, McGuiver. She's not just Monica. She's La Monica. I love that. Like, La, Regina, the queen, La Monica.

You know, it's just hysterical to me. Anyway, La Monica, Magiver, first term congresswoman. It's now facing 17 years in prison because she decided to not just sing a little song about how we're not going to be moved, but she decided in all her glory out there in her red pantsuit to take on these officers and to actually, if it, you know, if I'm looking at the same video you're looking at, it looks like she pretty much assaulted them. You see this? You see that? Boom. I mean, that's, that's bad, okay? And we've watched this together, I know a lot. But this is, Whoa! That's the one, okay? That's the one. So now she has been indicted and she is going to have to face trial. She's pleading not guilty and she says they're just going after me because I'm a black woman. I don't think so. I think they're going after you because you decided to sock it to one of the federal law enforcement officers, okay? So like times have changed and those excuses aren't going to work anymore. And I think Americans are actually asking for,

all of these parties to stand up for what really, really does matter. And that means the Americans that are here and that are here legally. Okay, and by the way, this isn't that controversial. You ask any immigrant who came here legally, and they tell you the same thing. Quick shout out to our friends over at Balance of Nature. I love my balance of nature because they get all my fruits and veggies that I need to get. There's like 31 different ones and they like freeze dry them. And so they keep all the ingredients in there. If you flip it over on the back, you actually can understand what's in there. I didn't think about that, a supplement where you can actually understand the ingredients that are in there. So, Balance of Nature, wonderful company. They help me

bring you this show for free every single day, 35% off with Code Trish and free shipping. So go take a look at them today. Balance of Nature.com. Go to the website. Lots of testimonials. A lot of people who really, really love it, not just Trish Regan, but lots of different people. And they've been around for a while. I think you should definitely check them out. Again, 35% off. Codeward Trish, you're helping yourself and you're helping me. So as we go into the weekend here, again, knowing that the FBI is looking at multiple suspects, and there are still a lot of questions as to what happened, I think, you know, more than anything, we just need to remember the goodness of Charlie.

We need to remember what he represented, what he wanted, and his legacy has got to live on, right? Like his legacy has got to live on in a meaningful way for all of us. I think this is exactly what he would want. Without a doubt, I know it's what he would want. Because it was just a good person through and through. He was someone who really cared about the country. He cared about young people. He cared about the direction we were heading in.

He cared about his family. He cared about God. He wanted all of us to have a relationship with God. And he'll be missed every day. Every single day, I know by so many of you. So his funeral is this weekend. It's going to be a huge crowd. It's going to be a huge crowd out there in Arizona.

The president is attending. And we all have him in our hearts, and we will hold him forever dear. His wife, Erica, has just been named CEO of Turning Point, so she's got a lot of responsibility being put and placed in her, but I think she's ready for the job. I mean, I'll tell you, he picked a good one. He picked a good one in her. And we will honor his legacy forever.

Thank you for being here. Please subscribe. And we'll continue the conversation throughout the weekend.