The 'Seditious Six' + AI Amnesty

Speaker 1 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.

Speaker 1 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.

Speaker 1 You 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.

Speaker 1 Go start a Turning Point USA 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.

Speaker 1 Most important decision I ever made in my life. And I encourage you to do the same.
Here I am. Lord, use me.

Speaker 1 Buckle up, everybody.

Speaker 3 Here we go.

Speaker 2 The Charlie Kirk Show is proudly sponsored by Preserve Gold, the leading gold and silver experts and the only precious metals company I recommend to my family, friends, and viewers.

Speaker 3 All right, so Blake, take us up to speed. There's been a lot since yesterday's show about this back and forth between Secretary of War, Pete Hagseth, and Senator Mark Kelly.

Speaker 4 So let's just start from the baseline. Most of you have seen this, but in case you haven't, this is the video that kicked it off that six Democrats put out.

Speaker 4 They released on social media a few days ago. Let's just put it up.
164.

Speaker 5 I'm Senator Alyssa Slotkin.

Speaker 6 Senator Mark Kelly. Representative Chris DeLuzio.

Speaker 5 Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander.

Speaker 7 Representative Chrissy Houlihan.

Speaker 6 Congressman Jason Crowe.

Speaker 3 Our laws are clear.

Speaker 1 You can refuse illegal orders.

Speaker 7 You can refuse illegal orders.

Speaker 6 You must refuse illegal orders.

Speaker 4 And so, and it went on a bit like that.

Speaker 3 It said,

Speaker 4 you must refuse a legal order.

Speaker 3 Don't give up the ship. Don't give up the ship.

Speaker 4 So, as many people pointed out, that's definitely

Speaker 4 not implying anything that's good. The best defense you could make is they're worried Trump might make an illegal order, and they're saying people should defy it.

Speaker 4 But there's a very strong vibe that they are soliciting, encouraging some element of defiance of the administration's legal order.

Speaker 3 And we'll get to it order. But

Speaker 3 Slotkin has even gone on the record saying, no, I'm not aware of any illegal orders. So it's basically.

Speaker 4 Well, they have to say that, basically.

Speaker 4 Otherwise, they are actively telling them to defy orders right now.

Speaker 4 But anyway, Mark Kelly, he is a retired fighter pilot, but he still has...

Speaker 4 I can't remember his exact role with the military, but he has the ability to be recalled. So essentially, he is still subject to military discipline in certain ways, or so the War Department says.

Speaker 4 And so what we had is, first, the Department of War put out an official statement.

Speaker 4 Let's put up 155 the Department of War has received serious allegations of misconduct against Captain Mark Kelly US Navy retired in accordance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice and there's a whole long thing that they are may consider action in and then

Speaker 4 Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, comes out and he has his own tweet, 156.

Speaker 4 The despicable video urging Department of War troops to refuse illegal orders may seem harmless to civilians, but it carries a different weight inside the military.

Speaker 4 This was a politically motivated influence operation that never named a specific legal order. It created ambiguity rather than clarity.

Speaker 4 It used carefully scripted, legal-sounding language, and it subtly reframed military obedience around partisan distrust instead of established legal doctrines.

Speaker 4 In the military, vague rhetoric and ambiguity undermine trust, create hesitation in the chain of command, and erode cohesion. The military has clear procedures for handling unlawful orders.

Speaker 4 It does not need political actors injecting doubt. And

Speaker 4 so then he goes on in 158, he goes on to threaten an actual court-martial against him. Is that a video or a photo?

Speaker 4 It looks like it's a video. Let's do 158.

Speaker 8 Defense Secretary Pete Hegset is threatening to court-martial Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona. The Pentagon says they've received allegations of misconduct against the retired Navy captain.

Speaker 7 This appears to all stem from that video that Senator Kelly made with other Democratic lawmakers urging service members to remember that they have a duty to disobey illegal orders.

Speaker 7 And the Department of Defense, which now calls itself the Department of War, posted a statement on X saying that they have received serious allegations of misconduct against Captain Mark Kelly.

Speaker 7 He was a captain when he retired from the U.S. Navy.

Speaker 7 And they said, importantly, that a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which could include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures.

Speaker 4 So, definitely, email us what you think about this, freedom at charliekirk.com, especially because this is Arizona's senator.

Speaker 4 Because I guess, where do you think you're going to go from here? Do you think they'll go for it, Andrew?

Speaker 3 Well, so I think they've given themselves an out here or administrative measures, right? And so,

Speaker 3 I think what's going to happen is they're going to basically try and

Speaker 3 shame him into in some way, shape, or form. And we have to, we talked about this actually before we're going to be able to do that.
Do you think they'll stop with that?

Speaker 3 I mean, I don't know, but I will stop.

Speaker 4 To shame Letitia James.

Speaker 3 Yeah, and James. And by the way, for those who are curious, the UCMJ, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, if you're wondering why it only applies to Mark Kelly, which was a question I had,

Speaker 3 it governs conduct for active duty members, reservists, and certain retirees. It does not apply to fully separated veterans, those who left without retiring after 20-plus years.

Speaker 3 So presumably he put in his 20-plus years, retired in a full military retirement style, and therefore he's still subject.

Speaker 3 If you take the 20-year-plus retirement from the military, apparently you're still subject to the UCMJ.

Speaker 3 But yeah, I mean, I think he's saying that they're still subject to certain administrative measures.

Speaker 3 I am,

Speaker 3 listen, I find this to be egregious, what they did. You and I actually immediately

Speaker 3 immediate reaction was egregious. And I would also just say that there is a risk because I've been disgusted how all of them have gone on social media and been, I'm a victim, I'm a victim.

Speaker 3 I can't believe President Trump would say this about me and that he's, you know, he wants me to be executed. No, he was rightfully offended.
He was rightfully,

Speaker 3 I would say, upset, angered,

Speaker 3 P.O.'d, you might say, which is the word I was going for. I stopped myself.
But he was rightfully all of these things.

Speaker 3 He put on social media, he truthed a Washington Examiner article, and it said that, yeah. Listen, this is seditious behavior.
If you are found guilty of seditious behavior, then guess what?

Speaker 3 One of the potential punishments is,

Speaker 3 you know, not so good things, as Charlie would say.

Speaker 3 And so, listen, I don't think anybody is thinking that this is going here, but I do think that there should be real consequences for this, save going so far as to make him an actual victim.

Speaker 3 That's what we have to warn for. And that's what we talked about before here.
If you actually make him a sympathetic figure, then what they did was egregious.

Speaker 4 I don't think it was egregious enough that you could bring Mark Kelly into a court-martial docket, have him in his uniform, sitting up rigid straight, giving speeches how I only ever cared about serving my country,

Speaker 4 looking the part, all cinematic.

Speaker 4 And you try to convict him of that. Maybe you do.
I feel the only reason to do that is if you are dead certain you have good oppo on Mark Kelly and you want him to be J.D. Vance's 2028 opponent.

Speaker 3 Right. Well, because

Speaker 4 that would very quickly make him a front.

Speaker 3 I mean, I don't want to get into it too much, but I've just heard we are in Arizona after all. I heard there's quite a bit of oppo on Mark Kelly.
But listen,

Speaker 3 I'll stop there. This is what really upsets me.

Speaker 3 And this is that Elise Slotkin, who was CIA, by the way, what's the CIA really good at, Blake? Oh, I don't know, destabilizing foreign governments. Did you say that?

Speaker 3 I feel like they're pretty bad at that. Well, they might be bad at it, but listen, they think they're pretty good.
They like to think they're good. So

Speaker 3 this is what frustrates me. And you said that they have to say this, but look at 159.
Let's go ahead and play this cut. This is from the weekend.

Speaker 3 Alyssa Slotkin admitting that Democrats lied about President Trump issuing illegal orders to the military. 159.

Speaker 9 Let's talk right now. Do you believe President Trump has issued any illegal orders?

Speaker 5 To my knowledge, I am not aware of things that are illegal, but certainly there are some legal gymnastics that are going on with these Caribbean strikes and everything related to Venezuela.

Speaker 3 Oh,

Speaker 3 so

Speaker 3 there it is. He hasn't done anything illegal.
We just out of the blue decided to throw up a flare.

Speaker 4 We're worried you might. We're worried you might.

Speaker 3 We're worried that there might be another pandemic. We're worried that there might be an economic collapse.
We're worried about a lot of things. That doesn't mean you go out and make a video.
I mean,

Speaker 3 this is what I think has a lot of people's hair on the back of their necks up. And that is the fact that out of the blue, these people just did this video

Speaker 3 and they are hinting at something. There's something very fishy, very...

Speaker 3 underhanded going on here.

Speaker 3 You know, there is a lot of people that are suggesting that this is seeding the ground for something terrible in the future or for some other sort of color revolution-esque action.

Speaker 3 And I think that's why we're all like kind of, it got our attention because, like, something isn't right here. Something is very not, very much not right.

Speaker 3 And I understand the reaction that they're getting.

Speaker 11 This is Lane Schoenberger, Chief Investment Officer and Founding Partner of YReFi.

Speaker 11 It has been an honor and a privilege to partner with Turning Point and for Charlie to endorse us.

Speaker 11 His endorsement means the world to us, and we look forward to continuing our partnership with Turning Point for years to come. Now, hear Charlie in his own words tell you about YReFi.

Speaker 2 I'm going to tell you guys about YRefi.com. That is YREFY.com.
WhyReFi is incredible. Private student loan debt in America totals about $300 billion.

Speaker 2 WhyReFi is refinancing distress or defaulted private student loans? You can finally take control of your student loan situation with a plan that works for your monthly budget. Go to yrefi.com.

Speaker 2 That is whyrefi.com. If you have a co-borrower, whyReFi can get them released released from the loan? You can skip a payment up to 12 times without penalty.
It may not be available in all 50 states.

Speaker 2 Go to yrefi.com. That is yrefy.com.
Let's face it, if you have distress or default to student loans, it can be overwhelming.

Speaker 2 Because of private student loan debt, so many people feel stuck. Go to yrefi.com.
That is why.com. Private student loan debt relief, yrefi.com.

Speaker 3 All right, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk Show. We've got a couple emails here, Blake.

Speaker 4 We got a bunch of good emails in that breakup.

Speaker 3 Freedom at CharlieKirk.com. Freedom at CharlieKirk.com.

Speaker 4 First, I want to shout out Nancy, who just messaged us to say that she was just baptized at the age of 63, and she gives Charlie credit for that decision.

Speaker 4 Thank you very much. God bless you, Nancy.
Wanted to shout that out.

Speaker 4 We got an email from one of our biggest fans, Steve at American Tactics AZ. He sends us a Bible verse every day, along with a lot of responses.

Speaker 3 And he says,

Speaker 4 Senator Mark Kelly accused President Trump of calling for Kelly's execution. I claim balderdash on that accusation as a lifelong resident of Arizona.

Speaker 4 This pathetic excuse of an elected official who is a transplant has placed an enormous stain on the great state of Arizona. We need to bring Arizona back to full-on red.
Amen, Steve.

Speaker 4 We're working on that. Obviously, we're going to keep working.

Speaker 3 Yeah, I mean, he's, you know, what's funny about him is I look at Mark Kelly, you know, here he is invoking the name of Charlie, you know, because President President Trump said, you know, he's doing seditious things, so obviously one of the potential penalties is the death penalty.

Speaker 3 Okay, that's that's I get it, that's inflammatory, that's that's probably the max.

Speaker 4 It's probably not going to happen.

Speaker 3 Now, Grace sent us a little bit, but hold on, for him to bring up Charlie's name is, is, I just, I find it really despicable, actually. And so, anyways, go ahead, Grace.

Speaker 4 Well, Grace says, come on, guys. Charlie would demand we arrest and charge constitutional justice, yes, to death penalty.
I am calling for the military.

Speaker 3 Here's Phyllis. Of course they should all be convicted of sedition.
They are all guilty of trying to undermine the President of the United States. Nothing will happen, though.

Speaker 3 They are all getting away with everything. Well, I think this is, I think, you know, I think this is why Secretary Hexeth

Speaker 3 is sounding the tone that he's sounding, is because I think there is a genuine fundamental just frustration within the base that these people keep getting away with it, right?

Speaker 3 We're going to have Mike Davis on in the second half of this hour. We're going to be talking about Letitia James, Comey.

Speaker 3 It looks like the DOJ is going to be appealing that court case that has been thrown out because of a technicality, basically, on the legality of Lindsey Halligan's appointment

Speaker 3 as a first step. So they're going to be appealing that.
But in general, there is a feeling of frustration that some of these people,

Speaker 3 these wrongdoers, these people that have, I think, done illegal things and it's been proven and they keep getting away with it.

Speaker 3 This is a video, a social media video that was designed to be provocative and cute. But the problem is, the underlying message here, Blake, was that they were undermining and sowing doubt.

Speaker 4 And that, and by the way, that's you have to be sedition is a dicey word to use. That's, as I like to point out to Charlie, treason is defined in the Constitution.

Speaker 4 It's defined narrowly as, you know, it has to be levying war against the United States or giving aid and comfort, and you need at least two witnesses.

Speaker 4 That's all because our founders knew English history. And in English history, treason and sedition, you know, related laws were used a lot for domestic political reasons against

Speaker 4 just domestic foes. And they were very worried about that.
And we saw that ourselves.

Speaker 4 We saw that with January 6th, where they were hunting around to bring a sedition case against President Trump, against his supporters.

Speaker 4 In the end, they settled for mostly just indicting hundreds and hundreds of his followers and convicting and sending them to prison. And we were very angry at that.

Speaker 4 We were very angry at that overreach. And quite plausibly, that overreach is why Trump Trump is president again.

Speaker 3 Yeah, it's important not to overreach.

Speaker 4 There's both damage you can do to the country by really aggressively pursuing this, and also damage you can do to yourself politically. And you always have to take account for that.

Speaker 3 Well, and here's what I will say: you know, when you talk about overreach, there's a clip here from Mark Kelly. Listen, I find Mark Kelly to be

Speaker 3 pretty despicable, actually.

Speaker 3 I feel like I see right through Mark Kelly. I don't see the strength that other people see or this stand-up serviceman that served his country.

Speaker 3 And, like I said, there is an oppophile on Mark Kelly in the state. But here's what's interesting: I do agree with you that I'm not sure how far we want to take this fight from a political standpoint.

Speaker 3 Listen, you in the base, you in the audience, you get what he was trying to do. He's undermining the president of the United States, sowing doubt, sowing confusion.

Speaker 3 But he has this ace in the hole, and you got to acknowledge it. You got it when you're going to fight a battle.
You got to understand what you have in your favor, what is working against you.

Speaker 3 Play 161.

Speaker 4 Donald Trump called for my execution.

Speaker 12 I know a little bit about political violence. My wife, Gavin, was nearly assassinated.
She was shot in the head because of political violence. She nearly died.

Speaker 12 These are the kind of threats that this president makes. Not just to me, some of my colleagues as well.
Just this week, he did this.

Speaker 12 threatened our lives, said we should be hanged because of something we said.

Speaker 3 So he's got this Trump card, if you will. And it is, what happened to his wife is egregious, terrible.
I mean, especially in the wake of what happened to Charlie, I get it.

Speaker 3 So you just have to be careful about the battle you're going to fight. Now, that's why I say, listen, he's going to get investigated.
The White House is saying that they fully support it.

Speaker 3 You cannot have a functioning military when you have elected leaders, especially of the profile, Mark Kelly and Slotkin, saying, you know, don't trust the Commander-in-Chief, right?

Speaker 3 That is sowing discord within the ranks. The White House House is supporting this investigation.
I think we're going to find ourselves in an

Speaker 3 administrative solution. That's my prediction.

Speaker 3 You know, I've been thinking about how much culture is shaped by what we choose to watch because whether we realize it or not, the stories we invite into our homes shape the way we see the world.

Speaker 3 That's why what Angel Studios is doing matters. And right now, they're having their biggest sale of the year.

Speaker 3 For a limited time, you can get an Angel Guild membership for as low as $6.99 a month for 12 months, plus two free tickets to see David in theaters.

Speaker 3 Angel Studios is leading a quiet revolution in entertainment. They're telling stories that elevate truth, celebrate family, and remind us what courage really looks like.

Speaker 2 These aren't just good films, they're cultural reset buttons.

Speaker 3 When you join the Angel Guild, you don't just stream entertainment, you help create it, and you help decide what the next generation of stories will look like.

Speaker 3 Take advantage of the lowest price of the year, become a member of the Angel Guild, and get your two free tickets to see David in theaters this Christmas. Go to angel.com/slash Charlie.

Speaker 3 That's angel.com/slash Charlie to learn more.

Speaker 3 Mike Davis from the Article 3 Project is joining us now. Mike, welcome to the show.

Speaker 3 I got to just say, we're talking about the seditious six, so let's start there.

Speaker 3 Give us your take on it. Are you a maximalist? Do you want to go full court-martial proceedings after Mark Kelly?

Speaker 3 Are you advising a more reserved

Speaker 4 like me?

Speaker 3 Blake is saying, let's not make him a victim. Let's not make him a future presidential candidate here, if that's possible.

Speaker 10 What Senator Mark Kelly is doing here by

Speaker 10 wank, wank, nod, nod to 18-year-old military enlistees to decide what orders of the President of the United States, the Commander-in-Chief, are lawful versus unlawful, and then to ignore what these 18-year-old enlistees think are an unlawful orders of the president of the United States.

Speaker 10 You cannot get more dangerous than this. That is interfering with the chain of commands.
Mark Kelly is trying to portray himself as some noble hero.

Speaker 10 He's trying to portray himself as some victim when he got called out on it. He should absolutely get court-martialed and held accountable for this.
And he can raise his congressional

Speaker 10 speech or debate clause arguments for his defense, whatever he needs to do, but they need to make an example out of this guy.

Speaker 10 There's no chance this guy is going to be the president of the United States. He's a clown, and

Speaker 10 he's really hurt his credibility by doing this far outside of the political circles.

Speaker 10 He's hitting real Americans in real America, the non-political people who think it's appalling that you have members of Congress calling on the military, calling on intel agencies to ignore the president of the United States.

Speaker 3 You know, I tend to fall on your end of this,

Speaker 3 Mike. I think that, you know, I think this was a self-owned by them.
I think they got way out over their skis. This was unsolicited, by the way.
This came from out of nowhere.

Speaker 3 I guess you could make the argument that the boat attacks.

Speaker 4 I mean, there's always one thing or another they could fixate on. It just stands out to me.
What a... dangerous escalation it is.

Speaker 4 Even though I'm the squish on how hard you prosecute it, we should not lowball how bad it was that they did this, how dangerous it is, and how they are egging on a destructive thing.

Speaker 4 And one reason I am wary of prosecuting him is I'm thinking if they actually induce members of the military to try doing this, to try defying the president, you need to make sure you are in the strongest political position possible to defend against what would basically be a coup d'état.

Speaker 10 I wrote a Fox News piece on this, Andrew, and I point this out.

Speaker 10 If the Supreme Court of the United States, the Trump administration is going to the Supreme Court of the United States on the emergency docket, and they are getting the smartest lawyers and judges at the lower court level reversed by the Supreme Court with like a 91 or 92 percent reversal rate.

Speaker 10 If these very smart Harvard lawyers and judges at the district or the appellate court level are getting the law wrong and the Supreme Court has to fix this 92 percent of the time, how the hell do we expect 18-year-old military enlistees to figure out what the law is?

Speaker 10 Such a good point, Mike. I mean, we have to, you have, if you are in the military, you have to follow the president of the United States on every order.

Speaker 10 And I can think of a time, for example, during Vietnam where there was a military officer who ordered the mass murder of the Vietnamese, burned down the villages.

Speaker 10 That would be at the military commander level, where you would say, I can't do this because this is clearly a war crime.

Speaker 10 You're raping and killing children, women, children. You can't do this.

Speaker 10 That's very clear. When you're dealing with the President of the United States, you better follow every order of the President of the United States unless you are goddamn sure it is wrong.

Speaker 10 For example, when President Trump ordered the strike on the Iranian nuclear facility, are you going to have some military officer or military enlistee saying, sorry, I can't do this strike.

Speaker 10 I'm going to expose this ongoing military operation because I don't think President Trump has the lawful authority to take out this Iranian nuclear facility.

Speaker 10 This is a very dangerous game these politicians are playing. And Mark Kelly not only should be ashamed if he's capable of shame, he should be held accountable for this.

Speaker 3 Well, you know what this reminds me of, Mike, as well and Blake? It kind of reminds me of what Vinman did to Trump, right?

Speaker 3 It was basically this inside-out, oh, we got this phone call, and guess what? He was abusing his power and withholding military aid for political gain, right? And then all of a sudden, you know,

Speaker 3 Trump's in the throes of all this chaos. It undermines the entire

Speaker 3 term in so many ways.

Speaker 3 It's such a slippery slope because if you can start alleging that the president has done something illegal

Speaker 3 when he is given broad authority to command the armed forces, you could basically nitpick anything and start pulling away all authority from the executive branch to command the military.

Speaker 3 And then you do have the third worlding of the American military, where they would lead a military junta, where it would be a coup d'état.

Speaker 10 Let me ask you this.

Speaker 10 These Democrats who pretend like they care about President Trump using the military, which what they think is unlawfully, President Obama

Speaker 10 ordered an extrajudicial drone strike on two American, on several American citizens, including a minor. I fully supported that drone strike of Obama, but there is doubt whether that was legal or not.

Speaker 10 You have David Barron, who is now a judge on the First Circuit Court of Appeals, who was running the Office of Legal Counsel in the Justice Department at the time.

Speaker 10 OLC is the one that decides whether executive branch actions are lawful or unlawful within the executive branch.

Speaker 10 Of course, judges ultimately decide, but it was Judge David Barron who told President Obama that he had the lawful authority to

Speaker 10 order a drone strike on American citizens, including a minor, extrajudicial killings. Was that legal? Was that illegal?

Speaker 10 That's up for debate, but you certainly don't want these drone officers, these drone operators in the military to say, you know, I just can't do this.

Speaker 10 I don't think that President Obama was being lawful here, so I can't do this. Those people would be court-martialed.

Speaker 10 They would be thrown in the brig, and that's exactly what should happen to Senator Mark Kelly for pushing this very dangerous game that they're playing because they don't like Trump.

Speaker 4 Into the brig.

Speaker 3 Well, I mean, it's going to be hard to run for president if he's in the brig.

Speaker 4 We were talking about if Trump would have to win.

Speaker 3 I remember that.

Speaker 3 Listen, Mike, I tend to agree. I think there needs to be pretty stern consequences here.
So I'm very sympathetic to your argument.

Speaker 3 I do think that the punishment has to fit the crime here, and I think it's a pretty egregious crime. I'm open-minded to an administrative solution here.

Speaker 3 I don't want to create a victim out of this guy, but you know, at the same time,

Speaker 3 I am in this moment having flashbacks to Vinman. I'm literally having flashbacks because this is a slippery slope.
This is the third worlding of the U.S. military.

Speaker 3 I want to change our attention here to the news that broke yesterday: that James Comey and Letitia James, that a judge had thrown out the case basically based on procedural issues with Lindsey Halligan.

Speaker 3 So, saying that she was not lawfully appointed to her position.

Speaker 3 Now, I'll play this clip. This is A.G.
Pambondi saying, you know, we're going to appeal this right away, 190.

Speaker 13 Sure, we'll be taking all available legal action, including an immediate appeal to hold Letitia James and James Comey accountable for their unlawful conduct. I'm going to keep going on this.

Speaker 13 I'm not, you know, I'm not, I'm not worried about someone who has been charged with a very serious crime. His alleged actions were a betrayal of public trust.

Speaker 3 And James Comey's already taken a victory lap. Maybe she pump the brakes, as Caroline Levitt says, but 195, and this is James Comey.

Speaker 14 The message has to be sent that the President of the United States cannot use the Department of Justice to target his political enemies. I don't care what your politics are.

Speaker 14 You have to see that as fundamentally un-American and a threat to the rule of law that keeps all of us free.

Speaker 14 I know that Donald Trump will probably come after me again, and my attitude is going to be the same. I'm innocent.
I am not afraid.

Speaker 14 And I believe in an independent federal judiciary, the gift from our founders that protects us from a would-be tyrant.

Speaker 3 A would-be tyrant. Oh, Mike, I see you shaking your head.

Speaker 4 They can't stop acting like they're in a movie.

Speaker 3 It's this virtue signaling holier than thou. Mike Davis.

Speaker 10 It's worse. James Comey got charged with lying to Congress and obstruction of a congressional investigation for the very thing he's complaining about.

Speaker 10 He politicized and weaponized intel agencies and law enforcement with the Russian collusion hoax with Crossfire Hurricane to take out President Trump, his political enemy.

Speaker 10 He got caught lying about it. The prior interim U.S.
attorney was a giant wimp and didn't bring charges. Same with Letitia James with her mortgage fraud.

Speaker 10 And so Lindsey Halligan went in there, found the evidence, took it to a grand jury, a Democrat-controlled grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, outside of Washington, D.C.

Speaker 10 And even this Democrat grand jury found probable cause on both James Comey for lying to Congress and an obstruction of a congressional investigation and against Big Tish James, the New York Attorney General, who lied about having a second home in Virginia to get a better mortgage rate when it was an investment property.

Speaker 10 The grand jury returned these indictments. Then you had this Democrat Obama chief judge of the Fourth Circuit pick a Clinton judge in South Carolina to come in and to dismiss these indictments.

Speaker 10 And they dismissed these indictments on the incorrect legal grounds.

Speaker 10 They essentially argue that the courts, after 120 days, the courts, instead of the President of the United States or his Attorney General, get to decide who the chief law enforcement officer is, the U.S.

Speaker 10 Attorney in these districts. That is an incorrect reading of the statute.
It's a dangerous reading of the statute because you don't have accountability.

Speaker 10 You don't have prosecutors who are accountable to the American people through their duly elected president of the United States.

Speaker 10 You have prosecutors who are picked by Democrat judges in Democrat hellholes like the D.C. suburbs or New Jersey to protect their political allies and go after their political friends.

Speaker 10 The Supreme Court will fix this.

Speaker 10 And in the meantime, the Attorney General has many different tools to bring accountability for both Big Tish and James Comey, including indictments in the Southern District of Florida.

Speaker 3 Right now, in war-torn Ukraine, elderly Jews like Maria face a brutal winter and a constant search for food. Maria is 85 years old and lives alone.
She's nearly blind and suffers from a broken hip.

Speaker 3 Maria is a Holocaust survivor. Her father and brother were murdered by the Nazis.
Maria still lives in her childhood home. There's no indoor plumbing, no heat, and it's bitterly cold.

Speaker 3 Today, like yesterday, Maria barely has enough food to survive. Her hunger is unbearable.
She prays for warmth, food, and someone to help her. This winter, as the snow falls and the nights grow long.

Speaker 3 longer, her hope fades with each passing day. She feels forgotten and needs our help.
That's why I'm so grateful for the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews.

Speaker 3 For over 40 years, the fellowship and their supporters have delivered boxes stuffed with nutritious food, cooking supplies, and other essentials to suffering and impoverished people like Maria.

Speaker 3 To learn more about the great work of IFCJ, visit urgentifcj.org. That's urgentifcj.org.

Speaker 3 Mike Davis, Article 3 Project. Tell us your coordinates.
How do people follow you and track you and support the work you're doing?

Speaker 10 Article3Project.org, Article3project.org, article number threeproject.org. Follow us on social media.
Donate what you can afford, but take action.

Speaker 10 That's the most powerful thing your audience can do is action, action, action. And thank you guys.

Speaker 3 Yeah, absolutely. We're going to be talking one of your initiatives on AI.
I have a lot of questions, Mike. Article 3 Project, Mike Davis, there is a back and forth going on.

Speaker 3 I mean, it first flared up during the One Big Beautiful Bill about this moratorium on states

Speaker 3 putting forth any regulation. So at that time, we brought in Stephen Miller.
Stephen and Charlie had a big conversation about it. Ended up going viral.

Speaker 3 And it was about this idea of: can states like California or New York issue regulations when it comes to AI?

Speaker 3 And basically, it was saying we don't want them to do that. We don't want the woke states, the Democrat-led states, to be leading the charge on this.
You disagree with this position.

Speaker 3 Now, lawmakers are once again trying to stuff it into the NDAA, I believe. So, Mike, give us your perspective on it.
I'm all ears.

Speaker 10 No, I don't necessarily disagree with Stephen Miller on the need for a federal standard for AI.

Speaker 10 I guess it's the tech companies are the only companies in America who think they need federal preemption, but I'm not necessarily opposed to federal preemption.

Speaker 10 They're not asking for federal preemption with federal rules of the road.

Speaker 10 They're asking for AI amnesty, like they did with Section 230 back in 1996, where these small tech platforms had Section 230 amnesty and then antitrust amnesty.

Speaker 10 And then we got Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple that crush competition, shutter small businesses, and cancel conservatives and others with whom we disagree.

Speaker 10 We can't repeat the mistakes of Section 230 with AI.

Speaker 10 And so I understand that we need to be competitive across the world and compete with China and compete with other adversaries, but we also need federal rules of the road if we're going to have federal preemptions.

Speaker 10 So state and and local governments cannot touch AI. For example,

Speaker 10 I call this the four C's. Are we going to have protections for children

Speaker 10 from online abuse? Are we going to have protections for conservatives so we don't get canceled by these AI platforms?

Speaker 10 Are we going to have protections for communities so we make sure that we don't, for example, jack up the water and electricity prices in these small communities so the working class have to foot the bill for these AI data centers that consume all this water and electricity?

Speaker 10 Are we going to have zoning

Speaker 10 protections in communities so we don't put AI data centers in the middle of neighborhoods?

Speaker 10 These big tech oligarchs, the AI bros, say no, that they should have full amnesty from state and local and then no federal rules of the road so they can just do whatever the hell they want, like they did on Section 230.

Speaker 10 And my response to that is: hell no. Why would we let

Speaker 10 Meta, for example, and Google, for example, who hate us as conservatives, run us over and make trillions of dollars on the backs of conservatives, children, content creators, and communities?

Speaker 10 If you're not going to protect the four C's, they don't have 60 votes to get this done. They thought they had 60 votes four months ago at the end of June, at the beginning of July.

Speaker 10 They thought this thing was going to pass and must pass legislation.

Speaker 10 And then the Article III project kicked into gear and it went down 99 to 1, including the lead sponsor, Ted Cruz, voting against his own bill. I'll tell the AI bros the same thing.

Speaker 10 If you try to do this again, we'll kick your butts again. And

Speaker 10 if you're going to get 60 votes, you're going to protect the four C's.

Speaker 3 Yeah, this is a Trump Truth Social 169.

Speaker 3 He says, you know, investment in AI is helping to make the U.S.

Speaker 3 economy the hottest in the world. This is image 169.
Thanks, guys.

Speaker 3 But overregulation by the states is threatening to undermine this growth. Some states are even trying to embed DEI ideology into AI models, producing woke AI.
Remember, Black George Washington?

Speaker 3 We must have one federal standard instead of a patchwork of 50 state regulatory regimes.

Speaker 3 So I, and actually, by the way, in the final line there, Mike, he says we can do this in a way that protects children and prevents censorship.

Speaker 3 So is the middle ground here spearheading a federal effort to make sure that we have AI, a regulatory regime at the federal level so we don't have this patchwork?

Speaker 3 It sounds like you're open-minded to that.

Speaker 10 Yeah, and

Speaker 10 I'm working with the president and the vice president and their teams on that right now.

Speaker 10 But they're going to protect children, conservatives, communities, and creators, or they're not going to get this done.

Speaker 10 It's very easy to go on conservative media and get people to light up their two home state senators and their U.S.

Speaker 10 House rep, and then all of a sudden this AI amnesty that they think they're going to jam through at 4 o'clock in the morning goes down 99 to 1.

Speaker 10 So if they want to play this game again, I'll kick their asses again.

Speaker 3 I'm convinced. I'm convinced, Mike.
I think you're right.

Speaker 3 I think there's some money involved in some of this push to keep getting this bill that went down in flames back into the NDAA. I think you're right.
I think we need to scrap it.

Speaker 3 I think we need to get it into

Speaker 3 federal level. I think that's the key here.
I think, because we can't.

Speaker 4 As he says, you know, if it's content creators, get your pound of flesh out of it.

Speaker 3 Yeah, exactly. Mike Davis, Article 3 Project.
Thank you, man. We appreciate you.

Speaker 10 Thank you, guys. We'll see you soon.

Speaker 4 For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com.