September 15, 2025 • 22 mins
Vice President J.D. Vance hosted Charlie Kirk’s podcast today and vented. Amy and T.J. listened, so you don’ have to! While there were some poignant and beautiful moments regarding his love and respect for Kirk, Vance was also angry, emotional and vowed retribution on liberal institutions and the people who fund them.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Hey, they're folks. Did it Monday, September the fifteenth, and
the Vice President says unity is not possible. Welcome to
this episode of Amy and TJ. Robes Are. This was
a at times pretty jarring, emotionally jarring with the words
(00:25):
from the Vice President today and also from Steven Miller
during a podcast in which they were honoring Charlie Kirk.
They were doing it on his show, and you know,
there were very nice moments we will get into, but
you walk away thinking almost there was a declaration of
war on the other side.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Of the aisle, without a doubt. I mean, they vowed
retribution for Charlie Kirk's death. They said that they were
going to use every resource they had at the Justice Department,
at Homeland Security, throughout the entire government to disrupt and
to eliminate anyone and to find anyone who is speaking ill,
(01:10):
of promoting funding any sort of ideology that promotes leftist extremism,
but certainly anyone who even makes fun of, makes light
of jokes, celebrates Charlie Kirk's murder.
Speaker 1 (01:26):
This was a wide ranging It was a two hour episode,
has some commercial breaks in there, but this was the
Vice President playing host on Charlie Kirks Show. It's a podcast,
but he was doing it from the White House, but
it was all on all on video, and he had
several guests. He had the White House Chief of Staff,
the deputy the chief of Staff was there as well.
(01:47):
Even RFK Junior made an appearance, and a lot of
people were sharing stories and some of them sweet we
can hit on here in a moment about how they
and just how close they were. I think it really
does hit home. They lost somebody who was a dear
friend and family member too, a really tight knit group.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Yes, they all this wasn't just professional, this wasn't just business.
It absolutely felt personal. They were a group of people
who knew each other's wives and children. So yes, this
was a close group and they are deeply wounded, and
understandably so, I mean, this is jarring. And it hasn't
(02:29):
even been that long. They're probably still in shock. I
mean the way he died, how he died in front
of the world watching, that's a lot to process and
a lot to digest.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
And this is a guy. According to JD. Van, I
think it. The Vice President shared some very personal anecdotes
about Charlie Hurt, who was thirty one years old, but
he said he was a critical part of getting Trump
and getting JD. Van's elected, called him the smartest polytical
operative he had ever met. That is that's pretty high
(03:06):
marks for a kid. Essentially, he was thirty one years old,
found at this organization when he was still a teenager eighteen.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
He was eighteen when he founded the organization.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Yes so, and was able to put it together and
to get to the level he got to at thirty
one is awfully impressive. There are people who have all
kinds of issues with how he spoke and how he
spoke about people, and some of they would frankly call
it hate speech. Some of the things he said, we
get that, but as a human beings who has been
(03:37):
murdered in front of us, all essentially.
Speaker 2 (03:39):
Right, absolutely, And I thought it was I thought what
he had to say about Erica and what he had
to say about Charlie as a husband, I thought those
were very poignant moments. And I heard some things I
hadn't heard before from JD. Vance talking about what kind
of a husband and father he was and how he
taught him to be a better husband.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
I thought that was interesting. He I didn't know where
he was about to go with that, but he said
Erica told him that Charlie never raised his voice, never
cursed at her at any point during their relationship, and
Jade Bands admitted and like, look, I've been unpleasant to
my wife. I can't say that that I haven't raised
my voice. But he did, And this was one of
(04:20):
the more poignant moments. I thought. He said, I now
am getting opportunities with my kids and with my wife
that Charlie Kirk's kids and wife are not going to
get with him. How dare I ruin that or disrupt
that with a bad attitude, bad words of being unpleasant?
So that I thought that was a sweet point that
(04:41):
he did make.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
Yeah, and I think that that was one of the brighter,
more positive moments during this two hour session, which there
was a lot of unpleasant things said. But I did
think that was a really beautiful takeaway. And I do
like that to recognize what he did and what he
did better than most and say, I'm now, in his
honor going to take that on and the next time
(05:04):
I find myself about to gill up my wife or
get upset, I'm going to remember Charlie and I'm going
to do better. I think that is amazing if that
comes out of it, amazing.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
And everyone who came up, they had some of the
staffers who were very close to Charlie, someone he worked
with at Turning Point, USA. Somebody from the White House
kind of had a panel discussion there for a moment.
But you also had one on one with Stephen Miller,
of course, the deputy chief of staff at the White House.
Now there was a lot of honoring and personal stuff,
(05:35):
but there was a lot of politics and almost robes.
It sounded like they were declaring policy. I say politics,
but this might end up being now policy for the
United States government or at least the Trump administration. Robes.
I don't want to go too far, but I want
a declaration of war on anyone who would dare. It's
(05:58):
one thing to be violent speak ill, even of Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Yes, so this was Miller said this right, Stephen Miller.
He said the last messages that Charlie sent me, he said,
we need to have we need to go after left
wing organizations that are promoting violence in this country. And
I will write those words on my heart. I mean,
there was a lot of very It was a call
(06:26):
to action, for sure, but a promise of swift justice
and investigation it got it for me. It got a
little scary, sounded sounding. It got like sounding like a
Salem witch hunt or a witch trial where we're going
to start looking for you and if you're there and
we hear anything you did or said or wrote, we're
going to come after you. It just it felt a
(06:47):
little scary when I heard what they were proposing.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
Now, the words, if you just read them, that's one thing.
But there was a delivery from certainly J. D. Vans
and Stephen It was emotional. It was angry. It actually
was angry. We can understand that they lost a family member,
someone was gunned down this way, a beloved family member,
(07:13):
we should even say, and so they should be angry.
But Stephen Miller talked about that anger. He said, yes,
there is sadness, but he said there's also anger. But
he called it focused anger and righteous anger. And he said,
if you have that and it's directed for a just cause,
(07:33):
it's one of the most important agents of change in
human history. We are going to channel all the anger
we have over the organized campaign that led to this
assassination to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks. Now, Robes,
did you catch there was on more than one occasion
(07:56):
that they refer to left leaning groups.
Speaker 2 (07:59):
As terrorist organizations organization terrorist networks. And my concern is
when he talks about focused anger, righteous anger, directed for
a just cause. Here's my problem with that. Each side
thinks they have that. Who's to say what's righteous? Who's
(08:22):
to say what the just cause is? Because just as
many people on the other side of the political isle
think that their anger is justified and that their anger
is righteous.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
So what we do?
Speaker 2 (08:35):
So that's but that's what blows my mind that they
do they really believe. I'm just curious, like honestly believe
that theirs is just and theirs is righteous, yes, and
the other side is not.
Speaker 1 (08:47):
Yes. And you know what this led to over the
years war wars that you absolutely one hundred percent believe
what that Steven Miller believes that he's saying one hundred
But how do we also have some kind of balance
in that we have to leave a little space or
(09:07):
opportunity of being wrong, or we have to leave space
for someone who thinks differently because they have to be
in the same group too. Right, Then what do we do.
The righteous was a scary word for me.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
It was because also is he only talking about extremist
like leftist groups, people who would be aligned with the killer,
only them. He's not talking about Democrats, he's not talking
about just people on the left side of the political aisle.
He is only referring to the extremist groups. But so
(09:41):
you fight fire with fire, then I don't know what
the endgame is or what these investigations or these I
don't know what these going after a group of people,
like what does that look like? What does that entail?
Speaker 1 (09:58):
Because it's vague. It also adds to your fright right
now because we don't even know exactly what they're planning
to do. And there was an example that jd. Vance used.
Will get into that in a second of groups that
you wouldn't necessarily call fringe, like our mainstream, big time
(10:18):
democratic funders that are now being identified as, if not
extremist groups themselves, they in some way are promoting or
funding funding something else that allowed for some negative speech
to be made. So it's to your points tweet, it's
(10:40):
just a it's just vague, and Steven Miller refer to
it as they're going out to folks who are organized
docsing campaigns, organized riots, organized street violence, organized campaigns, and
messaging designed to trigger violence. What is that whatever they
(11:05):
deem as speech that's too upsetting that maybe it could
incite someone else to violence.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
Could someone's peaceful protest.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
Be there.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Organized organized riot riot? Or they're organized campaigning designed to
trigger violence.
Speaker 1 (11:24):
So it's all vague. But he ended that statement by saying,
God as my witness, we're gonna use all we have.
I mean that we're just such and what you're trying
to allow for emotion, you're trying to allow for these
people are hurting, they're angry, to take that anger and
use the all resources of the federal government to go
(11:45):
after folks who are speaking in a way you don't like.
I mean, both signs are now saying what the other
side can can't say.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
It really is frightening, and I think that's I actually
feel uncomfortable and concerned.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
But JD. Vance wrapped up at the end by going
after groups that are funding democratic leaning organizations. I should say,
I guess news organizations, organizations, And he made a plea
about one particular magazine, one particular article, and actually one
(12:25):
particular claim and that article, we will tell you what
it was, and then we'll tell you what the truth
actually is. Stay here continuing now with JD. Vance honoring
(12:46):
certainly Robes his friend Charlie Kirk filling in form on
his show today, the Charlie Kirk Podcast, and it was
there were some very heartfelt moments. You can tell these
people that they have lost not just a I mean
he was a valuable asset. To hear them talk about
just how much he meant to them as a political
(13:08):
operative and ally.
Speaker 2 (13:09):
And as a thirty one year old, that's wild to
me to think that at that young age she had
that much influenced, that much respect, and that much of
a reach. And certainly we've heard President Trump say it,
but Jadvans echoed it that they credit his effort with
reaching out and being able to connect with young voters
(13:29):
as to why Trump and Jade Vans are sitting in
the White House now.
Speaker 1 (13:33):
And to think of people who are that connected up
at the heights of government and these political insiders they
were run around chasing some mid twenties, late twenty year
old kid like they were seeking him out. That is
impressive what he was able to build. Again, I know
a lot of people on the other side, it's not impressive.
(13:54):
They don't think it's impressive what he built. They think
it's a shame, and they think he built it on
some pretty I guess, some even say hateful ideas. One
of those things came up today worked at the end.
Speaker 2 (14:05):
Jd.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Vance took a few minutes and he brought up an
article in particular in do you have an upright it's
in the Nation magazine? Yes, but the title, yep.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
The title is Charlie Kirk's legacy deserves no mourning now
that stings.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
That sucks. The days after his death, what day was
this one put out this? He said, what's the day
on this? Because he actually said it during the podcast,
jad Van said, I can't remember what he said. Actually
he said days. So it was in the days after
Charlie Kirk had been murdered September twelfth, the twelfth, less
(14:46):
that was that was Friday eleventh, so it was Wednesday
he was killed till Friday. This article Friday, This article
came out and at one point in the article, the
writer accuses Charlie Kirk or says Charlie Kirk had referenced
Katanji Brown Jackson, Chila Jackson, Lee, Michelle Obama, and Joey
(15:11):
Reid or at MSIPI right, and had spoken of them
in such a way that they didn't have brain processing power,
that they were affirmative action higher he attributed. He said
that this writer attributed a quote to Charlie Kirk that
wasn't accurate right, And in doing so, they said that
(15:31):
this writer was ruining the good name and reputation of
Charlie Kirk. So if you go and you look it
up robes which we have and looked up the exact quote.
So what should we go with. First, we're going to
write what their update was, or we're gonna say what
he actually said.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
Well, I think if you just hear what he actually said,
that's all you need.
Speaker 1 (15:56):
So there you go. So the Vice President today is
saying that the article was wrong because it insinuated that
Charlie said that black women do not have brain processing power.
And he made a long, several minute argument saying that
(16:16):
Charlie Kirk didn't do that, and that this writer lied
about a dead man, and that this magazine, the Nation magazine,
which he called an esteemed magazine that is funded by
George Soros, lied in order to justify a murder. He
(16:37):
called it soulless and evil. So what did Charlie Kirk
actually say, Miss Robock.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
So The Nation put out a correction at the bottom
of their article and it says correction. A previous version
of this article attributed a quote to Charlie Kirk incorrectly.
Kirk said this, and here is the quote. If we
would have said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and
Shila Jackson Lee and Katanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks,
(17:07):
we would have been called racists. Now they're coming out
and they're saying it for us. They're coming out and
they're saying, I'm only here because of affirmative action. We
know you do not have the brain processing power to
otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal
a white person's slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.
(17:31):
Sounds like he called them that.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
There's video, there's a clip. You don't have to interpret
it is what he said. That is it's not an
AI situation.
Speaker 2 (17:44):
That was verbatim.
Speaker 1 (17:45):
It was verbatim from him, and there's video of him
saying it, and he says it with glee, I think,
and it is Robes. It's difficult. Somebody kids lost a dad,
a wife lost the husband, and we should mourn the
loss of a life. I don't think any human being,
(18:08):
no matter what problem you have with anything he ever said,
could feel nothing but pain and loss and sadness at
what has taken place. That should be the end of
the story, but it's not.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
Unfortunately, what happens is people on both sides of the
aisle dehumanize one another, and then they get mad at
the other side for dehumanizing them and for making it
just all about politics or somehow not acknowledging the unbelievable
tragedy that actually happened. But both sides are guilty of
(18:44):
doing it, and neither one is admitting it. And I
think that's the frustrating part.
Speaker 1 (18:52):
And JD. Vance and Rose, he said a lot there
at the end. There were a lot of accusations he
was throwing around with not getting into all of that,
but he mentioned the word unity several times, and in
referencing unity he said we can't have it.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
He talked about the divisiveness.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
And said unity is not possible with anyone who would
be okay with the death of Charlie Kirk, and his
last two minutes it felt like he was angry. He
was yelling almost at times. And what he was saying,
I mean, this was a fiery declaration, is what it
(19:35):
Wasn't It wasn't that we are It sounded like we're
going to be on the offensive, like we are now
coming after you.
Speaker 2 (19:44):
Yes, that is absolutely what it sounded like. And it
is what he said. And he again, in the name
of unity, talked about there was a some sort of
a survey being done and he said that only twenty
four percent of liberals, sorry, twenty four percent of liberals
(20:05):
believe it's acceptable to be happy about the death of
Charlie Kirk or someone who's a political enemy. And then
he said only three percent of conservatives thought that. So
that was his proof.
Speaker 1 (20:19):
He was making a point that the folks on the left,
those extremists are more violent. Correct, he said, it's a
statistical fact. And look, this was not something that's going
to bring the country together. Maybe today wasn't the time
this was on Charlie. Charlie Kirk has an audience, and
maybe he was speaking directly to that audience. And yes,
that makes sense, that's an audience that is morning right
(20:43):
now as a nation we all should be. But this
one was a tough one to listen to today at times.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
And it's interesting, I know we're wrapping up here, but
when he got really angry, obviously talking about liberal liberal extremism,
but he also got really personal and talked about what
his kids heard when they were at Disney World, Disneyland,
one of the two, and said the things that were
shouted at his children and so his anger, like you
could these were wounds that were there and what happened
(21:11):
to Charlie Kirk certainly I think exposed them, or at
least you could tell that it was. Yes, it was
about Charlie, but it was also concerned. He even kind
of referenced to him macab way that he too could
suffer the same faith. It's almost as if he knows
that he has a target on his back, or he's
saying he does, and so he feels threatened. It seemed
(21:32):
as though to me hearing him today, he felt like
he was in the same boat potentially as Charlie Kirk,
and not scary.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
It was ominous. It was scary about the future in
a lot of ways from our politics from our politicians right.
Your heart goes out for all of them. I'm terrified
that somebody is going to go after another one and
this is going to set off something in the country.
But folks, y'all hanging there, tell him you love him,
(22:01):
kiss him. Nothing is promised, but we appreciate you as always.
We just want to hop on for a few minutes
after listening and always appreciate you all listening to us.
Hey, they're folks. Did it Monday, September the fifteenth, and
the Vice President says unity is not possible. Welcome to
this episode of Amy and TJ. Robes Are. This was
a at times pretty jarring, emotionally jarring with the words
(00:25):
from the Vice President today and also from Steven Miller
during a podcast in which they were honoring Charlie Kirk.
They were doing it on his show, and you know,
there were very nice moments we will get into, but
you walk away thinking almost there was a declaration of
war on the other side.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Of the aisle, without a doubt. I mean, they vowed
retribution for Charlie Kirk's death. They said that they were
going to use every resource they had at the Justice Department,
at Homeland Security, throughout the entire government to disrupt and
to eliminate anyone and to find anyone who is speaking ill,
(01:10):
of promoting funding any sort of ideology that promotes leftist extremism,
but certainly anyone who even makes fun of, makes light
of jokes, celebrates Charlie Kirk's murder.
Speaker 1 (01:26):
This was a wide ranging It was a two hour episode,
has some commercial breaks in there, but this was the
Vice President playing host on Charlie Kirks Show. It's a podcast,
but he was doing it from the White House, but
it was all on all on video, and he had
several guests. He had the White House Chief of Staff,
the deputy the chief of Staff was there as well.
(01:47):
Even RFK Junior made an appearance, and a lot of
people were sharing stories and some of them sweet we
can hit on here in a moment about how they
and just how close they were. I think it really
does hit home. They lost somebody who was a dear
friend and family member too, a really tight knit group.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Yes, they all this wasn't just professional, this wasn't just business.
It absolutely felt personal. They were a group of people
who knew each other's wives and children. So yes, this
was a close group and they are deeply wounded, and
understandably so, I mean, this is jarring. And it hasn't
(02:29):
even been that long. They're probably still in shock. I
mean the way he died, how he died in front
of the world watching, that's a lot to process and
a lot to digest.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
And this is a guy. According to JD. Van, I
think it. The Vice President shared some very personal anecdotes
about Charlie Hurt, who was thirty one years old, but
he said he was a critical part of getting Trump
and getting JD. Van's elected, called him the smartest polytical
operative he had ever met. That is that's pretty high
(03:06):
marks for a kid. Essentially, he was thirty one years old,
found at this organization when he was still a teenager eighteen.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
He was eighteen when he founded the organization.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Yes so, and was able to put it together and
to get to the level he got to at thirty
one is awfully impressive. There are people who have all
kinds of issues with how he spoke and how he
spoke about people, and some of they would frankly call
it hate speech. Some of the things he said, we
get that, but as a human beings who has been
(03:37):
murdered in front of us, all essentially.
Speaker 2 (03:39):
Right, absolutely, And I thought it was I thought what
he had to say about Erica and what he had
to say about Charlie as a husband, I thought those
were very poignant moments. And I heard some things I
hadn't heard before from JD. Vance talking about what kind
of a husband and father he was and how he
taught him to be a better husband.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
I thought that was interesting. He I didn't know where
he was about to go with that, but he said
Erica told him that Charlie never raised his voice, never
cursed at her at any point during their relationship, and
Jade Bands admitted and like, look, I've been unpleasant to
my wife. I can't say that that I haven't raised
my voice. But he did, And this was one of
(04:20):
the more poignant moments. I thought. He said, I now
am getting opportunities with my kids and with my wife
that Charlie Kirk's kids and wife are not going to
get with him. How dare I ruin that or disrupt
that with a bad attitude, bad words of being unpleasant?
So that I thought that was a sweet point that
(04:41):
he did make.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
Yeah, and I think that that was one of the brighter,
more positive moments during this two hour session, which there
was a lot of unpleasant things said. But I did
think that was a really beautiful takeaway. And I do
like that to recognize what he did and what he
did better than most and say, I'm now, in his
honor going to take that on and the next time
(05:04):
I find myself about to gill up my wife or
get upset, I'm going to remember Charlie and I'm going
to do better. I think that is amazing if that
comes out of it, amazing.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
And everyone who came up, they had some of the
staffers who were very close to Charlie, someone he worked
with at Turning Point, USA. Somebody from the White House
kind of had a panel discussion there for a moment.
But you also had one on one with Stephen Miller,
of course, the deputy chief of staff at the White House.
Now there was a lot of honoring and personal stuff,
(05:35):
but there was a lot of politics and almost robes.
It sounded like they were declaring policy. I say politics,
but this might end up being now policy for the
United States government or at least the Trump administration. Robes.
I don't want to go too far, but I want
a declaration of war on anyone who would dare. It's
(05:58):
one thing to be violent speak ill, even of Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Yes, so this was Miller said this right, Stephen Miller.
He said the last messages that Charlie sent me, he said,
we need to have we need to go after left
wing organizations that are promoting violence in this country. And
I will write those words on my heart. I mean,
there was a lot of very It was a call
(06:26):
to action, for sure, but a promise of swift justice
and investigation it got it for me. It got a
little scary, sounded sounding. It got like sounding like a
Salem witch hunt or a witch trial where we're going
to start looking for you and if you're there and
we hear anything you did or said or wrote, we're
going to come after you. It just it felt a
(06:47):
little scary when I heard what they were proposing.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
Now, the words, if you just read them, that's one thing.
But there was a delivery from certainly J. D. Vans
and Stephen It was emotional. It was angry. It actually
was angry. We can understand that they lost a family member,
someone was gunned down this way, a beloved family member,
(07:13):
we should even say, and so they should be angry.
But Stephen Miller talked about that anger. He said, yes,
there is sadness, but he said there's also anger. But
he called it focused anger and righteous anger. And he said,
if you have that and it's directed for a just cause,
(07:33):
it's one of the most important agents of change in
human history. We are going to channel all the anger
we have over the organized campaign that led to this
assassination to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks. Now, Robes,
did you catch there was on more than one occasion
(07:56):
that they refer to left leaning groups.
Speaker 2 (07:59):
As terrorist organizations organization terrorist networks. And my concern is
when he talks about focused anger, righteous anger, directed for
a just cause. Here's my problem with that. Each side
thinks they have that. Who's to say what's righteous? Who's
(08:22):
to say what the just cause is? Because just as
many people on the other side of the political isle
think that their anger is justified and that their anger
is righteous.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
So what we do?
Speaker 2 (08:35):
So that's but that's what blows my mind that they
do they really believe. I'm just curious, like honestly believe
that theirs is just and theirs is righteous, yes, and
the other side is not.
Speaker 1 (08:47):
Yes. And you know what this led to over the
years war wars that you absolutely one hundred percent believe
what that Steven Miller believes that he's saying one hundred
But how do we also have some kind of balance
in that we have to leave a little space or
(09:07):
opportunity of being wrong, or we have to leave space
for someone who thinks differently because they have to be
in the same group too. Right, Then what do we do.
The righteous was a scary word for me.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
It was because also is he only talking about extremist
like leftist groups, people who would be aligned with the killer,
only them. He's not talking about Democrats, he's not talking
about just people on the left side of the political aisle.
He is only referring to the extremist groups. But so
(09:41):
you fight fire with fire, then I don't know what
the endgame is or what these investigations or these I
don't know what these going after a group of people,
like what does that look like? What does that entail?
Speaker 1 (09:58):
Because it's vague. It also adds to your fright right
now because we don't even know exactly what they're planning
to do. And there was an example that jd. Vance used.
Will get into that in a second of groups that
you wouldn't necessarily call fringe, like our mainstream, big time
(10:18):
democratic funders that are now being identified as, if not
extremist groups themselves, they in some way are promoting or
funding funding something else that allowed for some negative speech
to be made. So it's to your points tweet, it's
(10:40):
just a it's just vague, and Steven Miller refer to
it as they're going out to folks who are organized
docsing campaigns, organized riots, organized street violence, organized campaigns, and
messaging designed to trigger violence. What is that whatever they
(11:05):
deem as speech that's too upsetting that maybe it could
incite someone else to violence.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
Could someone's peaceful protest.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
Be there.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Organized organized riot riot? Or they're organized campaigning designed to
trigger violence.
Speaker 1 (11:24):
So it's all vague. But he ended that statement by saying,
God as my witness, we're gonna use all we have.
I mean that we're just such and what you're trying
to allow for emotion, you're trying to allow for these
people are hurting, they're angry, to take that anger and
use the all resources of the federal government to go
(11:45):
after folks who are speaking in a way you don't like.
I mean, both signs are now saying what the other
side can can't say.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
It really is frightening, and I think that's I actually
feel uncomfortable and concerned.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
But JD. Vance wrapped up at the end by going
after groups that are funding democratic leaning organizations. I should say,
I guess news organizations, organizations, And he made a plea
about one particular magazine, one particular article, and actually one
(12:25):
particular claim and that article, we will tell you what
it was, and then we'll tell you what the truth
actually is. Stay here continuing now with JD. Vance honoring
(12:46):
certainly Robes his friend Charlie Kirk filling in form on
his show today, the Charlie Kirk Podcast, and it was
there were some very heartfelt moments. You can tell these
people that they have lost not just a I mean
he was a valuable asset. To hear them talk about
just how much he meant to them as a political
(13:08):
operative and ally.
Speaker 2 (13:09):
And as a thirty one year old, that's wild to
me to think that at that young age she had
that much influenced, that much respect, and that much of
a reach. And certainly we've heard President Trump say it,
but Jadvans echoed it that they credit his effort with
reaching out and being able to connect with young voters
(13:29):
as to why Trump and Jade Vans are sitting in
the White House now.
Speaker 1 (13:33):
And to think of people who are that connected up
at the heights of government and these political insiders they
were run around chasing some mid twenties, late twenty year
old kid like they were seeking him out. That is
impressive what he was able to build. Again, I know
a lot of people on the other side, it's not impressive.
(13:54):
They don't think it's impressive what he built. They think
it's a shame, and they think he built it on
some pretty I guess, some even say hateful ideas. One
of those things came up today worked at the end.
Speaker 2 (14:05):
Jd.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Vance took a few minutes and he brought up an
article in particular in do you have an upright it's
in the Nation magazine? Yes, but the title, yep.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
The title is Charlie Kirk's legacy deserves no mourning now
that stings.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
That sucks. The days after his death, what day was
this one put out this? He said, what's the day
on this? Because he actually said it during the podcast,
jad Van said, I can't remember what he said. Actually
he said days. So it was in the days after
Charlie Kirk had been murdered September twelfth, the twelfth, less
(14:46):
that was that was Friday eleventh, so it was Wednesday
he was killed till Friday. This article Friday, This article
came out and at one point in the article, the
writer accuses Charlie Kirk or says Charlie Kirk had referenced
Katanji Brown Jackson, Chila Jackson, Lee, Michelle Obama, and Joey
(15:11):
Reid or at MSIPI right, and had spoken of them
in such a way that they didn't have brain processing power,
that they were affirmative action higher he attributed. He said
that this writer attributed a quote to Charlie Kirk that
wasn't accurate right, And in doing so, they said that
(15:31):
this writer was ruining the good name and reputation of
Charlie Kirk. So if you go and you look it
up robes which we have and looked up the exact quote.
So what should we go with. First, we're going to
write what their update was, or we're gonna say what
he actually said.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
Well, I think if you just hear what he actually said,
that's all you need.
Speaker 1 (15:56):
So there you go. So the Vice President today is
saying that the article was wrong because it insinuated that
Charlie said that black women do not have brain processing power.
And he made a long, several minute argument saying that
(16:16):
Charlie Kirk didn't do that, and that this writer lied
about a dead man, and that this magazine, the Nation magazine,
which he called an esteemed magazine that is funded by
George Soros, lied in order to justify a murder. He
(16:37):
called it soulless and evil. So what did Charlie Kirk
actually say, Miss Robock.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
So The Nation put out a correction at the bottom
of their article and it says correction. A previous version
of this article attributed a quote to Charlie Kirk incorrectly.
Kirk said this, and here is the quote. If we
would have said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and
Shila Jackson Lee and Katanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks,
(17:07):
we would have been called racists. Now they're coming out
and they're saying it for us. They're coming out and
they're saying, I'm only here because of affirmative action. We
know you do not have the brain processing power to
otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal
a white person's slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.
(17:31):
Sounds like he called them that.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
There's video, there's a clip. You don't have to interpret
it is what he said. That is it's not an
AI situation.
Speaker 2 (17:44):
That was verbatim.
Speaker 1 (17:45):
It was verbatim from him, and there's video of him
saying it, and he says it with glee, I think,
and it is Robes. It's difficult. Somebody kids lost a dad,
a wife lost the husband, and we should mourn the
loss of a life. I don't think any human being,
(18:08):
no matter what problem you have with anything he ever said,
could feel nothing but pain and loss and sadness at
what has taken place. That should be the end of
the story, but it's not.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
Unfortunately, what happens is people on both sides of the
aisle dehumanize one another, and then they get mad at
the other side for dehumanizing them and for making it
just all about politics or somehow not acknowledging the unbelievable
tragedy that actually happened. But both sides are guilty of
(18:44):
doing it, and neither one is admitting it. And I
think that's the frustrating part.
Speaker 1 (18:52):
And JD. Vance and Rose, he said a lot there
at the end. There were a lot of accusations he
was throwing around with not getting into all of that,
but he mentioned the word unity several times, and in
referencing unity he said we can't have it.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
He talked about the divisiveness.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
And said unity is not possible with anyone who would
be okay with the death of Charlie Kirk, and his
last two minutes it felt like he was angry. He
was yelling almost at times. And what he was saying,
I mean, this was a fiery declaration, is what it
(19:35):
Wasn't It wasn't that we are It sounded like we're
going to be on the offensive, like we are now
coming after you.
Speaker 2 (19:44):
Yes, that is absolutely what it sounded like. And it
is what he said. And he again, in the name
of unity, talked about there was a some sort of
a survey being done and he said that only twenty
four percent of liberals, sorry, twenty four percent of liberals
(20:05):
believe it's acceptable to be happy about the death of
Charlie Kirk or someone who's a political enemy. And then
he said only three percent of conservatives thought that. So
that was his proof.
Speaker 1 (20:19):
He was making a point that the folks on the left,
those extremists are more violent. Correct, he said, it's a
statistical fact. And look, this was not something that's going
to bring the country together. Maybe today wasn't the time
this was on Charlie. Charlie Kirk has an audience, and
maybe he was speaking directly to that audience. And yes,
that makes sense, that's an audience that is morning right
(20:43):
now as a nation we all should be. But this
one was a tough one to listen to today at times.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
And it's interesting, I know we're wrapping up here, but
when he got really angry, obviously talking about liberal liberal extremism,
but he also got really personal and talked about what
his kids heard when they were at Disney World, Disneyland,
one of the two, and said the things that were
shouted at his children and so his anger, like you
could these were wounds that were there and what happened
(21:11):
to Charlie Kirk certainly I think exposed them, or at
least you could tell that it was. Yes, it was
about Charlie, but it was also concerned. He even kind
of referenced to him macab way that he too could
suffer the same faith. It's almost as if he knows
that he has a target on his back, or he's
saying he does, and so he feels threatened. It seemed
(21:32):
as though to me hearing him today, he felt like
he was in the same boat potentially as Charlie Kirk,
and not scary.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
It was ominous. It was scary about the future in
a lot of ways from our politics from our politicians right.
Your heart goes out for all of them. I'm terrified
that somebody is going to go after another one and
this is going to set off something in the country.
But folks, y'all hanging there, tell him you love him,
(22:01):
kiss him. Nothing is promised, but we appreciate you as always.
We just want to hop on for a few minutes
after listening and always appreciate you all listening to us.
Hosts And Creators
Amy Robach
T.J. Holmes
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.