October 3, 2025 • 42 mins
We discuss Candace Owens' "investigation" of the Charlie Kirk assassination, the Netflix boycott, and we introduce a new writer with a short Red Pilled America style story called Bred to Struggle. We also give our MLB Playoff predictions. Join us for RPA Presents Famboogie!
Sponsored by The Licorice Guy!
Support the show: https://redpilledamerica.com/support/
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 (00:03):
This is red Pilled America.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Hey, this is Patrick.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
Carrelchi and I'm Adriana Cortez and welcome to Red Pilled
America's Famboogie.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
I hope you guys are having a great week.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
It's October, which means it's baseball playoff time, so I
hope your team is losing really badly because.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
Unless your team is the Dodgers. It's also my birthday month.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Oh, it is your birthday month. This is Red Pilled
America's Famboogie. If you want to join the fanbam, go
to Redpilled America dot com and click join in the
top menu. You'll be supporting storytelling that aligns with your values.
And if you haven't heard, we start to doing video
versions of our show on YouTube and on Rumble. For
(01:08):
many of you have asked, we're on both. We'll leave
links in the show notes. Check it out, go leave
us comments, give us a like, Subscribe to the channels
on both YouTube and Rumble. It helps with helps us
beat the big tech algorithm. As we always have liked
to say.
Speaker 3 (01:24):
Yeah, and we have two episodes up now, two video episodes,
so yeah, please check them out, you guys, and share them. Share, Share,
share on your social media, on your Facebook, your Instagram.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
Yeah, we give you guys permission to cut clips and
put it on social media because we need to get
clips out there. Because I personally think that Adriana is
much much better looking than me. Clip a portion of
her and put it on.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
Your social account. Pig Patrick, pig Patrick, you guys, he's
a natural.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
I am a natural. I'm just being monest right now.
Go check it out. We'll leave it once again. We'll
leave a link, or you could just go to YouTube
and rumble and just put in Red Pilled America podcast
and it'll pop right up. This week we have the
video version of our invasion episode, so share the word
on the show. This episode we're gonna get into We're
gonna play a little mini storytelling from a new writer
(02:16):
that you guys might be into. It's not like a
full episode, but we're gonna give you guys a little
piece of an episode here on fam Boogie, a little
piece of Red Pilled America. We're gonna get into the
boycott thing that's happening that's trending with Netflix right now.
We'll get into that, and then we're gonna also talk
about the MLB Playoffs. We're gonna give our predictions, but
(02:39):
first we're gonna start off with this Charlie Kirk conspiracy
theories that's been going on. We spoke about some of
this last week, and they continue in they're beginning to
heat up, and so we thought we should talk about
this and in particular some of the positions that Candice
Owens is taking on this. But before we do that,
how's your week? Ben Adriana?
Speaker 3 (03:00):
You know what, my week was pretty good this week week.
I had been in a really big funk ever since
Charlie Kirk's murder. It really really hit me hard, as
you know, But things have started to turn around for me.
I've been super busy working on on the show and
then also now the video show and all of my
(03:23):
Instagram fashion stuff. It's been a lot, and you know,
obviously my mom and my wife duties which are the most.
Speaker 2 (03:30):
Important to me, and feeding the doggies.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
Feeding my doggies and making sure that I get their
rough greens in there for them. I have to tell you,
Pablo's nose looks so good. Have you noticed that?
Speaker 2 (03:38):
As is the facts what used to check out her Instagram?
She has one hundred thousand followers now.
Speaker 3 (03:44):
And I got to one hundred thousand.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
It's our biggest social media account is her fashion blog.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
Because you were right, I am better looking at you.
I'm just kidding.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Adriana underscore Jade. Adrianna spelled with a Y. Go check
that out. My week's been good. I've just been working
on another project that we have in the works behind
the scenes. That's been pretty a big version of my focus.
We're also working on the you know, the next episodes
that we have coming up, so I've been doing that
behind the scenes. But other than that, it's been kind
of uneventful. I've been just so locked in on the
(04:15):
Dodgers and the playoffs right now, and I have some
major major predictions that I can ben Oh goodness giving
later on.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
You're lucky you're married to somebody that loves the baseball.
Speaker 4 (04:25):
Say no, right there, don't imagine if.
Speaker 3 (04:27):
I didn't like baseball, if you didn't like that.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
We'll get into that later. We'll get at the very end,
the kind of fun segment at the very end of this.
But let's talk about this. These Candace Owens theories that
have been kind of sweeping the web. Let's say, on
social media. So for those of you guys that know
Candace has been on this show before, we interviewed her
way back in two thousand and seventeen. She was actually
(04:50):
at a Turning Point event. She was in her hotel room,
and we reached out to her and said, hey, we'd
love to do an episode on your kind of you know,
rise in the political space. She was just starting to
make a little bit of noise at that time, and
so she said yes. We interviewed her once again at
a Turning Point event. It was their December event there.
(05:11):
I think it's called America Fest now or Amerafest something
like that, And it was one of our earliest episodes
that we.
Speaker 3 (05:17):
Did, episode number two.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Actually, it was on basically why so many from the
Black community vote for Democrats?
Speaker 3 (05:25):
And called Booty Call.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
We had a couple of different names for it. I
ended up changing it. Initially it was called Booty Call,
and I didn't like that because I didn't want to
use I didn't want that title to be next to
Candice Owens and Diamond and Silk. I thought that was disrespectful,
so I changed the name to it It was a
sure thing, yes, which also isn't that great of a name.
I know, I agree we should have, but maybe it
(05:50):
took a little bit of a step back. Anyways, So
interviewed her there and it was kind of like the
story of her kind of getting involved in YouTube and
her early kind of involvement in politics and what have you.
And then when she had the breakup with The Daily Wire,
we did a much deeper dive into her career and
(06:11):
the guys from the Daily Wire and the conflict that
they had there. So I guess I could say that
I've spent more time reviewing her life and reviewing her
videos than most people. Yes, I'm sure her some of
her followers and her listeners that watch her show every
day have clocked a lot of hours, but I'm talking
(06:31):
about the very early days of her career and kind
of her positioning and what have you. I feel like
I could speak with a little bit of credibility on
her approach. So we've been watching this thing and as
you guys know, she's had a relationship with Charlie Kirk
famously had a relationship with Charlie Kirk. She the big
moment I think for both her and Charlie Kirk was
(06:53):
when she connected with Kanye West then called Kanye West
now Yea, and they started kind of doing the paparazzi thing.
I think they went on TMZ, and this relationship was
very public. It was when Yay had this moment where
he went into the White House I think shortly after
that and was wearing the Maga hat and he kind
(07:14):
of was having one of those Maga moments. And so
Charlie and her have had a long relationship. They kind
of came up together so fast forward to his assassination,
and I was really touched by her first video to him.
I thought it was really well done. I thought it
was heartfelt. I thought it was respectful, it was short
(07:37):
and sweet. She just kind of talked about the relationship
and it was really touching. I remember watching it almost
immediately when it came out, because we were just kind
of so hungry for positive information about Charlie at the time.
As the days started to follow, I think what really
set her off was when bb net and Yahoo came
(07:57):
forward and aside from just wishing, you know, rip wish
to Charlie Kirk, he started connecting Charlie Kirk to his
love for Israel, and I thought that that was a
really just not a smart move for BB at the time,
given kind of the heat on him right now. I
(08:20):
thought it just would have been better for him just
to take the high road, wish that his family, Charlie's
family the best. You don't have to, like, you know,
mention somebody's support for Israel every time you speak, dude.
And so I'm seeing that happen and I'm like, dude,
you are just not It is not the time for that. Yeah,
and so, but he did, and I think that kind
(08:42):
of set things off with Candice, and she started to
do a lot of discussions on this, and one of
the things that got brought up is BBE was saying
that Charlie had recently sent him a letter that was
very kind of doubling down and underscoring his support for Israel,
and that is what set Candace off. So when BIB
(09:06):
started discussing this letter that Charlie sent, Candace was claiming
that he was misrepresenting the contents of that letter, and
so she started putting out videos. This was on September sixteenth,
so we're talking six days after Charlie was assassinated, and
she was challenging BIB to put out the entire letter.
Speaker 4 (09:28):
Publish the entire thing you're holding it.
Speaker 5 (09:31):
I'm saying you're severely misrepresenting the contents that in May,
Charlie was concerned about Israel and their influence on American
politics and how they were pushing things that he felt
were in conflict with his beliefs free speech here in America.
(09:53):
Bibe's holding it up like Charlie just in May said, Hey,
you know what, I just want to write a love
letter at Israel. That's how it was presented. Would you
guys agree, That's not how it happened. Let's stop saying
how Charlie felt, and instead, if you're going to hold
up the letter, release it in its entirety. Okay, lies
by severe O mission. I'd like to be very clear,
are lies?
Speaker 2 (10:13):
Okay? So that was she was basically strongly claiming that
Bibe was misrepresenting the letter that Charlie wrote. She was
claiming that he left some things out and suggesting that
Charlie had included in the letter some negative things about
Israel and about his relationship with Israel and about some
(10:36):
pressure that was being applied to him. Okay, So what
happens next? You know, fast forward? She started going into
some you know, pretty an investigation, let's say, over Charlie
Kirk's assassination, and some things were interesting. Some things I
thought were kind of way out there. One thing I
thought was interesting is she came up with a picture
(10:58):
of this Tyler Robinson, guy who the FBI says killed Charlie,
who they say found They found DNA on a towel,
They found DNA on a screwdriver that was used to
disassemble the rifle that he used to kill Charlie Kirk,
that they have found text messages that they've spoken to
(11:18):
the parents, and the parents have said that he had
confessed to them. So the FBI clearly is saying that
this Tyler person is the person that killed Charlie. She
found came up with a picture of him at a
local dairy queen. It sounds like it was in the
area of the college. So I thought that was kind
of interesting. Well, she started going into some other kind
(11:39):
of wild accusations, and we'll get into those in a minute.
But to kind of close the loop on this position
that she had about the BB letter, the New York
Post posted the letter that Charlie sent to allegedly sent
to BB and this is what it says in the
New York Post. This is the headline of the New
York Post. Charlie Kirk wrote of his deep love for
(12:02):
Israel in letter to net Nyahu about how to counter
rising opposition to the Jewish state in the US. I'm
going to read some of this article for you. Assassinated
conservative activist Charlie Kirk advised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netnyahu
how to counter anti Israel sentiment among gen z and
(12:22):
when the information war being waged against the Jewish State.
According to a letter obtained by The Post, Kirk wrote
to net Nyahu in the May second missive that he
was alarmed by anti Israel and anti Semitic trends hitting
record levels on social media, since one of his greatest
joys as a Christian is advocating for Israel and forming
(12:43):
alliances with Jews in the fight to protect Judeo Christian civilization. Quote,
my team and I have spent months analyzing these trends
and debating ideas that could help you and your country
push back against these disturbing developments. End quote. He goes
on to state anti Israel sentiment can undermine American support
(13:05):
for Israel. So then they go on and they post
the entire letter with they claim as the entire letter.
It's I believe it's seven pages, and it is pretty
much what BB said it was, was that he was
advising him on how to fight back against this kind
of growing anti Semitic fervor here in the United States.
(13:27):
And I believe I've seen some people claim that some
of these efforts that you've recently seen with BB speaking
to social media influencers and asking for their advice and
asking for their help in kind of changing the tide
of anti Israel sentiment, it's being proposed that it was
Charlie that actually was the one that advised BB to
(13:50):
do that, and that BB is kind of following through
with that guidance. So it kind of is kind of
a big moment for Candice because he or she was
claiming that the contents of this letter were being misrepresented
by the leader of that country, and then the leader
(14:10):
of that country gets this letter to the New York
Post and they post it and it turns out to
be pretty much what he has stated that it was.
So if you're going to be taking this position like
Candace has taken, you would expect for her to have
had the letter and read the letter and have that
in her back pocket, to be able to kind of
(14:33):
show at some point and say, hey, no, it does
not have this information. She's taking on this kind of
role as an investigative journalist. She's been doing that for
quite some time now, going back to before her investigations
on Macron, which was largely done by other people people.
But you know, she did an investigation on Kamala, She's
(14:55):
done an investigation on the A Kamala, I should say,
on what's his name, Harvey Weinstein. She's done some other investigations,
and but what she's now done is she's kind of
suggesting that this letter did not represent Charlie Kirk's current position,
or at least the position right before his death. So
(15:16):
she puts out this new challenge. Now, she puts out
this new challenge where and now she's turning her eyesights
on Turning Point, and it's a pretty flammatory attack. I
would say, on Turning Point, I want to play a
portion of that. But we're going to play that right
after the break.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Licorice, Licorice, Where art thou licorice? If you listen to
Red Pilled America. You know that I love licorice, and
there is no licorice in America better than the delicious,
gourmet licorice made by.
Speaker 2 (15:47):
The Licorice Guy. The Licorice Guy is simply the best.
What sets their licorice apart is its flavor and freshness.
They have a great selection of flavors to choose from,
like red, blue, raspberry, black, and green apple, just to
name a few. The freshness of the Licorice Guy is
unlike anything you've ever tasted in licorice before. Seriously, if
(16:08):
you haven't tried licorice from the Licorice Guy yet, then
you ain't living life right. Trust me, you will not
regret it. It's time to dump that store bought liquorice
but's so hard it'll break your teeth and get yourself
the soft, fresh stuff from the Licorice Guy. What I
also love about the Liquorice Guy is that it's an
American family owned business. It's made right here in the
beautiful US of A. We are big proponents of buying
(16:31):
American and supporting American workers. Right now, Red Pilled America
listeners get fifteen percent off when they enter RPA fifteen
at checkout. Visit licoriceguy dot com and enter RPA fifteen
at checkout. That's licoriceguy dot com. A ship daily, treat
yourself and those you love and taste the difference. You're
(16:57):
listening to Red Pilled America's famboogy. Join the fambam support storytelling.
Go to Redpilled America dot com and click join in
the top menu.
Speaker 4 (17:07):
It's like eight.
Speaker 2 (17:08):
Dollars a month and you have like it's got a
cup of coffee, and you're going to be supporting storytelling
that aligns with your values.
Speaker 3 (17:14):
And you're going to help us make more YouTube videos
so we can spread the message far and wide.
Speaker 2 (17:19):
Yes, and go to YouTube and you can look up
Red Pilled America Podcast and you will find our new
videos there also at Rumble. So when we left you guys,
we were talking about this Candace kind of brew ha
ha that she's having.
Speaker 3 (17:36):
She's always having a brew ha ha.
Speaker 2 (17:38):
I think it's her business model. Yes, I think it's
her business model. And I guess more power to somebody
that that's how they kind of want to live their life.
But this one is kind of a big one because
she's attacking turning point now and she's basically suggesting, well,
I'm gonna let her talk. This is Candace Owens on
September thirtieth, and she issues a new challenge to Turning Point.
Speaker 5 (18:03):
And I don't know how the executives over at Turning
Point USA sleep at night. Okay, I don't know how
you can present yourselves as a Christian organization and not
be dedicating yourself to.
Speaker 4 (18:18):
The truth, no matter what the cost is. You tell
the truth. That's it, Okay.
Speaker 5 (18:21):
You don't hie hide it, you don't try to obsicate it,
you don't try to say, well wait until, wait until
the memorial events, before we start looking into who murdered him.
You tell the truth, and you tell it immediately. And
I don't think they're capable of doing that. And I
have an idea as to why that is. I think
the same people that were pressuring Charlie are pressuring them.
Speaker 4 (18:39):
In fact. I know that for a fact, so they
might need my help.
Speaker 5 (18:42):
Okay, I'm gonna state this, and I'm going to challenge
Turning Point USA executives to issue a very clean statement
saying that I am lying if this is not true.
About forty eight hours before Charlie Kirk died. Charlie informs
people at Turning Points, as well as Jewish donors and
a rabbi, that he had no choice but to abandon
(19:03):
the pro Israel cause out right. Okay, Charlie was done.
He said it explicitly that he refused to be bullied
anymore by the Jewish donors.
Speaker 4 (19:12):
Can you guys answer, did he express that?
Speaker 5 (19:14):
Did he also express that he wanted to bring me
Candice Owens back because he was standing up for himself?
And then did he just forty eight hours later, conveniently
catch a bullet to the throat before our on stage
reunion could happen. It's a yes or reno. Okay, let's
stop this ditching. Let's stop the dodging. Let's like, explicitly,
(19:35):
I want to hear from Turning Point USA that I'm
lying about that.
Speaker 4 (19:38):
I want you to.
Speaker 5 (19:38):
Say, no, No, it was just, you know, he was
feeling a little bit of pressure. No, I want you
to literally answer what I have just said. It either
happened or it didn't. I'm either making it all up
or it happened exactly as I'm saying. And while we're
at it, may I ask what is the name of
the Jewish donor who sponsored the Hampton's Weekend.
Speaker 4 (20:00):
Okay, And to Pastor Rob McCoy.
Speaker 5 (20:04):
Were there any LLC's that you or your son were
being paid through that sat outside of Turning Point. I'm
asking that question genuinely. Yeah, I'm putting the fire here
right at the feet of turning Point because I am disgusted.
I am genuinely disgusted. I am looking around and wondering
(20:28):
whether Charlie's entire life was the Truman Show. None of
you guys are behaving in the way that you should
be behaving. Okay, there was no way you are letting
these lives fly unless, as I am hearing, unless it
is true that there.
Speaker 4 (20:41):
Was a big, big, big payday that was on the line.
Speaker 5 (20:44):
And if Charlie radically stated but he was done with Israel.
If Charlie said he had no choice but to abandon
the Peri Israel cause because of and I quote Jewish donors,
the behavior of Jewish donors.
Speaker 4 (20:58):
If he said that yes or no, well, then I
don't know.
Speaker 5 (21:03):
Maybe maybe some people didn't want to take that risk,
that he was.
Speaker 4 (21:06):
Kind of what become canas Owen's and Ducker carls in.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
Okay, so there's a lot there. Wow, she but she,
I don't know this is the way I interpret it.
You tell me if this is your interpretation. She suggests
that Israel assassinated Charlie Kirk because she says that he
they were going to come out and she was going
to be brought back to Turning Point. He was no
(21:31):
longer going to support Israel. And then she says, forty
eight hours later, he conveniently caught a bullet to the neck.
Speaker 3 (21:40):
Before any of that could happen, basically before him and
her could be brought together on stage for a reunion.
And she's saying that his team is complicit.
Speaker 2 (21:47):
And let's remind everybody who the team is now. I mean,
the very top of Turning Point is Erica Kirk. She
is the head of Turning Point now, So it sounds
like to me there that she is. She's not directly
saying the head of Turning Points. She's saying turning Point executives.
(22:08):
Because very early on she said, the only thing that's
going to get me to stop on this are my
husband and Erica Kirk.
Speaker 3 (22:17):
Let's play that.
Speaker 5 (22:18):
No one, and I mean absolutely no one outside of
my husband and Erica Kirk has the power to shut
me up, right now.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
That's it.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
That was pretty early on.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
That was, you know, just a couple of weeks September sixteenth.
Speaker 2 (22:31):
I want to say, yes, after Charlie Kirk was assassinated.
So this would lead me to believe that, you know,
that is a very big statement. And for somebody that
has done some investigative journalism before in the past, those
of you guys have listened to the show. You know,
we were responsible for a Obama appointee resigning being forced
(22:54):
out as the same part of that same investigation, we
forced the White House, who initially said that we were
misconstruing this report that we had done, ended up capitulating
and submitting a new guidelines, new ethic guidelines, and saying
that they were never gonna let this thing happen again. Okay,
that was part of anough investigation that we were involved with.
(23:15):
So we have some history behind doing these kinds of investigations.
Many of you guys know that we dug into the
Tim Ballard stuff. I think that you saw the way
that we did that and the way we handled it.
We didn't just go on sources or hearsay or somebody
calling us and giving us their side of the story.
We pulled court documents. We went and pulled interviews that
(23:39):
he had done and statements that he he had made,
and then we compared that to court documents, and we
compared that to other court documents that we got hold
of in Columbia. There's a certain kind of level of
investigation that you need to do to make these very
very grand claims. Now there is some wiggle room here
(23:59):
to say that, well, maybe she's working with Erica kirk
on this, and Erica Kirkee has not made a public
statement on this. There is no evidence of that. But
the thing that I don't like about this is I
don't like the fact that she is using her same approach,
this kind of this very kind of hmmm, I wonder
what this is, you know, the same I'm just asking
(24:21):
questions approach on the topic of her best friend according
to her assassination. Okay, she's making kind of these the
very theatrical videos and this very theatrical approach to someone
that she has considered to be or is claiming to
be her best friend.
Speaker 3 (24:39):
She's using it as content.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
It seems to be that.
Speaker 3 (24:44):
Her best friend's murder and.
Speaker 2 (24:45):
You know, We've tried to stay away from, you know,
criticizing Candice Owans on this thing. We try to give
her a little bit of a space. She has been
on the show before, and we you know, don't like
going at people that have been on the show. But
in this case, it seems like she's making some very
very poor decisions.
Speaker 3 (25:04):
Okay, But we've also had Charlie's right hand manned Tyler Boyer,
on the show. We have, and I want to be
fair to them.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
As well that this is the reason why we wanted
to talk about this, because now you have Chyler Boyer
who's been on our show, and he made a public
claim recently, and it seems directly.
Speaker 3 (25:23):
He made not a public claim, he made a public statement.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
He made a statement and it seems directly kind of
pointed at Candice Owans. Why don't you read it?
Speaker 3 (25:31):
All right, here's what Tyler Boyer said. He said this
October second. I am sorry to have to tweet this,
but I do. Accusing innocent people much worse, accusing the
people who knew Charlie best, loved him more than just
about anyone, and witnessed his death isn't just wrong, it's
baseless mud slinging on the same level as calling someone
(25:52):
a Nazi or fascist who is not. It signals to
crazy people many evil ideas, thoughts, and feelings. It is
calling the good bad, and the innocent criminal. The worst
part of this wicked behavior is it is putting a
target on the backs of the people working to carry
out Charlie's work from before and after his murder. The
(26:12):
harassment may emotionally or physically sideline them, stopping the work.
Every single person who loves Charlie and knew him best
will not settle for anything less than the truth throughout
the process of grief, investigation, trial, and continuing on without
the person we loved and who we know the world loved.
I personally feel Charlie with us every day, and it
(26:33):
has given our people's strength to persevere in the darkest
hours of our lives. I hope people will seek truth,
apologize for getting things wrong along the way, support righteous causes,
and strive to not engage with destructive forces that I
believe the devil wants people to promote to undo the
good work that emanates from turning point Charlie and everything
(26:54):
he has left behind.
Speaker 2 (26:56):
So you know, I think what he is kind of
alluding to there one sound it fills to me, given
that you know, Cannas has made these comments rather recently
and directly is pointing at Turning Point executives, and he
is a Turning Point executive, that this is directed towards her.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
This is part of.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
What Candace does a lot of times, is she tends
to make these accusations towards people trying to draw a
response from them.
Speaker 3 (27:22):
She does this whole prove me wrong, prove me wrong.
Speaker 2 (27:25):
Yes, I thought I thought the Quartering had a good,
you know, kind of the best take on this so far.
The Quartering says the Candace Owens investigation journalism method, make
wild claim, provide zero evidence, and instead challenge someone else
to disprove it. If ignored, claim victory if disproven claim,
(27:47):
the evidence is fake. Rinse, repeat, cast, check. And this
is kind of how you know when you look at
this BB letter. She challenged them to release the letter.
The letter was released, and now what.
Speaker 3 (28:01):
Now she's saying that it's probably fake.
Speaker 2 (28:03):
You know, And so that doesn't make it. That doesn't
make any sense. I mean, it's a bad approach.
Speaker 3 (28:07):
Yeah, it's a bad approach. But about regarding Tyler's statement,
he did not say that Candace was lying. I know
he didn't reference her, but you know, we have a history,
you and I and on this show. If somebody calls
us a liar or makes accusations about us like the
ones that she is making, we go scorched earth. We
(28:31):
would not stand for that, and we have not. We
would defend ourselves, we would put it out there. Maybe
that's not their way, but she's making some very very
big accusations. She's saying that they're complicit in his murder.
Speaker 2 (28:44):
Yes, it's an assassination. That sounds like what she's saying.
It does, and it sounds to me like you know,
and I think at the end of the day, you
are right that he didn't directly address some of her claims.
I think this is the problem with and I think
we've had a little bit of distance enough now with
the whole assassination of Charlie Kirk to speak frankly about
(29:05):
some of these things. Charlie and his space is a
big tent space. He's constantly trying to build coalitions. He's
about elections, he's about getting politicians elected. He's about moving
the MAGA movement forward, and so he's very much a politician,
and he's very much a coalition builder, Okay, And so
(29:31):
if he needed to send something to BB to kind
of reinforce his relationship with Israel and make it sound,
I don't know, overly supportive, he's going to do that.
That's the kind of space that he is within. And
you know, I didn't know the man, but I've been
(29:52):
I've watched him for long enough and kind of seen
how these kinds of things have played out. He would
have been the type of person that would have sent
a letter even if he was having some revelations or
some or some new opinions on his view on Israel,
he would have sent a letter like that.
Speaker 3 (30:08):
Yes, people in his position know how to navigate the space.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
He was starting to go at Israel and was one
of the first people to start questioning Israel on certain
things right after October seventh. Very early on after October seventh,
he started to question whether Israel had a stand down order.
He talked about that right on Patrick Bett David's show.
I was very surprised to see that. And we're talking
(30:33):
about within days of October seventh, and he was speaking
out about certain things and sounds like some of the
things that she is saying here in regards to him
having maybe second thoughts or having some pressure from Jewish donors.
That has been backed up by Megan Kelly. It was
also backed up by Charlie Kirk himself. He went on
to Magan Kelly's show and made some of those claims.
(30:56):
So I guess what I'm The problem that I'm having
here is just with her approach. If you're going to
make these kinds of accusations, you should come up with
the goods. We've been down this road before when we
wrote these did that investigation on the White House. That time,
we had the goods in our back pocket ready to
(31:17):
go if somebody lied about it, and then once those
lies started to come out, we started to provide that
information and we did it within this timeframe. I mean
we're talking now with a little over three weeks from
when he was assassinated. That's kind of was the same
timeframe that we had our fight with the White House,
(31:37):
and we started putting out those things within like the
three or four week timeframe. But she's making some major mistakes.
I want to play this for you, this clip for
you real quickly she's in this investigation that she's doing.
She is claiming that the text messages that the FBI
was presenting between Tyler and his boyfriend were looked like
(32:03):
they were created by law enforcement or the FBI because
he used in these text messages the word vehicle. And
as justification for that, she played a bodycam video from
a cop that had an interaction with Tyler Robinson years ago,
where he says the name he says the word car,
(32:25):
and she claims because he didn't use the word vehicle
there that nobody uses the word vehicle except for law
enforcement in that kind of thing. Let's hear her on
this part. This is on September thirtieth, twenty twenty five.
Speaker 5 (32:38):
There's old footage of Tyler Robinson that is now circulating
from a car accident that he had, and during the
discussion with the officer that showed up, Tyler certainly refers
to it as his car, not his vehicle, because that's
how most Americans, how most English Speakers refer to a
(33:01):
car unless they're in the military or on the police force.
So here is twenty twenty two police bodycam footage in
case you miss that of Tyler making a crash report.
Speaker 4 (33:14):
Take a listen.
Speaker 1 (33:16):
Your mom's on her way.
Speaker 2 (33:17):
Yeah, she's gotta be a minute.
Speaker 5 (33:18):
She's got to shuttle over from where she's at to her.
Speaker 2 (33:20):
Car, and the drive over gotcha. So that was just
Tyler Robinson using the word car, not using the word
vehicle in this one interaction. So this is kind of
her proof that those text messages likely did not come
from Tyler. They came from law enforcement.
Speaker 4 (33:40):
His mother was going to shuttle over from her car.
Speaker 2 (33:43):
Interesting, So you see her approach there, how she does it.
She talks really slow and then you know like she
is hmmm, she does that a lot a style. What
she doesn't do is show the rest of the body
cam video that clearly shows that Tyler Robinson and uses
(34:04):
the word vehicle. Yeah, I was looking off at the
light just before getting there.
Speaker 5 (34:08):
I saw it shift yellow, and as I get into
the intersection, the folds there was a vehicle in the lane.
Speaker 2 (34:14):
So you hear him say that. He said vehicle. Clearly
said vehicle and.
Speaker 3 (34:18):
It was right literally the next sentence after the clip
that she played.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
So how could she have not listened to that entire body.
Speaker 3 (34:26):
Cam or did she listen to it and just not play.
Speaker 2 (34:29):
I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt
on that and say that she saw what she wanted
to see and that was that. But it gets worse
than that because she claims that, you know, no normal
person uses the word vehicle. But then milk Bar TV
pulled out these clips where she says vehicle a bunch
of times after Charlie Kirk's murder and before.
Speaker 5 (34:49):
And Nick was particularly asking him to determine who owned
a white vehicle, and everyone locally had had looked at
this vehicle, so I can help you to figure out
more about this vehicle.
Speaker 4 (35:03):
Only a president gets shot in a moving vehicle.
Speaker 5 (35:05):
November twenty second, nineteen sixty three, JFK was shot. President
JFKA was shot sitting alongside his wife in a vehicle.
Speaker 2 (35:13):
So this sloppy approach to investigative journalism is not voting
well for her, it's making her, it's ruining her credibility.
Of course, people use vehicle and car. The word vehicle
and car. Is that enough evidence to say that those
text messages were crafted by law enforcement? Of course not.
(35:34):
I had and still have questions about those texts. It
felt like to me like they were staged. But I
thought that it was likely Tyler and his boyfriend boyfriend
staging staging them to kind of create this innocence of his.
Speaker 3 (35:48):
Boyfriend, the boyfriend, the trance boyfriend.
Speaker 2 (35:50):
Here's another another instance where I was really kind of
shocked by her positioning. She claimed straight up in these
story posts on her Instagram that this is exactly what
she says. Tyler Robinson maintains his innocence and has never
even been to the UVU campus. How can she make
(36:13):
a claim that Tyler Robinson has never been at the
UVU campus, even if she has a source that's told
her that. I asked you this the other day when
I saw this, I said to you, have I ever
been to U see Santa Barbara? And what did you say?
Speaker 3 (36:28):
I said no?
Speaker 2 (36:29):
And I told you I actually have yes.
Speaker 3 (36:31):
And then I asked you, have I ever been to
U see Santa Barbara? And what did you say?
Speaker 1 (36:36):
I said no?
Speaker 3 (36:37):
You said no? And guess what, I have been And
we've been married for a.
Speaker 2 (36:42):
Long, a long time and I've known.
Speaker 3 (36:44):
You since nineteen ninety five years.
Speaker 2 (36:45):
I know you since nineteen ninety one.
Speaker 3 (36:47):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (36:48):
Okay, So the point being is is there's no way
that she can know whether a human being has been
at a campus or not yet she is making this
claim that he's never been at the UVU campus. Okay,
that is just it's so sloppy. And here's the thing.
If you make a mistake, you come out and you
(37:08):
make a correction, like I'm about to do right now.
Last week, when we spoke about this these alternative theories
about Charlie Kirk's death, we said that there was several
people out there that had videos that were going extremely
viral that were claiming he was shot from behind the
head and that the neck was an exit wound. And
(37:28):
in that discussion I talked about and what I said
was it was either and then I said ear piece.
I was about to say what the other potential thing
that it could be, and then I just kind of
didn't go the other direction. I just kind of stayed
I wanted to keep this story kind of simple for
the audience because at the end of the day, the
point was that that blood spatter that the person was
(37:49):
showing in the video wasn't blood spatter. It was something else,
So some kind of other object, And what I said
it was was an ear piece. Well it turns out
it was the other thing that I was about to
say that it was, which is it was a necklace.
It looked like it was potentially a necklace that shot
back when he was hit and you could see it
kind of, you know, kind of wave past the side
(38:10):
of his head. There's no entry wound. You could see
it from the side from that side, that side view,
there's no entry wound. And so you know, I want
to it's not really a connection, a correction maybe kind
of a clarification that it wasn't an earpiece, it was
a bracelet or excuse me, a necklace that he was wearing.
It's just that simple, if you're really trying to search
for the truth and not have to be right. And
(38:32):
that's the feeling that I feel like that she gets.
She needs to be right when she does these kinds
of things.
Speaker 3 (38:37):
Well, I also feel like her hatred for bb net
Yaho is so huge. Yes, she can't see past it.
Speaker 2 (38:46):
She can't.
Speaker 3 (38:47):
She cannot see past it.
Speaker 2 (38:48):
She can't see past it. She's making sloppy decisions because
of that. She's making wild accusations and tying it, tying
Charlie Kirk's assassination to Israel with no evidence whatsoever. Zero evidence.
She's not providing anything. She hasn't provided anything that makes
these points.
Speaker 3 (39:04):
Yeah. And let me just say this though, if she
comes forward and she somehow produces some receipts and what
she ends up saying ends up being true, then we
would on this show say, wow, she got it right.
You know what, We need to give her some credit
for that one hundred percent We do that.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
It doesn't take back from the theatrics. I don't like
the theatrics on this. This is her quote unquote best
friend that she is using this kind of just very
theatrical way to do an investigation rather than digging in
deep getting the evidence holding off. You don't need the
immediate gratification of putting something out there right now. You know,
(39:43):
if she has these audience members that there's the research
for her, then set up some kind of a chat
room or some kind of a slack page where you're
kind of communicating with those people, get everything together, and
then make the pitch.
Speaker 1 (39:55):
To the public.
Speaker 2 (39:56):
Because what she is basically doing is she's saying that
Turning Point is complicit, Erica Kirk is complicit. She's saying
that Patel cash Patel is complicit. Dan Bongino is complicit.
Trump In by extension is as well. Jadie Vance is complicit.
This entire group of Maga audience she is claiming is
(40:20):
complicit in this by making the accusations that she's making
and she's not showing any evidence of it. This isn't
you know, a kind of a funny thing. This is
supposed to be her best friend that she is doing
this investigation on, and she's doing it in a way
that is just completely ruining her credibility. There's nothing that
she could do to take away this vehicle credibility unless
(40:42):
she comes out and says, you know what, I got
that wrong. Guarantee you she doesn't come out and say
I got the vehicle thing wrong. She's just going to
move on past it.
Speaker 3 (40:49):
That's what people do in this day and age of
social media. That's been the mo They don't have to
come forward and say that they were wrong.
Speaker 2 (40:56):
And that this is not what independent journalism was supposed
to to take over, you know, is this new media thing.
It was supposed to take over this space and we
were supposed to supplant the legacy media by this dogged
search for the truth, and now the space has become
(41:16):
conspiracy theory ridden space. Anything that gets you clicks, anything
that feeds the algorithm, and it's tiring. Join us over
at part two. We're gonna discuss this Netflix boycott that's
been going down. We're also going to play a new
story for you guys by a new writer that we
(41:39):
want to introduce you guys to, and then we're going
to give our predictions on the MLB playoffs. Join us
over at Part two. You don't want to miss it.
Thanks everybody,
This is red Pilled America.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Hey, this is Patrick.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
Carrelchi and I'm Adriana Cortez and welcome to Red Pilled
America's Famboogie.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
I hope you guys are having a great week.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
It's October, which means it's baseball playoff time, so I
hope your team is losing really badly because.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
Unless your team is the Dodgers. It's also my birthday month.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Oh, it is your birthday month. This is Red Pilled
America's Famboogie. If you want to join the fanbam, go
to Redpilled America dot com and click join in the
top menu. You'll be supporting storytelling that aligns with your values.
And if you haven't heard, we start to doing video
versions of our show on YouTube and on Rumble. For
(01:08):
many of you have asked, we're on both. We'll leave
links in the show notes. Check it out, go leave
us comments, give us a like, Subscribe to the channels
on both YouTube and Rumble. It helps with helps us
beat the big tech algorithm. As we always have liked
to say.
Speaker 3 (01:24):
Yeah, and we have two episodes up now, two video episodes,
so yeah, please check them out, you guys, and share them. Share, Share,
share on your social media, on your Facebook, your Instagram.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
Yeah, we give you guys permission to cut clips and
put it on social media because we need to get
clips out there. Because I personally think that Adriana is
much much better looking than me. Clip a portion of
her and put it on.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
Your social account. Pig Patrick, pig Patrick, you guys, he's
a natural.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
I am a natural. I'm just being monest right now.
Go check it out. We'll leave it once again. We'll
leave a link, or you could just go to YouTube
and rumble and just put in Red Pilled America podcast
and it'll pop right up. This week we have the
video version of our invasion episode, so share the word
on the show. This episode we're gonna get into We're
gonna play a little mini storytelling from a new writer
(02:16):
that you guys might be into. It's not like a
full episode, but we're gonna give you guys a little
piece of an episode here on fam Boogie, a little
piece of Red Pilled America. We're gonna get into the
boycott thing that's happening that's trending with Netflix right now.
We'll get into that, and then we're gonna also talk
about the MLB Playoffs. We're gonna give our predictions, but
(02:39):
first we're gonna start off with this Charlie Kirk conspiracy
theories that's been going on. We spoke about some of
this last week, and they continue in they're beginning to
heat up, and so we thought we should talk about
this and in particular some of the positions that Candice
Owens is taking on this. But before we do that,
how's your week? Ben Adriana?
Speaker 3 (03:00):
You know what, my week was pretty good this week week.
I had been in a really big funk ever since
Charlie Kirk's murder. It really really hit me hard, as
you know, But things have started to turn around for me.
I've been super busy working on on the show and
then also now the video show and all of my
(03:23):
Instagram fashion stuff. It's been a lot, and you know,
obviously my mom and my wife duties which are the most.
Speaker 2 (03:30):
Important to me, and feeding the doggies.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
Feeding my doggies and making sure that I get their
rough greens in there for them. I have to tell you,
Pablo's nose looks so good. Have you noticed that?
Speaker 2 (03:38):
As is the facts what used to check out her Instagram?
She has one hundred thousand followers now.
Speaker 3 (03:44):
And I got to one hundred thousand.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
It's our biggest social media account is her fashion blog.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
Because you were right, I am better looking at you.
I'm just kidding.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Adriana underscore Jade. Adrianna spelled with a Y. Go check
that out. My week's been good. I've just been working
on another project that we have in the works behind
the scenes. That's been pretty a big version of my focus.
We're also working on the you know, the next episodes
that we have coming up, so I've been doing that
behind the scenes. But other than that, it's been kind
of uneventful. I've been just so locked in on the
(04:15):
Dodgers and the playoffs right now, and I have some
major major predictions that I can ben Oh goodness giving
later on.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
You're lucky you're married to somebody that loves the baseball.
Speaker 4 (04:25):
Say no, right there, don't imagine if.
Speaker 3 (04:27):
I didn't like baseball, if you didn't like that.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
We'll get into that later. We'll get at the very end,
the kind of fun segment at the very end of this.
But let's talk about this. These Candace Owens theories that
have been kind of sweeping the web. Let's say, on
social media. So for those of you guys that know
Candace has been on this show before, we interviewed her
way back in two thousand and seventeen. She was actually
(04:50):
at a Turning Point event. She was in her hotel room,
and we reached out to her and said, hey, we'd
love to do an episode on your kind of you know,
rise in the political space. She was just starting to
make a little bit of noise at that time, and
so she said yes. We interviewed her once again at
a Turning Point event. It was their December event there.
(05:11):
I think it's called America Fest now or Amerafest something
like that, And it was one of our earliest episodes
that we.
Speaker 3 (05:17):
Did, episode number two.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
Actually, it was on basically why so many from the
Black community vote for Democrats?
Speaker 3 (05:25):
And called Booty Call.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
We had a couple of different names for it. I
ended up changing it. Initially it was called Booty Call,
and I didn't like that because I didn't want to
use I didn't want that title to be next to
Candice Owens and Diamond and Silk. I thought that was disrespectful,
so I changed the name to it It was a
sure thing, yes, which also isn't that great of a name.
I know, I agree we should have, but maybe it
(05:50):
took a little bit of a step back. Anyways, So
interviewed her there and it was kind of like the
story of her kind of getting involved in YouTube and
her early kind of involvement in politics and what have you.
And then when she had the breakup with The Daily Wire,
we did a much deeper dive into her career and
(06:11):
the guys from the Daily Wire and the conflict that
they had there. So I guess I could say that
I've spent more time reviewing her life and reviewing her
videos than most people. Yes, I'm sure her some of
her followers and her listeners that watch her show every
day have clocked a lot of hours, but I'm talking
(06:31):
about the very early days of her career and kind
of her positioning and what have you. I feel like
I could speak with a little bit of credibility on
her approach. So we've been watching this thing and as
you guys know, she's had a relationship with Charlie Kirk
famously had a relationship with Charlie Kirk. She the big
moment I think for both her and Charlie Kirk was
(06:53):
when she connected with Kanye West then called Kanye West
now Yea, and they started kind of doing the paparazzi thing.
I think they went on TMZ, and this relationship was
very public. It was when Yay had this moment where
he went into the White House I think shortly after
that and was wearing the Maga hat and he kind
(07:14):
of was having one of those Maga moments. And so
Charlie and her have had a long relationship. They kind
of came up together so fast forward to his assassination,
and I was really touched by her first video to him.
I thought it was really well done. I thought it
was heartfelt. I thought it was respectful, it was short
(07:37):
and sweet. She just kind of talked about the relationship
and it was really touching. I remember watching it almost
immediately when it came out, because we were just kind
of so hungry for positive information about Charlie at the time.
As the days started to follow, I think what really
set her off was when bb net and Yahoo came
(07:57):
forward and aside from just wishing, you know, rip wish
to Charlie Kirk, he started connecting Charlie Kirk to his
love for Israel, and I thought that that was a
really just not a smart move for BB at the time,
given kind of the heat on him right now. I
(08:20):
thought it just would have been better for him just
to take the high road, wish that his family, Charlie's
family the best. You don't have to, like, you know,
mention somebody's support for Israel every time you speak, dude.
And so I'm seeing that happen and I'm like, dude,
you are just not It is not the time for that. Yeah,
and so, but he did, and I think that kind
(08:42):
of set things off with Candice, and she started to
do a lot of discussions on this, and one of
the things that got brought up is BBE was saying
that Charlie had recently sent him a letter that was
very kind of doubling down and underscoring his support for Israel,
and that is what set Candace off. So when BIB
(09:06):
started discussing this letter that Charlie sent, Candace was claiming
that he was misrepresenting the contents of that letter, and
so she started putting out videos. This was on September sixteenth,
so we're talking six days after Charlie was assassinated, and
she was challenging BIB to put out the entire letter.
Speaker 4 (09:28):
Publish the entire thing you're holding it.
Speaker 5 (09:31):
I'm saying you're severely misrepresenting the contents that in May,
Charlie was concerned about Israel and their influence on American
politics and how they were pushing things that he felt
were in conflict with his beliefs free speech here in America.
(09:53):
Bibe's holding it up like Charlie just in May said, Hey,
you know what, I just want to write a love
letter at Israel. That's how it was presented. Would you
guys agree, That's not how it happened. Let's stop saying
how Charlie felt, and instead, if you're going to hold
up the letter, release it in its entirety. Okay, lies
by severe O mission. I'd like to be very clear,
are lies?
Speaker 2 (10:13):
Okay? So that was she was basically strongly claiming that
Bibe was misrepresenting the letter that Charlie wrote. She was
claiming that he left some things out and suggesting that
Charlie had included in the letter some negative things about
Israel and about his relationship with Israel and about some
(10:36):
pressure that was being applied to him. Okay, So what
happens next? You know, fast forward? She started going into
some you know, pretty an investigation, let's say, over Charlie
Kirk's assassination, and some things were interesting. Some things I
thought were kind of way out there. One thing I
thought was interesting is she came up with a picture
(10:58):
of this Tyler Robinson, guy who the FBI says killed Charlie,
who they say found They found DNA on a towel,
They found DNA on a screwdriver that was used to
disassemble the rifle that he used to kill Charlie Kirk,
that they have found text messages that they've spoken to
(11:18):
the parents, and the parents have said that he had
confessed to them. So the FBI clearly is saying that
this Tyler person is the person that killed Charlie. She
found came up with a picture of him at a
local dairy queen. It sounds like it was in the
area of the college. So I thought that was kind
of interesting. Well, she started going into some other kind
(11:39):
of wild accusations, and we'll get into those in a minute.
But to kind of close the loop on this position
that she had about the BB letter, the New York
Post posted the letter that Charlie sent to allegedly sent
to BB and this is what it says in the
New York Post. This is the headline of the New
York Post. Charlie Kirk wrote of his deep love for
(12:02):
Israel in letter to net Nyahu about how to counter
rising opposition to the Jewish state in the US. I'm
going to read some of this article for you. Assassinated
conservative activist Charlie Kirk advised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netnyahu
how to counter anti Israel sentiment among gen z and
(12:22):
when the information war being waged against the Jewish State.
According to a letter obtained by The Post, Kirk wrote
to net Nyahu in the May second missive that he
was alarmed by anti Israel and anti Semitic trends hitting
record levels on social media, since one of his greatest
joys as a Christian is advocating for Israel and forming
(12:43):
alliances with Jews in the fight to protect Judeo Christian civilization. Quote,
my team and I have spent months analyzing these trends
and debating ideas that could help you and your country
push back against these disturbing developments. End quote. He goes
on to state anti Israel sentiment can undermine American support
(13:05):
for Israel. So then they go on and they post
the entire letter with they claim as the entire letter.
It's I believe it's seven pages, and it is pretty
much what BB said it was, was that he was
advising him on how to fight back against this kind
of growing anti Semitic fervor here in the United States.
(13:27):
And I believe I've seen some people claim that some
of these efforts that you've recently seen with BB speaking
to social media influencers and asking for their advice and
asking for their help in kind of changing the tide
of anti Israel sentiment, it's being proposed that it was
Charlie that actually was the one that advised BB to
(13:50):
do that, and that BB is kind of following through
with that guidance. So it kind of is kind of
a big moment for Candice because he or she was
claiming that the contents of this letter were being misrepresented
by the leader of that country, and then the leader
(14:10):
of that country gets this letter to the New York
Post and they post it and it turns out to
be pretty much what he has stated that it was.
So if you're going to be taking this position like
Candace has taken, you would expect for her to have
had the letter and read the letter and have that
in her back pocket, to be able to kind of
(14:33):
show at some point and say, hey, no, it does
not have this information. She's taking on this kind of
role as an investigative journalist. She's been doing that for
quite some time now, going back to before her investigations
on Macron, which was largely done by other people people.
But you know, she did an investigation on Kamala, She's
(14:55):
done an investigation on the A Kamala, I should say,
on what's his name, Harvey Weinstein. She's done some other investigations,
and but what she's now done is she's kind of
suggesting that this letter did not represent Charlie Kirk's current position,
or at least the position right before his death. So
(15:16):
she puts out this new challenge. Now, she puts out
this new challenge where and now she's turning her eyesights
on Turning Point, and it's a pretty flammatory attack. I
would say, on Turning Point, I want to play a
portion of that. But we're going to play that right
after the break.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Licorice, Licorice, Where art thou licorice? If you listen to
Red Pilled America. You know that I love licorice, and
there is no licorice in America better than the delicious,
gourmet licorice made by.
Speaker 2 (15:47):
The Licorice Guy. The Licorice Guy is simply the best.
What sets their licorice apart is its flavor and freshness.
They have a great selection of flavors to choose from,
like red, blue, raspberry, black, and green apple, just to
name a few. The freshness of the Licorice Guy is
unlike anything you've ever tasted in licorice before. Seriously, if
(16:08):
you haven't tried licorice from the Licorice Guy yet, then
you ain't living life right. Trust me, you will not
regret it. It's time to dump that store bought liquorice
but's so hard it'll break your teeth and get yourself
the soft, fresh stuff from the Licorice Guy. What I
also love about the Liquorice Guy is that it's an
American family owned business. It's made right here in the
beautiful US of A. We are big proponents of buying
(16:31):
American and supporting American workers. Right now, Red Pilled America
listeners get fifteen percent off when they enter RPA fifteen
at checkout. Visit licoriceguy dot com and enter RPA fifteen
at checkout. That's licoriceguy dot com. A ship daily, treat
yourself and those you love and taste the difference. You're
(16:57):
listening to Red Pilled America's famboogy. Join the fambam support storytelling.
Go to Redpilled America dot com and click join in
the top menu.
Speaker 4 (17:07):
It's like eight.
Speaker 2 (17:08):
Dollars a month and you have like it's got a
cup of coffee, and you're going to be supporting storytelling
that aligns with your values.
Speaker 3 (17:14):
And you're going to help us make more YouTube videos
so we can spread the message far and wide.
Speaker 2 (17:19):
Yes, and go to YouTube and you can look up
Red Pilled America Podcast and you will find our new
videos there also at Rumble. So when we left you guys,
we were talking about this Candace kind of brew ha
ha that she's having.
Speaker 3 (17:36):
She's always having a brew ha ha.
Speaker 2 (17:38):
I think it's her business model. Yes, I think it's
her business model. And I guess more power to somebody
that that's how they kind of want to live their life.
But this one is kind of a big one because
she's attacking turning point now and she's basically suggesting, well,
I'm gonna let her talk. This is Candace Owens on
September thirtieth, and she issues a new challenge to Turning Point.
Speaker 5 (18:03):
And I don't know how the executives over at Turning
Point USA sleep at night. Okay, I don't know how
you can present yourselves as a Christian organization and not
be dedicating yourself to.
Speaker 4 (18:18):
The truth, no matter what the cost is. You tell
the truth. That's it, Okay.
Speaker 5 (18:21):
You don't hie hide it, you don't try to obsicate it,
you don't try to say, well wait until, wait until
the memorial events, before we start looking into who murdered him.
You tell the truth, and you tell it immediately. And
I don't think they're capable of doing that. And I
have an idea as to why that is. I think
the same people that were pressuring Charlie are pressuring them.
Speaker 4 (18:39):
In fact. I know that for a fact, so they
might need my help.
Speaker 5 (18:42):
Okay, I'm gonna state this, and I'm going to challenge
Turning Point USA executives to issue a very clean statement
saying that I am lying if this is not true.
About forty eight hours before Charlie Kirk died. Charlie informs
people at Turning Points, as well as Jewish donors and
a rabbi, that he had no choice but to abandon
(19:03):
the pro Israel cause out right. Okay, Charlie was done.
He said it explicitly that he refused to be bullied
anymore by the Jewish donors.
Speaker 4 (19:12):
Can you guys answer, did he express that?
Speaker 5 (19:14):
Did he also express that he wanted to bring me
Candice Owens back because he was standing up for himself?
And then did he just forty eight hours later, conveniently
catch a bullet to the throat before our on stage
reunion could happen. It's a yes or reno. Okay, let's
stop this ditching. Let's stop the dodging. Let's like, explicitly,
(19:35):
I want to hear from Turning Point USA that I'm
lying about that.
Speaker 4 (19:38):
I want you to.
Speaker 5 (19:38):
Say, no, No, it was just, you know, he was
feeling a little bit of pressure. No, I want you
to literally answer what I have just said. It either
happened or it didn't. I'm either making it all up
or it happened exactly as I'm saying. And while we're
at it, may I ask what is the name of
the Jewish donor who sponsored the Hampton's Weekend.
Speaker 4 (20:00):
Okay, And to Pastor Rob McCoy.
Speaker 5 (20:04):
Were there any LLC's that you or your son were
being paid through that sat outside of Turning Point. I'm
asking that question genuinely. Yeah, I'm putting the fire here
right at the feet of turning Point because I am disgusted.
I am genuinely disgusted. I am looking around and wondering
(20:28):
whether Charlie's entire life was the Truman Show. None of
you guys are behaving in the way that you should
be behaving. Okay, there was no way you are letting
these lives fly unless, as I am hearing, unless it
is true that there.
Speaker 4 (20:41):
Was a big, big, big payday that was on the line.
Speaker 5 (20:44):
And if Charlie radically stated but he was done with Israel.
If Charlie said he had no choice but to abandon
the Peri Israel cause because of and I quote Jewish donors,
the behavior of Jewish donors.
Speaker 4 (20:58):
If he said that yes or no, well, then I
don't know.
Speaker 5 (21:03):
Maybe maybe some people didn't want to take that risk,
that he was.
Speaker 4 (21:06):
Kind of what become canas Owen's and Ducker carls in.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
Okay, so there's a lot there. Wow, she but she,
I don't know this is the way I interpret it.
You tell me if this is your interpretation. She suggests
that Israel assassinated Charlie Kirk because she says that he
they were going to come out and she was going
to be brought back to Turning Point. He was no
(21:31):
longer going to support Israel. And then she says, forty
eight hours later, he conveniently caught a bullet to the neck.
Speaker 3 (21:40):
Before any of that could happen, basically before him and
her could be brought together on stage for a reunion.
And she's saying that his team is complicit.
Speaker 2 (21:47):
And let's remind everybody who the team is now. I mean,
the very top of Turning Point is Erica Kirk. She
is the head of Turning Point now, So it sounds
like to me there that she is. She's not directly
saying the head of Turning Points. She's saying turning Point executives.
(22:08):
Because very early on she said, the only thing that's
going to get me to stop on this are my
husband and Erica Kirk.
Speaker 3 (22:17):
Let's play that.
Speaker 5 (22:18):
No one, and I mean absolutely no one outside of
my husband and Erica Kirk has the power to shut
me up, right now.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
That's it.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
That was pretty early on.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
That was, you know, just a couple of weeks September sixteenth.
Speaker 2 (22:31):
I want to say, yes, after Charlie Kirk was assassinated.
So this would lead me to believe that, you know,
that is a very big statement. And for somebody that
has done some investigative journalism before in the past, those
of you guys have listened to the show. You know,
we were responsible for a Obama appointee resigning being forced
(22:54):
out as the same part of that same investigation, we
forced the White House, who initially said that we were
misconstruing this report that we had done, ended up capitulating
and submitting a new guidelines, new ethic guidelines, and saying
that they were never gonna let this thing happen again. Okay,
that was part of anough investigation that we were involved with.
(23:15):
So we have some history behind doing these kinds of investigations.
Many of you guys know that we dug into the
Tim Ballard stuff. I think that you saw the way
that we did that and the way we handled it.
We didn't just go on sources or hearsay or somebody
calling us and giving us their side of the story.
We pulled court documents. We went and pulled interviews that
(23:39):
he had done and statements that he he had made,
and then we compared that to court documents, and we
compared that to other court documents that we got hold
of in Columbia. There's a certain kind of level of
investigation that you need to do to make these very
very grand claims. Now there is some wiggle room here
(23:59):
to say that, well, maybe she's working with Erica kirk
on this, and Erica Kirkee has not made a public
statement on this. There is no evidence of that. But
the thing that I don't like about this is I
don't like the fact that she is using her same approach,
this kind of this very kind of hmmm, I wonder
what this is, you know, the same I'm just asking
(24:21):
questions approach on the topic of her best friend according
to her assassination. Okay, she's making kind of these the
very theatrical videos and this very theatrical approach to someone
that she has considered to be or is claiming to
be her best friend.
Speaker 3 (24:39):
She's using it as content.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
It seems to be that.
Speaker 3 (24:44):
Her best friend's murder and.
Speaker 2 (24:45):
You know, We've tried to stay away from, you know,
criticizing Candice Owans on this thing. We try to give
her a little bit of a space. She has been
on the show before, and we you know, don't like
going at people that have been on the show. But
in this case, it seems like she's making some very
very poor decisions.
Speaker 3 (25:04):
Okay, But we've also had Charlie's right hand manned Tyler Boyer,
on the show. We have, and I want to be
fair to them.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
As well that this is the reason why we wanted
to talk about this, because now you have Chyler Boyer
who's been on our show, and he made a public
claim recently, and it seems directly.
Speaker 3 (25:23):
He made not a public claim, he made a public statement.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
He made a statement and it seems directly kind of
pointed at Candice Owans. Why don't you read it?
Speaker 3 (25:31):
All right, here's what Tyler Boyer said. He said this
October second. I am sorry to have to tweet this,
but I do. Accusing innocent people much worse, accusing the
people who knew Charlie best, loved him more than just
about anyone, and witnessed his death isn't just wrong, it's
baseless mud slinging on the same level as calling someone
(25:52):
a Nazi or fascist who is not. It signals to
crazy people many evil ideas, thoughts, and feelings. It is
calling the good bad, and the innocent criminal. The worst
part of this wicked behavior is it is putting a
target on the backs of the people working to carry
out Charlie's work from before and after his murder. The
(26:12):
harassment may emotionally or physically sideline them, stopping the work.
Every single person who loves Charlie and knew him best
will not settle for anything less than the truth throughout
the process of grief, investigation, trial, and continuing on without
the person we loved and who we know the world loved.
I personally feel Charlie with us every day, and it
(26:33):
has given our people's strength to persevere in the darkest
hours of our lives. I hope people will seek truth,
apologize for getting things wrong along the way, support righteous causes,
and strive to not engage with destructive forces that I
believe the devil wants people to promote to undo the
good work that emanates from turning point Charlie and everything
(26:54):
he has left behind.
Speaker 2 (26:56):
So you know, I think what he is kind of
alluding to there one sound it fills to me, given
that you know, Cannas has made these comments rather recently
and directly is pointing at Turning Point executives, and he
is a Turning Point executive, that this is directed towards her.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
This is part of.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
What Candace does a lot of times, is she tends
to make these accusations towards people trying to draw a
response from them.
Speaker 3 (27:22):
She does this whole prove me wrong, prove me wrong.
Speaker 2 (27:25):
Yes, I thought I thought the Quartering had a good,
you know, kind of the best take on this so far.
The Quartering says the Candace Owens investigation journalism method, make
wild claim, provide zero evidence, and instead challenge someone else
to disprove it. If ignored, claim victory if disproven claim,
(27:47):
the evidence is fake. Rinse, repeat, cast, check. And this
is kind of how you know when you look at
this BB letter. She challenged them to release the letter.
The letter was released, and now what.
Speaker 3 (28:01):
Now she's saying that it's probably fake.
Speaker 2 (28:03):
You know, And so that doesn't make it. That doesn't
make any sense. I mean, it's a bad approach.
Speaker 3 (28:07):
Yeah, it's a bad approach. But about regarding Tyler's statement,
he did not say that Candace was lying. I know
he didn't reference her, but you know, we have a history,
you and I and on this show. If somebody calls
us a liar or makes accusations about us like the
ones that she is making, we go scorched earth. We
(28:31):
would not stand for that, and we have not. We
would defend ourselves, we would put it out there. Maybe
that's not their way, but she's making some very very
big accusations. She's saying that they're complicit in his murder.
Speaker 2 (28:44):
Yes, it's an assassination. That sounds like what she's saying.
It does, and it sounds to me like you know,
and I think at the end of the day, you
are right that he didn't directly address some of her claims.
I think this is the problem with and I think
we've had a little bit of distance enough now with
the whole assassination of Charlie Kirk to speak frankly about
(29:05):
some of these things. Charlie and his space is a
big tent space. He's constantly trying to build coalitions. He's
about elections, he's about getting politicians elected. He's about moving
the MAGA movement forward, and so he's very much a politician,
and he's very much a coalition builder, Okay, And so
(29:31):
if he needed to send something to BB to kind
of reinforce his relationship with Israel and make it sound,
I don't know, overly supportive, he's going to do that.
That's the kind of space that he is within. And
you know, I didn't know the man, but I've been
(29:52):
I've watched him for long enough and kind of seen
how these kinds of things have played out. He would
have been the type of person that would have sent
a letter even if he was having some revelations or
some or some new opinions on his view on Israel,
he would have sent a letter like that.
Speaker 3 (30:08):
Yes, people in his position know how to navigate the space.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
He was starting to go at Israel and was one
of the first people to start questioning Israel on certain
things right after October seventh. Very early on after October seventh,
he started to question whether Israel had a stand down order.
He talked about that right on Patrick Bett David's show.
I was very surprised to see that. And we're talking
(30:33):
about within days of October seventh, and he was speaking
out about certain things and sounds like some of the
things that she is saying here in regards to him
having maybe second thoughts or having some pressure from Jewish donors.
That has been backed up by Megan Kelly. It was
also backed up by Charlie Kirk himself. He went on
to Magan Kelly's show and made some of those claims.
(30:56):
So I guess what I'm The problem that I'm having
here is just with her approach. If you're going to
make these kinds of accusations, you should come up with
the goods. We've been down this road before when we
wrote these did that investigation on the White House. That time,
we had the goods in our back pocket ready to
(31:17):
go if somebody lied about it, and then once those
lies started to come out, we started to provide that
information and we did it within this timeframe. I mean
we're talking now with a little over three weeks from
when he was assassinated. That's kind of was the same
timeframe that we had our fight with the White House,
(31:37):
and we started putting out those things within like the
three or four week timeframe. But she's making some major mistakes.
I want to play this for you, this clip for
you real quickly she's in this investigation that she's doing.
She is claiming that the text messages that the FBI
was presenting between Tyler and his boyfriend were looked like
(32:03):
they were created by law enforcement or the FBI because
he used in these text messages the word vehicle. And
as justification for that, she played a bodycam video from
a cop that had an interaction with Tyler Robinson years ago,
where he says the name he says the word car,
(32:25):
and she claims because he didn't use the word vehicle
there that nobody uses the word vehicle except for law
enforcement in that kind of thing. Let's hear her on
this part. This is on September thirtieth, twenty twenty five.
Speaker 5 (32:38):
There's old footage of Tyler Robinson that is now circulating
from a car accident that he had, and during the
discussion with the officer that showed up, Tyler certainly refers
to it as his car, not his vehicle, because that's
how most Americans, how most English Speakers refer to a
(33:01):
car unless they're in the military or on the police force.
So here is twenty twenty two police bodycam footage in
case you miss that of Tyler making a crash report.
Speaker 4 (33:14):
Take a listen.
Speaker 1 (33:16):
Your mom's on her way.
Speaker 2 (33:17):
Yeah, she's gotta be a minute.
Speaker 5 (33:18):
She's got to shuttle over from where she's at to her.
Speaker 2 (33:20):
Car, and the drive over gotcha. So that was just
Tyler Robinson using the word car, not using the word
vehicle in this one interaction. So this is kind of
her proof that those text messages likely did not come
from Tyler. They came from law enforcement.
Speaker 4 (33:40):
His mother was going to shuttle over from her car.
Speaker 2 (33:43):
Interesting, So you see her approach there, how she does it.
She talks really slow and then you know like she
is hmmm, she does that a lot a style. What
she doesn't do is show the rest of the body
cam video that clearly shows that Tyler Robinson and uses
(34:04):
the word vehicle. Yeah, I was looking off at the
light just before getting there.
Speaker 5 (34:08):
I saw it shift yellow, and as I get into
the intersection, the folds there was a vehicle in the lane.
Speaker 2 (34:14):
So you hear him say that. He said vehicle. Clearly
said vehicle and.
Speaker 3 (34:18):
It was right literally the next sentence after the clip
that she played.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
So how could she have not listened to that entire body.
Speaker 3 (34:26):
Cam or did she listen to it and just not play.
Speaker 2 (34:29):
I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt
on that and say that she saw what she wanted
to see and that was that. But it gets worse
than that because she claims that, you know, no normal
person uses the word vehicle. But then milk Bar TV
pulled out these clips where she says vehicle a bunch
of times after Charlie Kirk's murder and before.
Speaker 5 (34:49):
And Nick was particularly asking him to determine who owned
a white vehicle, and everyone locally had had looked at
this vehicle, so I can help you to figure out
more about this vehicle.
Speaker 4 (35:03):
Only a president gets shot in a moving vehicle.
Speaker 5 (35:05):
November twenty second, nineteen sixty three, JFK was shot. President
JFKA was shot sitting alongside his wife in a vehicle.
Speaker 2 (35:13):
So this sloppy approach to investigative journalism is not voting
well for her, it's making her, it's ruining her credibility.
Of course, people use vehicle and car. The word vehicle
and car. Is that enough evidence to say that those
text messages were crafted by law enforcement? Of course not.
(35:34):
I had and still have questions about those texts. It
felt like to me like they were staged. But I
thought that it was likely Tyler and his boyfriend boyfriend
staging staging them to kind of create this innocence of his.
Speaker 3 (35:48):
Boyfriend, the boyfriend, the trance boyfriend.
Speaker 2 (35:50):
Here's another another instance where I was really kind of
shocked by her positioning. She claimed straight up in these
story posts on her Instagram that this is exactly what
she says. Tyler Robinson maintains his innocence and has never
even been to the UVU campus. How can she make
(36:13):
a claim that Tyler Robinson has never been at the
UVU campus, even if she has a source that's told
her that. I asked you this the other day when
I saw this, I said to you, have I ever
been to U see Santa Barbara? And what did you say?
Speaker 3 (36:28):
I said no?
Speaker 2 (36:29):
And I told you I actually have yes.
Speaker 3 (36:31):
And then I asked you, have I ever been to
U see Santa Barbara? And what did you say?
Speaker 1 (36:36):
I said no?
Speaker 3 (36:37):
You said no? And guess what, I have been And
we've been married for a.
Speaker 2 (36:42):
Long, a long time and I've known.
Speaker 3 (36:44):
You since nineteen ninety five years.
Speaker 2 (36:45):
I know you since nineteen ninety one.
Speaker 3 (36:47):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (36:48):
Okay, So the point being is is there's no way
that she can know whether a human being has been
at a campus or not yet she is making this
claim that he's never been at the UVU campus. Okay,
that is just it's so sloppy. And here's the thing.
If you make a mistake, you come out and you
(37:08):
make a correction, like I'm about to do right now.
Last week, when we spoke about this these alternative theories
about Charlie Kirk's death, we said that there was several
people out there that had videos that were going extremely
viral that were claiming he was shot from behind the
head and that the neck was an exit wound. And
(37:28):
in that discussion I talked about and what I said
was it was either and then I said ear piece.
I was about to say what the other potential thing
that it could be, and then I just kind of
didn't go the other direction. I just kind of stayed
I wanted to keep this story kind of simple for
the audience because at the end of the day, the
point was that that blood spatter that the person was
(37:49):
showing in the video wasn't blood spatter. It was something else,
So some kind of other object, And what I said
it was was an ear piece. Well it turns out
it was the other thing that I was about to
say that it was, which is it was a necklace.
It looked like it was potentially a necklace that shot
back when he was hit and you could see it
kind of, you know, kind of wave past the side
(38:10):
of his head. There's no entry wound. You could see
it from the side from that side, that side view,
there's no entry wound. And so you know, I want
to it's not really a connection, a correction maybe kind
of a clarification that it wasn't an earpiece, it was
a bracelet or excuse me, a necklace that he was wearing.
It's just that simple, if you're really trying to search
for the truth and not have to be right. And
(38:32):
that's the feeling that I feel like that she gets.
She needs to be right when she does these kinds
of things.
Speaker 3 (38:37):
Well, I also feel like her hatred for bb net
Yaho is so huge. Yes, she can't see past it.
Speaker 2 (38:46):
She can't.
Speaker 3 (38:47):
She cannot see past it.
Speaker 2 (38:48):
She can't see past it. She's making sloppy decisions because
of that. She's making wild accusations and tying it, tying
Charlie Kirk's assassination to Israel with no evidence whatsoever. Zero evidence.
She's not providing anything. She hasn't provided anything that makes
these points.
Speaker 3 (39:04):
Yeah. And let me just say this though, if she
comes forward and she somehow produces some receipts and what
she ends up saying ends up being true, then we
would on this show say, wow, she got it right.
You know what, We need to give her some credit
for that one hundred percent We do that.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
It doesn't take back from the theatrics. I don't like
the theatrics on this. This is her quote unquote best
friend that she is using this kind of just very
theatrical way to do an investigation rather than digging in
deep getting the evidence holding off. You don't need the
immediate gratification of putting something out there right now. You know,
(39:43):
if she has these audience members that there's the research
for her, then set up some kind of a chat
room or some kind of a slack page where you're
kind of communicating with those people, get everything together, and
then make the pitch.
Speaker 1 (39:55):
To the public.
Speaker 2 (39:56):
Because what she is basically doing is she's saying that
Turning Point is complicit, Erica Kirk is complicit. She's saying
that Patel cash Patel is complicit. Dan Bongino is complicit.
Trump In by extension is as well. Jadie Vance is complicit.
This entire group of Maga audience she is claiming is
(40:20):
complicit in this by making the accusations that she's making
and she's not showing any evidence of it. This isn't
you know, a kind of a funny thing. This is
supposed to be her best friend that she is doing
this investigation on, and she's doing it in a way
that is just completely ruining her credibility. There's nothing that
she could do to take away this vehicle credibility unless
(40:42):
she comes out and says, you know what, I got
that wrong. Guarantee you she doesn't come out and say
I got the vehicle thing wrong. She's just going to
move on past it.
Speaker 3 (40:49):
That's what people do in this day and age of
social media. That's been the mo They don't have to
come forward and say that they were wrong.
Speaker 2 (40:56):
And that this is not what independent journalism was supposed
to to take over, you know, is this new media thing.
It was supposed to take over this space and we
were supposed to supplant the legacy media by this dogged
search for the truth, and now the space has become
(41:16):
conspiracy theory ridden space. Anything that gets you clicks, anything
that feeds the algorithm, and it's tiring. Join us over
at part two. We're gonna discuss this Netflix boycott that's
been going down. We're also going to play a new
story for you guys by a new writer that we
(41:39):
want to introduce you guys to, and then we're going
to give our predictions on the MLB playoffs. Join us
over at Part two. You don't want to miss it.
Thanks everybody,
Hosts And Creators
Adryana Cortez
Patrick Courrielche
Popular Podcasts
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.
Cardiac Cowboys
The heart was always off-limits to surgeons. Cutting into it spelled instant death for the patient. That is, until a ragtag group of doctors scattered across the Midwest and Texas decided to throw out the rule book. Working in makeshift laboratories and home garages, using medical devices made from scavenged machine parts and beer tubes, these men and women invented the field of open heart surgery. Odds are, someone you know is alive because of them. So why has history left them behind? Presented by Chris Pine, CARDIAC COWBOYS tells the gripping true story behind the birth of heart surgery, and the young, Greatest Generation doctors who made it happen. For years, they competed and feuded, racing to be the first, the best, and the most prolific. Some appeared on the cover of Time Magazine, operated on kings and advised presidents. Others ended up disgraced, penniless, and convicted of felonies. Together, they ignited a revolution in medicine, and changed the world.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.