Ben Shapiro and Michael Knowles Share First Impressions of Charlie Kirk and What His Death Means for America
Enjoying this? Share it with someone who needs to see it.
Up Next
Pastor Jack Hibbs Addresses Charlie Kirk's Assassination and the Legacy of a Modern American Martyr
45:31
Megyn Kelly Honors Charlie Kirk From His Studio Alongside His Team and Close Friends
1:57:07
Thousands Gather to Honor Charlie Kirk: A Memorial of Faith, Courage, and the Gospel
1:33:31
Ben Shapiro and Michael Knowles Share First Impressions of Charlie Kirk and What His Death Means for America
Ben Shapiro and Michael Knowles open up about their first encounters with Charlie Kirk, reflecting on his extraordinary trajectory from an 18-year-old organizer to a global conservative icon. They discuss the profound impact of his assassination on the country, the rumors surrounding his final days, and what needs to happen to preserve his legacy. Both share deeply personal reflections on faith, security, and the future of political discourse in America, offering rare candor about the threats facing conservative voices and the courage required to continue Charlie's mission.
Ben Shapiro recalls meeting Charlie Kirk when he was just 18 years old at a David Horowitz Freedom Center event. Charlie appeared as a gangly teenager in an ill-fitting jacket, already pitching his vision for Turning Point USA. Shapiro remembers turning to Jeremy Boreing immediately after and predicting, "That kid's going to be the head of the RNC."
What struck Shapiro most was Charlie's inherent grit—a quality he emphasizes cannot be taught. While Charlie excelled from the beginning as an organizer and fundraiser, Shapiro notes that many of his most iconic skills were developed through sheer determination. The charismatic speaker who commanded stages at Oxford Union and AmFest, the skilled debater who accumulated billions of views—that Charlie Kirk willed himself into existence through relentless improvement.
Michael Knowles first met Charlie in a Fox News green room in Los Angeles around 4:00 a.m. While Knowles sat half-asleep, Charlie bounced in full of boundless energy despite probably being off a flight and not having slept in days. This immediate impression of Charlie's inexhaustible enthusiasm would prove consistent throughout their friendship. Knowles never saw Charlie down, though he could occasionally sense stress as Charlie managed what amounted to five people's careers at the highest levels of politics and media.
The Shocking Reality of Charlie's Death
When Shapiro first heard Charlie had been shot, he assumed it wouldn't be too serious. Despite being one of the most threatened conservative commentators and living with 24/7 security for his own family, the baseline assumption remained that Americans don't get murdered for political debate. That assumption shattered with Charlie's death.
Shapiro points out the stunning fact that Charlie was only 31 years old. The magnitude of what he accomplished by that age is almost incomprehensible. The global outpouring of grief—from the United States to Argentina, London, Italy, Israel, Canada, South Korea, and New Zealand—testified to an impact rarely seen from someone so young.
Knowles describes a surreal progression after hearing the news. His first thought was hoping Charlie's recovery wouldn't be too bad. It didn't initially occur to him that Charlie could have been killed. When the reality set in, his wife captured the collective disbelief perfectly: "He can't possibly be dead, but he can't possibly be alive."
For Knowles, the grief hit hardest on the third day. While sitting in his home office surrounded by his Bibles and religious items, the full force of the loss overwhelmed him for several minutes—a rare moment of letting emotions surface before pushing them back down, as he describes right-wing men are trained to do.
Security and the Decision to Stay Exposed
Both Shapiro and Charlie understood the risks they faced. Shapiro's Daily Wire spends millions annually on security for him, Matt Walsh, and other personalities. His four children, ranging from ages two to eleven, have never known life without 24/7 security guards—guards they now play lightsabers with as a normal part of childhood.
According to those close to Charlie, there were discussions after Trump's assassination attempt about moving campus tours indoors and having Charlie wear a bulletproof vest. Charlie refused. He wanted to be with the crowd, to maintain the open exchange of ideas that defined his mission. Shapiro himself recalls questioning his own security in 2017 before speaking at Berkeley, which required 500 police officers. Even then, the idea of being shot for expressing political views seemed absurd.
That baseline assumption—that political debate doesn't get you killed in America—is what Charlie's assassination shattered for the entire country. As Shapiro emphasizes, Charlie was doing exactly what made millions of people conservative: having open conversations with those who disagreed. He was killed while living out the principle "disagree, front of the line."
Addressing Rumors and Speculation
Shapiro directly confronts rumors that circulated online about Charlie being allegedly threatened or blackmailed regarding his positions on Israel. He calls these allegations completely unfounded, noting there isn't "one iota of evidence" to support them. The people spreading such rumors, Shapiro argues, are "agents of demoralization" trying to split the movement and smear Charlie's legacy.
Charlie was both principled and a coalition builder—a difficult combination requiring the ability to hold together people who disagree on various issues. There can be real disagreements behind the scenes about handling pragmatic coalition-building matters, but the notion that Charlie was radically shifting to become anti-Israel or pro-Hamas is absurd to anyone who knew him. Shapiro interviewed Charlie on his show the day before the assassination, and they laughed together about these very allegations.
The last text Shapiro received from Charlie was an invitation to speak at AmFest, which Shapiro accepted. That was their final private communication.
Faith, Martyrdom, and Civil Rights
Knowles addresses the question of whether Charlie can be considered a martyr. While acknowledging that theologians might quibble about definitions, Knowles emphasizes that Charlie was ultimately killed not merely for his political views about taxes or policy, but because of what he said about the nature of man, the relationship between body and soul, and about God and Christ. Charlie never let an opportunity pass without preaching the gospel.
Both guests confirm Charlie's deep and authentic faith. Knowles notes that Charlie took religion and truth "very seriously" and pursued both "rigorously" and "zealously." When asked about rumors of Charlie potentially converting to Catholicism—a topic he and Knowles discussed frequently, including in a recent conversation—Knowles declines to reveal private discussions but states simply: "I feel good about Charlie."
Regarding the description of Charlie as a civil rights leader, Knowles affirms this in the true sense of the term. While the left has corrupted the phrase to mean "any race hustler or sexual deviant who wants to push some radical leftwing agenda," Charlie defended actual rights and was eminently civil. In fact, Knowles notes, "He was killed because he was civil."
The Marketplace of Ideas Requires Order
Knowles offers a crucial corrective to well-meaning but misguided calls to "redouble our devotion to the open marketplace of ideas" in the wake of Charlie's death. While this sounds noble, Knowles argues it's actually reckless because marketplaces require rules. You cannot have a marketplace if people are shooting it up.
True liberty requires order first. This is why certain categories of speech—direct threats, fighting words, fraud, obscenity—are not protected by the First Amendment. These restrictions don't shrink the marketplace of ideas; they protect it. As Knowles explains, citing Chesterton, "the only thought that ought to be stopped" is "a thought that stops thought."
This philosophical foundation supports concrete actions: people celebrating Charlie's murder or encouraging violence against conservatives should face consequences, including losing jobs or expulsion from schools. This isn't about suppressing disagreement but about maintaining the basic order that makes any exchange of ideas possible. You cannot have a society where teachers encourage students to be murdered, where hospital staff call for poisoning patients, or where the celebration of murder masquerades as protected speech.
The Timing and Trump's Presidency
One of the small mercies in this tragedy is the timing relative to who controls the levers of power. News broke during the recording of revelations about "Arctic Frost"—a reportedly corrupt FBI investigation under the Biden administration targeting over 90 names in Republican politics and media, including Turning Point USA.
The fact that this information is coming to light now, with Trump in the White House, Kash Patel at the DOJ, and allies in positions of authority, means there's a real possibility of justice and accountability. Under a Kamala Harris administration, Charlie's death might have been downplayed, swept under the rug, or pushed out of the news cycle. As it stands, there was a national address from the Oval Office and the Vice President filled in to host Charlie's podcast—actions that focused national attention and demonstrated the seriousness with which this tragedy is being treated.
And the reason Trump won—the reason there is a second Trump term at all—is in no small part due to Charlie Kirk. As Knowles states matter-of-factly: "This is not hyperbole. This is not just a nice thing that one says after a person dies. This is a fact. There almost certainly is not a Trump second term without Charlie Kirk."
Daily Wire's Commitment to Turning Point USA
Shapiro makes clear that immediately after Charlie was shot, the Daily Wire reached out to Andrew Kolvet and the Turning Point team offering everything at their disposal—talent, support staff, and monetary resources. They believe in what Charlie believed in and what TPUSA does and will continue to do.
Shapiro dismisses as "the biggest load I've ever heard" the rumors that he would be taking over Turning Point USA. The internet, particularly X (formerly Twitter), he notes, is "an incredibly stupid and bad place" where people "need to touch some grass."
Nobody can fill Charlie's shoes—not Shapiro, not anyone. Charlie was a giant, an icon of the movement. It's both impossible and inappropriate for anyone to try to replace him. Instead, everyone needs to "pick up Charlie's bloodstained microphone" and do their part. The collective effort of many carrying forward his mission is the only path forward.
Continuing Charlie's Work
When asked how Charlie will be remembered in months and years to come, Shapiro emphasizes Charlie's ubiquity. The massive library of content Charlie created needs to continue circulating on TikTok, where he had an enormous audience, and across all social media platforms. This content represents an invaluable resource for future generations.
Supporting Turning Point USA remains paramount. The organization Charlie built embodies his mission and legacy. That mission, at its core, was straightforward: people need to make America better and make themselves better. For Charlie, that meant going to church, believing in Christ, having open conversations, and believing in family, faith, and freedom.
Shapiro plans to show Charlie's content to his own children as they grow up. The 11, 9, 5, and 2-year-olds will learn from Charlie just as millions of others did—many of whom became conservative specifically because of Charlie's influence, having started from completely different political viewpoints.
The Global Impact
The breadth of grief following Charlie's death extended far beyond conservative circles. Shapiro received texts and calls from people who radically disagree with him politically—people who would be considered traditionally liberal—who were devastated by Charlie's loss. This testifies to something crucial about Charlie's approach and impact.
Charlie wasn't siloed. He specifically sought out disagreement, putting dissenters at the front of the line. This openness, this willingness to engage across divides, transformed millions of people—not just their politics, but their perspectives on God, on their own lives, on fundamental questions of meaning and purpose. The vigils in cities and countries that lean radically left, the outpouring from people who disagreed with Charlie on various issues—all of this demonstrates a reach that transcended tribal political boundaries.
Moving Forward Without Fear
Despite rumors to the contrary, Shapiro has no plans to retreat from public engagement. When asked if he's scared to continue doing college tours, he answers simply: "No." Operating in the world requires some baseline assumption that things will be fine, even as security precautions intensify.
Everyone in this space needs to continue the work. The biggest mistake would be for the right to silo itself and abandon the kinds of conversations Charlie was having when he was shot. Charlie stood for the possibility of taking people from one political viewpoint to another, from one perspective about God to a different one, from one view of their own life to something better.
As Knowles articulates, the remedy for a sick culture starts individually with prayer—ideally on your knees, because as Chesterton observed, from high places everyone looks like ants, but when you're on your knees you can look up to heaven. Personally, people must talk to God before even calling their mothers.
But humans are also political creatures, social animals who need public authority to recognize truths and pursue the common good. As Knowles states: "Good is to be done and evil is to be avoided." Modern culture denies not only good but that we can even distinguish between good and bad. Reasserting this basic truth with clarity and courage—promoting good, suppressing evil, promoting truth, suppressing falsehood—is what the moment demands.
The work continues. The mission remains. And Charlie's legacy will live on through the millions he influenced, the organization he built, and the example he set of how to live with purpose, faith, and boundless energy in service of truth.
Video Transcript
[Music]
My two guests today really need no introduction. This week, I'm releasing three special episodes featuring guests
who knew and loved Charlie in tribute to him. Today, it's the Daily Wires Ben Shapiro and Michael Nolles. As per
usual, no matter who I'm interviewing, it is my style to ask the tough questions, sometimes uncomfy ones, based
on what I think people would want to ask themselves if they were the ones hosting a podcast. Ben and Michael share their
first impressions meeting Charlie, what his assassination means for our country going forward, how they're coping with
the aftermath, and we always end, of course, with asking what their remedy is to heal us at culture. You can watch
this episode on the real Alex Clark YouTube channel or Culture Apothecary on Spotify, which now features video. And
right now, as we try to get back into the rhythm of releasing episodes after this tragedy, it would mean a lot for
you to leave a five-star review on Spotify or Apple and just say why you love the show. Find the show on
Instagram, Culture Apothecary, or find me at real Alex Clark. You can get show merch or Charlie Kirk Legacy merch to
help support the organization. TPUSA merch.com. You'll get 10% off with code Alex Clark. Please welcome Ben Shapiro
and Michael Nolles to Culture Apothecary.
Tell us about the first time that you had even heard of Charlie Kirk or met him. Yeah, so the first time I met Charlie,
I've told this story before, is he was 18, I was 28. Uh, and I was working at the David Horitz Freedom Center and we
were doing some sort of Horwood Center freedom event, and I see this gangly 18-year-old kid with a very ill-fitting
jacket kind of pop up, and he goes, "Mr. Shapiro, I'm starting this organization called Turning Point. We're looking for
donors. I really want to talk to you about what it is that we're doing." And so we sit together and he tells me about all this extremely energetic, obviously
very bright, really, really gritty. I mean, one of the things we say at Daily Wire in terms of our hiring is, "You can't teach grit." Like Charlie was just
grit and energy all day long. And I had this conversation. My co-founder of the Daily Wire, Jeremy Boring, was there as
well. And as Charlie walked away, I turned to Jeremy. I said, "That kid's going to be the head of the RNC." Like, you knew it the first time you met
Charlie. And one of the things that I've said over and over about Charlie since this horrific act of evil is that
Charlie is one of the rare people who got better at legitimately everything. So the the
kind of take when you see somebody who's very good at things is that they must have had some insane level of talent. Like obviously Charlie was innately
incredibly smart, very bright, and very fluid. But Charlie was not charismatic as a speaker. Charlie was not a great
debater. And he was a great organizer from the very get-go. Terrific fundraiser. all the things that that made TPUSA sort of behind the scenes an
unbelievably large and powerful organization. That stuff he was great at at the beginning. The charismatic Charlie Kirk that the world knows
through billions of views. The one who was making great arguments on college campuses and and going at it at Oxford Union and and the Charlie Kirk who was
giving speeches in front of thousands of people at at SAS or Amfest that Charlie Kirk, he willed himself to become
incredibly good at those things, like the best on earth at many of those things. And that is amazing. It's also,
you know, it contributes to the the horrifying tragedy of of what happened because, of course, if his trajectory was that, then where would he have been
in in 10 years? I mean, that's that's the part that's astonishing. You know, when when I first heard that that
Charlie had been shot, obviously, everybody went into a state of shock. Everybody. But the thing that
that stunned me the most is when the headline started to come out and it would say Charlie Kirk, 31. It's like he
was 31 years old. And of course I knew that because I'm 10 years older than he is. I'm 41. He's 30. But because Charlie
had accomplished so unbelievably much by the time he was 31. It's insane to think that he was only 31 years old and he had
done all of this. When a normal 31-year-old person dies,
obviously it's a tragedy, but you don't see the outpouring of grief from literally tens of millions of people all over the globe, ranging from, you know,
countries like the United States where you have tens of millions of people to Argentina to London to Italy to Israel
to Canada to to South Korea to New Zealand. I mean, like that's that's an amazing testament to who Charlie was. It
was a privilege to watch him go from a an 18-year-old go-getter young man to a
true man in every sense of the word, a husband, a father, and an iconic figure. When I first was hired from Turning
Point, so I've been here for 6 years. It was July of 2019, I believe. You spoke
at SAS or one of our gala dinners, right when I very first got hired. And then there was a little bit of a gap. There's
a little bit of a gap between Turning Point, Ben Shapiro, maybe some rumors of like just a little bit of competition
between you and Charlie, a little competitive nature or tension. Can you talk candidly about that gap? Yeah, I mean I I I never felt that in
terms of my personal relationship with Charlie. I mean certainly I I it's not like we ran a campus organization. I mean we we run a media outlet and so the
the idea that there was some sort of competition for for whom uh would have been weird. I mean the reason there was a gap is because there was co I mean
that was 2019 and then there was a gap in 2020 and 2021 and then last year I spoke at at Amfest in in December.
So no beef. No, I mean what what what would the beef have been? I mean that's the thing I
keep asking people. So what what is the supposed beef that I had with Charlie between say 2019 and 2023? What what
exactly would that have been? I'm unaware of it. I mean, we're in the game
of politics. That means that we have discussions all the time behind the scenes about how to pragmatically handle all the things that are happening behind
the scenes. Are those conversations that that Charlie and I had? Of course. Are those conversations that that ever got
fraught and angry? No. Not Not one bit. You may be one of, if not the only
other, I mean, most threatened conservative commentator ever. Have you
had to have these preparation type conversations with your own wife a thousand times? Um, yes. My my my wife
unfortunately is quite used to this and so are my kids. I I have four kids. They 11, 9, five, and two and they do not
know what it's like to live without 24/7 security. They've been living with it their entire life essentially. And so, you know, honestly, like for for them
it's kind of normal and they play lightsabers with the security guards and everything. Uh but obviously in the
aftermath of of what happened, security went into even higher gear and you know,
don't go out to dinner, don't go into public spaces, all that kind of stuff. And and I'm sure I'm not the only person
who's felt that, but I knew that that Charlie was taking risk, you know, by
doing the right thing. And that's the nature of the that's the nature of what Charlie wanted to do. He knew he couldn't do what he needed to do unless
he put himself at a certain amount of physical risk. and he was incredibly brave for for
doing all of that. One of the first things I said, I mean, I'm just like angry and sobbing and in
tears. And I said to um Kvette, I said,
"Why was he allowed to be outside after
Trump's assassination attempt? Why wasn't he wearing a bulletproof vest?" And he said, "We tried. He didn't want
to do it." like there were talks of hey when we do these campus tours we probably need to be indoors all that and
he said no I mean that that's a decision that that he wanted to make because he felt like he wanted to be with the crowd right he wanted to do that and that's that is a
decision I mean obviously I used to do a lot of campus events uh the the campus
events that that I traditionally do are indoors and they do require more security and there have been situations like back in 2017 I believe when I spoke
at Berkeley that they had to have something 500 police officers and I was wearing a bulletproof vest at the behest of my security and I remember saying my
security. Do I need a bulletproof vest? Like why? Why? I remember actively saying my security. This is ridiculous. Nobody's going to shoot me for saying
political things. And I think that, you know, to be in this business and to do what Charlie did. I think there's a
baseline assumption. I think this is what got shattered for for the country. There was a baseline assumption in this
country, you do not get shot to death for having political debate with the
people you disagree with. You don't do that. And I know I operated along those lines. I know Charlie operated along
those lines because he was in the same business. And that's what I think is so shocking and horrifying about this. Not just obviously most of all, most of all
for his family, but but for the entire country is that we live in a new world where yes, you very well could be shot
and murdered for your political beliefs and for debating those in an open space. You recently said that you're going to
get back out there. You're going to go on some college tours. Are you scared? No. Uh I mean again I I've always
operated under the assumption that everything is going to be fine because it would be hard to operate in the world without that. You couldn't you couldn't exit. Well the reason that I said that
is because there had been a rumor that was promulgated immediately after Charlie's shooting that I had canceled a
college tour which is not true. There was no college tour actually planned. And so I said like that's ridiculous.
Everybody everybody needs to go out and pick up Charlie's bloodstained microphone. You know, the the internet
of course immediately decided that's not what I had said, but if you actually go and watch it, I say we. I use the plural pronoun we because
we all have to do that. No one is capable of filling Charlie's shoes. No one. I'm not capable of it. No one's
capable of it. It's silly to even argue about it. Everybody needs to do their bit. Charlie was a giant. He was iconic
in the movement. It's funny for me to say this about someone 10 years younger than I, but Charlie was he was an icon of the movement. And it's not possible
and no one should even try to replace Charlie Kirk or do what Charlie was doing. It's not it's not possible. We
all have to go out and and do those things. Are you taking over Turning Point USA? That is the biggest load of
I've ever heard in my entire life. Truly. As soon as Charlie was shot, we reached out to Andrew and to the rest of
the team here and we said, "What do you need? Let us put everything at your disposal." Literally everything. Like we we put our
talent at at the disposal of TPUSA. We put our support staff at the at the disposal of TPUSA who monetary resources
behind TPUSA because we believe in what Charlie believed in and we believe in what TPUSA does and is going to continue
to do on into the future. X is an incredibly stupid and uh and bad place
and and again people need to touch some grass. Does this change anything for policy or procedure at the Daily Wire? Um, in
terms of security procedure, we already had unbelievably high security precautions because, as you mentioned, you know, the number of death threats
that I receive or Matt Walsh receives, Yeah. extremely extremely high. Uh, and so we have, you know, very strong security procedures, some multi-millions
of dollars every year on my security on on Matt security and and all the rest. So, you know, I assume that it'll change
some procedures. I can't imagine that it'll change too much because unfortunately, we've been operating in
this world for a while. when you see all of these vigils in different cities, different countries even that lean
pretty radically left pouring out support for Charlie Kirk, what does that mean for the world?
So, I think that one of the the big things that that Charlie stood for and the thing that he was killed doing,
which is what makes this so, again, I keep using the word horrifying, but I don't know another word for it. It really is just horrifying. But the
reason for this is because Charlie was not siloed. The big mistake for the right here would be to silo itself and
not have the kinds of conversations that Charlie was having when he was shot. Charlie specifically went out there and
said something that those of us in the industry who've been doing this for a while said for a long time. If you disagree, go to the front of the line,
right? Disagree front of the line. We need to have those conversations. We need to have those discussions. It's why millions of people became conservative
because of Charlie. They weren't conservative before. They became conservative because Charlie was talking to them. And so while the right
naturally is saying let's unify and I think that's true. The reality is that the biggest thing that Charlie stood for
was the possibility of taking people from one political viewpoint to another political viewpoint. From one
perspective about God to a different perspective about God. From one perspective about their own life to a different perspective about their own
life. And that's the thing that we need to get out there and do. And that's why I think you saw such a breath and depth
of of grief. And again, I got texts from people and calls from people who radically disagree with me on on
politics, people who would be considered traditionally liberal, who were devastated at Charlie's death because of
And that's a testament to Charlie. It wasn't just the right that that rose up in in a cry of of hurt and pain and
anguish and rage. It was a bunch of people who either used to disagree with Charlie or still on some matters
disagree with Charlie. And that's a testament to the breadth of his reach and and his capacity for for conversation.
I have to ask you, what do you think about the rumors that Charlie was scared for his life wondering if Israel was
going to allegedly take him out before he died? I I think there's a game that gets played online. Make a
allegation. I use that word advisedly. And then when a bunch of people push back, you say, "Ah, you see, they've
they've now taken the allegation seriously enough to deny it." There's not one iota of evidence that that's
true. Not one. I was not at the meeting in the Hamptons with Bill Aman. I have
friends who were at the meeting with with Bill Aman, right? People like Josh Hammer, for example, or Seth Dylan. I
know that they'd been invited by Charlie and they've spoken pretty publicly, I believe, about what it was that that went down. Bill Aman has spoken pretty
publicly. First of all, the notion that that Charlie would be quote unquote blackmailed into taking a position is just unbelievably silly. The people who
are spreading these rumors, they're agents of demoralization. They are trying to to split the movement. They're
trying to smear Charlie's legacy. I mean, Charlie
was two things. He was a principled man who who argued in public and he was also a coalition builder. Coalition building is a very difficult business.
Mhm. It's a business where you have to hold together a bunch of people who disagree on a bunch of different areas. And there can be real, as I said before, you know,
disagreements behind the scenes about how to handle those sort of pragmatic matters of building a coalition. But the
the this notion somehow that Charlie, for example, was radically shifting on Israel and suddenly he was going to turn
into a fan of Hamas and and start preaching that. If you can show me
evidence of that, I mean, I was interviewed on his show the day before he was shot and we laughed together
about some of the allegations that were being made along these lines. Nobody's going to believe me who doesn't want to
believe me online because that's how it works in the in the X space. But you know better than I do. You tell me. you were on the inside here.
So my perspective being on the inside is um actually you said that perfectly about coalition building. So he was very
disturbed by this splitting on the right. He was like this is a way bigger
issue than we even realize. Like I mean the whole movement is basically splitting in half. Pro- Israel, anti-Israel. What am I going to do here?
Like let's give everyone an opportunity to speak, share their sides. I mean, that's why he hosted this debate on
Israel at SAS um this year, this summer. He was planning on having, you know, you
speak at our events, Tucker speak at our events. Like, so it was like, let's just give everybody a platform. Internally, I
never personally heard any like major worldview shifts on Israel like that. It
it was just very much I'm hearing what everybody's saying. You know, you would know better than I would, but
again, that that seemed to be my perception from the outside. I mean, again, until the day he was shot, he was publicly a pro-Israel person in every
debate that he ever personally held in terms of his personal beliefs, which those were in the last couple months. I mean, that is very, very
recent conversations. After that interview, just a few days before he died between you and Charlie on Israel,
did he text you after the interview? Anything? No. The last text that I received from Charlie was inviting me to speak at I
mean, I can pull it up. It was It was literally inviting me to speak at Amfest. Yeah. that and and I said yes and he
said great we'll plan it. That was the last text that I received from Charlie and that would have been the prior Thursday maybe.
And the last conversation I had with him was was the conversation that we had on air in 3 months from now in 5 years from
now. How will we make sure that people remember Charlie Kirk? The amazing thing about Charlie is his
ubiquity. So I think that obviously the clips of Charlie are never going to die. live out there and I think that they
need to continue to be trafficked on TikTok where obviously had an enormous audience uh and on the various other
social media platforms. I think that the the biggest thing that can be done is continuing to support TPUSA which of
course as I said Daily Wire we're behind you guys. We believe that you're going to be able to navigate these waters. We believe in Charlie's mission and his
legacy and we believe that again that fractious business of coalition building which is a tough business is is one that
you guys are going to navigate properly. It's exactly what Erica said, right? building this movement is is what
Charlie would have wanted and doing it in his name I think is something that that he would have wanted as well and so
we're going to contribute to that as much as we can as a company I'll do that as much as I can personally you know what Charlie stood for in the end in the
end was a belief that people need to make America better and make themselves
better and that meant for him people need to go to church obviously was a very religious Christian
people need to believe in Christ people need to go back to church people need to engage with the people to need to have open conversations. They need to believe
in basic American values like family and faith and freedom. These are the things that Charlie stood for. If we stand for
that and if we continue to cite Charlie, I think that's a good thing. I think
it's a very good thing to continue to promote Charlie and continue to promote his content. Again, we're lucky we're left with this enormous mass of content
that he bequeaths to us that we can still that we can still look at and gain inspiration from and pass on to our
kids. I mean, I have kids who are, as I say, 11, 9, five, and two. I plan on showing them Charlie Cocypse. I ask every guest this. If you could
offer one remedy to heal a sick culture, it could be physically, emotionally, or spiritually. What would that remedy be?
Go to church. Go to church. I say this is a Jew. Go to church. Why do you say that as a Jew? Because this is a Christian country. I
want my I want Jews to go to synagogue. But there ain't that many of us. So if you're if you're a Christian or if you grew up in a Christian household, even
if you didn't, go to church. Church is good for you. I've said that my entire career. Charlie said it his entire
career. It ain't going to stop now. Thank you, Ben, for coming on Culture Apothecary. Thanks so much.
How are you feeling? Actually, I'm okay. You know, uh there people that
we should be more concerned about and praying for, you know, uh closer to Charlie. Got the news and uh my first
reaction was, "Oh, you know, I hope it I hope it wasn't too bad. I hope, you know, he'll I hope his recovery won't be
too bad." it it actually didn't occur to me that he could have been killed. We're all familiar with the threats and the
attempts over the years, especially from the radical left. Um, and he was an extraordinarily
uh prominent public figure uh globally actually, but but especially in the
United States. And so, you know, he he understood those threats, but I thought, well, okay, you know, I hope it wasn't wasn't too bad. And then when it we
realized what had happened, that was surreal. And uh my wife talked about it.
She saw the video. I saw the far away video. I did not, thank God, see the close-up video. And I have not seen the
close-up video. How did you All right. How do I have social media and I didn't see the video? I was very intentional about it. I'd
heard that there was a video beforehand and I made a very very concerted effort not to see it. I don't need to see it. I
know I know what happened. Uh she saw it and she said it was the strangest
reaction because on the one hand she said he can't possibly be dead and then on
the other hand having seen it she said he can't possibly be alive but he can't be dead. Charlie Kirk cannot be dead
was her reaction. Obviously uh we've all been talking to each other and then and then talking about it publicly for those
of us who who do that. And it took me about 3 days. You know what happens when
a a family member or friend dies and it's just weighing on you and then you go to sleep and you dream about whatever
and when you wake up anyone who's suffered a loss will will know this. You wake up and there's this one second
where you say huh. Then one second later it hits you again. Say ah.
So it was about the third day. Obviously there had been a lot of media, a lot of
things happening behind the scenes, a lot of conversations happening. And I was sitting in my office at home, which
is where I keep my Bibles and my religious items. And it's where I have, you know, real solitude.
And it was about uh 11:00, 11:30, and I I had, you know, just been sort of
staring at my computer, my phone. I was in principle doing work. What was the work? I had to write my show. And my show was Talk About Charlie. So, I
didn't need more than 11 seconds really to write that. I was just staring, staring, and then I I just let it hit me
for for about 90 seconds to 3 minutes, you know, really just the full force of
it hitting. And uh men, we don't like to cry. And so I
you let the tears come to your eyes and then you especially right-wing men, we just push it right back down. You say,
"Okay, this is not what we're supposed to do." Uh but that that's when it hit me. Day three, obviously a lot of prayers. It's very helpful for for those
of us on the right, especially, you know, Charlie, he was quite certain about what he believed and quite certain
about where he was going. So, there's a consolation to that, but but it's a soft consolation in the short term, you know,
for for uh Erica and for for the whole family, obviously. Have you gotten to talk to Erica at all?
Yeah. Yeah. How was that? That was wonderful to be able to see her and uh you know but
she's uh you know she's going through just about the worst thing that's imaginable. So uh
she's uh I know she's in the prayers of millions of people around the world and she's just done an unbelievable job like
a superhuman job of reacting to this with their children with the speech was
you know superhuman that she was able to give. So she's a very strong and and uh
you know serious person. Um but you know doesn't matter how strong and serious
you are you know one simply has to grieve this kind of loss. There's an outpouring of support from many many
millions of people all all around the world but but you know Jesus wept when his friend died even right before he
raised his friend from the dead. So you know one simply has to mourn. And I know
there are people who mean very well in the public space who, you know, their first reaction is to be really happy
clappy about everything. And Charlie had a an absolutely certain uh faith, hope,
and charity, all three of the theological virtues. But one still grieavves. It's just a terribly, terribly sad thing. And and uh there's
there's no getting past it, you know. That's really the point, I guess. Do you remember the first time that you ever heard of Charlie Kirk or that you
met him? Yeah. I don't know about the first time I heard of him. I had heard of him before I met him. I do vividly
remember the first time I met him. Tell us about it. I was in the Fox Green Room in LA. This
was about 150 years ago. And it was 4:00 in the morning because the morning show LA time, you know, is awful. It's like
3:00 a.m. or or whatever. So, I'm sitting there. I lived in LA. And I'm sitting there half asleep and Charlie
walks in probably off some flight. I don't know. Hadn't slept in three days. bouncing off the walls. Hey, Nolles.
Hey, what's going on? This boom boom boom. And I'm there. You know, I should have been adjusted to the time. And I'm,
you know, I buddy, come on. I'm trying to sleep or whatever. And uh but he was just full of boundless energy. And it
gets to gets to the bigger point on faith and everything, which is they say
that all the way to heaven is heaven. All the way to heaven is heaven. And you
really could see it with him. I I never saw him down. I could see him a little
stressed out. A little obviously, you know, he was managing like the equivalent of five people's careers at
the very highest levels of politics and media, but uh I never saw him down at
all. Uh which which is not accidental, you know, that's not merely coincidental. There were definitely like you could
tell there were moments I mean just working here for the last six years. Um and one of like the I mean we have
exploded in the last few years. I mean, when I first got hired in 2019, there was like, I don't know, 40 employees.
Like, we could all fit in one building. Now, we have tons of buildings. Like, it's it's just crazy. I don't even know everybody who works here at this point.
We've grown so much. But at that time, I mean, there were definitely those moments where it was like he was very motivated to get things done, that type
of like stressed. But, yeah, never raised his voice at people, never cursed
at people. um never spoke poorly about others, never
gossiped about others. And you know, JD Vance, the the vice
president, kind of echoed that. He said that that's something that Erica had told him. Yeah. That that he had never raised his voice
or spoke, you know, shortly with her. And he said, "Well, that is just such motivation to me to be a better
husband." Because every husband falls short. He's like, "I guess Charlie was an anomaly. Thanks, Charlie." Um but
when you heard that, what did you think? Well, it totally rings true. The guy really was who he said he was. And that
isn't always the case in sometimes is the case in public life, but but not always. And those of us though who had
spent some time with the guy over a long period of time uh could tell no, he
really was that guy, you know, literally a boy scout and his faith really was sincere. In in some ways, I think it's
it's one of the things that made him so successful. You know, we have this idea in politics that you have to be a mchavelian animal in order to succeed.
And he he really disproves that because with him, the truth is usually the simplest uh option. You don't have to
keep track of all of your lies and all of these things. And he was a complete straight shooter with everyone,
including not only his friends, not only his political allies, not only his colleagues, but but with his enemies,
too, you know. And you can judge a man by his enemies. And he had a he had the caliber of enemy that would tell you
that he was not only on the right side of things but extraordinarily effective. And it's important to know the
difference between your friends and your enemies. If if for no other reason, as a friend of mine points out, for no other reason than to know who to pray for. You
know, Christ tells us to pray for our enemies and love our enemies. And so it's it's good to know that. And and he
he lived that out every day. He he you could you could see the great charity that he had even and especially for his
enemies. There was a little bit of news the day that we're recording this that just came out that the Biden
administration had created a a federal investigation that they called Arctic Frost. And
whistleblowers alleged that this was a corrupt FBI investigation that they were
looking into over 90 names in Republican politics and media and that
one of them was Turning Point USA, of course. And so my question for you is
what does it say about our justice system when the federal government investigates political opponents under
the guise of security? Well, that's nothing new. Uh Barack Obama was also doing that in a in a
transparently uh corrupt way. And he was re he was exposed for having done that though they
never faced any consequences. Unfortunately, we saw the corruption of the DOJ from the earliest days of the
Trump campaign all the way through Trump's first administration. Uh I I this is the first I'm hearing of that,
but it doesn't surprise me at all. In fact, I think most of us would have guessed that something like that would
have existed. But I guess the KOD to that whole story is who controls the DOJ
now? You know, who's in the White House now? And the answer is we are. That's how this information is coming out. And
one of the major reasons that we do have that political power now is Charlie. This is not hyperbole. This is not just
a nice thing that one says after a person dies. This is a fact. There
almost certainly is not a Trump second term without Charlie Kirk. And so even the fact that these sorts of things are
coming to light now days after Charlie was killed is quite directly attributable to him. And and not only
his clear vision, he had a very clear vision. It was very good. not only to his great great charity and generosity
for everyone which was manifest but to his effectiveness. They didn't target him. Whether we're talking about the
assassin or whether we're talking about Biden DOJ, they did not target him because he was ineffective. Quite the
opposite. So here's what's crazy you saying this. When we first, you know, were told
officially that he had passed, I went through three immediate things popped
into my brain. First thing was, and I had tweeted it, was I am so thankful
that Charlie loved and knew Jesus. Two, how in the world are we supposed to
go on without him? Yeah. And three, thank God Trump is president because I knew that if this would have
been a Kla Harris administration and we didn't have Cash Patel, we didn't have Dan Bonino, I was like, we would never
have answers. It would have been downplayed. would have been pushed out of the news.
There would be no justice or it would be Yes. swept under the rug. And I was just like, "Thank you, Jesus." And and it was
crazy because I was like, "And the reason we have that, the reason we have it is literally because of Charlie."
Yes. And you know, it it's I was going to say little things. I guess these aren't really little things. A national
address from the Oval Office by the president of the United States that really focuses how people are
thinking about it. uh the vice president filling in to host Charlie's podcast,
host his friend's podcast that really focuses attention and the the outpouring
of grief and love and attention that actually preceded the Oval Office
conference and the the Oval Office address and the vice president that w that was all Charlie. That was people
reacting to Charlie. Someone who in many in many cases were actually friends with him. Charlie had many many real friends
uh but also people who just felt that they were friends of his because he was on their phone all the time for years. I
mean some kids grew up listening to him. He he really formed the way they thought about politics. Some people radically
changed their views of politics and of man's relation to the cosmos you know their religious views because of
Charlie. So they felt that this really personal uh connection to him and and they were grieving him because of that.
But the fact that then the political powers flew in and said, "Hey, hey, yes,
now let's focus and let's bring some justice. Let's bring some reforms to
punish the bad people. Take the antisocial elements that are totally undermining our society out of polite
society and and let's let's really do something here. Let's be effective, which is uh very much in keeping with
Charlie's career." There are two descriptions that are being thrown um around right now about Charlie Kirk. One
is that he was a civil rights leader and two is that he was a martyr. Do you
agree with any of those? Well, he he was it depends on uh how you
define these terms. The left has taken the term civil rights leader to mean any, you know, race hustler or uh sexual
deviant who wants to push some radical leftwing agenda. But of course, Charlie was a civil rights leader in the true
sense of that term. He actually he defended the right, not the wrong. And and he was eminently civil. He was
eminently civil. He was killed because he was civil. Uh in terms of martyrdom, I I think that
one one cannot escape the fact that he was killed not merely because of his political views, not merely because he
liked low taxes or whatever. He he was he was killed because of what he had to say about the nature of man and the
relation of the body to the soul and about God, about Christ. You know, he he
he never let an opportunity go by when when he did not preach the gospel to
people. And so, uh I guess theologians can quibble about the meaning of of that term, but but there is no question he
was targeted be because ultimately of his faith and religious convictions. You
said that in the aftermath of Charlie's death, it would be reckless to redevote ourselves to protecting the marketplace
of ideas. Redouble. Redouble. Yes. In in the wake of Charlie's assassination,
there are there are people who in great sincerity say that the most important thing to do right now is to redouble our
devotion to the open marketplace of ideas. And this seems like a noble and courageous thing and it comes from a
good place. But it is in fact uh reckless be because
we had an open marketplace of ideas or something like it and the left shut it up. And so
we we cherish the healthy exchange of ideas. No one did so more than Charlie. Uh but nice words and soft soap will not
accomplish that. Uh because marketplaces require rules. You can't have a marketplace of ideas or of anything else
or of bananas. If people uh are are shooting up the marketplace, if there
are not basic rules uh common media of exchange, trust in in that sort of
system. And so what what is required for any kind of liberty for that matter is
first order. In that sense, do you agree then that that is why it's okay for
people to be saying uh some need to be losing their jobs or being expelled from school if they are celebrating his death
or saying that he deserved it? Yes. So for instance uh the celebration
of murder that's a good that's a good example because it's so egregious. One cannot tolerate the celebration of
murder for engaging in political debate within the the so-called marketplace of
ideas because rather than that kind of thing expanding the marketplace of ideas, it actually undermines the whole
thing. If someone comes out and says, "I encourage everyone to go murder that conservative if if he dares to open his
mouth," you're not thereby increasing speech. You're not thereby increasing the exchange of ideas. You're completely
shutting it down. This is why and our our founders and framers wrote about this extensively but it's even in the
constitution in the first amendment. This is why certain kinds of speech are not protected by the first amendment.
Things like direct threats, things like fighting words for that matter, things like fraud, things like obscenity. There
there are a number of of categories of of sound that are not protected as
speech. And the reason is not to shrink uh the marketplace of ideas, but to
protect it. You cannot have, in the words of GK Chesterton, a thought that stops thought. In the words of
Chesterton, that's the only thought that ought to be stopped. You cannot simultaneously, for instance, be free
and undisiplined. The founders and framers wrote extensively about this. Uh you you you can you cannot
simultaneously be free and totally ignorant. You have to know some basic things. This is this is why we don't let
toddlers vote because they don't know anything and they're not disciplined. We know this intuitively. We can also arrive at this philosophically. And so
what is needed now, it would seem to me, is the reassertion of order. Uh and the
kind of order that makes liberty possible, that makes the exchange of ideas possible. It's not that we arrive at at these
basic truths and moral goods is the asmtoic end goal of endless debate.
Rather, these are the axioms without which debate is not possible. It's it's like in mathematics with within
mathematics you you don't start from nothing. You have to start from axioms. And so an example would be a equals a. I
can't prove that a plus b equals b plus a. I can't prove that. However, I can't
prove anything else without accepting that as a premise. And the same is true
in in speech and debate and public life. As Lewis talks about this. He calls this
the dao. Others call it the natural law or the first principles of practical
reason. Certain basic things that I can't exactly prove. I can't exactly prove to you that it's wrong to commit
murder. But I can't prove anything else about morality if I don't accept that. That has always been the case uh in our
society. And so if if all of a sudden you have a society where people deny these basic axiomatic truths in in a way
that is that is in fact threatening and inciting violence then then you have to
you have to stop that. You have to punish that. You you can't expect someone to send their children to a
school at which the teacher is encouraging those children to be murdered. Mhm. You cannot go to a hospital uh when the
nurses and the surgeons are openly calling for the murder of you and half the country along with you. I can't go
to a restaurant if the cooks and the servers are talking about how much they want to poison me. You can't you cannot
have those things. You cannot have a society in that way. And so, uh none of this is particularly revolutionary. You
know, these were always considered basic truths. And isn't that just conservatism, common sense? Yes, it is actually. And and so in a
political reform like this, which is something that we're talking about now, it's always good to air on the side of
caution, you know, uh so you say, look, we're it's not that we want to uh throw
people out of the public square or ostracize people for saying things that we merely disagree with.
We're talking about particularly egregious examples that undermine the whole public order. And so I think a
good place to begin here is uh with those who would celebrate and encourage
the murder of innocent people simply for speaking. There's a lot of rumors online that Charlie was considering converting to
Catholicism. You just did an interview, right, with Charlie about Catholicism or we had you talked about faith a million
conversations and that was recent. That was a recent conversation. So is there any legitimacy to Charlie potentially converting to
Catholicism as of recent? You know, it's funny because Charlie and I, we always jive each other about religion, you
know, and almost every conversation, certainly publicly, we get a kick out of doing that publicly. Privately,
conversations are a little bit different. And so, look, it's not really my place to reveal uh my own opinion of
this or other conversations I've had with Charlie. And uh his his publicly stated views speak for themselves. And
if other people close to him, you know, want to reveal private conversations, they're welcome to. That's not my place
to do it. All I will say on this fact is I feel good about Charlie. I feel good about Charlie.
His salvation, you mean? Yes. I I feel good. We trust to God's extraordinary mercy, you know, and and
and we pray for for the dead. And uh I do at least. Um but I I I feel good
about Charlie. Uh and and the thing that I will certainly say that is obviously
public is Charlie took religion very very seriously and he took truth very
seriously and he would he would pursue it rigorously and uh he he could do it
bombastically even you know zealously. So you know he he that's what he cared about obviously most of all. Um so
people sometime when whenever anyone dies especially someone who really cares about religion they say well what would
this person have believed 10 or 20 years from now I don't know you know we don't have that time so all that all that we
can do is pray for our friend uh in faith and uh and you know feel whatever
consolation we have from our public or private conversations and so the the thing that is uh giving me some
personally some consolation is I feel good about him. I ask every guest this that comes on the show, if you could
offer one remedy to heal a sick culture, physically, emotionally, or spiritually, what would it be?
The first thing you have to do is pray ideally on your knees. That's the first thing you have to do personally. And
that's physical, emotional, and spiritual, by the way, because we're bodies, too. We're not just spirits floating in outer space. That's what
modern ideologies say, Gnostic ideologies, the transgender ideology, for example, says that our body has
nothing to do with who we really are. But no, no, it's in our bodies. you know, our Lord is incarnate in the flesh in history and he picks real apostles
and he leaves them real sacraments and then when he's he's crucified and resurrected, he broils them real fish,
you know, that's how he appears to them and eats it, you know, in his body. So the body really matters and that's the first thing because it uh gives you the
ability to look up and uh Chesterton again this popped in when one of his
detective stories one of the conclusions is don't pray in high places because from high places everyone looks like
ants but when you're on your knees you can look up to heaven. So that's the first thing you got to do personally. You have to talk to God. You
know God's real and so you should talk to him shouldn't you? That's before you call your mother even you should talk to
God. Um, that's the first thing. But we're political creatures as well. We're
a social animal. And so, uh, we need the the public authority to recognize
truths, to recognize goods like the common good, and to pursue them. You
know, this is the this is statecraft 101 going all the way back to the first caveman community, which is that good is
to be done and evil is to be avoided. And there is much that flows from that basic observation. But that's the that
is the first charge that we have. Good is to be done and evil is to be avoided. And one of the problems that we have in
our modern culture is that we not only deny good, we deny that we can even distinguish between good and bad. We
it's not only that we deny truth, we deny that we can distinguish between truth and falsehood. If that is the
case, not only should we hang up self-government, we should hang up our humanity because we're we're
surrendering our reason. We can know these things and and so what is called for now is not only the clarity of
vision that I think most of us have deep down but it's the courage to say no no no I I will promote the good and I will
suppress evil and I will promote truth and I will suppress falsehood and I won't we'll have a light touch and we'll
have all of these wonderful subsidiarity and federalism and all these nice uh things that attend to politics
but let's not mince words here you know let's let's do what we know is right. Uh
those would be the two sides of it because we're all going to face our particular judgment as individuals. But we are going to live in in this life and
in the life to come as part of a community, the the political community here in this in this world and also in
this world and in the life of the world to come as part of the mystical body of Christ. So we need to do things together
too. Michael Nolles, thank you for coming on Culture Apothecary and honoring our friend Charlie with me. Thank you for having me. It's wonderful
to be with you. Big thank you to Michael and Ben for
being so open and vulnerable and sharing so much with us. In the next episode, I'll be talking to arguably one of the
closest people in Charlie's life. All about his marriage, how he managed a work life balance, why people on
Charlie's team started taking down cameras immediately after he was shot, what will happen with the Charlie Kirk
show, a more in-depth look at Charlie's potential conversion to Catholicism and feelings on Israel. what Erica being CEO
means for Turning Point USA and more. Please leave a five-star review. Tell others why they should be listening to
Culture Apothecary. We're on a mission to heal us culture twice a week, Mondays and Thursdays, 600 p.m. Pacific, 9:00
p.m. Eastern. Make sure you're subscribed. I'm Alex Clark and this is Culture Apothecary.
