Could Joe Kent’s Public Doubts Complicate the Trial of Charlie Kirk’s Alleged Killer

[00:00] Uh Blake, how you doing?

[00:01] >> I was better a few minutes ago, Andrew.

[00:03] >> And we will get into that in just a

[00:05] second. So, uh moments ago, a new report

[00:09] from journalist Michael Shelonburgger

[00:11] dropped. As you know, yesterday we

[00:14] covered uh the backstory, but what

[00:17] really happened with the screen grabs um

[00:20] the notorious screen grabs now. and and

[00:23] I revealed to this audience that I did

[00:26] in fact share that screen grab with Joe

[00:28] Kent and uh Joe suggested that I leak

[00:31] that publicly. I declined. He actually I

[00:34] went back through our messages and he

[00:36] suggested I do so twice. I declined

[00:39] obviously those were private messages. I

[00:41] wanted to keep them private for

[00:43] Charlie's sake. I thought that was

[00:44] honoring my friend. Anyway, so this new

[00:46] report

[00:48] comes out from Shelonburgger and it

[00:50] says, as you see on your screen, that

[00:52] Joe Kent says he's willing to testify

[00:57] at the trial of Tyler Robinson. So, this

[01:00] is obviously a huge bombshell and

[01:03] escalates everything to a much bigger

[01:05] level. I have reached out to Michael

[01:07] Shelonburgger and he has agreed to come

[01:09] on the show today. He interviewed Joe

[01:11] Kent uh for this report. So, these are

[01:13] Joe Kent's own words. Michael

[01:15] Shelonburgger will be joining us at 1:30

[01:18] Eastern. So, set your clocks and uh

[01:20] please, please, please tune in then.

[01:22] It's going to be an important

[01:23] conversation. And Blake, let's just take

[01:26] this out a step and explain why this is

[01:30] actually a a really important thing. As

[01:32] you know, there's a lot of conspiracy

[01:34] theories that we do not indulge, that we

[01:37] do not discuss. This is different. Joe

[01:40] Kent was a government official at a very

[01:44] important post and now he's saying he's

[01:46] willing to testify

[01:48] ostensibly on behalf of Tyler Robinson.

[01:51] >> Yes,

[01:52] >> this is a bigger deal. This is a a line

[01:55] cross that we have not seen. Yes. Uh

[01:57] let's I mean let's just recite it where

[01:59] he says uh Kent this is Shelonburgger's

[02:03] reporting on Substack. Kent said he knew

[02:05] he might be called as a witness before

[02:06] he made his statements that a quote

[02:09] foreign nexus may have been involved in

[02:11] Kirk's assassination. "I was definitely

[02:14] warned of that over and over again,"

[02:16] said Kent. "If I end up having to play

[02:17] that role, then I'll do it. It's not

[02:20] something I'm seeking." When pressed

[02:22] that his testimony could help the

[02:23] Robinson defense, Kent said, "Then

[02:25] honestly, so be it. If it gets us to the

[02:28] truth, that's obviously the risk I'm

[02:31] taking." Neither Robinson's attorneys

[02:32] nor the prosecuting attorneys responded

[02:34] to request for comment. And then looks

[02:37] I'm not sure if there's more. I might

[02:38] have to pay for Shelonburgger's

[02:39] subscription. Yeah. But

[02:41] >> yeah, it I'm sure it does go go further.

[02:43] And we're going to, like I said, be

[02:45] talking to Michael Shelonburgger and uh

[02:47] the second half of next hour at 1:30

[02:50] Eastern. And uh I can't wait to hear

[02:52] what he has to say. This this this to me

[02:57] is this is galaxy brain run a muck. And

[03:01] what let me explain why why I say that.

[03:05] Jonathan Turley, who is a I guess he's a

[03:08] contributor to Fox News, legal

[03:10] contributor. He's a professor of law at

[03:12] George Washington University, said that

[03:14] 90% of the evidence accumulated against

[03:18] Tyler Robinson could be thrown out. So,

[03:21] the defense could be successful in

[03:22] throwing out 90% of the evidence and he

[03:24] would still be found guilty of murder.

[03:28] >> Let's refresh people. There is a murder

[03:31] weapon that was found near the site of

[03:33] the shooting. It was owned by Tyler

[03:36] Robinson's family, given to him by his

[03:37] grandpa,

[03:38] >> of the caliber used to shoot Charlie. It

[03:41] has his DNA all over it,

[03:42] >> all over the casings.

[03:43] >> He They release a photo of the shooter.

[03:46] They are not able to find him otherwise.

[03:48] Tyler Robinson's parents see that photo

[03:51] and think that looks like Tyler. They

[03:53] begin asking him things like, "Where is

[03:56] your I believe it was his grandfather's

[03:57] gun."

[03:58] >> They start asking him this. Tyler

[04:00] Robinson starts talking like he might

[04:02] kill himself. They get a friend of the

[04:04] family to sit down with him. He actually

[04:07] he admits that it's him. They get him to

[04:09] drive up to Orm and turn himself in. His

[04:12] parents helped him turn him in. And we

[04:14] run into people who say that that didn't

[04:16] happen or that's fabricated. There's

[04:18] digital confessions.

[04:19] >> There's digital confessions. But also,

[04:20] his parents are out there. They have

[04:22] never stepped forward and said, "This is

[04:24] a lie. They could easily do that. It

[04:26] would be trivial to do that if it was

[04:27] the case." They have not done that.

[04:29] >> His parents turned him in. That is the

[04:32] most obvious piece of evidence in the

[04:34] world that nothing can argue around. And

[04:36] some people are so obsessed with these

[04:39] same conspiracies that they concoct for

[04:41] every other thing that ever happens. And

[04:45] so they have to shove it into this one

[04:47] too because they care more about their

[04:49] conspiracy theories than about the

[04:50] person who murdered my friend facing

[04:53] justice. I am fed up with it. Yeah. And

[04:56] you should be. And and this this is

[05:00] I I mean this is a tough job for us

[05:03] today to be honest because this is

[05:05] really personal. Uh I have been open to

[05:08] everything. I think candidly I don't get

[05:12] enough credit for even the fact that I

[05:15] shared these group chats in the first

[05:16] place. We shared a lot of information

[05:18] about trans about Charlie how Charlie

[05:20] was more concerned about than any other

[05:23] community about the trans coming after

[05:25] him. You want to know the truth? That's

[05:27] actually the truth. I heard over the

[05:29] course of the last two years of

[05:30] Charlie's life probably about 50

[05:32] references of how he he knew the trans

[05:35] uh transif was going to come after him

[05:37] and he was worried about that. That's

[05:39] the truth. Never mentioned one time

[05:41] about the Jews. Okay? Never once. And

[05:46] here's here's why it's so frustrating is

[05:48] because there is going to be even more

[05:50] evidence that is presented to the public

[05:52] in May at the evidentiary hearing. Okay?

[05:56] And it's a mountain of evidence, some of

[05:59] which has been made public, some of

[06:00] which has not been made public yet. And

[06:02] the prosecution is going to lay out its

[06:04] case against Tyler Robinson. And I'm

[06:07] told it's a whopper. I'm told they've

[06:08] got this guy dead to rights. And

[06:11] meanwhile, you have government officials

[06:13] that are now saying on the record to

[06:16] journalists, they are willing to testify

[06:17] on behalf of the defense to get

[06:20] ostensibly to get Tyler Robinson off the

[06:22] hook for something that he did.

[06:26] And so the level of betrayal that I

[06:30] currently feel is dramatic and extreme.

[06:35] the level of just frustration,

[06:38] the the idiocy that is on full display,

[06:42] we have to call it out because if this

[06:44] ends up screwing up the jury pool, if

[06:46] this ends up in some ways getting a hung

[06:48] jury, getting a getting this taste uh

[06:51] this case thrown out or even just

[06:53] getting the death penalty off the case

[06:55] off the potential list of consequences

[06:58] here, I'm not going to be happy with

[07:00] that. I'm telling you that as somebody

[07:03] who was open to all different options, I

[07:06] didn't care where the truth led. This is

[07:08] where the truth led. This is it. And for

[07:11] any fair-minded person, this is crackpot

[07:13] conspiracy garbage brain rot stuff. And

[07:16] now it's gotten really serious. This

[07:18] isn't podcaster junk. This isn't like

[07:20] social media conspiracy nonsense. This

[07:23] is an actual government official who's

[07:25] now going to be called to testify on

[07:27] behalf of the defense. And that is a

[07:28] bridge too far. That is a line in the

[07:30] sand that we must hold because this

[07:32] could negatively impact the trial of the

[07:35] assassin of my friend, of Blake's

[07:37] friend.

[07:39] So, that's the breaking news. I don't

[07:41] want to dwell on it for the whole show

[07:43] here because we're going to have Michael

[07:45] Shelonburgger come on next uh in the

[07:47] next hour and he can tell us more about

[07:48] what he knows. But, if this is how it

[07:51] reads, this is an egregious egregious

[07:53] moment that um we're having to live

[07:56] through. On Tik Tok, teens get over 50

[07:59] built-in protections from the start. But

[08:02] for parents, further visibility and

[08:04] control of content can help create the

[08:06] right environment. That's where family

[08:08] pairing comes in. Teens under 18 have a

[08:11] 60-minute screen time reminder in place.

[08:13] And with family pairing, parents can set

[08:15] their own screen time limits or even set

[08:18] restricted times based on what works

[08:20] best for their family. Family pairing

[08:22] lets parents link accounts to see their

[08:24] teens followers and who they follow and

[08:26] help restrict content that's not right

[08:28] for them because peace of mind shouldn't

[08:30] take guesswork. With easytouse tools

[08:32] like family pairing, parents can help

[08:34] shape the environment that makes the

[08:35] most sense for their teen first. That

[08:37] way, discovering creativity can follow.

[08:40] Learn more at tik

[08:41] tok.com/guardiansguide.

[08:47] Welcome to the show, Michael. It's great

[08:49] to have you. Thank you for uh you know,

[08:51] we we talked this morning after your

[08:53] story broke. Uh and boy oh boy, it's a

[08:55] this is a big one and uh you interviewed

[08:58] Joe Kent and so I'll let you say it in

[09:00] your own words. What did he tell you?

[09:03] >> Hey, thanks for having me on, Andrew,

[09:04] inviting me on. Um yeah, I mean I think

[09:06] it's pretty big news. Uh Joe Ken, of

[09:08] course, the former director of the

[09:09] National Counterterrorism Center, um you

[09:12] know, has been saying for the last week

[09:13] that uh he thinks that uh that he

[09:17] doesn't buy the lone shooter theory of

[09:20] the assassination of Charlie Kirk. He

[09:22] suspects there's a foreign nexus was the

[09:25] words he used uh involved in that

[09:27] assassination. He said that the FBI

[09:30] prevented him from investigating it and

[09:32] that he viewed that as uh suspicious and

[09:36] if there was nothing there, he told me

[09:38] then uh why did they prevent him from

[09:40] investigating it? I asked him if he was

[09:44] aware before he went public last week

[09:46] that Tyler Robinson, the the suspected

[09:50] assassin of Charlie Kirk, that his

[09:52] defense attorneys might actually call

[09:54] Kent to the witness stand to argue that

[09:57] uh that Robinson could not be convicted

[10:00] because the prosecutors had not given

[10:02] them all the information they had

[10:04] available to them. That's something

[10:05] known as the Brady rule named after a

[10:08] Supreme Court decision I believe in the

[10:10] 1960s but nonetheless most people are

[10:12] familiar with it from television which

[10:13] is that the prosecutors can't deny

[10:16] federal government can't deny the

[10:17] government can't deny the defense um any

[10:20] information and Kent is saying that

[10:22] there is information um and that the

[10:24] investigation itself was inadequate and

[10:27] that uh you know I spoke to a

[10:29] constitutional uh law uh legal scholar

[10:31] yesterday who said you know it would be

[10:33] a no-brainer for the defense attorneys

[10:36] now for Robinson to use Kent statements

[10:39] uh as a way to uh you know gain an

[10:41] advantage or potentially a hung jury or

[10:44] a mistrial or something of that nature.

[10:46] So it's pretty serious for people that

[10:49] uh are interested in seeing uh justice

[10:51] served with the assassination of Charlie

[10:53] Kirk.

[10:54] >> Well, listen, Michael, I know that you

[10:55] have to be sort of dispassionate. You're

[10:57] a reporter. Uh but to me this feels like

[11:00] a giant red line. This feels like like

[11:03] galaxy brain run a muk. Did you Did you

[11:05] get a chance to ask him just straight up

[11:08] just because he didn't get led into the

[11:11] investigation doesn't mean it wasn't

[11:12] investigated?

[11:15] >> Yeah. I mean, thanks. Uh I appreciate

[11:17] the the point. I mean, I'm trying to um

[11:20] you know, I mean, the truth is I

[11:21] actually like kind of everybody involved

[11:23] in this. I've always um I've actually

[11:25] admired uh Kent and the things he said

[11:27] in the past. Uh I also care a lot about

[11:30] the transgender uh issue. We we reported

[11:34] it exclusively on leaked files.

[11:36] >> Amazing on this issue, Michael. Just to

[11:38] just to underscore your point, you have

[11:40] been one of the the lead voices exposing

[11:43] some of the craziness and the ziness uh

[11:46] behind the uh behind the transgender

[11:49] radical trans ideology. So I just wanted

[11:51] to give you some bonafides there.

[11:54] >> Thank you. Yeah, it's a obviously it's a

[11:56] big issue and I think many Americans

[11:58] felt that they didn't need to pay

[11:59] attention to the issue at all. But now

[12:00] we've seen uh transidentified people uh

[12:04] engaged in uh shootings obviously or

[12:07] maybe not obviously probably obviously

[12:08] to your audience. It was the last thing

[12:10] that Charlie Kirk was talking about uh

[12:13] before he was assassinated. It appears

[12:15] as though the evidence that Tyler

[12:17] Robinson uh committed that assassination

[12:20] is pretty overwhelming. And and to be

[12:22] fair to to Joe Kent, he didn't dispute

[12:24] that. What's really what he's raising

[12:27] here is that there may be some broader

[12:29] conspiracy. And there's not a lot of

[12:34] evidence for that. And um but

[12:37] nonetheless, because Kent is such a an

[12:38] important voice, uh he could easily be

[12:41] used by the defense attorneys. Um I did

[12:44] directly ask him repeatedly that you

[12:47] know given that his agency is an

[12:49] intelligence gathering or really an

[12:51] intelligence synthesizing and

[12:54] coordinating agency is part of the

[12:55] broader coordinating intelligence

[12:57] mission of the office of the director of

[12:59] national intelligence. you know, he

[13:01] didn't have the authorities to do a law

[13:03] enforcement investigation, it was FBI

[13:04] investigation. And, you know, didn't he

[13:06] sort of need to trust that his

[13:08] colleagues at the FBI and elsewhere or

[13:11] and also with the Utah uh police, law

[13:13] enforcement, um at some point, you know,

[13:16] you can pass along a tip or an idea, but

[13:19] don't you at some point have to sort of

[13:20] trust unless you have other evidence,

[13:22] you know, and I asked him if he had

[13:23] other evidence, you know, of some sort

[13:25] of corruption or conspiracy. Um, and he

[13:29] he said he didn't. So, it kind of raises

[13:31] the question of, you know, what is this

[13:34] sort of based on because I think it's

[13:35] worth pointing out to people that the

[13:37] restrictions on Kent's authority to

[13:40] investigate the Kirk murder are not

[13:42] arbitrary. It's not something that

[13:44] Director Cash Patel, whatever you think

[13:46] of him, uh, sort of invented as a way to

[13:49] styy a proper investigation. Those those

[13:51] restrictions on investigative power are

[13:55] what protect us as citizens. It's

[13:57] written into our constitution. It's part

[13:58] of our lock in system of government. And

[14:01] I think we saw those uh we saw the

[14:03] intelligence community abuse those

[14:05] powers uh to create the Russia gate

[14:08] hoax. You know, the Russia gate hoax.

[14:11] >> So, and and it's not just that. I mean,

[14:12] we can go through, you know, the int

[14:14] that wasn't the first time the

[14:15] intelligence community had abused its

[14:16] powers, but when you go through so so

[14:19] these the the restrictions on Kent that

[14:21] I think for people that maybe haven't

[14:24] thought about it a lot or haven't um you

[14:27] know that don't work don't aren't

[14:28] familiar with the intricacies of why

[14:30] these laws exist. I think it's important

[14:32] context like these laws are not there to

[14:34] prevent a thorough investigation or to

[14:36] cover up things and it certainly wasn't

[14:38] a subjective determination by the FBI

[14:41] director. It's written into laws and

[14:43] those laws are there, you know, first

[14:45] and foremost to protect us obviously,

[14:47] but obviously part of the process of

[14:49] protecting innocent civilians is also uh

[14:52] to make sure that you get the guilty

[14:53] party and you don't go off and engage in

[14:55] activities that would potentially uh

[14:58] entrap innocent people.

[14:59] >> So, two questions for you, Michael. So,

[15:02] first of all,

[15:03] >> I just wanted to really harp on this

[15:05] point. He didn't present any did he

[15:08] present a single example of evidence

[15:10] against Tyler Robinson that he believes

[15:13] may have been flawed or mistaken on one

[15:15] end and on the other end did he give you

[15:17] a single concrete example of evidence in

[15:21] the case that he believes that he

[15:24] specifically that went uninvestigated by

[15:26] the FBI or by any other law enforcement?

[15:30] >> Um,

[15:32] I'm afraid I can't answer all of these

[15:34] questions. um because I have to protect

[15:37] uh but I will say that um he presented

[15:40] nothing on the record and hasn't

[15:41] presented anything on the record.

[15:45] >> Okay. Um so I want to I I would love to

[15:50] follow up on that, but I have a feeling

[15:52] that we're going to Yeah. There's

[15:54] nothing you can you could say. Yeah.

[15:55] >> I I mean here's here's the problem,

[15:57] though. So, he's now essentially said

[15:59] that he's willing to go

[16:02] testify ostensibly on behalf of the

[16:05] defense on Tyler Robinson's defense.

[16:08] I've heard him say in other interviews

[16:11] that, you know, he's he said, I'm sure

[16:14] there's a slam dunk case against Tyler

[16:16] Robinson. I'm not saying it wasn't him,

[16:17] but now it seems like almost he's moved

[16:20] on from that point. Did did you

[16:23] ascertain his sense his internal sense

[16:26] of the guilt of Tyler Robinson or not?

[16:29] >> Well, this is um let's get let's get

[16:31] into this part because this is extremely

[16:33] important and um important to

[16:35] understand. And I posted uh the all of

[16:38] the on there portions of our interview I

[16:40] posted and also uh was very careful to

[16:44] make sure that the stuff that was posted

[16:45] was on the record um after the fact.

[16:48] confirmed it uh with uh Kent uh earlier

[16:52] uh today before publishing. So

[16:53] everything that's in that in that

[16:55] recording it's over 30 minutes. Um I

[16:57] think what's he also said that he

[16:59] thought that there was a strong case

[17:00] against Robinson and I don't think he's

[17:03] changed that view. I I'm not um well I

[17:07] should put it this way. I don't think

[17:09] anybody in the media had yet asked him

[17:13] directly and kind of consistently if he

[17:16] was aware that his allegations could be

[17:20] used by Robinson's defense team to argue

[17:23] that Robinson was potentially a victim

[17:24] of a wider conspiracy and um and Ken

[17:28] said that he was aware of that before

[17:30] going public. Um the Brady rule is not

[17:33] an obscure rule. I mean, everybody knows

[17:35] that

[17:36] >> the defense attorneys are going to need

[17:38] to know everything that went into some

[17:40] investigation, any government

[17:41] investigation. That's a really important

[17:43] civil uh liberties protection. Um, you

[17:46] know, and similarly, it's a protection,

[17:48] you know, it's a protection of the

[17:49] innocent. It's it's a strong protection

[17:51] of people of defendants that people may

[17:53] be very convinced are already guilty,

[17:54] but it's also there to make sure that um

[17:57] that that you're not um you know, like

[18:00] we've been talking about, abusing those

[18:01] authorities. But um he said he was aware

[18:04] of that. He said he wasn't like

[18:05] volunteering to to testify, but he said

[18:07] he was aware that he he might be asked

[18:09] to investigate. And like I said, I think

[18:12] I think if I'd be shocked if Robinson's

[18:14] attorneys don't use this.

[18:15] >> Well, of course.

[18:16] >> Yeah. this is the obvious this is the

[18:18] obvious result of this is that he's

[18:20] doing this PR tour and

[18:23] >> and that's what infuriates me is he's

[18:25] like endlessly he's like someone who's

[18:27] vague posting on Facebook where he's

[18:29] like there's there's things I might know

[18:31] people should know I might

[18:33] >> but I can't tell you what those are but

[18:34] I can't go I can't go on the record with

[18:36] this reporter that I'm talking to I

[18:38] can't like

[18:39] >> state what you actually think happened

[18:41] if if you want to do that you can at

[18:42] least argue with him but like this

[18:44] endless appeal to well I had this senior

[18:47] I saw things everywhere. Like I'm sick

[18:50] and tired of seeing this and I always

[18:51] see it from the same people who are

[18:53] maximally conspiratorial. Um, here's

[18:56] what I want everybody to know. Shortly

[18:58] after Tyler Robinson's arrest, the

[19:00] prosecutors released a probable cause

[19:02] affidavit detailing the evidence

[19:04] gathered immediately after Charlie's

[19:06] assassination. The evidence presented at

[19:09] that time was overwhelming. But people

[19:12] also need to remember this. In the

[19:14] months that have followed, we know the

[19:16] investigation has continued. More

[19:19] details will come out in May when the

[19:21] assassin has a probable cause hearing

[19:23] and we are certain there will be even

[19:25] more evidence submitted against Tyler

[19:28] Robinson by the state. And that's a so

[19:31] so the frustration here, Michael, is

[19:34] that we have this vacuum, this void

[19:36] that's been created where the

[19:38] investigation is kind of still ongoing.

[19:40] They're still gathering it, getting it

[19:42] presentable for this May probable cause

[19:44] hearing, but the internet never stops.

[19:47] And Joe Kent resigned when he did, and

[19:49] now he's doing this PR tour. And it

[19:51] really does, and I want to get this

[19:53] through the audience's head. This really

[19:56] does have a potential to not only taint

[19:58] a jury pool, but to undermine the very

[20:02] prosecution of Tyler Robinson, who I am

[20:04] 100% convinced pulled the trigger and

[20:07] killed Charlie Kirk. Could you just

[20:09] speak to that?

[20:12] >> Yeah, sure. I mean, I think, you know,

[20:13] the first thing that's just worth

[20:14] acknowledging is that uh, you know, the

[20:17] American people, all of us have seen,

[20:20] you know, real world conspiracies um,

[20:23] exposed and I mean by conspiracies, you

[20:26] know, illegal secret activity by the

[20:28] government. Russia gate collusion hoax

[20:30] is the most famous. We uncovered a

[20:33] censorship industrial complex uh whereby

[20:36] government officials working with uh you

[20:39] know intelligence community officials or

[20:41] recently departed intelligence community

[20:42] officials pressured social media

[20:44] companies to engage in mass censorship.

[20:46] We saw a cover up of the uh science of

[20:50] co's origins almost certainly in a

[20:53] laboratory in China. So, I think

[20:54] Americans are and that's not even to get

[20:56] into, you know, um other spectacular

[20:59] potential conspiracies like JFK or UAP.

[21:01] >> We've been on all of that stuff as well,

[21:03] Michael. I'm not we like the conspiracy

[21:05] theorists have been proven right about a

[21:06] lot, but that was before you had people

[21:08] that Charlie helped get in these

[21:10] positions in the first place, you know,

[21:13] as part of the investigative arm. You

[21:15] know, I I just Anyways, I'm sorry I cut

[21:17] you off, please.

[21:19] >> Well, no. I mean, I think that's just

[21:20] important context that um I you know,

[21:22] I'm uh I'm my opponent, my critics call

[21:25] me, they accuse me of being an

[21:27] irresponsible conspiracy theorist. So,

[21:29] uh but I also just think it's important,

[21:31] you know, obviously that you have

[21:33] evidence to allege uh potential, you

[21:37] know, you know, really strong evidence

[21:39] to especially behind really strong

[21:40] allegations like this one. And I think a

[21:43] lot of times right now, you know,

[21:45] because the social media and podcasting

[21:48] is so powerful that I think um, you

[21:50] know, it's fun, it's entertaining, um,

[21:53] you know, everybody loves a good

[21:54] conspiracy theory. And, um, I think

[21:56] that's, you know, I I think actually

[21:58] some amount of speculation is necessary.

[22:00] I think you should ask um, asking even

[22:03] outrageous questions is totally

[22:04] appropriate. I think to um I think

[22:06] though that there are consequences

[22:09] potentially if that starts to affect

[22:12] things like juries, you know, and it

[22:14] starts to um you know, I think the point

[22:17] is that we want to have trust in our

[22:19] institutions. It's not that we want to

[22:21] be in a state of permanent distrust. Uh

[22:23] we need to have uh that's why you need a

[22:25] regular changes of government to have,

[22:28] you know, clean house. I I have seen no

[22:30] evidence that anybody in this

[22:33] administration um would do anything. I

[22:35] mean, this is an administration that's

[22:37] absolutely passionate about Charlie

[22:38] Kirk. Um that, you know, I think

[22:41] everybody knows that the reaction from

[22:43] the Trump administration, the White

[22:44] House, uh all the federal agencies was

[22:46] of just shock and horror and outrage.

[22:49] So, I just don't see how you how any

[22:51] broader conspiracy could be either

[22:54] carried out or or covered up in the ways

[22:58] that I think uh Joken is suggesting

[23:01] here. And and so, you know, like like

[23:03] you know, if there there's just really

[23:05] not um there's just not anything here

[23:08] that would suggest that there's a cover

[23:10] up going on that I'm seeing or that

[23:12] anybody else was involved than, you

[23:14] know, than Tyler Robinson, you know, and

[23:16] I think Ken at one point sort of or a

[23:19] couple points maybe in the interview

[23:20] sort of agreed that you don't need

[23:23] anybody else. I mean, Tyler Robinson,

[23:26] um, you know, it appears from the

[23:28] evidence has been released so far,

[23:29] there's ample motive and a lot of

[23:33] evidence that he did it. So, I don't I

[23:35] just don't see the need to add something

[23:37] else to it. And again, you would think,

[23:39] well, maybe it's just for fun and, you

[23:41] know, just, you know, you know,

[23:42] podcasting, entertainment, but in this

[23:45] case, I think the consequences could be

[23:46] quite serious.

[23:49] >> Yeah. And that's what I think we're all

[23:51] terrified of. And I and I just want to

[23:53] make a point here. I am for asking

[23:56] questions. This is why I shared the

[23:58] group chat with Joe Kent in the first

[24:00] place. I'm not afraid of the answer to

[24:02] those questions. If Israel had a hand in

[24:04] killing Charlie, I want to know. I

[24:07] wanted to know.

[24:08] >> What I am telling you is that we've had

[24:10] six months plus since that time to track

[24:13] down all those leads. None of which have

[24:15] been corroborated. None of which have

[24:16] actionable evidence behind. None of

[24:18] which have been presented in any way,

[24:20] shape or form to suggest there was there

[24:23] was uh probable that there's any

[24:25] evidence overwhelming evidence very

[24:28] rapidly zero evidence. That's my point

[24:29] of course currently facing trial.

[24:31] >> Yeah, I am willing to ask the hard

[24:33] questions. We want the truth. But when

[24:36] there's no evidence and there's no facts

[24:38] that would back up those questions, then

[24:40] you have to say, "Okay, moving on." All

[24:42] right. You couldn't corroborate it.

[24:44] Okay. So, I'm not anti- asking

[24:46] questions. I'm not anti-conspiracy

[24:48] theories. I'm I'm open to it all. Okay.

[24:50] But you have to have facts. And the

[24:52] recklessness with which these

[24:54] accusations are being thrown out now has

[24:56] real world implications. And I just it's

[24:59] this brain rot, Michael, that's driving

[25:01] me insane being on the other side of it.

[25:03] I will never look at a conspiracy theory

[25:05] the same way having been on this side of

[25:07] it because people make jumps to conclu

[25:09] they jump to conclusions. They connect

[25:12] disperate pieces of evidence and they

[25:13] connect them in ways that don't make any

[25:15] sense. Uh so anyways, I guess final

[25:18] minute to you, Michael. Um where does

[25:20] this leave us and what do you expect to

[25:22] happen next?

[25:24] >> Yeah, I mean for me I you know having

[25:25] worked on this for now a couple days and

[25:27] really it's been heavy focus on it. I

[25:30] kind of walk away um just reminded that

[25:33] these restrictions on what intelligence

[25:35] agencies can do are really good and

[25:37] important and we wouldn't want to reduce

[25:39] those uh protections. Um I'm not seeing

[25:42] evidence of a wider conspiracy. I don't

[25:45] think anyone's presented uh evidence of

[25:46] that. Um I am very worried about this

[25:50] affecting the trial. Um I think most

[25:53] people when they think about what's

[25:54] occurred now uh would share that

[25:56] concern. And um you know I think that

[26:00] people sometimes want to have a bigger

[26:02] meaning for the Charlie Kirk

[26:03] assassination. Like it couldn't just be

[26:05] one guy. I mean because the

[26:06] assassination is just it's one of the um

[26:10] you know most significant political

[26:12] assassinations in American history. And

[26:14] so to kind of go it was just a guy, you

[26:16] know, um, you know, that had a maybe a

[26:20] furry fetish and a trans identified

[26:22] boyfriend. I think for a lot of people

[26:24] that might feel like not big enough or

[26:26] something or significant enough. And I

[26:28] would say it is big enough. It the

[26:30] what's I mean Charlie Kirk's whole

[26:32] legacy is tied up with him not going

[26:34] along with the idea that he needed to

[26:37] agree with a belief that you could

[26:39] change your sex or that men could become

[26:40] women.

[26:41] >> It's a powerful insight, Michael. We got

[26:43] to wrap it up. That's a powerful

[26:44] insight.