What Do Leaked Charlie Kirk Texts ACTUALLY Mean? | Guests: Sulaiman Ahmed, Jenna Ellis | Ep 369

There we go. Good. There we go. We're back at it. Sorry, guys. I know. Uh, you know, sometimes you have technical difficulties. You know, we just got to uh learn how to I guess uh make it work. Do we have our guest? >> Oh, we might as well bring him on. All right. Uh, with all that being said, let's welcome on our guest, Sulam Ahmed. Sulleain, uh, are you there, Sulamine? >> Yeah, I'm here. How you doing? >> I'm doing horrible. My show's not working. We don't have any audio and uh, we don't I mean, no, I'm doing horrible, dude. I'm losing my job and in 2 weeks I don't literally I mean I mean I I'm about to start drinking. I know in your culture that's not really socially acceptable, but I mean in mine I don't have any other choice. >> Well, it's pure haram and yeah, I've had technical difficulties myself as well. I had to set it all set all the system up myself and it was very difficult. >> Well, Sullean, you look good and I appreciate you coming on. I'm sorry that I'm in a bad mood because of all this, but you know, Sullean, you're very outspoken online and and you know, I think that you and I, we probably agree on a lot of stuff. I'm sure there's other stuff we disagree on, but can you tell me right now your position when it comes to what is happening with this latest ceasefire deal? Does this look like something that's actually serious? I mean, can we trust Israel to, you know, abide by it? Can we trust Hamas to abide by it? What What is your opinion of this uh most recent ceasefire agreement that allegedly Monday the hostages will be start uh will they will release them on Monday? Allegedly. Yeah, that's an excellent question and I have huge concerns about the ceasefire agreement and the reason for it is is because if you look at the history um Israel has consistently not followed the ceasefire agreements and what we've seen is that this has happened time and time and time again. Now if you look at this specific agreement, what it entails is that Hamas release all of the hostages, all 48 hostages within 72 hours. Israel remove themselves about 48 to 70% away from their current position but still within Gaza. We had Donald Trump come out in a video where he he was asked a question that can you guarantee that Israel won't bomb Gaza again? And he said no, I can't guarantee it. So already he's given us an indication that there is plans to ensure that they basically get their hostages back and then continue to bomb Gaza. So I have I have huge concerns, >> you know, and and for me what what where I kind of fall on the situation is I do believe Israel should have a right to exist. And I don't know if you believe that, but I do believe that. But at the same exact time, it's an asymmetrical power struggle. They have all the power. They have all the weapons. They have all the nuclear. They have all the control of the death and destruction. So they're the they're supposed to be the adults in the room, you know? So they take all the responsibility. Like I don't get mad if you know a little kid I'm not trying to call guys little kids but in this struggle they have all the power so they need to be the adults and I don't think that they've handled that power very well. So that's my major critique and I don't like seeing you know hospitals get bombed. I obviously don't like seeing schools get bombed. So is it is it okay to have a nuanced position or what is the correct position in your opinion on this Israel Palestine conflict? >> So I'm for Israel having their own land. The issue I have is when they're using their power to oppress other people and they're taking that land by stealing it off somebody else. That's where the major issue lies. And so when you look at that situation, no, I don't accept it. And when you look at the when you're mentioning the big kid and the small kid, in reality, it's Israel who's the small kid. This >> entity has only been in that region for 80 years around less than 80 years. >> Well, this is a better example. It's like the small kid, but they have America as the big bully. You know what I mean? you know, that's why they're the the more powerful one. But I understand what you're saying. Sorry to cut you off. >> Yeah. And so and you're completely right about that. They've got control of the United States of America and it's only based on that control that they've continue to exist. If you look at historically every single incident other than 48 where there's been a situation where the right where their existence has been bought into question, it's always been the United States of America who's come in and saved them. So I believe, look, at the end of the day, what's my opinion? I believe in a one-state solution. And the reason I believe in a one-state solution is because of western values. And this is the irony of it. They tell us about how they believe in western values. They claim that they believe in Judeo-Christian values. But then when you look at it, they don't believe in it. Because in the west, what are we taught? We're taught that all man is equal irrespective of race, religion, or creed. It doesn't matter who you are, what you are, you are equal to another man. And that's clearly not happening there. Because in a one-state solution, irrespective of who's in charge, whether it's Israel, whether it's Palestine, all man would be equal. And that's what it says in the Hamas charter. And they don't want that because they want this supremacy. They want this idea that they are better than everybody else. And hence why you see it from their laws, their rules, and their actions. >> What about this conspiracy, Sulam? I hope I don't get cancelceled for this conspiracy. What about this conspiracy? You see, Israel has been doing um these red heer rituals and um they say that they did a practice one, but they did it to every single protocol that is supposed to be done for a real one. And then I was watching this scholar, I don't even want to say his name because I could get cancelled for that. But he was saying in order for their prophet to come back, their god to come back, the whole world basically has to be pitted against Israel. That's the only way for them to, I guess, get God's favor to protect him is the whole world has to be against them. Now, this is just a conspiracy. I don't know if I necessarily agree with that. And I think is I think Jewish people are very smart people. I'm saying and they're losing this PR war. They could be handling it better, but are they doing like, you know, 5D chess? Maybe they want to lose a propaganda war. Maybe they want to have people that are mad at him so that it will actually usher in um you know the this the third coming or second coming whoever you know you are however you want to call it of God. Um I think it's unlikely. What you do see is when it comes to the religious Jews, the ultraorththodox Jews, they're against what's happening and they're doing it solely based on their own religious text. Because according to the religious text, the third temple should not be built until certain esqueological events occur, which is that the messiah returns. And so this is the issue they have. This is why they've not taken over Alexa mosque. This is why they've not dismantled it. And their belief is that if they were to dismantle it, they would be basically not have their own state for another thousand years. So from a religious perspective, it doesn't make sense. Now, it could be that they've kind of trying to engineer the situation and create the esqueological events for it to occur. But I mean if they are trying to do that that should be huge concern for everybody because even according to Ashkanazi Jewish text they say what they say during the end of times there's going to be a situation where the go Gentiles will be this will be you know they will get their comeuppances and what will that be well the ones that were nice to them which is the Muslims open like they didn't have any issues with the Muslims until 48 they actually were friends so the ones that were nice to them >> they're going to get to be slaves they'll get that opportunity they'll be slaves but the ones that were mean to them, which is the Christians who threw them out of a huge number of countries, who oppressed them, who tried to kill them, who try who tried to eradicate them, they're going to cease to exist. They're going to be completely annihilated. So, this is like the esqueological text, which is kind of a bit problematic. >> I know. And I could just kind of see when it comes to all oxa mosque though, and that mosque is on, you know, one of the holiest, most holy site in the world. You're telling me though, according to their order of operations, I thought that they would need to destroy that mosque in order for the third temple to come. So, you're telling me that God has to come back on Earth before they're able to blow up that mosque? Because wouldn't that potentially just kind of start the real civil world war if they blew up the all oxam mosque? That would that would actually cause uh you know, people shooting each other in the street. I think >> I think yeah, that would annoy a lot of people for sure. I'm not a big Look, I know it's controversial, but I think a human life is more important than any kind of religious building, right? So, but I can see why something like that would cause an emotional impact on people and therefore there could be issues that occur. But this is why they've not done it because it actually goes against the es esquetology and this is like the so I don't see that foresee that happening at the moment. I think there's going to be other events that occur like you mentioned the red heer and whether that's legitimate and then there'll be certain events occur and then it'll be their it'll be the return of their messiah but I believe their messiah is not god their messiah because they don't believe in like anthropomorphism as far the general normal position or the normative position but they believe that obviously there will be the return of the messiah well and I do have struggles with that because I in the old testament I mean it sounds like it's a monotheistic god but is Judaism polytheism do they have multiple gods gods like you know like the Greeks had multiple gods. What is how is is I don't know even though my last name is Stein I don't know enough about Judaism. Is it a monotheism religion or a polytheistic religion? >> You're betraying your people. Uh but um so actually Judaism went through a historical change right and this is why some people may argue obviously I read a lot of literature irrespective of what it is. This is why some of the argument is that these are not the real Israelites. The reason is because contemporary Judaism actually went through a change. Initially, contemporary Judaism actually had two gods. It was a polytheistic religion and then over time they removed the second god and made it into a monotheistic religion. And the current iteration of Judaism depending on obviously every sect's different but the mainstream position is actually monotheistic and very not anthropomorphic. And that's why that's actually one of the things I've respected about Judaism is that kind of theological position which is a nonthrop anthropomorphic which means not giving God a physical entity and then it being monotheistic. >> Well, and I kind of like that idea because I do think God is not like this physical being. It's something that our brains aren't even able to comprehend what God is because it's such, you know, he or she or whatever it is is such a special entity. Now, you know, you can get into narcissism, you can get into a lot of crazy stuff when it comes to, you know, occult Christianity, but when it comes to the battle of Judaism versus Christianity, or excuse me, versus Roman Catholicism versus Islam, I was shocked to see Adam King say on a podcast that to him as a Jew, he would rather, if he had to take out of a religion or take out a religion, that he viewed Roman Catholicism as a bigger threat to Judaism than Islam. I mean, like you said that they were friends since 1948. Why can't we kind of fix this situation? If really, if the Roman Catholics are the ones that, you know, killed Jesus and yada yada, why are the Muslims and and Jews fighting so much when really the Roman Catholics are their biggest enemy according to Adam King? >> Yeah. And so, in terms of your explanation of like God, that is the Muslim position as well. And and what Adam King said is he's being extremely honest and actually I think he's trying to backtrack from that position because he's seeing that that's upsetting a lot of people. But that's the real Jewish opinion because for them Catholics have been their enemy for thousands of years and they see them as the major problem. And so uh in reality he's just being honest. Now in terms of what's happened why did Muslims become enemy and why did you know why do why do why do they dislike Christians? Well the reason in my view and this again this is my interpretation of it is simple. So they went through the Holocaust and I obviously think the Holocaust was u you know they were oppressed in the Holocaust but they also believe that they were oppressed in the hol holocaust and they when they came out of that thought never again like we're never going to have a situation where we allow this to happen again. And so what they did was put things in place to ensure it doesn't happen again. So what were those things that they put in place? So they looked at Muslims who could possibly be a threat and they looked at white Christians and thought they could be a threat. How do we deal with these people to make sure that they're no longer a threat anymore? So with the white Christians, they thought, look, ideologically they're not very strong, but physically they're strong. So we'll manipulate and control their nations and cause population collapse, cause feminism, liberalism, and all these different ideologies and weaken them physically. And that's why you're seeing a huge population collapse, rise of feminism, the destruction of the white race. And then with Muslims, they thought, wait, ideologically, they're very strong in terms of they'll they won't give up their religion, but physically they're not very strong. And so therefore, we'll destroy them by physically bombing them. And that's why they've had this plan of taking over the entire Middle East. They've been bombing the Middle East. They've been expanding and the aim is like the great Israel project. So I think that's the psychological reason why they don't agree. But in terms of from a specifically religious perspective, of course, like Islam and Judaism from a legalistic perspective is very similar. And then Islam and Christianity is very similar from a theological perspective. Well, where do you fall when it comes to the idea that if you do criticize Jewish people or the state of Israel specifically? You're called an anti-semite, but am I crazy? Because I would think that a European Jew from Germany would be less seemetic than a Palestinian from Palestine. Is that crazy to think that? >> It's not crazy. And actually you've indicated the kind of weakness in their argument because they say that Israel is their land but what's the basis of that? So if the basis is solely uh religion it means anyone can convert to Judaism and basically go back to Israel >> which is kind of true though you kind of can right. I think they have a thing where like you basically say I'm Jewish now and they almost give you citizenship in Israel. I think it's like that easy. I saw a Tik Tok of it, but maybe I'm just, you know, spreading misinformation. But I I swear I saw a video of a person who's like, "I'm not even Jewish, but they invited me to come live here and took, you know, paid for my flight and I moved to Israel because they need people so bad." >> Yeah. So that doesn't happen because if that was the case, you could have a Nigerian basically saying, "Oh, I've turned Jewish. Let me in. They're not going to let him in." Right? Let's be clear on that. So it's not definitely a religious basis. I mean, sorry, it's definitely not a religious basis. So then the question becomes, what could the other basis be? Now they say it's because of genetics. I'm guessing that's why you say you're Jewish, right? Because of genetics. don't believe that. It doesn't sound like you actually believe in the religious of religion of Judaism or maybe >> I actually was baptized. Yeah. No, I don't I don't My grandfather was Jewish. So, my mother I didn't have a mom that was Jewish. So, technically I guess I'm not a Jew, but I have, you know, Jew in me. So, I'm not anti-Jew, but I'm not uh I'm not I don't I've never had a whatever bar mitzvah. I've never done any >> any So, your basis of claiming that you're a Jew is solely based on ethnicity as opposed to religion. >> But the problem with ethnicity is like how do you decide someone something? It makes no sense. Is it like this kind of one drop rule? Like you have one drop of Jew, one drop of Jew and now you're a Jew. Like this is kind of the line we're going down now. Right. Right. And if that's the basis then no one believes that. Like for example myself if if you I did my um 23 and me and I'm like 12% Celtic now. I don't look it obviously not don't look white enough but no one would claim that based on that 12% now I have a um a kind of claim to the United Kingdom or a claim to any other nation just based on the genetics. So the whole notion of some kind of genetical connection based on a one dropable rule is completely an antithesis to what they claims are. It makes no sense. >> Why is 23 and me basically illegal to get in Israel, but anybody in America can get it anytime. Why is that? >> Well, why do you Well, we know the reason why because if someone like you was to possibly take the genetic test, I'm guessing your percentage would be quite low. And then the problem becomes like it comes to the point that I'm mentioning. It's kind of proving the point I'm saying, which is wait a sec, Alex Stein, let's do a genetic test. What? He's only 8% Jew. Like, are we letting people in with 1% one drop rule? And then we see what the problems is. >> Okay. Now, now I want to ask you a hard question. Um, I get to represent Turning Point USA, so I don't really want to get too deep into the conspiracies, and I know everybody is talking about it. Candace's show is getting millions and millions of views. Charlie's show is still continuing to get millions and millions of views with Andrew Kovette and Blake Nef um hosting it. these text messages that came out where Charlie Kirk said that he was starting to um turn away from the pro-Israel cause and then I thought that was very surprising when Candace first shared the tweets. There's a coordinated effort by a lot of people to say the text messages were fake and then the next day Andrew Kovette confirmed the text messages were real and I thought that was a pretty big deal because these text messages kind of paint a picture different than what other people were painting online. Where do you fall on the truth around this? Now, I honestly do not think Israel killed Charlie Kirk, but at the same time, I don't know what the CIA m I don't know. I don't know what happened. Did Tyler Robertson, did he did he operate solely alone? I find that incredibly hard to believe and I don't believe it. So, that's kind of where I'm at when it comes to evidence. Now, when you see these text messages, don't you think it would be stupid for Israel to try to kill Charlie Kirk? Because they they still, even if he was trying to turn his back, don't you get more with, you know, what does it say? Sugar than vinegar. Like, wouldn't it have been better to try to keep on trying to work with him than try to take him out? Sulleainne, because I feel like he's more powerful on his side than dead, if that makes sense. >> He's definitely more powerful on their side. I do believe I do believe Israel did it. Obviously, I don't believe in these kind of wacky conspiracy theories that are coming out, like for example, blown up pages and drone attacks and signals and all these kind of things. And I think those are being pushed intentionally um to basically make people who have genuine questions or genuine positions sound conspiratorial and this has always done in terms of all operations. You look at 9/11 for example. We know Israel was involved but then people were like there was no there was no hijackers, there was no planes and what that was doing in the end was making the conspiracy theory so wacky that no one was allowed to question it. And now that we know the truth about 911, we know a lot of the hijackers were hijackers were being handled by Mossad. So it kind of not only did the conspiracy theory make it wacky, but it hides away sometimes certain important elements and questions. So why I'm saying that is when I bring it back to this situation. So there's two important elements. I'll try and explain as fast as I can. I'm speaking fast anyway. >> Speaking fast, but go ahead. So there but just one thing I want you to clarify this. You do think Israel killed Charlie Kirk. You believe that with all your heart? >> Not with all my heart obviously because we never can know for >> what evidence. And I'm not I'm saying what evidence because I would like to see it and I've looked. I've watched Candace. They just I would in my mind I keep kind of like debating has Israel killed important people? Yes, you know their MSAD has. But why would they even risk taking out a per like why would they even unless they wanted to get caught and they wanted us to dislike them? That's like the only thing in my head. It's like because I do feel like with people that are looking into this, we will get the truth with all this one day. >> Possibly. Possibly not. But okay, let's go. Why would they do it motive? >> So what is the motive for why Israel would do it? Okay. So, from the sources I've spoke to who are close to uh Charlie Kirk and this has been confirmed by Max Bloomath all sources as well, the claim is and what I've been told is that the biggest issue that Israel had a problem with and what was largely concerning about Charlie Kirk was he was against the war with Iran. And what I mean by that, he was against the US being involved in the war with Iran. And so in the first war with Iran, it was 12 days long. I covered it. I think we had the most views. And what we saw was that Israel received a huge amount of damage. And if it wasn't for the US getting involved and if the war had continued for a week, Israel, Israel may have no longer existed or they may have been forced to use the nuclear bombs. Now, what I'm being told is within Trump's regime, all of them are pro war and pro war with Iran. Whether it's Hexath, whether it's Vance, whether it's H. Rubio, they all support. And apparently Charlie Kirk was the only one who was against the war in Iran. So you've got that aspect and then we believe and I do believe that there is going to be another war with Iran possibly in the next few months and if that war happens they no longer have the surprise surprise elements they had before because in the previous time Trump assured Iran they said Israel's not going to bomb you. He gave them a guarantee they were meant to have a meeting on Sunday. Israel bombed on the Friday. Israel bombed through Mossad agents uh on the ground. The large success came from within Iran and that surprise attack shook Iran for a day or two. Then they basically recouped, rec calibrated and then attacked Israel and you saw the huge amount of damage that happened against Israel. So once you understand that context, you think another war with Iran, it's impossible that Israel could beat Iran on its own. And so if Israel can't beat Iran on its own, it does require US assistance. And so if it requires US assistance, they can't have somebody counter signaling and stopping a war with Iran because the next war with Iran without US means Israel ceases to exist. And we've seen in the past when anything that impacts their existence such as JFK and Deona and then and the observation of the and nuclear bombs and him registering a far they were willing to take him out. So there is this existential threat which would cause the existence to cease to exist. And in terms of like killing him because of like him turning. I'm saying that's less of a stronger motive. I agree with you on that one. >> Yeah. Because I got that's what I'm saying. Just him turning on the cause. I don't think that's enough because I really I I I mean I'm not best friends with Charlie, but I feel like I know Charlie well enough that he's not going to go out there and publicly say anything bad about Israel. You know, he would have a very nuanced professional way to say it. Even if he had a critique of it, he would say it in a way that wouldn't probably demonize Israel because he's that's he's a professional. That's the type of guy he is. And he respect and had a bunch of respect for Israel. He might not have liked everything Benjamin Netanyahu did, but he definitely had respect for the Old Testament, a book that he liked and you know, a lot of the Jewish customs and religions. So now, let me ask you this. This is the one thing. A lot of people put the blame on Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu. And I get it because they do want to accelerate a lot of this stuff. But how much blame because you said something very important. You said that it was only Charlie that was counter signal signaling JD Vance, Pete Hagsath, basically whole entire cabinet wants to go and bomb Iran. Could it be the real conspiracy is that America almost uses Israel as a proxy to start war so that we can spend more money on our military-industrial complex? Like because a lot of people like yourself and and people online give us the impression like, "Oh, it's Israel the tail that wags the dog." But isn't it really more likely that, you know, we're the dog wagging the tail of Israel? Isn't that the more likely scenario or is that is that a conspiracy in your opinion? >> I mean that's the impression that people give, right? But in reality and this is what many people believe. This is people in the Middle East believe that believe this for a very long time until we've had the access to knowledge information on social media where we're able to analyze these things. And no, I think Israel is completely in control of the United States of America. And I can just give a minor example. I'm not going to go into Apac because I'm sure you know about it. I'm not going to talk about the various controls they have of the US and the UK. They controlled both nations. But I'm going to talk specifically about just a recent incident that happened. Israel bombed Qatar. So Qatar is a US ally. Qatar is subservient to the United States of America. They're literally like America's poodle. They gave uh Donald Trump a $400 million plane. They gave United States of America one over a trillion dollars. They've kept the biggest US base in Qatar. So in the region, the biggest Middle Eastern base, it's not in Israel, it's in Qatar. Um, and so when you look at all of these things, and by the way, this whole claim about Hamas being in Qatar, that was because Obama asked for it. Obama said, "Look, we need mediators who are and a place for to to do mediation. Can you take in these Hamas guys so we can mediate with them?" So, they agreed with Obama to take them in. And so, and by the way, I'm not procar. I disagree with them. I think they've got too many contracts and deals with >> real quick, when you when you're talking about Barack, you're talking about the $30 million that Israel funneled to Qatar to funnel to Hamas. or is this a different thing? >> No, no. I'm talking about if you look at Israel and Qatar themselves, they have a number of uh and and by the way, I don't agree with that one point as well, but I'll come to that in a second. >> Well, you're saying that that's not true that that um Israel is funding uh Hamas through Qatar? >> No, I don't believe so. >> Okay, good. I've just heard that rumor. I'm happy that's not true. I've just heard. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, that is an argument people make that look Israel propped up Hamas. Hamas is like an entity that is there for Israel. I disagree with I know there's some people who hold that position within the pro Palestinian movement. I disagree with I think Hamas is a result of oppression on occupation and then they decided and they decided that the only way to deal with this is to physically resist and you've seen that when you don't physically resist against Israel for example the West Bank what happens you lose your land anyway you lose your property anyway and you no you slowly slowly cease to exist but in terms of um the separate question that you had um in terms of like Qatar so no Qatar has got major dealings with Israel both from a like energy perspective from a business perspective like I disagree with all of that. So I'm not like someone who's pro kata like I'll I'll I'll call out Qatar as well but my point is Qatar is a US ally which is something that you see that Qatar in my view is subservient to the US US and yet Israel bombed him and there was no response from Qatar. There was no nothing from the United States of America. The least the most Trump could do was get Netany Netanyahu on a call to say look I'm sorry which was kind of a joke. Imagine it was the other way around. Imagine Qatar bombed Israel. What would the reaction have been? what would the situation have been? So that's just gives you an example. >> It would have been big uh it would have been big big news. Now um Sulman, I'm happy to have you on real quick before we let you go. We are I want to welcome on our next guest. Now she is a great attorney. She is a really she's for me I feel like she got targeted. I know that she's gotten a lot of pressure from people on the conservative side, but she's always been very nice to me. I want to welcome on the one and the only Jenna Ellis. Jenna, how are you doing? Jenna, are you familiar with Sulleane? And welcome to the show. >> Thanks so much, Alex. Big fan of yours as well. And yeah, Sulamon and I have been in Maru Nef spaces together. So, good to see you again. >> Yeah, great to see you, Jenna. And I do agree that you were oppressed by the uh by the system. >> Well, and J and Jenna, I know you're a big uh Israel supporter and I really appreciate that because I think they do need our support, but how do we have a nuance conversation, Jenn and we're not going to talk about this whole time, just why we have Suland. How do we have a nuance conversation if we can critique America's government? How do we kind of help this situation? I know Trump's trying to do the ceasefire, but it's like how do we have a nuance conversation about this topic without uh you know being considered a racist or a bigot or you know anti-Israel? >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think we do exactly what Charlie Kirk was trying to do, which is bring together people who have opposing views on it in good faith and actually have a debate that doesn't presume some of these uh assumptions of others like you're bigoted or you're racist if you think that America first means America only or that uh if you are pro-Israel that somehow you are not America first. I think that there is so much within the conservative movement that is really hostile toward each other. And one of the things that Charlie did uh not even two months before he was assassinated was actually brought Josh Hammer and uh Dave Smith together for a debate on this question because this is one of the biggest questions right now among the America First movement and the overall MAGA movement and honestly within the evangelical American church as well is what obligation if any does the United States have to support Israel? And that is a policy question. It's a relevant question but also as a Christian myself I believe it's a theological question as well. You have to go to the history of western civilization. You have to go back to this without just being hostile toward the other side. We need to debate this openly and freely and actually discuss why this matters. >> Now now I want to go to you Sullean. 1979 uh that is when Islamic law came into power and it was unanimously voted. I think it was 92% people wanted Islamic law and that now people don't realize Iran and Saudi Arabia have a huge rivalry because of this and you know the adoption of it. Has the Middle East gotten better since the adoption of Islamic law? Because me selfishly I kind of agree with with Jenna. Israel is a kind of a westernized European version of the Middle East. But isn't that good? Don't we kind of want to, you know, westernize the Middle East or is that in your opinion like gentrification and that's a bad thing? No, I I agree with Jenna in the sense of a western values. I mean, that's the reason why I made the argument that there should be equality in the country. I'd say I disagree with you that Israel is a western ideal country. If you look at it that the antithesis of what we learned in terms of what those values were, which were based on Christianity. I agree. And and I do believe Christianity and Judaism and Islam in terms of a value perspective are similar. But in terms of if you look at it from the history perspective, the constitution was based on the Magna Carta, which was based on um which was based on Christian values essentially. But what is that? That all man is equal. But then if you look at Israel, they've got supremacist laws. If you're Palestinian as an example, I even if your parents or grandparents were from that land, you're not allowed back in. But if you're a Jew, irrespective of not having any connection to the land, you're immediately allowed back in the land. I think that's an antithesis of Western values. In terms of the Middle East, generally speaking, they don't have Islamic law. You're I think you're speaking about um you're talking about Iran. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I guess I'm saying, you know, that I'm just kind of using that as an example. That's kind of when, you know, 1979 is when it became more Islamified, right? And then I think that's kind of when the strife came. You know, before 1979, you know, it wasn't everything was much more secular in the governments in the Middle East. >> Um, they were secular and yet they were still in war, right? So, if you look at it, we had the 1967 war, we had the 1973, there was war after war after war when it pertained to Israel. And not just Israel, there were other wars in the region as well. So, I mean, it wasn't peace before that and neither was there peace after that. And I don't think it's because of Islamic law. And by the way, I'm like I'm I agree with Jenna. Like, I'm willing to have these conversations about Islamic law because I think there's this kind of misunderstanding of what Islamic law is because Americans have been conditioned by the Zionist lobby to believe certain things about Islam when they're not true. That's one of the things I push back on. So, like for example, now, what is it about Islamic law that people find problematic? Whenever I ask people, they're only able to explain. So, for example, gears. >> Well, I know I kind of like some of Islamic law. Well, like women can't drive. That would be good. Sorry. Go ahead, Jenna. >> And and what I have a problem with with Sharia law specifically is that Islam is based on essentially a theocracy. You're literally an infidel if you don't believe in the Muslim faith. And to say that Israel is not a westernized civilization is utterly laughable because America was founded on the Judeo-Christian worldview. America and Western civilization would not exist without Israel, without monotheism, without the God of the Bible, without an understanding that equality and religious freedom is actually built on an understanding that every human being is made in the image of the God of the Bible. Uh that is Yahweh and the image of Christ. And that because of that, we all have inherent dignity and worth. And because of that, we can all freely debate these ideas. We couldn't have this conversation and freely debate these ideas. I couldn't participate as a woman in an Islamic country in Iran. I would have to be uh covered. My hair would have to be covered. All of these other things. But the main problem that I have with Sharia law is the fact that it requires a belief in the Muslim religion where Israel and the United States and it's not just based on the Magna Carta. It's based on a Judeo-Christian founding that comes from the God of the Bible is that church and state are in fact separate jurisdictions. doesn't mean that Christians or people of faith can't participate in government. It means that the church does not control the government. That is utterly distinct from uh what Sharia law and the Islamic faith professes and that's utterly distinct from western civilization values. >> So just to respond to both of those points. Yeah. Just to respond to both of those points in terms of your claims that Islam is a theocracy. That's untrue. Like and I'll explain to you why. Because of course to be a Muslim you need to profess the faith. But just like to be a Christian, you need to profess Christianity. Just like to be a Jew, you profess Judaism. Actually, what makes Islam and Christianity different to Judaism? Irrespective of your race, religion, you can convert into those religions because it's about your belief. Judaism, you can't do so. It's a very complex situation to convert into Judaism. In Judaism, you have this concept of Jew and Gentile. There is a tiered system. In Islam, there's actually very different tiers within there. And what I mean by that is you could be a Muslim and then there's a different conversation about people of the book which is Jews and Christians and then there's different people about a conversation about atheists which is kafir. There's all of these different conversations. So again when you're making these claims about Sharia we actually have different and within Jew and for example within Sharia law you're allowed to marry you're allowed to eat the food of a Jew and Christian there is different rules when it comes to Jews and Christians where they are considered different to disbelievers. In Judaism you don't have that. It's either Jew or Gentile. And so, and when you talk about Judeo-Christian values, that is completely Zionist propaganda, something that was created. And if you look at the >> It's literally in the Bible. It's literally in the Bible. It's not propaganda. It's not in the Bible. Do you want to let me just finish the Bible? >> We're about to let you go. So, just finish your point because because I want to speak to Jenna about some other stuff, too. And she probably didn't expect to get a debate, but please finish your point and then then you'll say goodbye. >> We should have this conversation another time. So, Larry, let's do it. But in terms of Judeo-Christian values, this was something that was created after the Holocaust in order to integrate Christians into that. Jud Judaism had nothing to do with the creation of the United States of America other than control it, occupy it, and take over it. And that's the reality of it. It's like, for example, during the Holocaust, Jews went into the United States of America complaining about it. They didn't believe them. So this idea and actually if you look at the history, Jews and Christians fought each other for 2,000 years. So they never had this kind of consensus. There was never these Judeo-Christian values. This was created after 1948. If you look at the usage of that word, it propels after the 40s after 48 because of this reason because it was something that was promoted and uh propagated by the Zionist control media. >> So it was a controversy for 2,000 years but it was created after 1948. That isn't the math isn't mathing right there. But without without Jews and without the Old Testament Israel, we would not have Christ. The difference between uh the Jewish faith and Christianity is that Christians accept the person of Christ who literally lived as Messiah where non- messianic Jews do not. They're still looking toward the Messiah. But in terms of the values, in terms of the monotheism, in terms of uh how we understand who the person of God is. We all believe in the Old Testament, we understand that it's just the distinction is who is the person of Christ. And now for Christians, that is the entire debate. That's everything that uh you must be saved and when you believe that Christ is Messiah and so Jews don't accept that unless they are Messianic Jews. That's the distinction. But in terms of the valuebased premise, everything that comes from the Judeo-Christian faith as our founders recognized is built on that system that we would not have Christianity but for the Jews. >> Yeah. Jews believe that Jews believe Jew Jews killed Jesus. Jews believe that he's a rebel. Jews believe in the Talmud that he's burning his own extrement. There's clearly a distinction and a lack of respect when it comes to Jesus within Judaism. And that's completely different to Islam because actually in Islam, Jesus is a prophet. He is what we believe as Muslims is that he's been divinely inspired. Christians believe he's divine. Jews believe he's a rebel. So even this kind of consistency that you're claiming doesn't exist. They do not view Jesus in the manner that you're claiming. And this is meant to be the Christian God, which is kind of hilarious, I find. Well, and that's where Islam to say that Jesus was just a prophet and to deny his divinity is actually disrespectful to the Christian faith. So, it's not to say that Islam somehow accepts the Christian truth more so. Um, that's actually an absolutely false claim. >> Of course, they don't believe in the Christian truth or they would be Christian. They be I'm talking about the respect of Jesus and believing that he's divinely inspired. Whereas Jews, >> respect for him as a prophet and saying that he's fully man is actually disrespectful. That's not what we believe. That's diametrically. >> Well, we can all admit that. >> What about him being a rebel? What about him being a rebel? What about the fact that he's in hell burning? >> Yeah, but let's just admit that they don't listen. Uh, Jews don't >> they don't accept him as Messiah, but that's not the point here. We understand that they're distinct faith systems. And so, Christians would say that Jews who are non- Messianic do not accept Christ as Messiah. So we are distinct face but the premise here is the value system and whether or not Israel is a western nation and those values that are rooted in old testament law understanding the Abrahamic covenant why America supports Israel is that we believe that those covenants that were in Genesis 11 and 12 that the literal descendants of Abraham not Ishmael which is the whole uh Palestinian nation that is why this has been at war for 6,000 years they don't have a right to the physical land the Israel the Israelites do the literal descendants of Abraham. And so when we're talking about supporting Israel from a theological perspective and we're talking about western values, when we're talking about those things, yeah, we can talk about the distinctions between siriology or the premise or the doctrine of salvation, that's a distinct conversation from whether or not the nation of is uh of Israel supports western values and whether America would exist without the nation of Israel. >> Yeah. And so they don't basically follow Western values. You can quite see it bas see it based on their follow values. But real quick, I just say they follow more western values than any other country in the region. >> No, they don't because what are No, no, they don't. What are western values? Maybe you mean LGBTQ. Maybe those little western values values at all. >> Well, they are western values that have been created and presented within the west by by basically Zionists in order to destroy the west because in reality, yes, because Christianity was the basis that well I can't prove it you guys basically >> Christianity was the basis in Genesis 2 and three Christianity God made male male and female is based on Christianity our rights come from God our creator not our declaration of independence >> so where does LGBTQ come into this >> the LGBTQ comes in from the left it's not a facet of Christianity and it is not something >> that's my point so you're not pro you're proving my point because you just said previously and it showed the major contradiction you LGBTQ ideology is part of western values. I'm saying actually >> I said that I said that but I was kind of being sarcastic because that is what America's about is being gay. But go ahead >> because in reality when you look at the UK and you look at the United States of America it was based on religious doctrine and LGBTQ isn't part of that. And that's what I would say Israel purports and presents. And if you look at it through the media they've destroyed western society through the liberalism, feminism, LGBTQ because they control the media. They call control Hollywood. They control all aspect. >> That's actually Qatar. Speaking of Qar, they have put over $3 billion if funding into the United States. They're not a puppet or a poodle of the United States. They're actually trying to control the West. And I would encourage everybody. Where's the politicians that are controlled by Qatar? Where's the politicians that are controlled by Qatar? Where's the politicians who lobbyed when Israel bombed Qatar? Like this whole basis is illogical. And when you make those arguments, you just lack credibility. >> Okay, time out. Time out. Let me just say this. Israel is the greatest country on earth. I love Benjamin Netanyahu and that's how you make $7,000. Okay, now Sullean, you got to get out of here. How can you shout out your support and what do you want to say before you go? >> Thank you. >> Oh, but where can people find you? Shout out your Twitter. Uh he's got a big Twitter account. Everybody needs to follow him. >> Yeah, I've um you can find me on Twitter, which is I stream on party.com, which is a regular news show Monday to Friday at 7:00 p.m. Eastern. So do check me out on that as well. >> Congratulations, Sullean. Party.com. I know a lot of big people are on there. Uh we love Sneo, a lot of people are on there. So Sulleane, thank you for joining us. We got to have this conversation again and we'll connect you and Jenna so you guys can do this in a more formal and long connected thanks. Okay, perfect. Okay, good. Good. Good. You guys already connected. All right. Well, thank you S. I'll talk to you again soon. Jenna, thank you so much for joining us. Now, Jenna, we got to talk about that was great. Really, I really appreciate it. I'm sorry that you kind of had to do that, but you obviously you're a professional. You know how to handle yourself when it comes to um you know uh conjecture and debate and everything. So, let me ask you a really hard question. >> Important. >> Let me but let me ask you the hard question. There's this guy that's been getting a lot of hate that I like and my dad loves I'm actually kind of mad that my dad likes this kid so much. Brillin Hollyand I, you know, is it Brandlin or Brelin? I feel like I want I don't want to say it incorrect, but he is a he's basically the newest guy on the scene since the terrible tragic passing of Charlie and now no a million Brandins can't fill Charlie's shoes. But that's not really Breeland's job to do that. But he's getting a lot of hate online. I don't think all of it's fair. maybe, you know, a little bit of teasing because that's when you that's what you get for putting yourself in the public eye. You and I both know that. So, where do you fall on Breland and uh is it fair that he's getting a lot of negative publicity for trying to do something good? >> Well, I've known Brilan since he was about 13 and so he's not a newcomer to the scene. He actually started the Truth Gazette when he was 11 years old. And one of the first interviews that he ever did was with Charlie Kirk and also Candace Owens, which is kind of ironic in today's in today's media narrative. but uh he connected with me when I worked for the Trump campaign and I connected him with uh you know a lot of different members uh and media spokespeople from the Trump campaign. So he's actually been around for a really long time. A lot of people are just now discovering him because he's going to campuses and he's trying to have an open mic situation and talk about a lot of these different values. So um I agree with you that I think that some that a lot of the media criticism is unwarranted. I think some of it is. I think he's had kind of some, you know, bad optics like this photo that you're putting up right now being on the private plane. You know, that's just one of the things that I loved about Charlie is that he never made it about himself. He never made it about his his lifestyle. He never made it about anything with that. That's just, you know, a that that was a mistake for sure. >> Let me cut you off. That's a good thing to get canceled for for being on a private jet. I mean, I know it definitely doesn't, you know, humanize him and makes him look like an elitist, but like this is really a small potato scandal at the end of the day. Oh, you flew on a private jet. something that people might criticize, but we would all like to do. You know what I mean? >> Yeah. Well, I mean, and this is where I think that so many people in their anger in the aftermath of Charlie Kirk's assassination are coming down really harshly on some of these really young kids who don't deserve as much criticism as much as they deserve mentorship. And so, I actually really respect Ryland for engaging the debate, being willing to go out and speak on college campuses. And listen, you know, when you and I were 18, I don't think that I could have spoken as clearly as Brian. And I certainly didn't have the media following that he did. And so, we need to give him a little bit of grace. Now, is he going to be perfect on everything? Absolutely not. But if the whole idea is to say, "Hey, let's get the young people and Jenzers involved." Then the criticism and going after Brian is certainly not going to encourage that. >> Yeah, I agree with you on that. I think like like I said kind of earlier, you know, there's a little fair criticism for anybody putting themselves in the spotlight, but at the end of the day, he is a young kid that's trying to do good. So, let's not, you know, beat the kid up too much when he's really doing he's a net positive, not a net negative. And I think that that is important. So, everybody kind of has their own role and they need to play it. But what I also see is when they when they hate on him too, a little bit about it is they see a young guy, they feel like that and this I think we all have this with politicians, right? We don't like a young politician. Everybody kind of likes a seasoned politician. So, I think that is kind of what hurts him is that we do live in an age of society where most people like you to be young, but when it comes to like going and touring and being like this, people probably don't like that he's kind of a wonderkinned 18-year-old, you know what I mean? It just it just it's it's unusual, I guess. Like, there's only one Charlie Kirk. So, I think people are just going to have to kind of get used to um used to him and then, you know, he's going to keep on having success. He's been doing this for over six years, so I have no doubt that he'll be successful. >> Yeah. And you know, his his response has been with humility and grace, which is actually remarkable for being 18. You know, he kind of admitted like, "Hey, you know, here's the truth of the matter on his his photo op on the private jet." And he's saying, "Listen, this is what I'm trying to do." And I think he's approached it with more humility than we've seen from a lot of Jenzers. So, I respect that, too. >> And Jenna, uh, and so, uh, we give him the best of our luck. We love him. I know you love him. You've helped him out a lot. Not in that weird way, but Jenna, I want to say I want to say I love you and thank you so much for you defending me. You probably don't even remember this. Full screen number four and five. You actually defended me against my favorite big booty Latina AOC. When she came after me, she tried to cancel me and you shared a great screen grab. Now, let's play full screen number five. This is you calling her out for hero her hypocrisy. Now, the whole point of protesting is to make people uncomfortable. activists that take uh take that discomfort with the status quo and advocate for concrete policy changes. Popular support often starts small and grows to folks who complain protest uh demands make others uncomfortable. So it's hard to read. That's the point. My point is she literally had just tweeted this before it happened. She was telling people to go out there and protest and make people feel uncomfortable. And then I went there and I complimented her and your tweet did really well. I mean it was maybe it was a too nice of a compliment but I just wanted to thank you Jenna. I've never had the uh uh you know opportunity to thank you. So, thank you so much. >> Sure. Of course. Well, I mean, I fully support everything that you did and I became one of your biggest fans when uh you know, you stood up in the middle of schoolboard meetings and pointed out their hypocrisy during the whole, you know, Leah Thomas uh situation. So, continue to speak truth boldly. That's what it's all about. >> Okay. And Jenna, now I I know there's only so much we I don't want to get into any of the bad stuff, you know, that's happened to you, but how are you doing? Everybody knows that you went through a kind of a, you know, challenging time to say the least. And you seem like you're doing well, but how are you doing, Joe? Like, how is everything now that you're on the other end of it? It feels like it's probably the last four years, it felt like probably a hundred years, but how are you doing after going through everything? And, you know, like what is kind of on your horizon? What is your northstar? What are you trying to do next? >> Yeah, I really appreciate that. And, you know, um, I have been through a lot. Everybody does know that. And um you know it's been really difficult because you know in the midst of a lot of these allegations what people don't understand is that um I continued to plead the fifth and not uh speak in any of uh the subpoenas that I was issued. And then the plea agreement that I entered into was simply to say I will be willing to testify truthfully if called upon. And for everyone who says you know that's your traitor, your backstabber, all of that. Um it's it's utter nonsense. And uh my my question would be well if the truth is so anti-Trump then what exactly do you think the truth is right? So there's a lot of misperceptions um and and that's okay. I mean everybody has haters and you know that's no big deal. Um but it is really good to be on the other side of that and know that I'm willing to stand for the truth uh regardless of uh whatever happens. And so um I have been with the American Family Association hosting a nationally syndicated radio broadcast for the last going into my fourth year. So, the last three years and I love it, Alex, because I get to just speak the truth every day. We address news of the day, cultural issues, but also theology. Um, in the conversation we just had with uh Sulleon, um, these things are really important and Charlie Kirk understood that. And so over the last month um since his assassination really um that rocked me to my core and I realized and I'll I'll say this to you and and obviously publicly that I feel like I've kind of sidelined um myself because of some of the haters too much. >> Uh and and have only gone to areas where I knew I had friends. And seeing what Charlie was willing to stand for and literally die for um has really encouraged me to um to do more with the time that um I'm given. And you know, Ephesians 5 in the scripture says take advantage of every opportunity for the days are evil. We're seeing that. And so, um, what I have now pursued over the last month, um, since Charlie, to honor him and to honor, obviously Christ, my savior, is to truly take advantage of every opportunity and not care about the lies and the push back and, you know, the haters, but, um, really to just continue speaking the truth >> and and I really appreciate that. Now, let's let's kind of foreshadow what do you see in the future for the Conservative Party? Obviously, you're very affected by Charlie's loss. I'm incredibly affected. The whole entire world is affected. And I think it's pretty I think we could really come to the conclusion that he would have been potentially JD Vance's vice president or you know the president of the United States in the future. So where do you see the future of the the Republican party going because I like JD Vance but I don't know. I mean you know what I mean? Like it just Gavin Newsome's actually doing pretty good on Twitter now kind of copying some of the you know conservative playbook like AOC you know I mean this is the thing. If it's AOC versus JD Vance I might have to vote for my favorite big booty Latina and I don't want that. I don't want to be forced to have to do that. But the future I'm saying I know that Hey, listen. At least I'm honest. But what is the future of the Conservative party in your opinion now that Charlie's not with us any longer and Trump cannot run uh for any more elections? >> Yeah. I mean, this is a postTrump world that we will uh be getting into. I mean, as soon as the midterms are done, that's going to be the question on everybody's mind. And uh what I really think about this is that we are at a turning point um to to turn a phrase of the GOP. Are we going to go toward godless populism or are we going to go toward our Judeo-Christian founding and actually understand on America's 250th anniversary coming up next year? Are we going to understand the roots of where we came from and actually build um a more perfect union? Because if we understand the idea of America and our constitution as being built on a social contract theory, this idea that we the people are the sovereign, then we are losing the battle to a secular humanist playing field before we've even entered the debate. Because then it just becomes that how do we engage by force and we have to have sheer numbers in order to elect people that might do what we think is right and good. But what the founders understood is that we the people are not actually the sovereign. They appealed to the supreme judge of the universe for the rectitude of their intentions. That's right there in the declaration of independence. They say we hold these truths to be self-evident. Truth is self-evident that all men are created equal. They're endowed by God their creator with certain unalingable rights. Among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And you know how the declaration goes on. And so with that, we have to understand that ultimately our authority for the institution of government, for the family, for the church, all of those definitions are vested in God, our creator. And America has to in this moment when we're seeing revival. We're seeing so many people attend church uh that haven't in years. They're actually wanting to open scripture and answer life's most important questions. You know, who are we? Is there a God? Who is he? Uh where are we going? All of these essential questions. what happens after you die? Um, the only way that we can truthfully engage those questions is by exercising our first freedoms, the right to do what we're doing right now, speaking together about truth. Only in a society that understands that our rights are pre-political. They're not just agreed upon by consensus of the majority would allow that. And we have to take this moment to decide, is the conservative movement just about big government sucks? um as Charlie initially said, or are we going to take Charlie's mantle to say he pointed everyone at every turn toward the truth of Christ? Now, I'm not a Christian, Alex, just because I believe that Christ is the Messiah. That's true. But I am a Christian because I believe that the biblical worldview is the best explanation to the reality to which I'm presented. Now, the left denies reality. They deny reality of the bio biology of humanity. They say that we can change our gender. They say that you know there that um there that morality is a social construct. I mean they deny reality at every turn. So we have to decide are we going to embrace reality, speak the truth or not. >> And you know this is the thing is I agree with you. This godless populist you know party which is kind of the way you know conservatism is kind of trending. I don't think that's necessarily good at all. But at the same time, Janet, and you were a big victim of this, we really have a uni party where people were actually on, you know, they said that they're on Trump's side, but they're going after Trump harder than the people on the left. So, it's like when when both sides are kind of corrupt, how do I even have faith in the system? I lose a lot of my faith. But I know that there's good people that are, you know, trying to make it better, but I just worry that sometimes the bad people um, you know, outnumber the good. >> Yeah. And you know the founders provided a solution for that in article five of the US constitution which is that the state legislatures can convene together and propose amendments to the US constitution and then ratify them. We don't need Washington. We don't need Congress in order to do that. We've never done that in our nation's history. And I believe that now is the time to do that. We could have judicial reform. We could have term limits. We could utterly gut Washington's power uh if we would simply utilize the brilliance that our founders provided. >> I know. I feel like they did give us uh loopholes or ways to fix the system and we just don't have the coh, you know, we can't come cohesively together and actually go against the federal government and the federal government is so incompetent and I know state level it's worse. But at least it's more local. It's more it just they're fighting for their own constituents. It's hard for somebody in DC to fight for somebody in Alaska and Texas and and Chicago all at the same time. It's basically impossible. So Jenna, thank you so much for joining us. Really, I really appreciate it. I know that you've uh been through a lot. I don't want to keep on going through that, but I know that you are a very strong individual and what doesn't kill us uh kill us makes us a lot stronger. So, you're strong because of that. So, where can people find you and how can they support you, Jenna? >> Thanks so much, Alex. Well, you can find me at Real Jenna Ellis on X and then Jenna Ellis Media on other platforms. And you can listen to my radio show on American Family Radio Network. Download a free app. Um it's AFR or you can go to AFR.net. >> Oh, last question. Who is going to be uh who's going to be the governor of Florida? I really really hope honestly that it's not Byron Donald's only because he lost my respect when he had to ask Trump's permission and blessing before he opposed amendment four which would have made Florida basically recreational abortion. And he didn't come out strongly against amendment three which would have provided basically Canada coming in uh to control legalized marijuana in this state. So I want a governor who's willing to stand up for right and wrong without having to ask Donald Trump. Well, is Byron Donald's anti-weed? He got arrested for smoking weed though, right? >> Um, I think that's accurate. I'd have to go back and look at his record, but um I got to see that he came out at all against uh legalized marijuana. That's a huge, huge issue. U my former home state of Colorado made that a constitutional amendment in 2012 and everything bad that has happened in that state has come after that. So, it'd be really a shame if Florida turned back purple just because we had a governor who uh wasn't willing to stand up for what's right. >> Yeah, I tend to agree. Like it sounds good. Oh, marijuana even though the taxes are all BS and half these marijuana dealers are cartel members that are just, you know, moneyaundering anyway. So, they're not even paying taxes on it. So, it just kind of breeds a lot of um black market activity even when you legalize it. So, that's kind of why I'm like it shouldn't even be legal because all the black market stuff that is attached to it because actually the black market marijuana becomes cheaper because it's legal. So it just it creates a whole new um you know bag of problems. Okay. >> And and driving under the influence of of drugs and marijuana