Charlie Kirk, even though he had views that a lot of people disagreed with, he also was eager to discuss with people who disagreed with him. For somebody like that to be gunned down, I don't know. It's different. Welcome to the Two Angry Men podcast. Mark, I am not going to mince words. I fear a civil war. I I have lived a long time and I have seen a president assassinated. I have seen multiple attempts at killing presidents. I have seen civil rights leaders slain. I've seen presidential candidates slain. I have seen war. I have seen riots. But Charlie Kirk is different. This is not a politician. This is somebody who was slaughtered for his views and not pushing a particular you know even political party. I think he had an ideology and he was a young guy on college campuses and I am feeling like people are at the point where they think this is the solution and I am worried as much as I have been my entire life about democracy and America. You know, we discussed a number of episodes ago, you had a similar thought and I forget what the kind of uh impetus or was for it and I did not agree with you.
I do think this has a qualitative difference feel to it. I don't know if that's because it was so shocking in real time to have watched it or closely. I don't know if it was because we've come so far in AI that I know I and a lot of people that I know at first their first reaction was is this real or is this AI? um which is kind of a a distortion of reality that is that is really stunning. And then I think also there are, you know, you start with Manioni and the idea that somebody can be assassinated for presumably under the government theory for a a who they are in terms of being a health care professional having a uh constituency as you will.
Charlie Kirk clearly has a constituency. I might push back a little bit on whether he's affiliated with one side or another, but I think Well, he is affiliated with one side. I'm just saying I think he's he he's a grassroots guy. Yeah. And I think that clearly when you think of him, you think you automatically think of MAGA or you think of you think you associate Turning Points with and the movement, the grass movement he started with um the MAGA movement. And I think also there is uh some uh you know coming off of Butler and the president and the assassination attempt there I there is this feeling that this kind of cauldron that we're in that uh does have a kind of a frightening feel.
I mean you like me remember where you were when Kennedy was assassinated. I mean, for guys of our vintage, that is something that is seared into your memory. I I remember standing in school and knowing exactly where I was. I can still Me, too. Me, too. I mean, look, I was at the Ambassador Hotel the night Robert Kennedy was assassinated. I was working in his campaign. Um, I was in high school, but I was ahead of the students there for Kennedy. And, um, so I've seen a lot of this, and a lot of it has been shocking. Martin Luther King was shocking. Robert Kennedy was shocking. John Kennedy was shocking.
There was a lot that was really alarming, but this feels like a flashoint. It feels different. Um it feels like that in the past we've always talked about you know this one lone lunatic who did you know James Earl Ray with Martin Luther King Lee Harvey Oswald with John Kennedy Sirhan Sirhan um you look at at at John David Chapman from you know with John Lennon they're all we we push them aside as wackos and oneoffs and it's not feeling like a one-off anymore.
We keep saying, "Yeah, it's this lunatic fringe, you know, just they don't really matter. They don't really count, but it feels like they start to count and that it's not just these oneoff lone crazy people." So, one of the things, you know, against the framework of how did Ebstein die? Was he killed or was it a suicide? And because there are so many questions about that, the Kennedy assassination, there's so many questions about that. There there are so many questions swirling around this case already for you know the the there's you've seen the internet, you've seen the speculation, I've seen the where the the people who have theories that there was a hand signal. There are now all kinds of not just theories but um people who are taking the data points of the question that was being asked and then the subsequent shooting and now there is a suspect who is in custody presumably turned in by his relative and then he does not fit kind of one or the other of the conspiracy theories.
That's one of the things that's been buzzing around in my world today is that you know I watched an interview by Patrick Bet David and Patrick Bet David was going through and said you know that he had four different theories and I thought you know he's a very he's a very smart man and I I one of his theories was is pe if there is another shooting c attempt or assassination of somebody on the left who's identified with the progressives or the left that that to to his point it articulates yours that seems like that would be orchestrated to cause a war to cause some kind of uh to kind of ratchet up divisiveness of well there were words used after the assassination uh they have woken us the [ __ ] up them's fighting words and I I don't disagree like I said, "I've come a long way since the episode where you talked about framing kind of what's happening in the country as a war." I I understand that the the video of this was just so graphic, was so in your face, was so um uh like I say, almost kind of breaking the the wall of reality in the sense that you said to yourself, is this AI or is this real? that that has that has taken us to a level and because Charlie had such strong opinions and was so had such a fil mind that it really is and because he would go into the proverbial lion's den uh it has it has shocked a little people.
I think you then take some of those man on the street interviews where people say good or it's fine or this or that and I know TMZ's taken a lot of heat um and uh for supposed laughter which you know if you have I think adequately explained but the there is it is a flash point I think I don't disagree with you anymore. Yeah. You know, I mean, I I think part of it is that Charlie Kirk, even though he had strong views that a lot of people not only disagreed with, but some found abhorrent, he also was one of those people that was willing, not willing, just eager to discuss with people who disagreed with him. And you know, he did that with Bill Maher. He did that with Young Turks. He did that with a lot of people. Gavin Newsome's podcast did it with Gavin Newsome and and you know and and the idea was almost you know let's test our views and that is the essence of democracy is what Abraham Lincoln did in town squares many many decades ago and for you know for somebody like that to be gunned down the way he was when he is reaching out he's doing what you're supposed to do in a democracy I don't know.
It's different. It's just different than a politician who has power, who, you know, for whatever reason, somebody wants to stop the exercise of that power. This is different. And the fact that people are so up in arms right now and you don't feel like anybody wants, you know, you don't feel like there there are people on both sides that do not want to tamp down. I mean, it used to be nobody would say, "Yeah, let's let's go to war." There are a lot of people who don't want to tamp this down right now on both sides.
So, I come from a a career of doing battle in court where you exchange where, you know, you're diametrically opposed to somebody. Somebody's trying to literally kill my client and I'm defending against that. I mean, kill in some cases literally. And but one of the things that I have said and you've seen this many times over the years, some of the people I'm closest to in the world are people who I've done gone through that battle with. I've gone through a hard-fought trial where we wouldn't even speak until the end and and and you know I may win, they may win or whatever it is. But there is that kind of going through the trenches and you have that ability at a certain point to go out of the courtroom after the battle and to at least have there's a certain level of camaraderie which is one of the things I always admired about him.
I used to watch his videos. I watched the one I think I told you this the other yesterday that I watched the one the night before he was killed of of a guy who was 5 foot three um and teasing him about not being 6'5. In fact, ironically, I was going to tease you about that and um and and I watched it because he did it with such good humor. He did it with such a plum and he did not mind and I I can appreciate this as somebody who goes against the grain often by defending periodically, you know, the most unpopular or most hated people, but he did it and didn't mind it. It was one of the things that I always kind of admired about Pete Buddha Judge that he is not afraid to go to Fox News for instance and argue with people who have different viewpoints. Charlie Kirk relished the idea of going in into tough situations and using his wit, using his intelligence, and there's something to be admired about that. And boy, if now we're going to kill people who do that.
I that's that's what I'm saying. That makes it different. And you know, I I I will say it has been I want to get into two things. There there is I I don't even want to call it a conspiracy theory, but there's something that is unanswered and really bothering me uh that I want to get into in a minute, but uh but you know, I will say that it really struck me today to hear all the people in Congress talking about, you know, their kids telling them last night, "You can't run again. I don't want you to die. Um we're cancelling town halls because they're just too dangerous." um how are you going to do political rallies next year during this election? I mean, there were so many the fallout of this where, you know, I remember when Gabby Gford was shot and, you know, she was out, I believe, in a parking lot in Arizona and she was shot along with others and there was a kind of momentary, you know, nationwide fear among politicians, but it kind of subsided.
But with everything ramping up the way it has with what happened in Minnesota, um, and just all of the shootings and then this, I think there an alarm has gone off with politicians. And I wonder how many people are not going to run for reelection next year. I I think a lot. I think a lot. It's not worth it. It's not worth it. I thought about I hadn't thought about the repercussion for politicians. I I've I think the the stunning thing to me is just somebody who is having an unpleasant conversation for you or for the audience. Okay. And when I say unpleasant conversation, you have as you kind of I think brilliantly observed, we have a rich history in America of debating of getting into it. I mean that whether it's the founding fathers who had had a robust discussion over a period of time and through a constitutional convention whether it is the Douglas Lincoln um uh debates whether it is Kennedy Nixon Kennedy Nixon whether it is Harris and Trump I mean and whether it's Biden and and Trump debates and discourse and the idea of uh an exchange of ideas.
The kind of the food fights on cable news, uh, you know, in the that were prevalent in the 90s and the 2000s to to some degree. the I I remember being in in some of the prosecution versus defense food fights, which I' I've done for years myself. The idea that getting into a discourse or getting angry at somebody that you're arguing with to the point where you take their life and seemingly it's not I mean it's never a an excuse but uh there is some comfort sometimes comfort is probably the the worst word in the world but when there is an extreme mental health issue and which I've dealt with on on countless murder cases. At least there's a way that you can kind of analyze it and rationalize it and put it into a category where you can wake up in the morning and go about your business. I think what you're talking about is that this is you crossed the Rubicon where it becomes very difficult to get out of bed and do what you need to do for for the fear that you can be shot down literally for an exchange of ideas.
Yeah. I want to go over something with you that I I'm having trouble kind of piecing together. So when the authorities held a news conference uh saying that they had captured this guy, um they said that Tyler Robinson had a roommate and that Tyler Robinson in some way, shape, or form. And they said that he used Discord. Discord told us it wasn't on their platform, but in some way communicated to the roommate that after the shooting that the gun was in a um towel in the bushes and it needed to be retrieved. Now, the roommate showed the authorities this note, however, whatever form it took, and they say that right now they are not looking at any other people is in who might be involved in this. There's nobody they have in their sights, but the investigation continues. But what is when he he the note seems to be saying get that gun and when you say get that gun, what are the coordinates? It's wrapped in a towel in the bushes.
Well, in fact, it was wrapped in a towel in bushes. That's all true. But when you just say bushes in Utah, it could be anywhere. So, it's almost like he must have said something to someone before if the note is as vague as it's in the bushes that someone would know which bush to look at because it was accurate where the where this was, you know, hidden. And I I'm I'm having trouble with this because we contacted the authorities and they said there's no one else we're looking at as far as we're concerned right now. It's a single person who committed this act. But this has been troubling me. And I don't understand. And by the way, uh this is based on I can't tell you how many murder cases that I've handled. I do not understand this idea of closing down initially any potential investigation by saying we're not looking the the if it's well they said presently that they're just saying right now but why would you ever say that I don't know I don't know I agree with you it doesn't make any sense to me I agree with you and I it makes zero sense also the other thing is it it It seems peculiar based on the video of what of the timing of the shots if it was somebody who was 200 yards away who presumably cannot hear um the exact questioning at the time unless it's amplified sound that carries and that's certainly a possibility.
But the idea that you would shut that down based on a note based on the language that was being uttered by the speaker and the shot which required and I also had this argument this morning already somebody telling me no that's not a I feel the same way as you it very rarely do you see somebody fire a single shot and especially at that range and yet he fired one shot and left And that feels much more professional than amateur to me.
I I you know the I you're hardpressed to believe that that is such an easy shot for somebody who is not at some level trained. Yes. Number one. And and confident enough after the first shot. And you know, speaking of shots, um, you know, you mentioned Luigi Manion, who had left, uh, an an an engraving on one of the cartridges, one of the bullets. And, um, you look at what this guy did and it said, "Hey, fascist, catch." And there were several others. um that you know it used to be manifestos that people left and diaries and now it's what you write on a bullet cartridge and you know you just think about that and it's chilling it's almost here's my slogan for what I'm doing and that's enough you know it's this this whole thing now and we're going to put our reasoning on the bullet that kills the person and that that as you say is chilling.
I didn't know and obviously I don't know. I don't have any insight information into the investigation other than what is being reported. So I caution. But if there was that and other insignas or signatures or uh inscriptions um that also lends credence to the idea that it was not just a single solo oneoff person. Well, I'm not sure I agree with that because look, Luigi was a lone person and he had inscriptions on on the bullets. There were three bullets they found with cartridges that had inscriptions. Um, and basically all the same, but it could be a lone person doing that. Um, I'm I I'm just having trouble with these notes that were left for the roommate that it just feels like if he's being if he's asking for somebody to get the gun and get rid of it, it's not good enough just to say it's in a bush.
There had to be a discussion beforehand, right? So, yes. And and I don't know with who and there's no evidence the roommates's involved in this. I want to make that really clear. But somebody But somebody they you don't say it's in a bush if you want him to pick it up and nobody knows where the bush is. By the way, there's also it's not one of these situation where somebody goes into this thinking this is my last act. You know, this is a planned at least seemingly very well planned very timed perfectly for the message that they once sent. Uh an escape route um a plan for what they were going to do with the evidence afterwards. I you know the a lot of times prosecutors traffic in this idea of what is the how sophisticated is you can you know the argument that I've been having this morning argument is probably too strong but the discussion I've been having is well this isn't that sophisticated and I think it's fairly well sophisticated I think it's a fairly um uh intricate plan but you know you know what's weird about that though you you say it's intricate he was he had apparently um gone to the school to get the lay of the land before he did what he did.
And he was wearing certain clothes um when he did that. And then he was wearing the clothes you see in the various surveillance videos that had been released um you know when he actually allegedly fired the shot. Um, he seemed to have gone home, changed out of the clothes he was wearing during the shooting, but put the other clothes back on when he had gone to the campus knowing that there was there were surveillance cameras on campus. He had to know that. So, if he was that sophisticated, why would he be wearing something that got captured on surveillance video? That that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Unless he thought that I'm going to change into the clothes I'm already on the surveillance video. When they take me into custody, they're going to test those clothes. There's no gunshot residue on those clothes and therefore they'll realize that I was a person of interest in catch and release. That's pretty weak because you're just connecting the dots with those close. It's not like it's the smoking gun, but you can see it's the same person who is scoping out the place as the person who fired the shot.
And even though they're wearing different clothes, you can still see other features that connect the two. And if he's wearing what was he was wearing in that first video, it's pretty damning right there. Well, given the state-of-the-art now on facial recognition um and this appears to be somebody who had some depth of knowledge on um uh in these areas, the the facial recognition to would be something that I think they would be more concerned with.
I have a question for you. Um so he supposedly confessed to his father, right? but then would not agree to turn himself in. So his father told a youth minister and the youth minister then called the police. If this thing ends up going to trial, is there such a thing as a you know the parishioner priest privilege where he could say you can't well I suppose the father could still test breaks right the does it break because of the father breaks because of the father would be the argument that the prosecutor would make.
Prosecutor would say once he told his father famously there is no parent child privilege there's spousal privilege a horizontal is that gone in every state the parent almost almost every state you know I I don't know about Utah but you know that's an interesting question you know I don't know whether he doesn't have a whole lot to raise but you know you know what Mark and I are talking about just so everybody knows there used to be a privilege within families that has kind of gone by the wayside.
So, you know, the theory would be that what he what the kid says to his dad is privileged and then what the dad says to the youth uh minister is part of the parishioner priest privilege and therefore the confession can't be used. I mean that that would be the argument that if there was still or if an existing privilege, you could make that argument. A uh a murder case provides a cynic would say a murder case provides a lot of uh probable cause to break that chain. You know, I thought about uh Brian Coberger when I heard the um prosecutors were asking for the death penalty and there were some people in my office who were saying, "Do you think this thing is going to plea bargain where he agrees to life without parole and in return they don't go to trial?" I don't see it in this case because you know the president on on down they've called for the death penalty. The governor has said it and you know the prosecutor in Coberger took a lot of heat for plea bargaining that case and I just do not see a plea bargain in this one.
Do you? No. And I also would not be surprised if you see federal and state tandem. Oh yeah. Which goes first? That's always a kind of a a struggle if you will. There are, if you're the defense lawyer, the first thing you're doing is you're looking at the individual state constitution. Is there a clause? We saw it in New York with Paul Maniffort. I I had it back in in the day with the case called the Japanese OJ case in California where if you were tried federally and acquitted, that was a bar, double jeopardy.
Um, and it did not work in reverse. And so, uh, they they probably a defense lawyer would look at that on the off chance that they think that there's some way to to engineer something in terms of one case going, one prosecution going before the other. So, what do you think's going to happen next year in the elections with this kind of backdrop? I will I will tell you against this backdrop.
I'll circle back to I hope hope that whatever door number four of the Patrick Pat David uh um kind of uh going through the the possibilities does not happen. I hope it does not spawn yet another killing. I hope it does not uh escalate because it's it's truly a it's a bridge too far. I mean any killing is a bridge too far but a killing that is presumably based on discourse you don't like and the reaction of that kind of kind of overreaction to that of quelling all discourse based on that is also an overreaction. So what I I think you're right in the sense that given where we are, I can see a lot of people saying it's just not worth it. I'm not getting into the arena. This battle isn't worth it anymore. I can see that.
And that's that's horrible because in our political system right now, what you want is more voices, more robust voices uh that are that are uh that are kind of courteous at some level. So my final thought and it's not good but I'm gonna but I'm gonna say it. It's not good but I'm going to say it.
So if there is a retaliation say uh on the right to somebody on the left um I think it's on because when you look at what's happened with school shootings I mean I remember you know I remember the first shooting I I believe his name was Charles Wittmann in 1964 I believe at the University of Texas where he got up in the bell tower and it was so shocking but it such a one-off and then you have you know many years later I believe 1990 was Coline and you know that's almost three decades ago and it seemed shocking just as University of Texas was but then it was followed by another and another and another and it's a way that people on the fringes expressed their animosity and it's become almost a weak thing in this country.
So, you know, as much as it's abhorrent to see each time we see it, it's not shocking the way it used to be shocking because it happens so much. And it's almost the, you know, this is America. And that's what we're saying about these, you know, school shootings and office shootings and grocery store shootings and everything else that this is America. If this happens where it's a tit for a tat and you see one and two and then you see three and four, it's going to feel like the same sort of thing. And I am really worried. We're right on the edge of that happening. Well, the I I have friends who used to go around to do college tours, college speaking tours, and then because their opinions were not so-called popular, they would they were banished and didn't anymore. And I would hate to think that that's where we're at at this point and that they we get to a tit for chat. I'd hate to think it, too. I'm just saying, you know, it's one of the things about getting old that it helps you connect dots.
And I'm just not liking what I'm seeing. I I don't disagree with you. I don't want to be a negative Nelly, but I don't disagree with you. And like I said, eight episodes ago or podcast episodes ago, I did not I I reacted uh strongly against your negativity. But this definitely has a different feel to it. It does. Okay, my friend. Take care. Take care..
