Charlie Kirk demands that after DC is freed, all American cities be completely occupied by the military.

On Monday, conservative activist Charlie Kirk intensified his rhetoric, urging what he called a “full military occupation” of U.S. cities once Donald Trump’s administration reclaims Washington, D.C. Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA and a loyal Trump ally, made the statement on his podcast, insisting that the White House should send tanks, soldiers, and the National Guard into major cities to impose “law and order.”

His remarks followed Trump’s latest actions in the capital. After a reported late-night carjacking attempt involving Edward “Big Balls” Coristine, a former DOGE employee, Trump announced the deployment of 800 National Guard troops to Washington, D.C. He also said his administration would temporarily take control of the city’s police force. In his comments, Trump described the capital as being overrun by “violent gangs,” “wild youth,” “drugged-out maniacs,” and the homeless, pledging to put an end to it.

Trump’s portrayal of the city was dire, despite the fact that violent crime has declined for two years under current leadership. Still, he compared D.C. to “the worst places on Earth” and justified a harsh response. His plan echoed the summer’s controversial deployment of the Guard to Los Angeles after protests over immigration raids. He hinted that New York and Chicago could soon face similar federal crackdowns.

Noticeably, Trump made no mention of Republican states with higher murder rates, nor of the January 6 Capitol attack—an event led by his own supporters that left deaths and injuries in its wake. After returning to office this year, Trump pardoned hundreds of those rioters, including many convicted of serious crimes.

Kirk seized on Trump’s announcement, arguing it should mark the beginning of a nationwide military campaign. “Crime’s gonna go way down,” he said confidently, adding that media critics would only complain that it was because of military presence. “Exactly,” he said. “We need full military occupation of these cities until the crime stops. Period.”

He cited what he called a “teenage crime wave,” highlighting Chicago as a key target. He demanded harsher sentencing for young offenders, suggesting car theft should mean 25 years in prison regardless of age or circumstances. “You’re gonna go meet a new dad in jail,” Kirk said. He argued the country needs more prisons and more prisoners.

This stance marked a reversal from Kirk’s earlier support of Trump’s criminal justice reforms, which had aimed at reducing mandatory minimums and promoting rehabilitation. On Monday, he dismissed those reforms as “totally wrong” and admitted they now made him “cringe.” Instead, he advocated humiliation and punishment, railing against what he called “coddling” offenders.

“Game over. No more protected classes,” Kirk said, claiming all citizens are equal “in the image of God.” He dismissed racial considerations, saying that system had been defeated. Critics labeled his remarks racially coded and part of his increasingly combative style.

Kirk also warned Trump not to make the military deployment in Washington symbolic. “If we just do this symbolically, we will lose,” he said. “We gotta go big. National Guard, tanks, every street needs military.”

Beyond policy, Kirk laid out a rhetorical strategy to counter accusations of authoritarianism. Critics liken Trump’s tactics to fascism, but Kirk urged listeners to respond by branding opponents “anarchists.” “We’re not fascist. We’re order,” he insisted. He recast the January 6 rioters as people who “wanted to say a prayer” in the Capitol and mocked the Guard’s deployment after that event—even while demanding it now for American cities.

Kirk listed cities he believed should be “liberated” next: Chicago, New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Portland, and San Francisco. “We got a big military. We should be willing to use it,” he said.

Kirk’s influence in conservative circles is at its peak. Through Turning Point USA and his media presence, he has built a large following of young conservatives, amplifying Trump’s agenda with uncompromising rhetoric. Critics argue his latest comments cross into outright authoritarianism, envisioning a militarized America where dissent and crime are crushed by force. Supporters counter that he speaks to frustrations about lawlessness in Democratic-run cities, even if Trump’s claims are exaggerated.

The broader debate over crime and safety is now framed by increasingly extreme proposals. Trump depicts Washington as a dystopian city in need of rescue, while Kirk demands tanks in the streets of New York and San Francisco. In reality, crime rates vary widely, with some of the most violent areas outside Democratic-led cities. Yet, nuance is lost in today’s political climate. As Trump wields military deployments and Kirk calls for federal control of cities, the line between rhetoric and policy grows thin. For many Americans, the question is no longer whether these ideas are extreme—it is whether they might actually happen.