During this segment of The Charlie James Show, the host takes a series of phone calls from local listeners sharing personal observations and opinions on public health policies. The conversation begins with Gerald calling from Spartanburg to describe a long wait at the health department where several people were turned away due to a card-only payment issue, leading to a lighthearted debate with Chuck from Mills River about payment preferences and broader political figures like Dr. Anthony Fauci. Callers Colleen from Fountain Inn and Joyce from West Pelzer join the dialogue to express skepticism regarding COVID-19 safety guidelines, questioning the shift from traditional handwashing to hand sanitizers and voicing concerns over how hospital protocols and financial incentives influenced pandemic-era care. Charlie wraps up the segment by previewing upcoming topics, including emails regarding NIH data on mask efficacy and President Trump's reaction to regional military developments in Jordan.

With early voting for the South Carolina Republican Senate primary set to begin in one week, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson joins the show to discuss his efforts to host a series of candidate forums. Wilson explains that after spending the past 13 months campaigning, he wants to provide a venue for the primary candidates to present their visions on key issues such as election integrity, immigration, national security, and judicial appointments. He outlines the schedule for upcoming forums in Columbia, Charleston, and Florence, while emphasizing the critical importance of conservative voter turnout in the upcoming general election. Following the interview, host Charlie James turns to the South Carolina gubernatorial race, analyzing Democratic candidate Jermaine Johnson’s expected selection of Sam Scarden as his running mate and offering political commentary on Katrina Shealy.

During the July 29, 2026 broadcast of The Charlie James Show, host Charlie James analyzes Dr. Anthony Fauci’s appearance before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. James highlights that Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment rights 121 times rather than answering questions regarding his actions and mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic. Citing Supreme Court precedents like Burdick v. United States, James argues that pleading the Fifth after receiving a presidential pardon constitutes a de facto rejection of that pardon, leaving Fauci legally exposed. Calls from listeners recount personal grievances and absurdities experienced during pandemic shutdowns, ranging from airline mask enforcement to small business disruptions. The segment concludes with comments on the political fallout of the hearing and local primary voting regulations.

During this segment of The Charlie James Show, host Charlie James explores the legal mechanics of presidential pardons, arguing that a pardon is a two-way transaction requiring both delivery and acceptance. Referencing historical Supreme Court precedents—such as United States v. Wilson (1833) and Burdick v. United States (1915)—James asserts that accepting a pardon waives Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination, whereas refusing or invoking the Fifth Amendment effectively constitutes a rejection of the pardon itself. Connecting these legal principles to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s appearance before a Senate committee, James argues that Fauci's refusal to answer questions by invoking the Fifth Amendment signifies a de facto rejection of his presidential pardon, theoretically reopening him to legal prosecution. The segment also features audio clips from Senator Josh Hawley and Senator Bernie Moreno questioning Fauci, followed by James's commentary criticizing the inconsistency of past COVID-19 mandates and public health policies.

During the July 29, 2026 broadcast of The Charlie James Show, host Charlie James examined recent Capitol Hill testimony where Dr. Anthony Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment rights 121 times when questioned about COVID-19 pandemic policies. James contrasted Fauci's earlier statements positioning himself as the embodiment of scientific truth with his present silence, highlighting the significant economic, educational, and social impacts of the federal lockdown measures. The segment included audio from a tense exchange in which a committee leader admonished and removed Fauci’s attorney for interrupting the proceedings, alongside caller discussions reflecting public frustration over pandemic-era restrictions.

In the July 28, 2026 edition of The Charlie James Show, host Charlie James covers the national memorial services for Senator Lindsey Graham, featuring a direct report from Joey Hudson at the Washington National Cathedral. The broadcast focuses heavily on South Carolina politics, analyzing candidate eligibility rules, primary voter requirements, and runoff predictions for Graham's open Senate seat, while examining Darline Graham's campaign strategy and legislative maneuvers around the SAVE America Act. Across all four hours, James engages with callers to debate Senate filibuster procedures, surveillance tools like Flock cameras and drones, newly released Joe Biden audio recordings, and escalating Middle East tensions. The program concludes with a detailed critique of Dr. Anthony Fauci's diary entries and upcoming congressional testimony, as well as commentary on cultural topics in women's sports.

In Hour 4 of The Charlie James Show, host Charlie James critiques Dr. Anthony Fauci's upcoming congressional testimony, newly released diary entries, and controversial stance on pandemic school closures. Callers join the broadcast to discuss the election integrity provisions of the SAVE America Act, clarify primary election participation rules, and debate potential legal accountability for federal officials. The conversation expands to broader national and international politics, including comments from actor James Woods, Senate leadership actions, and escalating Middle East conflicts. Finally, James reacts to recent remarks by Megan Rapinoe regarding women's sports and previews the show's upcoming coverage of congressional hearings.

Host Charlie James continues taking listener calls, beginning with Dee in Tamassee, who emphasizes the necessity of the SAVE America Act for securing national election integrity and voter rolls. James clarifies primary voting rules for Raymond in Duncan, explaining that all eligible voters—except Democrats who cast ballots in their own party's recent primary—can participate in the upcoming Republican primary and runoff. The open-phone segment transitions to discussion surrounding Dr. Anthony Fauci's upcoming congressional testimony, as callers John and Robert debate potential state-level legal accountability, national political leadership, and the broader impact of past federal policies.

Host Charlie James speaks with caller Doug from Simpsonville regarding upcoming congressional testimony involving Dr. Anthony Fauci, referencing a proposed strategy to rename the SAVE America Act in honor of the late Senator Lindsey Graham. The discussion turns to newly released diary entries and historical media clips featuring Dr. Fauci, highlighting contradictions between his public statements denying responsibility for COVID-19 school closures and his written reflections boasting about shutdowns in New York and California. James argues that these records reveal misleading advice provided to public officials and examines the broader debate surrounding pandemic-era health policies and origin theories.

In Hour 3 of The Charlie James Show, host Charlie James opens by addressing local issues like country road speed limit changes and reviewing newly released audio tapes of Joe Biden sharing classified information with his ghostwriter. James then takes calls from listeners to clarify primary election rules and discuss the South Carolina U.S. Senate race, defending his stance on candidate transparency and Darline Graham's qualifications. He critiques Democratic Party spending and campaign strategy while debating listener opinions on the SAVE America Act. Finally, callers weigh in with personal stories and commentary comparing political standards, government oversight, and party accountability.