YubNub Social YubNub Social
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Night mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode
Community
News Feed (Home) Popular Posts Events Blog Market Forum
Media
Headline News VidWatch Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore Jobs Offers
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Group

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Jobs

Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
35 w

Kamala Harris Ridiculed as She Debuts Another New Accent While Speaking at Church
Favicon 
www.westernjournal.com

Kamala Harris Ridiculed as She Debuts Another New Accent While Speaking at Church

Vice President Kamala Harris unveiled the latest of her accents while speaking at a church in Philadelphia on Sunday: Preacher Kamala. And she's been getting roundly criticized online for it, too. Speaking to a predominantly black congregation at Church of Christian Compassion, Harris said, "Here in Pennsylvania, right now, each...
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
35 w ·Youtube Politics

YouTube
Mark's Opening Remarks - 10/28/24
Like
Comment
Share
100 Percent Fed Up Feed
100 Percent Fed Up Feed
35 w

Patrick Bet-David Explains EXACTLY Why Democrats Are Terrified Of Trump
Favicon 
100percentfedup.com

Patrick Bet-David Explains EXACTLY Why Democrats Are Terrified Of Trump

Patrick Bet-David is a brilliant business man and student of humanity. He also has one of the top podcasts out there over at Valuetainment. What makes him great, in my opinion, is his ability to read people and quickly and clearly read the motivations that secretly drive people. So when I saw him post this video explaining why Democrats are terrified of President Trump, I was fascinated to watch. I think he’s onto something here, but I’d love to know what you think. Watch here: FULL TRANSCRIPT: Speaker: Here’s how life works, okay? Most people model themselves after somebody. They’ll say, “I want to be like Ronald Reagan. I want to be like John F. Kennedy. I want to be like Barack Obama. I want to be like Bill Clinton.” Right? Every once in a while, somebody comes up who’s not trying to be like anybody. They’re just unique. This guy’s unique—very unique. You haven’t experienced a candidate like this before. He’s rough around the edges. He believes in the basic rules: attack, attack, attack; never admit you lost; always be on the offensive; never admit to being wrong. He plays a very different game. Part of what helps him out is that he was raised in an environment with a lot of tough guys. When you’re raised around tough guys, you either get scared, or you start noticing patterns in how they try to bully you, and you think, “Oh, okay, that’s what you want to do? No problem. I’ll store it right here.” Six years later, he remembers when that guy did that, and he says, “Let me use this.” Here’s what’s going to happen right now: this guy’s been trained for this moment his entire life. His skin is so thick. Imagine what used to bother him 30 years ago—it doesn’t bother him today. Imagine what used to bother him 20 years ago—it doesn’t bother him today. What hasn’t he gone through? Right now, they don’t know how to handle a guy like this. This is the most intimidating, most obnoxious, annoying opponent they’ve ever had. John: Think about how a Barack Obama, a Pelosi, a Hillary, a Schumer, a Noem, an AOC—think about how they’re going to be sleeping over the next 24 days. Actually visualize how they’re sleeping. Whatever hotel they’re at, whatever Airbnb, house, penthouse—they finish the night watching CNN or Fox, they finish the night on X. They go to sleep having nightmares about him. Every flipping night, in the middle of the night, they wake up: “Oh my God, Michelle! Michelle! Michelle! The bed is wet.” Michelle: “What, babe? I’m right here.” John: “Babe, is it already November? Did they already announce him as president?” Michelle: “No, babe. Today’s October 25th.” John: “Oh, oh my God, babe. Please hold my hand. Please hold my hand. Please hold my hand. Oh my God, oh my God, it’s not here yet.” Every night, they’re going to sleep, wetting their beds because they’re frightened of this guy winning. Every night. The first time, they were able to get rid of him. This time around, this is going to be the most uncomfortable 23, 24, 22 days for these guys, and then add another four years. Now, here’s the thing about the next four years. He wins, and if they do something to him, like the whole three assassination attempts, the guy behind him—J.D. Vance—is not a lightweight. He’s not Mike Pence. J.D. Vance is not Mike Pence. Mike Pence, they could control. You can’t control J.D. Vance. As of right now, he may change; I’m not one to trust too early. But as of now, J.D. Vance crushed the debate, right? And we’re gonna see what he’s going to be doing with that. But yeah, this is when a guy comes in and says, “It’s my season. You’re going to hand me all the chips for the next four years. That guy is here.” They don’t like it because it’s no longer about Obama. Obama’s boring right now. It used to be exciting in 2004. Whether you’re Black, White, Hispanic, Asian, straight, gay—this was about America. “Oh my God, what a great speech!” In 2008, boom! Beats out everybody—President, inauguration, people cry, Nobel Prize just for becoming President. You haven’t done anything, but dude, you’re gonna bring us together. And then, more racism. More racism. “It’s because I’m Black. It’s because I’m Black. It’s because I’m Black.” Oh, we thought you were real. You’re just another one of those establishment guys. Yeah, we checked out. Do you think this also has something to do with it? UNHINGED: Robert De Niro Says “Let [President Trump] die in a f**king jail cell” And for more from Patrick, he recently sat down with President Trump for an exclusive interview and it was fantastic. You can find that here: President Trump FINALLY Sits Down With Patrick Bet-David President Trump FINALLY Sits Down With Patrick Bet-David Many of you know I'm a big fan of Patrick Bet-David....and for good reason. He provides so much incredible value and analysis on his show over at Valuetainment.  And actually, before he started talking about politics, I would follow him because his Business educational videos were so amazing!  Then he started talking politics, started speaking out to support President Trump, and the rest is history. Patrick's YouTube channel has over 2 million followers, but until now President Trump had never gone on his show. That all changed this week and it was every bit worth the wait! Please enjoy below and if you prefer the transcript instead, I also have that for you below. Watch here: Full transcript: Patrick Bet-David: So, before you watch this interview, I want to share a couple thoughts with you. For a guy like me, I used to come up in business. I never liked politics, never paid attention to it. I could care less. My parents got a divorce. I didn’t want to deal with it. I hated politics. Then I realized it matters to pay attention to politics. I’m starting to pay a lot of money, and I’m like, “Wait a minute, what is this all about?” If you consider yourself the leader of your household, never has there been a more important time than today to pay attention to politics. By the way, if you love Trump and you’re already committed to voting for him, you’re going to love this interview because there are a lot of things he’s never talked about before. If you hate Trump and nothing can change your mind, you’re also going to love this interview. But if you’re part of the independent undecided voter that’s sitting there saying, “I really want to make up my mind of who I’m voting for,” I address three issues. Personal life—I asked him a question at the end about personal. I played a clip for him. You’ll get to decide if he got emotional or not. You’ll see body language for yourself and say, “I’ve never seen this side before of him,” right? I asked him questions about business. I asked him a question about when he became President. You went into the White House first, who were the power players? Who—who was the most? Was it the Director of the CIA? Was it Big Pharma? Was it military? Who was it? I never thought the answer he was going to give me, and what name he gave to some of the people—I’ve never heard him say that before. He reacted to a few videos about Barack Obama. Showed him a couple charts he had never seen before. But all I will tell you is, you’re going to see things that’s never been discussed with him before for the first time ever in this interview. So, with that being said, again, if you consider yourself the leader of your household, where your voice matters, your vote matters, I would pay attention to every single minute of this interview with the one and only President Donald J. Trump. Patrick Bet-David: Did you ever think you would make it? President Trump: I feel I’m so—I taste victory. I know this life. Why would you bet on Goliath when we got Bet-David? Patrick Bet-David: So, we have a special guest in the house today for the podcast. We’ve been waiting to do this for a long time. However, whether you love him or hate him, there’s one thing you have to know. In my opinion, he is the only trifecta we’ve ever had in the history of America. Let me tell you why I call him a trifecta. We’ve only had one person who’s won in business—became the king of New York, became a billionaire—that’s one. Two, he won in media—number one show, Apprentice, 15 years in a row. Three, he becomes a President. So you got, he won in business, he won in media, he won in politics. Again, there’s never been a person who’s done that. Like I said, whether you love him or hate him, you have to respect him. Mr. President, it’s great to have you. President Trump: That was a nice introduction. Thank you very much. You are a one-on-one. Yeah, let’s end the show right now. Patrick Bet-David: Okay, so I want to get right into it. I got a lot of questions I want to ask. Some of it’s personal, some of it’s business, some of it’s politics. But something happened last week. Barack Obama, he’s at this event. He’s speaking, right? And he’s giving this message about your economy, how great the economy was. And then at the end of it, he says, “You know, you didn’t build that economy. I built this.” I kind of want to get your reaction on this, uh, talk that he’s given. Rob, if you can put that up. Rob: And the reason, some people think, “Well, I don’t know.” I remember that economy when he first came—came in being pretty good. Barack Obama video clip plays: Yeah, it was pretty good 'cause it was my economy. We had had 75 straight months of job growth that I handed over to him. It wasn’t something he did. I had spent eight years cleaning up the mess that the Republicans had left me the last time. So just in case everybody has a hazy memory of that, what he didn’t—he didn’t do nothing except those big tax cuts. Patrick Bet-David: So how do you feel about this, when you see him saying this last week? President Trump: I think he’s angry. He pretends not to be, but I think he’s an angry guy. He’s a nasty guy. He’s got a little bit of an edge. And, you know, he’s angry about a lot of things. You look at what happened with Biden, and you look at what he did with Biden, he really hurt Biden because, uh, I’m not sure he wouldn’t have imploded anyway. We had the debate, and he was down quite a bit, and they walked out, and they just took it away from him. I mean, if you think about it, they stole the election from a sitting president. That’s—you know, I always say coup, but the word coup, I don’t think it’s accurate enough. They just walked in and took it away from him. That is a legendary thing what he didn’t want to give up. He’s angry. Now they’re all angry. The Democrats, if you think, they’re angry. They’re both angry. President Trump: But no, I watched that last week, and I think he spoke down to Black men. I thought it was terrible, the way he spoke to them. Patrick Bet-David: You think it’s effective? You think he still carries the same stick as he did, you know, maybe eight years ago or twelve years ago? President Trump: No, I don’t think he is. No, I don’t think he does. I think people have gotten smart. And, uh, no, I don’t believe he does at all. He’s—I hadn’t seen him, he’s changed a lot. Visually, he’s changed. I like to say visually, as opposed to from the look standpoint, because of course, looks don’t matter anymore in politics. You know, you say looks don’t matter, doesn’t make any difference, right? Because we want to be politically correct. But they do matter. But he’s—he’s changed. His look has changed actually quite a bit. I haven’t seen him in a long time, and by the way, I think that’s even four years ago. I think it’s even more than it is. Patrick Bet-David: Well no, but the statement he just made was a couple days ago, and that—yeah, it was a couple days ago, and it’s similar to the statement he made back in 2012 when he told business owners, “You didn’t build that,” remember when he said that? President Trump: Yeah. Patrick Bet-David: I don’t know if you remember that whole comment. President Trump: I do. Patrick Bet-David: I think this is the speech. Rob, if you want to play this. Obama video clip plays: You got a business? That—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. President Trump: So this becomes a pattern. Patrick Bet-David: A pattern of Communism. You see a pattern of Communism? President Trump: No, I mean, that’s basically the view. You know, we didn’t do anything, right? Government did it. Somebody did it. Anybody but us. Patrick Bet-David: Do you think this works with the undecided voter? Do you think the undecided voter that’s sitting there—our audience, they’re entrepreneurs, they’re small business owners, they’re family, they have kids, they want to win, they’ve got dreams, they want to do something. Do you think a message like that from him lands on the business owner, on the undecided voter, on the person that says, “You know what? I think he’s right, I’m going to go vote for him.” You think it works? President Trump: I think you don’t have that many undecided voters. I think by now you have very strong Trump voters. I don’t think you have strong—you have strong Democrat voters, but I don’t think you have strong Kamala voters. What’s to vote for? I mean, take a look. She can’t do an interview. She hasn’t—has she been in here to do an interview? Patrick Bet-David: No, not yet. President Trump: I don’t think you’ll see her. You know, I have a—I hear she’s claiming she’s going to go on Rogan. Patrick Bet-David: Well, that’ll be interesting. So am I. I heard, uh— President Trump: But I think I am. I don’t know, I think so. But, uh, it’ll be interesting. It’ll be interesting to see what happens today with Brett Baier. You know, Brett’s two people. He can be very nice or he can be, uh, himself. Patrick Bet-David: He was tough on you. President Trump: If he’s tough on her the way he was tough on me. He was very tough on me. He was always—no, he was always nasty to me, and, uh—right? I don’t think he’ll be tough on her. I don’t think he’ll be. Fox is a very disappointing thing. During the day, Fox is just terrible. Terrible. Patrick Bet-David: But I want to show something with this. When you look at this whole Barack Obama thing, I think the one thing they don’t show—you were talking yesterday, uh, I think it was the Bloomberg event, which by the way, I loved. I love the way you handled the whole tariff conversation. That was a great— President Trump: I got sort of, uh, I got hoodwinked to go on that, you know. I was supposed to make a speech in front of the Chicago Economic Club, which is a big deal, you know, which is a very prestigious place, beautiful, everything was beautiful. And all of a sudden, I understand I’m being interviewed by this gentleman, and he’s got a reputation for—for being tough. Patrick Bet-David: Oh, I’d love to see him do, uh, Kamala. President Trump: We should. He should do Kamala. That would be beautiful. But he’s a tough cookie, and he’s the chairman of, uh, Bloomberg. He’s a big guy. So all of a sudden, I’m being interviewed, and I wasn’t happy about it because I found out that he is—you know, his reputation precedes him. But I decided to do it. You know, you have a choice. Walk out and don’t do it and have a scandal, or go in and do it and hopefully win, or you go in and do it and get killed, which is probably the worst. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But, uh, it was a great—it was a great interview, actually, and he was nasty, but he wasn’t overly nasty to me. I mean, other people thought he was. I thought nastier was David Muir, when he kept interrupting me during the debate and saying false things, like when I said crime is way up, and he said, “No, no, crime is down.” I said, “You’re wrong about that, crime is up.” And then two days later, it came out that crime is way up. I mean, to me, that was much nastier than, uh, this gentleman. But it was really a study of business. It was a detailed study of business. President Trump: It was a detailed study of business. Patrick Bet-David: You're talking about with the Bloomberg one? President Trump: With the Bloomberg one. And people loved it. I agree, the tariff one. And the one thing I wanted to show is the following. So, you know how you talked about Jerome Powell, what an easy job he’s got—he comes once a month and he says we’re going to increase the rates. Greatest job there. I think this is the one thing they don’t talk about. So Barack Obama got elected November 4th, okay? Quantitative easing started November 26th, right? And it stayed for 8 years until you got elected, right? So, if you look at that, low, pretty much 0% interest rate, right? Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: And then you get elected, right? If you go to January 2016, for the audience to see that, and then from there, one by one by one, rates are going up, going up, going up, going up, going up. And then Biden comes in, goes back down to zero to try to save the economy. And then, you know, the rest is obviously history, right? Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But do you think the average person knows, like, the impact of going to 0%? How much does that positively help the economy when the Fed lowers the rates to half a point? Patrick Bet-David: Yeah, it has a huge impact. The power of the Fed is, I think, pretty strong. Some people disagree with that. They think it’s overridden by the interest rate climate, but I think the power of the Fed is very strong. It’s an interesting graph, actually. Yeah, this just shows that the rates didn’t help you, you know when he says it was—well, they didn’t use them to help me, right? President Trump: And Powell, I gave him a hard time because he was raising them, and I was never a big fan of his. He was late, and he was early. He was too early and too late, you know. But, um, I had the greatest economy in history. We had the greatest economy in the history of our country, despite that. You know, this is another thing I can say—despite the fact that they weren’t very high, but they were, you know, reasonably high. And, uh, despite the rates not being at zero, I had a pretty good, uh—I had a great—we had a great run. Patrick Bet-David: Following up on the Barack Obama question, when I think about Van Jones and owning the Black vote, the 2024 election, I saw some numbers that came out which I thought were fascinating, right? Rob, if you can pull this up from CNN. So this is CNN reporting on this just two days ago, okay? Barack Obama, when it comes to Black men ages 18 to 44, he was up 81 points in November of 2012. Clinton—Hillary was up 63 when she went against you. Biden was up 53. Kamala, who is apparently Black, she’s up 41. President Trump: And what do you mean by apparently? Patrick Bet-David: I mean, that’s what they’re telling us. We’re supposed to believe she’s Black, and you know, it’s much better than—no, no. See, I would never say a thing like that, but you said it. President Trump: Well, no, you—you could explain it. Because I understand. I’m very comfortable explaining it because overnight, you know, she’s doing a show, she’s supposed to be Indian, and then all of a sudden now she’s Black. But it’s not landing with the average American. Patrick Bet-David: So, if you look at—do you think Black men—that’s why she’s not doing well? Some people say that in 2016, you had 13% of male Black voters, 18 to 44. In 2020, you had 18%. In 2024, you're at 26%. It’s doubled in eight years. The question I’m asking you is the following: Back in 1960, right, 64% of African Americans would vote Democrat, right? The other was pretty much conservative. African Americans have historically been very conservative. Okay, Barry Goldwater, the issue happens, 1964, right? It goes from 64% Democrat to 92%. And it’s been between 85 to 92% since 1964. Right? Patrick Bet-David: You’ve come in and you’ve shaken things up. Do you think 2024 is going to be one of those moments where African American men, they’re like, “Listen, I’m sick and tired of Democrats feeling like they own me. I think I’m going to go to the other side.” Do you think 2024 could be one of those years that we look back and say they lost the African American vote? President Trump: They really lost it for a while. The Republicans went, and it started, I guess, with Barry Goldwater, if you look at the charts. But, uh, I did criminal justice reform. That’s a big thing. They’ve been trying to get it. You know, I saw a guy named Van Jones—he’s not any—I don’t think anybody knows who he is. He’s a commentator for CNN. And he came to see me in the White House, and he was crying. Patrick Bet-David: I remember that. President Trump: He was crying because he—I just, I have—I bring these things up because it’s a lack of—I don’t know, there’s something about loyalty. You help somebody with something, uh, he came in with a fairly large group of people, uh, mostly Black people, and he was devastated because criminal justice reform wasn’t going to happen. Uh, Obama didn’t do it and, uh, didn’t even come close. Bush didn’t try. Nobody. Nobody was going to do it. And I’m the only one that could have done it. And he was with a group of people that were—they were begging to do it. They were five votes short, and they were had to be conservative votes because there was nobody else left, right? And I guess you needed the 61 or 60-something, maybe 66. But 61 is a hard vote. And he made a plea to me, Van Jones, total sob bag, he made a plea to me to help him and help this group of people, and they explained how for years they’ve been trying to get it, and they’ve been unable to get it. And I said, “Well, let’s take a look at it.” And, um, I studied it for a little while and, uh, spoke to them, and I said, “You know what? I’m going to help you. It’s going to help the Black people in particular, and I’m going to get it for you guys.” Patrick Bet-David: And? President Trump: And I called up five very conservative senators. And I’ll never forget, one of the senators who was in charge of it, he was literally leading the charge against it. And I mean, his whole career was this—he was going to stop criminal justice reform. Not because he was, uh, you know, anti-Black, just he didn’t like it. He didn’t want it. And he was in the papers every day. He’s fighting and fighting it, winning very easily. And I helped him get elected. Without me, he wouldn’t have gotten elected. I’ll never forget it. President Trump: I called him up. Now, he’s in the heat of passion. He is fighting this all the way. Not something he would ever give up. You couldn’t—you know, there are some things you can—I call him up. He gets on the phone. I didn’t say a word. I said, “Hello.” And he goes, “I’m giving it to you.” I said, “What are you giving me?” He said, “I’m giving you criminal justice reform. That’s why you’re calling, right?” I said, “It is why I’m calling.” He said, “You got me elected. I disagree with you, but I’m giving it to you.” Just like that. I said, “That’s one of the coolest things I’ve ever heard.” Because I also have the opposite, where I got a lot of people elected, you know, when I endorse somebody. In history, and I don’t want to brag, but in history, you can get another chart on that one. I mean, I’m like 289 and, and almost nothing for endorsements. President Trump: And he said, “You got me elected. I wouldn’t even be here if it wasn’t for you. And I did.” But I got a lot of people elected. And some of them get—and I said, “That’s the coolest thing.” I said, “Thank you.” I said, “You mind if I call a couple of the others?” “Nope, you do whatever you want.” Now, this is a guy who was the leader of the fight. I didn’t even ask. He knew what I was calling for, because he knew that I was going to help Van Jones. This Van Jones guy, I was going to help him. And you’ll understand why I’m being nasty to him now. Because what happened later is disgraceful. President Trump: So, I said, "Thank you very much, Senator. I'm so happy that I did help you." I think loyalty is a great thing, and that was. So, I had his vote. I then called four other guys, all of whom were against it, and I said, "I'd love to have," and they, you know, they don't do it for a lot of presidents, but they do it for me. And I got them five votes that they needed, and criminal justice reform passed right then. And I was happy for them. I was happy for everybody. Everybody was happy. They couldn't believe they got it done. And it was something that really, the Black population wanted far more than anybody else. I've never even heard it mentioned with other people. It was mostly the Black population, and they'd been fighting it for, like, what you'd say, 40, 50 years, right? Patrick Bet-David: Since '64, yeah. President Trump: So, we, 40, 50 years. Yeah, yeah. So, I got it done. I got something done—get a lot of things done that nobody else could have gotten done. So, what happens is, uh, Van Jones and all, they have—they called for a news conference that night. The vote was taken, they got it done, and I said to my wife, "Come on over here. This is beautiful. It's a beautiful thing to watch. Watch this. This, uh, gentleman was in my office a number of weeks ago, and they needed votes, and I got it done. It'll be nice to watch somebody really say something nice about your husband." I said that to Melania. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: And, uh, I said, "Watch this." And they got up, and they spoke, but Van Jones got up, and it was a little—I get, I don't get too embarrassed, you know. He got up. He thanked this one, he thanked that one, he thanked this one, this one, that one, that one. The only one he didn’t thank was Donald Trump. Patrick Bet-David: Wow. President Trump: And I look at that sleazebag now, and I say, "Uh, he's got bad ways. Bad ways." I—I looked at him then, and I saw him last night, and he was on CNN, which is dying, by the way, in the ratings because they have people like him on. And I watched him last night say how he hopes I'll be defeated, and, uh, we should defeat him. We have to fight him. He shouldn’t be allowed to be—and I said, "You know, uh, normally I'd say I wish I had that vote back, but I did the right thing." Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But why do I—why do I think he praised you? Why do I think he got emotional crying, giving you credit about what you did? Patrick Bet-David: No, I don’t know. All I can tell you is he was crying in my office—that's probably what you heard before he got it. He was crying. He was literally—they went over to him with handkerchiefs. He was crying. Tears were pouring down his eyes before. But after, he wasn’t crying—not that I know. Patrick Bet-David: So he didn’t mention you the night of the news conference. President Trump: He was leading the news conference, and I don't need it. I get mentioned plenty of times, etc., etc., but I watched last night—it's a good place to say this, actually. It's better than writing out a truth or whatever. But I watched last night, and I watched him talk about how I must be defeated. You know, I'm a bad guy or something. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: And Van Jones is saying this? Patrick Bet-David: Yeah, yeah, he said it last night. President Trump: I saw him last night. I—I don't watch CNN, honestly. I don't watch it, but I happened to be—you know, I'm passing it, and I see him on, and I watched him talking about essentially negative about me. You know, what difference does it make? Nobody cares what they do. They've, uh, they've been fighting me for years, and, you know, I became president. I did much better the second time than I did the first. And now I'm doing it the third time, and, uh, if the election’s not rigged, uh, we're going to win. If it is rigged, I guess that’s a different story, but we’ll find out pretty soon. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But, uh, but I watched this guy last night against me. Even if he was a little against me, but he wasn’t—he was like, you know, "We have to defeat Trump. We have to defeat him." And I've watched him a little bit over the years, and every time I watch him, I say, "What a, what a sleazebag he is." You know, what a bad guy. But I did it for Black people. I did it for—it was—it was purely—the only people that saw me about criminal justice reform were, uh, African Americans. That's all. And I did it for them. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: I also did Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and, uh, I got them financing. I would see, uh, the heads of colleges come down after two years. They would come to Washington, like, 45, 50 people, a group. They'd always come in a big group, and I got to know them a little bit because they had to come through my office to get funding. And after the second time, I said to them, "Why do you keep coming down here for funding? Don’t they give you—" He said, "No, they make us feel like beggars." That was the term. Patrick Bet-David: Wow. President Trump: And a couple of them, I got really friendly with. Some of them I still see a little bit. And I said, "Uh, what does that mean?" He said, "Every year we come down for funding for the Black colleges and universities." And they play a great role—a very important role, in my opinion. So I said, "So you mean every year you come down?" "We do, we get our—we come down together, and we go and see senators and congressmen, or we try seeing a president." But I got to know them, and I said, "You know, this is no way to live, where you come down—" And I ended up getting them more money than they even wanted, and I got it done. And I got it long-term. And I said, "Fellas, I just got this done for you, and I want to tell you a little secret. I'm unhappy about it." They said, "Why?" I said, "Because I’ll probably never see you again. You’ll never come down to Washington to see me." Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: And—and I meant it actually in a friendly way because I got used to seeing them. They were always coming down looking for money. I took care of their needs long-term—more money than they wanted. I said, "You're going to need more money than that," and I got it for them. And, uh, I think that’s why Black men really like me. And I think Black women do, too. But they have a woman who is Black—although you would say she's Indian, but, uh, she is Black. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But she—really a lot of people didn’t know, which is true, but I learned about it just a couple months ago. Patrick Bet-David: You mean the fact that she's Black or that she's Indian? President Trump: The fact that she's Black. I thought she was Indian until a couple months ago. Things change. I mean, a lot of people, because if you follow baseball, Samy Sosa kind of, you know, you sometimes have to respect people. They change, right? Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: So I thought maybe she was doing a Sammy Sosa the other way. Samy changed, right? People change. If you remember Sammy Sosa—oh, he could hit the ball. Patrick Bet-David: He could hit the ball. President Trump: 66 home runs, I think, one year, right? Patrick Bet-David: Yeah, yeah. President Trump: But I want to show you this—and by the way, the only reason I want to show you this is because I think Van Jones is scared of giving you credit. This is what Van Jones said after what you did, and it was the most uncomfortable moment on CNN because he had to thank you. If you can play this clip, Rob, I think this is the clip. Patrick Bet-David: Go for it. President Trump: Significant. Patrick Bet-David: Do you think—this is, by the way, one of your partners in working on this, Jared. This is how many years ago? Rob: This is the date on this—five years ago, December 18th, 2018. So you just got that. That’s pretty cool. Patrick Bet-David: Yeah, so this is six years ago. If you can play this clip. Van Jones video clip plays: My father went to prison, and who—who fought on this as hard as—this is history. This is history right now. You're witnessing history on the floor of the U.S. Senate. There's a Christmas miracle underway, where for the first time in a generation, Republicans and Democrats are arm in arm tonight saying we are sending too many people to prison. They're coming out bitter and not better. We want to make a tremendous difference. I want to say, uh, Hakeem Jeffries on the left, Jared Kushner, and Donald Trump on the right have brought together a coalition like I’ve never seen—literally the National Association of Manufacturers, Fox News... Patrick Bet-David: I’m glad you see it because, to me, you see, when I think about him—obviously, you know his history. He was close to Obama, Communist, all that stuff, you have to kind of drop it. But at the same time, they don’t want him saying something like this. I want to give Jeff—Jared—and you—to give that credit. President Trump: Right. Patrick Bet-David: This is the part where even Dems are sitting there saying, "How the hell do we argue against the fact that a Republican president that we’re not supposed to like did this?" Cut him off. Just give him 30 seconds, 40 seconds, let’s go to the next topic to bash him again. But it was kind of great to see Van Jones saying this about you. President Trump: It was, but again, uh, right after that, he—it was over. He has to go back. He has to go back. A real man would not have done that, and—and I’m glad I saw that, but it really doesn’t mean anything because he said it, and then after that, he—he took it back. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: I want to show you something, and this kind of goes maybe to the next point. So, yesterday, a new Gallup poll came out, okay? If you look at this Gallup poll—this is literally from yesterday—Americans’ trust in mass media from ‘72 to 2024. It officially hit the lowest in the history. We're talking ever. Not—not, uh, one of the lowest. This is the lowest ever in the history of America. Americans don’t trust mass media anymore. And even recently, I don’t know if you saw the numbers that came out two weeks ago. I'm sure you follow some of the stuff. Every one of the guys at CNN, MSNBC—they’re all getting a lower salary when they’re renewing their contracts. They're not getting paid the kind of money they were making. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: And, by the way, you may not like me saying this to you, but I think—I think I kind of want to see your reaction to this. I know a lot of people will say, “Well, you know, he has, uh, you know, XYZ, felon this, charged 91, 53 were dismissed, 32 of this, and 12 are the ones that are remaining.” I think the only one that Letitia James, Jack Smith, and maybe even Fani, if they wanted to claim that you—you did commit a crime, is you—you kind of—you kind of did kill mainstream media. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: If you think about it. Patrick Bet-David: They did, and that could be a crime for those guys. President Trump: I’m very proud of it. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: And I want to show you this clip, because this is the first time ever the phrase “fake news” was ever used, and from this moment on is when the decline started. Rob, if you can go and play this clip. Video clip of Trump: Since you’re attacking us, can you give us a question? Reporter: Since you’re... Video clip of Trump: No, Mr. President-elect... Reporter: Mr. President-elect... Video clip of Trump: Since you are attacking our news organization, can you give us a chance... Reporter: You are attacking our news organization... Video clip of Trump: Can you give us a chance to ask a question, sir? Reporter: Sir, can you... Video clip of Trump: Sir, go ahead. Reporter: Can you stay... Video clip of Trump: Quiet. Quiet. Reporter: Mr. President-elect... Video clip of Trump: Don't be rude. Reporter: Can you state categorically that nobody... Video clip of Trump: No. I’m not going to give you a question. Reporter: Can you state categorically... Video clip of Trump: You are fake news. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: Isn’t that disgusting? Think of it. That would never happen to a Democrat. But isn’t that disgusting? Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: He’s a—he’s a lowlife, the guy. And as you know, but, uh, and he has his own show. He gets no ratings at all. Nobody on CNN gets ratings. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But isn’t that disgusting? I’m just watching that, and isn’t it a shame that people can behave that way against the president, you know? And, yeah, I think I got—I think I’m responsible for those numbers up there where they went down. I’m—and frankly, I’m proud of it, because they—I’m also responsible for the term "fake news," and that’s a great term, but it’s not strong enough. I think "corrupt news" is a better term, but it doesn’t play as well. But they’re corrupt people. And disgusting people. But he is, uh, well, he—he wasn’t as bad as some. I mean, in a certain way, he was louder, but he wasn’t as smart as some. I mean, some are much smarter. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: He’s not a smart one. Patrick Bet-David: Did you think you were going to say “fake news,” or was it just—it kind of came out and it stuck, you’re like, “This is going to stick.” Was it intentional? President Trump: I don’t know if that’s the first time I’ve used it, but I do get credit for having—you know, having been an originator of the term. I mean, you know, a lot of times I come up with—I have a very fertile mind—I come up with very good names for people. Very creative. Pocahontas, uh, a lot of good names. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But, you know, I don’t know if that’s the first time, but I thought of that term often, and more so as I was running. You know, I—I actually used to get great press when I was an entrepreneur. I would get very glamorous press, very beautiful press. I went—I went the exact opposite. And I was amazed, and I—I really learned how corrupt it was. I didn’t think of it as that corrupt because, you know, I’d do something, and they’d give me credit. Um, but, uh, no, I—I had a very different life, actually, when you think about it. But then I run for president, uh... Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: And all of a sudden, it flipped. President Trump: I had a very different life, actually, when you think about it. But then I run for president, uh, so 92% of the people that run for president—presidents—92% were politicians, and 8% were generals. So, I wasn’t a politician. I wasn’t a general, so I was the only one that wasn’t in that group. No, there were no admirals. They were all either politicians or they were—sort of an interesting point—most people don’t know that. Some people said that’s interesting; other people say, because even Reagan would be a politician ‘cause he was a two-term governor. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: He was a politician. Patrick Bet-David: He was a politician. President Trump: He was a governor. There were some that were businessmen, but they were then ran for the Senate, or they were in Congress, and you know, they went from there to the presidency. But, um, nobody ever went right to the presidency. You know, I never ran for office. All of a sudden, I’m president. And I—I really learned about the press early, in the hard way, because I went from one extreme to the other. I got great press, and then all of a sudden, I was treated like by a... Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: Like that. And I—I really—I fought them very hard. They're very dishonest. They're very corrupt. Not all of them, but a big percentage of them. I would say, um, in the 80s—that’s a lot. Patrick Bet-David: That’s a lot. President Trump: That’s a lot—a big percentage—they’re very corrupt. Patrick Bet-David: Have they always been? Has it always been the case? You’ve been around media, TV... President Trump: Yeah. Patrick Bet-David: ...you know, for a long time. President Trump: I don’t think it’s ever been like this. Yeah, I’ve been around it for a long time. I don’t think it’s ever been like this. When you think, I started off, Patrick, I used to have a story written about me, and without fail, somebody would call after the story was written but not published. And they were called fact checkers. “Hello, sir, we’re calling about a story that we wrote about you. Is it true that you own this? And is it true that you did this and, uh, that you spent, uh, X dollars? Could we check that number?” Blah, blah, blah. And it would go on for a while to a point where you’d get somebody else to just do it. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But they—without fail, I’d have—if there were any details in a story—not always—but if there were any details, always. And they would call. Fact checkers. “Hello, sir, my name’s Jim Smith. I’m a fact checker for the New York Times,” and they’d check the facts of a story. And I think they at least—at least were trying to be real. I haven’t had a fact checker call me in 30 years. You know, they don’t call anymore. Patrick Bet-David: You think that’s because of the Fairness Doctrine Act of 1987? Because prior to that, media platforms had to actually give both sides of the story, and then once that was dropped, they lost the accountability. They could say whatever they wanted to say, and it was kind of free-for-all, like, let me go after them. President Trump: Well, for you, when you became a president, you know, if someone's running for office, you have to sit there and think about issues. Here's what I'm running on: wall, border, you know, economy, XYZ. Great. Obama, I'm going to go after healthcare. Well, Jimmy Carter, I’m going to go human rights. You pick and choose what you're running for. But there's also an element of, “Who are going to be my allies? Who are going to be my enemies?” Did you sit there and say, “The enemy of the people is media. I’m going to go after them.” Or did you say, “No, this happened accidentally.” Was this intentional, or was it accidental? President Trump: I think it's just long-term happened. It morphed into it. I don’t think they said... Patrick Bet-David: Talking for you, yeah. President Trump: For me—I—look, I’m the worst case because there’s nobody been abused like I am. And I don’t think—although I guess probably some—but for a shorter period of time. There’s nobody for over such a long... Patrick Bet-David: Who would you put? Have you even thought about it? Who do—who do you think for short-term? President Trump: I'd have to think—short term, people have been abused, yeah, over one deal, and they’re gone or something. Patrick Bet-David: Got it. President Trump: But I’ve been, you know, I’ve been doing this for a long time. And I've abused them also. So, you know, I do that. Patrick Bet-David: Did you say, did you target them and say, “I'm going to go attack media, and I’m going to go after them”? Is that part of the strategy that you had? Or no, that was just if you come after me, I’m going to come after you. President Trump: I think it’s a natural instinct with me, you know, like it would be for you and other people that know how to win a little bit. Patrick Bet-David: Sure. President Trump: No, but—but I—I really saw it in politics. I would tell them something, and they would write the opposite. I said, “What's that all about?” I called up the Washington Post. The Washington Post was treating me very badly. The New York Times is probably the worst, but the both—the two of them are really bad. And I know how to deal with the press. I'm a professional. I'm a smart guy. And I know. Patrick Bet-David: Sure. President Trump: So I said, “Watch, I’m going to call the press in. Washington Post. During my first or second year.” And I said, “I’m going to call the Washington Post. I’m not going to joke. I’m not going to be cute. I’m not going to be a wise guy. I’m going to just call them in, and I want to talk. And I’m going to explain what a great job I’ve done on different things, like the economy.” I had a great economy, all. And I called them in. I was very nice. I didn’t say, like, I didn’t say, “Hey, how's it going?” Everything was really professional. The numbers were fantastic. Everything was perfect. And I treated them with great respect. Shook their hand, and it was over. And the next day, they wrote a horrible story, you know? It was—and I said, “There’s no way around it.” And usually, it's the liberal side. And I don’t understand it, really. Why wouldn’t they want to have a strong border? Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: I don’t understand them because, you know, usually, like in business, you'll understand why somebody wants something. Why wouldn’t they want to have a strong border? Why do they want to have men playing in women’s sports? I watched the Olympics, and two people transitioned into womanhood. Two people. They went from man to woman, and they were into boxing. And they beat the hell out of everyone. They won the gold medal. Patrick Bet-David: Weightlifting records that held for 18 years. President Trump: Right. A quarter of an ounce on each side—you’ve seen me do it, probably, because it’s so cool. I mean, weightlifting is so easy to, you know, so descriptive, right? How can you be better than that? Like, golf is a little bit harder because you have to sink putts. That's different. Women can putt, but they can't lift, you know, 450 pounds over their head. And the weightlifting record that stood for 189 years gets broken by 100 pounds, you know? I mean, they put like a little—they take this—they take this top of this pen, see that pen? That thing weighs like an eighth of an ounce, and they put one over here and one over here. They couldn't have raised that weight for 189 years, and the guy comes along—it’s crazy. Patrick Bet-David: I mean, the border could make sense though if you were to say, like, “Why would they want the border to be... President Trump: Right. Patrick Bet-David: Why do they want it to be made there? Well, why do they want an open border with no checking? In other words, there's nobody vetted, nobody checked. And as you heard two weeks ago, the border patrol put out the numbers. They weren’t supposed to, but they did, because they had to because they had to inherently. You know, they endorsed me. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: I saw that. They endorsed me 100%. Unanimous. Like, massive. A full—they said, “He's the greatest in the history of—” I had the best border in the history of the country. I had the best economy in the history of the country. But you take a look at some of these stats. President Trump: But you take a look at some of these stats. So yesterday, a young woman’s playing volleyball—you saw that shot—and she got hit by a hard shot by a man, a man who transitioned. There’s been many of those. There was a new one yesterday. She got hit in the head. She didn’t know where she was. She said, “I’ve never seen a ball travel at that speed before.” Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But here’s what—why do they want that? I don’t understand that. Usually, you understand, like, somebody wants something. You try and figure it out. And you could go through a lot of things, you know. Why do they want a transgender—why do they want to take somebody’s child, a boy, and make the boy into a girl and not tell the parents? I mean, they do this. And at first, they said, “No, no, but that’s just an exaggeration.” No, it’s not. It’s really not. Patrick Bet-David: State of California. President Trump: Look at California, Gavin Newsom, who’s one of the worst governors. But he’s got a good line of stuff, and he’ll tell everyone how well he’s doing. But it’s the first time they’ve ever lost more people than they gained. You know, they look—they have such an advantage: the beautiful ocean, the beautiful weather, the everything-is-beautiful. And they run it so badly with all of the problems. They run it so—he’s a crummy governor. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But why? Why is it so—yesterday, and who would sign the bill that’s even presented to him? He signed a bill that you’re not even allowed to ask for voter ID. In other words, it’s not like you can’t have voter ID, that’s terrible, because everybody should have voter ID. And you have ID for everything. The Democrats had big ID, you know, when they had their convention. A friend of mine couldn’t get in. He said he doesn’t have the proper credentials. They want voter ID. They had a strong ID. They had an ID that you had to wear like a prisoner wears, you know, with a number. It was like this big card with a picture and everything over their tie. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: So they have it for the Democrat National Convention, right? But they don’t want to have it for the vote. But Gavin Newsom signed a thing that was incredible. He signed a bill that if you ask somebody for identification having to do with voting, I think you’ve committed a crime. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: Now, there’s only one reason that that happens—because they want to cheat. There’s no other reason. There’s no conceivable— Patrick Bet-David: Are you surprised? I mean, part of me is not surprised with that. I’m not sitting there thinking I’m surprised with what some of these states are doing. President Trump: California? Patrick Bet-David: Yeah. President Trump: No wonder people are leaving. Patrick Bet-David: California, I mean, you know, there’s a reason why they lost a trillion—two states lost a trillion dollars of money under management from 2020—New York and California. They got destroyed. The first time they had net negative migration in California since 1851. It hasn’t happened. Then they got it back-to-back-to-back. So— President Trump: And he just announced it two days ago that he’s raising gas taxes by 47 cents in the state of California. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: No wonder people are leaving. But I want to go to the tariffs. Patrick Bet-David: He doesn’t want gas vehicles. He wants to use all electric. President Trump: He wants all electric. Patrick Bet-David: It’s not going to work for him, though. President Trump: It’s not going to work. They’re going to get destroyed. I mean, he's already lost Musk. How do you lose Tesla? How do you lose Elon Musk out of your state? Patrick Bet-David: I asked Elon. I asked him this question yesterday. President Trump: What’d he say? Patrick Bet-David: I said, “When you left,” ‘cause he’s got a good thing in Texas, I said, “When you left, did Gavin Newsom—” I call him “Newsom” because I think it’s a more accurate name. But, “Did Gavin Newsom call and say, ‘Can we talk? I want to take you out to dinner. I want you to keep your company here?’” What did he say? He said, “He never called.” President Trump: Right. Patrick Bet-David: Your biggest entrepreneur in your state leaves, you don’t call. President Trump: Number one, biggest guy. Patrick Bet-David: Number two, big company. President Trump: Very big company, but a big oil company left also, taking thousands of jobs. But my question wasn’t that you—you know, that he left for whatever. I mean, did anybody ever call? He said, “No.” Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: I said, “Did Newsom call you at all? Did he like call and say, ‘Can we have dinner? I’d love you to stay here and we’ll work out some tax benefits or something, you know, some incentive to stay?’” He said, “Never called.” I was amazed at that. And you’re talking about thousands of workers and prestige and having Elon. Isn’t that wild? That you’re losing, and you don’t make the phone call? Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: You know, Elon endorsed me very strongly a while ago. And there’s no stronger endorsement. He said that if Trump doesn’t get elected, this country is going down the tubes. It might not ever survive. He said it’s the most important election. I was honored, but I was—I was amazed, because I asked him two days ago, I said, “Did anybody make a play to keep you?” Now think of it—you would. If you were governor, you heard a big company’s leaving, I would—first phone call at least—you’re calling, saying, “Is there anything we can do to keep you?” Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: Right? Patrick Bet-David: You know what I like about—and I do want to go to the tariffs, and I think this is a great transition—Tim Cook. They asked him, they said, “Why would you have a meeting with President Trump?” He says, “He’s the only president that called me.” President Trump: Right. Patrick Bet-David: Okay, let’s talk about something else. President Trump: Of course, he’s going to have a meeting with—if the guy’s calling, why wouldn’t you call the CEO of a, you know, three-trillion-dollar company? Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But let me just speak to Tim Cook. I think he’s a—I think he’s a quality CEO. Patrick Bet-David: Go for it. President Trump: So, if I’m going to just talk—when did you talk to—like, how recent? Patrick Bet-David: Uh, two hours ago. President Trump: Okay. Called me. I didn’t call him. And, uh, let me give you just a little—the nice part about this long format—you can talk. Patrick Bet-David: Yes. President Trump: Right? Patrick Bet-David: Yes. President Trump: It’s very nice. It’s something very— as opposed to bing, bing, bing, bing, bing. That’s why long format is working. Patrick Bet-David: Yes. President Trump: But I just talked to him. But I believe that if Tim Cook didn’t run Apple, if Steve Jobs did, it wouldn’t—maybe it would be—but it wouldn’t be nearly as successful as it is today. Patrick Bet-David: Wow. What a statement to make. President Trump: I think so, because I think Tim Cook has done—I think Tim Cook’s done an amazing job, and I’m not knocking Steve Jobs. I just think that it wouldn’t have been. Patrick Bet-David: So, tell me, tell you a couple of... President Trump: So, tell you a couple of stories. So, about the second term or second year, I get a call, and they say, “Tim Cook’s on the phone.” He calls. He said, “Could I see you, sir?” He’s the head of Apple, and I was born in Queens, and I said, “Oh, the head of Apple wants to see me, let’s go,” I guess, even though I’m president, you know, still. I was born in Queens, and the head of Apple is calling. And by that time, it was the largest company in the world, you know, it was the largest in terms of value. At that time, I don’t know what it is now, but it was. So, he comes in to see me, and it was about tariffs. He said, “You know, you’re charging us 25%,” because I was going to charge them, because we’re out of China. And the problem is, we can’t compete with Samsung because they didn’t have to pay tariffs because they weren’t in China—they were in South Korea. And he said, “It’s not really possible for me,” and I did waivers, you know, standard waivers. He said, “It’s not possible for me to compete with them if I have to pay a tax and they don’t to get our product into the United States.” I said, “I agree with you.” It didn’t take long. I mean, I sort of got it right. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: And I said, “I’m going to give you a waiver,” and I gave him a waiver. But I said, “I’m going to give you a one-year waiver, but I want you to start building your plants in the United States.” And he said, “All right.” And he actually did. He built one in Texas. He would have built a lot more, but we had a thing called, you know, a change in the administration, which is so horrible what happened, because of Russia would have never happened with Ukraine, October 7th would have never happened, inflation would have never happened, Afghanistan, we would have gotten out sooner, actually, than him. But Afghanistan would have never happened as we know it. All of these things—think of the difference in this country. No inflation, we would have been so rich because we would have had four to five times the production that they have right now. You know, they lost the production, and then they got it back ‘cause the whole thing was cratering because oil went up to $78 a gallon. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: So, anyway, so Tim Cook called, and I—then he, about a year later, he called again on something else. He said, “Could I see you?” Now, most companies send in lobbyists that get paid millions and millions of dollars to talk for them, and they probably say, “We know Trump. We’re up,” but they don’t. You know, for the most part, they don’t. And Tim Cook called me up directly, and he did it himself. Didn’t have to pay 10 cents. And I gave him 100% of what he wanted because he was right. I mean, you can’t compete with Samsung and one’s paying a tax. But I said, “You got to gradually move your company here.” But then, two hours ago, three hours ago, he called me. He said, “I’d like to talk to you about something.” I said, “What?” He said, “The European Union has just fined us $15 billion.” I said, “That’s a lot.” I know the feeling because I get fined, too, in fake cases, but I don’t know if his case is fake yet, but it’s a lot. Then on top of that, they got fined by the European Union another $2 billion, so he's at a $17 to $18 billion fine. I even said about Apple, “Can you pay that? I mean, do you have that kind of money? That’s a lot of money.” And he said something interesting. He said, “They’re using that to run their enterprise,” meaning Europe is their enterprise. Patrick Bet-David: Wow. President Trump: And I said, “That’s a lot.” He said, “But Tim, I’ve got to get elected first. But I’m not going to let them take advantage of our companies. That won’t—you know, be happening.” Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: I talked about it yesterday. I talked about something very important—I don’t know if it got—China was building massive plants in Mexico. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: Massive. The biggest plants in the world, and my friend was actually building it. It’s the one right there. Oh, that’s it. Guess what? They’re not building it anymore. You know that, right? Patrick Bet-David: Right, I heard you. President Trump: Why? Because of me. And if they built that, there would be no more Detroit. Now, Detroit’s been decimated over the years, but there would be no more Detroit. So, they’re building massive plants in Mexico—China is building them. And they’re going to make cars, sell them across the border, and destroy every automobile manufacturer, even in South Carolina and other places—Tennessee. They’re going to destroy it. You wouldn’t have one automaking company. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: What did I do? I said two months ago, “And if they do that, I will put a 100% or 200% or 2,000% tariff on these cars, and they will never enter America.” And that was it. And I said that four or five times during four or five speeches. And I met the man that’s building the plants two days ago when I was in Detroit at the Economic Club of Detroit, making a speech, talking about how we’re going to bring our car industry back, which is easy to do. All you have to do is the proper incentives. And I mean keeping Elon would have been easy to do, frankly. But nobody ever went to— Patrick Bet-David: I want to push back on this. I’m curious to know what you say with this. So, we thought about you. Everybody said, “Pat, let’s make sure we get one autograph hat of ‘The Future Looks Bright’ with the president’s signature on it and allow people to compete for it.” So, here’s what we’re doing. Anybody that places an order of ‘The Future Looks Bright,’ $100—the first hundred of you, one of you will be the lucky winner of the signed hat by Donald J. Trump. So, go to VTmerch.com. Minimum order $100. One of you will get this hat sent to you. Patrick Bet-David: So, going back to this—so, when I think about, by the way, Tim Cook—Steve Jobs dies. Apple’s worth $100 billion. Today, it’s worth $3 trillion. He 30Xed it, so he’s got credibility on what he did. He’s a very good—think Steve Jobs would have been as good as it’s interesting point you’re making? It’s a good point to debate. President Trump: Yeah. Patrick Bet-David: But I want to go to the China-Mexico. President Trump: Right. Patrick Bet-David: So, for the first time in a long time, actual labor is cheaper in Mexico than it is in China. Mexico is now $3.90 an hour, all in. China’s $4.50. Right? And when I think about this phone that Tim Cook, Steve Jobs—they built this phone. If I buy it made in China, it costs $1,100, okay? If I buy it—they tried to do a quarter in India—it backfired. They don’t have the infrastructure yet, so he kind of wanted to find out what to do next. If I buy this in the U.S., and it’s made in the U.S., it’s $2,400, right? So, there’s a part of it with Nixon where I think Nixon got it right. And years ago, you and Nixon had a relationship. He even said, whenever you were running, “You’re going to be president.” He said this many, many years ago. President Trump: He did say it. Nixon, or his wife said it—Pat. She said, “I watched somebody in the field, Donald, she said, I watched a man on television—a young man on television,” I have the letter. It’s the most beautiful letter. He said, “My wife just told me you’ll be president.” Because I knew him a little bit. And, uh, I said, “That’s interesting. I have to think about that.” But it was very nice, actually. But, no, she said it. Patrick Bet-David: Right. President Trump: But go ahead, please. Patrick Bet-David: So that’s when—whe
Like
Comment
Share
100 Percent Fed Up Feed
100 Percent Fed Up Feed
35 w

The Vatican Has a New Mascot….Meet “Luce”
Favicon 
100percentfedup.com

The Vatican Has a New Mascot….Meet “Luce”

The Vatican has just designed a new Mascot…. I know, I know, you would think that Jesus Christ would be sufficient, but no. No, what the Pope decided they really needed right now was a blue haired, pre pubescent, anime waif in a raincoat named ‘Luce’…which means “Light” or “Lightbearer”. Houston, we have a problem! The Vatican has announced the official mascot of the Holy Year 2025. It’s an anime character they call “Luce” for light. Featuring a blue haired, pre pubescent waif in a raincoat might not be the most edifying image at this moment for the church. Nor is this photo. Thoughts?! pic.twitter.com/pQAVTd1x7W — Raymond Arroyo (@RaymondArroyo) October 28, 2024 The comments are NOT very charitable towards the Pope or the Vatican: I know the Bible says: “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’” (John 14:6, ESV) And: “He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.” (Colossians 1:17-18, ESV) And: “For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.” (1 Corinthians 2:2, ESV) But the Catholic Church has decided Jesus Christ is out and “Luce the Lightbearer” is what we need now! Nevermind that it looks like a character from Inside Out 2, and has those big Disney pedo eyes, don’t worry about any of that. We need Luce! Oh, did I mention that the designer and his company are closely tied to Pride Month? Because….of course they are: NEW: Vatican unveils the official mascot for 2025 Jubilee year, as prep increases & pre-Jubilee events approach. It’s designed by Tokidoki creator Simone Legno, who highlights his Italian Catholic heritage. His company promotes Pride month. pic.twitter.com/9NM5IV6MtK — Michael Haynes (@MLJHaynes) October 28, 2024 It’s actually a full set of characters…. Collect them all! ERM bros we have more characters.https://t.co/3CY5FVcveH https://t.co/zkmN9mHBmr pic.twitter.com/LJ7NztX692 — Jaster Arroyx (@PapistCourier) October 28, 2024 The Church claims this will allow them to “live even within pop culture”, which I know was Jesus’ final commandment before he ascended back into Heaven, right? It’s straight out of Matthew 28: “And Jesus came and said to them, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.’ Oh and make sure you create graven images of an anime waif named Luce and make that your focus for 2025.“ What….the red part isn’t in your Bible? The Vatican has unveiled the official mascot of the Holy Year 2025: Luce (Italian for Light). Archbishop Fisichella says the mascot was inspired by the Church’s desire “to live even within the pop culture so beloved by our youth.” pic.twitter.com/hVU2CmYA3O — CatholicTV (@CatholicTV) October 28, 2024 CatholicNewsAgency confirms: Ahead of the 2025 Jubilee, the Vatican has launched a cartoon mascot unveiled Monday as the cheerful face of the Catholic Church’s upcoming holy year. The mascot, named Luce — which means “light” in Italian — is intended to engage a younger audience and guide visitors through the holy year. Archbishop Rino Fisichella, the Vatican’s chief organizer for the jubilee, described the mascot as part of the Vatican’s goal to engage with “the pop culture so beloved by our young people.” The mascot will debut this week at the Lucca Comics and Games, Italy’s celebrated convention for all things comics, video games, and fantasy, where the Vatican’s Dicastery for Evangelization will host a space dedicated to “Luce and Friends.” It will be the first time that a Vatican dicastery participates in a comics convention. Fisichella, who serves as the the pro-prefect of the Dicastery for Evangelization’s section for the new evangelization, said he hopes taking part in the convention “will allow us to speak to younger generations about the theme of hope, which is more central than ever in the evangelical message.” Clad in a yellow raincoat, mud-stained boots, and a pilgrim’s cross, Luce’s mission is to guide young pilgrims toward hope and faith with her trusty dog Santino at her side. Shells glimmer in her eyes, recalling the scallop shell of the Camino de Santiago, an emblem of the pilgrimage journey. Speaking at a Vatican press conference on Oct. 28 next to a plastic figurine of Luce, Fisichella described Luce’s shining eyes as “a symbol of the hope of the heart.” Luce, he said, will also be the face of the Holy See’s pavilion at Expo 2025 in Osaka, Japan, where she will represent the Vatican’s pavilion theme, “Beauty Brings Hope,” alongside Caravaggio’s “The Entombment of Christ,” a painting that will be temporarily on loan from the Vatican Museums for the expo. Simone Legno, the Italian co-founder of the pop culture brand tokidoki, designed Luce and her “pilgrim friends” — Fe, Xin, and Sky, each outfitted in brightly colored jackets. Luce’s yellow sailor’s raincoat is a nod to both the Vatican flag and to journeying through life’s storms. The mascot’s muddy boots represent a long and difficult journey, while her staff symbolizes the pilgrimage toward eternity. Legno, who admitted a lifelong love for Japanese pop culture, said he hopes that “Luce can represent the sentiments that resonate in the hearts of the younger generations.” “I am extremely grateful to the Dicastery for Evangelization for opening its doors to pop culture as well,” he said. A jubilee is a special holy year of grace and pilgrimage in the Catholic Church. It typically takes place once every 25 years, though the pope can call for extraordinary jubilee years more often, such as in the case of the 2016 Year of Mercy or the 2013 Year of Faith. Look, I know the Catholics get all mad at me whenever I dare criticize something they do, but what do you all think about this? Good move? Or has the Catholic Church lost its way? RELATED REPORTS: MEMO TO THE CATHOLICS: Please Stop Praying To Mary and Angels HERESY: Pope Francis Says “All religions are paths to reach God!” HERESY: Pope Francis Says "All religions are paths to reach God! (and Luce will guide you there!)" I've never actually been to Seminary, but I'm pretty sure on Day 1 the first thing you learn is Jesus is the way to God. Right? I mean, is that basically Christianity summed up in one sentence? Or if it's not that sentence then it's this sentence from John 14:6: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” Yet somehow the Pope missed that day in school and missed that verse in his Bible -- probably because it becomes more apparent with every passing day that he hasn't actually READ a Bible in years! The man is creating his own faith instead, in his own likeness, the way HE wants the world to be. That never ends well. Here's the latest heresy from the Pope, telling children in Singapore that, quote: ""All religions are paths to reach God," said Pope Francis. "They are—to make a comparison—like different languages, different dialects, to get there. But God is God for everyone." Pope Francis to children in Singapore: "All religions are paths to reach God. They are—to make a comparison—like different languages, different dialects, to get there. But God is God for everyone. If you start to fight saying 'my religion is more important than yours, mine is… pic.twitter.com/oR1Qpm9cb9 — Catholic Sat (@CatholicSat) September 13, 2024 From VaticanNews: The Holy Father went on to invite those gathered to join him in praying together for one another. "May God bless all of us, and when time passes and you are not young people, but older, and become grandparents," he urged. "Pass this on." God for all "God is God for all, and if God is God for all," he said, "then we are all sons and daughters of God." "All religions are paths to reach God," said Pope Francis. "They are—to make a comparison—like different languages, different dialects, to get there. But God is God for everyone." The Holy Father thanked the young people for engaging in interreligious dialogue, for respecting one another, and reassured them of his prayers. Here's the video: I gotta say, Pope Francis is emulating his father, Satan, in all that he does. He takes a portion of the truth and then twists it. Isn't that what Satan has done since the Garden of Eden? Oldest trick in the book. And it's one of Pope Francis' favorite tricks too. He starts off with truth: we are all children of God, all sons and daughters of God, all created in his image.  True! But then the Bible talks about this little thing called "sin" that Pope Francis and people like Joel Osteen NEVER want to talk about. And since they never talk about the sin problem, they never have to SOLVE the sin problem. So it's easy for them! Since there's no real problem to deal with, it's easy to just say "all religions lead to God!" Kum-bay-yah! Isn't this great?! The only problem is, it's not great if it's not true. If it's not true, you're actually doing a lot of eternal damage to a lot of people teaching that. It's also a problem because not even all the other religions of the world believe this. Pope Francis' statement would be deemed offensive by many religions around the world. Muslims, for example, do not believe that both Islam and Christianity lead to the same God.  It's why they're constantly blowing people up, throwing them off buildings, burning them alive in cages....because they don't believe that at all!  They call us the "Great Satan". Buddhists aren't violent, but they wouldn't agree with the statement either.  Their goal is not to get to God, their goal is to eventually fade away to "Nirvana"....basically to a point where they no longer exist. So basically......?  This Pope is a DOPE! And as luck would have it, Jonathan Cahn just recently posted a video completely exposing Pope Francis and showing how all power was stripped from him a few years ago. Check this out: FULL TRANSCRIPT: On December 17th, Pope Francis was preparing to issue a decree that would open the door to homosexuality in Catholic doctrine, practice, and life. Catholic doctrine states that the Pope sits in the chair, or the office, of Peter. That’s a whole other issue, but that is the Catholic belief and claim. According to that belief, Pope Francis sits in the succession, office, and authority of the Apostle Peter. There is a statue of Peter, the office of which Francis claims. It stands in South America, the land from which Francis comes. Furthermore, the statue of Peter stands in Argentina, the homeland of the Pope. The statue is located in the province of Buenos Aires. Buenos Aires is where the Pope comes from; he was over it before he became Pope. So, the statue is of the office that the Pope claims, in the land that the Pope is from, in the nation that is the Pope's nation, in the province of the city in which the Pope was presiding over. So, what happened? It didn’t happen long ago. What happened was a bolt of lightning came down and struck the statue. Does every lightning strike mean judgment? No, but this one is too much. It strikes the sign of the office in the land, in the nation, in the province of the Pope. And it turns out there are major lightning rods around the statue to prevent this, so this shouldn’t have happened, but it happened anyway. But it’s not only where the statue was and where the bolt of lightning came—it was when it all came. When the lightning struck the statue, it was on December 17th, 2023. Anything significant about that date? Well, yes. December 17th happens to be the birthday of the Pope. So, you have the office, the land, the nation, the province, the time, the birthday—all pointing to the present Pope. But something else: it struck the statue on December 17th. On December 17th, Pope Francis was preparing to issue that decree that would open the door to homosexuality in Catholic doctrine, practice, and life. So, the lightning bolt struck the statue of Peter not only on the Pope’s birthday, December 17th, but the very day the Vatican was planning to release that colossal decree that would change everything. It wasn’t just that the lightning bolt struck the statue—it’s what it did. I want you to see the statue, the head of the statue, before the lightning. Now, that’s a halo around the head. What does a halo symbolize? It symbolizes holiness—the holiness of the person around whom is the halo. Now, this is what the lightning did. Look at the image: the lightning bolt removed the halo from the statue. It removed the sign of holiness on the statue that points to Pope Francis. The sign would say there is no holiness. The act of blessing homosexual couples was an unholy act. And that was not all. I want you to look at the hand of the statue before the striking of the lightning bolt. The hand is holding the keys, as in the keys of Peter from the scripture when the Lord says, "I will give you the keys to the kingdom. What you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven, what you loose on Earth shall be loosed in heaven," saying that Peter and the authority of the Church believers are given authority, access, power, and a connection to heaven and the will of God. What did the lightning bolt do? I want you to see this now: the lightning bolt removed the keys. It melted them away, removed them. And what is that a sign of? The keys are a sign of authority, saying the authority is gone. No spiritual authority. The authority of God only comes inside the will of God. If you go outside the will of God, you can’t wield the authority of God. If you disobey the ways of God, you have no authority. And if any man goes against the will of God and instructs others to do the same, they have no authority at all. But a key is also about access—a link to heaven and a link to the things of God. The key is removed; there is no more access, or there is no access at all—it’s a closed and locked door. In the Bible, the right hand is a symbol of strength and power. Now, look at the statue—the hand of the statue before the lightning bolt. Now look at what happened to that hand after the strike of the lightning bolt. No power, no strength. In the Psalms, it’s written: "If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget its cunning." In other words, if I forget the purposes of God... well, the Pope forgot the purposes of God. The right hand was destroyed. In the Book of Kings, there’s a king named Jeroboam, an evil king. He builds a pagan shrine and an altar. He’s about to sacrifice on it when a prophet of God comes and rebukes him. Jeroboam orders his men to seize the prophet. He lifts up his hand as he orders the prophet's arrest. It goes against the will of God. Immediately, God strikes his hand so that his hand withers up. So, here is the hand of the statue here, all pointing to the Pope. It was struck and destroyed. The Pope had instructed this decree against the will of God. And so, this is not a sign of good; it’s a sign of evil. The Pope ordered that the Catholic Church may now bless homosexual unions. According to Catholic practice, blessings are given through the right hand. The officiant is to extend his right hand and bless. So, what happened? The very day before that decree to issue the go-ahead on the Catholic Church and priest blessing with their right hand homosexual unions, the lightning struck the right hand, the hand of blessing. It eviscerated it. Look at it, meaning there is no blessing; there can be no blessing—all blessings are nullified. You know, the previous head of the doctrine office said, "God cannot bless sin." The Pope said, in effect, "God can bless sin. The Catholic Church can bless sin." And so, the hand that blesses was struck down, in effect destroyed. In other words, God cannot bless, and there is no blessing—only a curse, and a curse on those who would bless what God has declared to be sin. Those of you in any church or ministry that blesses this—that which God clearly calls sin—do not in any way raise your hand to bless such things. The hand that is raised to bless that which God calls sin is the hand that is raised against God. It will be cut off. If you are in any church that blesses such things, talk to them that they might change. Pray for them. Show them this video. Give them the link. If they don’t, then leave because a curse rests upon that place. Whether you're Catholic, Protestant, or anything else, you cannot entrust your salvation to any man, any organization, anything except God. Man can go off, as you can see, but God and His word will never go off. The Bible says, "Let all men be liars, let God be true." God alone is our source; God alone is our shepherd. Follow Him regardless. There will be no religious seats or sections in heaven—only are you saved or not. Did you, for real, receive Jesus (Yeshua the Messiah) into your life and turn from sin and follow Him with all your heart? Were you born again, a true child of God? Did you live your life truly for Him and with Him and in Him and by Him? And if you haven’t, you need to do that. You need to get right with God. The most important thing you can do. If you have Catholic friends or anyone who needs to see this, get this video, get this link to them. Last thing: the statue of Peter in the province of Buenos Aires was one of two statues. The other statue was of Paul, the Apostle Paul. Now, in that statue, Paul is holding up a sword of iron. It was untouched. Nobody claims to hold the office of Paul or his keys, but Paul said, "Lift up the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God," and that’s the final word. In days of evil, in days of apostasy, it is not less important but more important that you, as a child of God, hold up the word of God without bending, without compromise, without fear. The more the world falls away, the more you stand strong. And now, I leave you with this word from the book of Ephesians from the Apostle Paul: "Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. Put on the full armor of God so that you’ll be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. Because our struggle isn’t against flesh and blood, but against rulers, powers, world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in high places. Therefore, take up the full armor of God so that you will be able to resist on the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm. Stand firm therefore, having belted your waist with truth, having put on the breastplate of righteousness, having strapped on your feet the preparation of the gospel of peace. In addition to all, take up the shield of faith by which you will be able to extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God." All right, if you haven’t already, make sure you don’t miss getting these messages when they come out. Remember, hit subscribe. This is Jonathan Cahn. Until next time, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. [Music] Shalom! Hi, I’m Jonathan Cahn, and I hope you were blessed with the video. Make sure you hit the subscribe button and tap the bell icon so you’re notified every time a new video is posted. Feel free to share your reactions with your comments on how you were blessed, and share this video with your friends. Thanks for watching, and I’ll see you next time. [Music]
Like
Comment
Share
100 Percent Fed Up Feed
100 Percent Fed Up Feed
35 w

Loy Brunson SCOTUS Case Is NOT Dead: “It’s Go Time!”
Favicon 
100percentfedup.com

Loy Brunson SCOTUS Case Is NOT Dead: “It’s Go Time!”

Loy Brunson was back on my show, The Daily Truth Report, yesterday with a fantastic message…. His Supreme Court case is NOT dead and could be pulled off the shelf at any moment! Does it feel to anyone else like perhaps all the things we’ve been waiting on for the last 4 years are suddenly all going to strike roughly at the same time? One right after the other in rapid fire, and the enemies within our country will be unable to withstand them all? I’m starting to get that vibe in a big way! First we get President Trump back into office and then everything starts to hit: Elon Musk drops the mother of all Twitter files (as he recently hinted he would do)…. The Supreme Court suddenly pulls the Brunson Case off the shelf and unexpectedly rules on it, removing some 381 members from Congress for violating their oaths of office…. Meanwhile, Elon Musk and Vivek go to work on cutting out 90% of the Federal Government toxic waste…. And amidst all of that, the Boss himself, President Trump is doing his thing all at the same time, bringing down energy costs, rebuilding our military, closing the border, deporting hundreds of thousands of violent illegal immigrants…. Oh my! Get excited my friends! Here’s Loy with more: Backup here if needed on Rumble: Here are the two links you need: Letter writing campaigns https://loybrunson.com Constitution revelations https://7discoveries.com Please visit either of the websites listed above to join the Letter Writing Campaign! We are aiming for 100 million letters sent to the Supreme Court and we need your help! We need to show them that the majority of this country supports them and wants this action taken. So just like voting, your action here is so important and it will be added to many others! One voice alone is not powerful, but 100 million of us banded together can change the world! Please send your letter here! And here’s more on Loy’s work involving the Federal Reserve Bank system: Want more? We’ve been covering Loy Brunson and his brothers for a long time, please check this out: INCREDIBLE: Meet Loy Brunson, One Of The Incredible Brunson Brothers! Have you heard a lot about the Brunson Brothers (I also call them the TRUMPet Brothers) Supreme Court case….but don’t know much about who they are? Same here. They kind of came onto the scene from nowhere (remember how Bo Polny keeps telling us it will happen “suddenly” and in a 24 hour period and how no one will see the plan coming? Well they certainly fit the bill!). But the funny thing is they had some relative fame already as TRUMPet players before doing any of this work with the Supreme Court. I’ve posted a little bit about their trumpet playing before, but now I want to introduce you to Loy Brunson, the Brunson brother who seems to be the Legal Eagle (not to take anything away from the other four). But OH MY is he incredible! THIS is what all of our elected officials should sound like! Can you imagine a Congress filled with 535 people like this guy? Our country would change overnight! We would be the shining city on a hill…the envy of all nations! And yet we can a fat buffoon who can’t even wear pants properly (you all know who I mean), pencil neck (you know him), bat-crazy Nancy and Chuckie Schumer.  Just to name a few. But you have to check this guy out… This may be one of the best videos you ever watch. Listen as he explains how the Constitution literally solves EVERY problem we have… Like taxes. Many of you know this, but we didn’t have the IRS until 1862! Our country served perfectly well — and thrived — for over 100 years without taxes! Why didn’t we have them? Because it turns out they are actually Unconstitutional! Brunson explains. It’s all right in the Constitution! He covers a ton of other topics too, but my favorite was his finding of what he calls the “Interpretation Clause” in the 9th Amendment. He says he was the first to discover it, and I think he’s right because I searched for “Interpretation Clause Constitution” and nothing comes up in search results. And yet, there it is plain as day….ignored for decades and centuries! We’re not a perfect country and the Founding Fathers were not perfect people….BUT….I do believe they were divinely inspired by God to write that document and you’ll be blown away as you listen to Loy Brunson explain more. Watch and enjoy right here: Backup on Rumble: Pass it around and let’s start waking some people up! And now if you want more on the Supreme Court case, keep reading… TRUMPet Supreme Court Case Moving Forward! TGP Confirmed! Several weeks ago, I was one of the ONLY websites to tell you about Brunson v. Adams, the Supreme Court Case that may upend the 2020 election steal. In fact, I was so early that many people doubted it was real. Our articles are ALWAYS real. If I can’t vet the article, I don’t run it. And this was 100% vetted by the best source possible: the Supreme Court website! That’s kind of what it means to be a journalist…. You take in all the information and sometimes you break the story! That’s what we did here. So much so that one comment I read to my article said: I don’t think it’s real, I haven’t seen the Epoch Times or Gateway Pundit cover it! Well….with all apologies to the commenter, the Epoch Times covered it shortly thereafter and The Gateway Pundit covered it today….again. I’m still waiting for my apology from the commenter (I forget who it was, they are not memorable) but I won’t stay up all night waiting. In all seriousness, the story is VERY real and very exciting! From my friends at The Gateway Pundit, here is Tim Canova: While there has been much public attention on the U.S. Supreme Court’s present consideration of the “independent state legislature” theory in Moore v. Harper involving North Carolina’s redistricting, that case would not immediately upend the 2020 Presidential Election. In contrast, a little-known case that appeared recently on the Court docket could do just that. The case of Brunson v. Adams, not even reported in the mainstream media, was filed pro se by ordinary American citizens – four brothers from Utah — seeking the removal of President Biden and Vice President Harris, along with 291 U.S. Representatives and 94 U.S. Senators who voted to certify the Electors to the Electoral College on January 6, 2021 without first investigating serious allegations of election fraud in half a dozen states and foreign election interference and breach of national security in the 2020 Presidential Election. The outcome of such relief would presumably be to restore Donald Trump to the presidency. The important national security interests implicated in this case allowed the Brunsons to bypass an appeal that was frozen at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit and get the case to the Supreme Court which has now scheduled a hearing for January 6, 2023. The Brunson Petition for a Writ of Certiorari would require the votes of only four Justices to move the case forward. It seems astounding that the Court would wade into such waters two years to the day after the Congressional vote to install Joe Biden as President. But these are not normal times. Democrats may well push legislation in this month’s lame duck session of Congress to impose term limits and a mandatory retirement age for Justices, and thereby open the door to packing the Court. Such a course would seem to be clear violations of Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution which provides that Justices “shall hold their Offices during good Behavior.” In addition to such institutional threats to the Supreme Court, several Justices and their families have been living under constant threats to their personal security since the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Perhaps these institutional and security threats have provided powerful incentives for the Court to put Brunson v. Adams on its dockets as a shield to deter any efforts by the lame duck Congress to infringe on the Court’s independence. Or perhaps conservatives on the Court are serious about using the Brunson case as a sword to remove public officials who they believe have violated their constitutional Oaths of office by rubber-stamping Electors on Jan. 6th without first conducting any investigation of serious allegations of election fraud and foreign election interference. Moreover, recent weeks have brought a cascade of news suggesting the likelihood of an impending constitutional crisis that could be difficult to resolve without the Court’s intervention. It is now clear that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was colluding with social media giants Twitter and Facebook to censor news of Hunter Biden’s laptop in the weeks leading up to the 2020 election – a most egregious First Amendment violation intended to rig the election outcome and perhaps to install an unaccountable and criminal puppet government. Meanwhile, the January 6th committee may soon send a criminal referral to the Justice Department to arrest President Trump even though his reinstated tweets are a reminder that he was not calling for insurrection but for peaceful protest on January 6th. More recently, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) was reportedly working with Big Tech to censor election critics.   Supreme Court Justices may well see these approaching storm clouds and conclude that the Court’s intervention is necessary to prevent larger civil unrest resulting from constitutional violations that are undermining public trust and confidence in the outcomes of both the 2020 and 2022 elections. When criminals break the law — state and federal statutes — to rig an election, we are dependent on prosecutions by law enforcement agencies that have sadly become politicized and complicit. When they break the Constitution — the supreme law of the land — to rig an election, the only recourse may be the Supreme Court or military tribunals.   As the Brunson lawsuit argues, all of Congress was put on notice prior to its January 6th vote by more than a hundred of its own members detailing serious allegations of election frauds and calling for creation of an electoral commission to investigate the allegations. Moreover, the Office of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was required to submit a report on foreign threats to the 2020 Presidential election by December 18, 2020. That deadline was set by executive order and by Congress itself. When December 18th came and went without ODNI submitting its report, Congress should have started asking questions and investigating. In fact, DNI John Ratcliffe announced on that day that the 17 U.S. intelligence agencies he was overseeing had found evidence of foreign election interference but were split as to its significance and whether such breach of national security was sufficient to overturn the outcome of the election. And yet there was no action whatsoever by Congress, no inquiry and no investigation. Instead, Congress approved the possibly fraudulent election results on January 6th without asking any questions of the DNI and the Intelligence Community. When the results of the 1876 presidential election were in doubt, Congress created a special Electoral Commission made up of five House members, five Senators, and five Supreme Court Justices to investigate. In contrast, in early 2021 Congress had nearly two weeks to investigate before the January 20th date of the Presidential Inauguration. Had Congress waited even just one more day to January 7th, they would have received the long-awaited ODNI report reflecting a split in the Intelligence Community and the DNI’s own conclusion that the People’s Republic of China had interfered to influence the outcome of the presidential election. As Dr. Barry A. Zulauf, the Analytic Ombudsman for the Intelligence Community, concluded at the time, the Intelligence Community shamefully delayed their findings until after the January 6th Electoral College certification by Congress because of their political disagreements with the Trump administration. This paints a picture of collusion and conspiracy involving members of Congress and U.S. intelligence agencies to coverup evidence of foreign election interference and constituting the crime of High Treason. The Brunson lawsuit does not claim the election was stolen, merely that a large majority of Congress, by failing to investigate such serious allegations of election rigging and breaches of national security, violated their Oaths to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic – an Oath also taken by Supreme Court Justices and members of the U.S. military.
Like
Comment
Share
The First - News Feed
The First - News Feed
35 w ·Youtube News & Oppinion

YouTube
Americans Are Exhausted with the Presidential Election
Like
Comment
Share
Classic Rock Lovers
Classic Rock Lovers  
35 w

"We're now eager to make a noise and make a mess and make mistakes": Pete Townsend says The Who will work together again in 2025
Favicon 
www.loudersound.com

"We're now eager to make a noise and make a mess and make mistakes": Pete Townsend says The Who will work together again in 2025

"We're now eager to make a noise and make a mess and make mistakes": Pete Townsend says The Who will work together again in 2025
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Satire
Conservative Satire
35 w ·Youtube Funny Stuff

YouTube
It’s A Mess Out There
Like
Comment
Share
One America News Network Feed
One America News Network Feed
35 w ·Youtube News & Oppinion

YouTube
OAN Investigates: Kamala Harris; A Damsel In Distress
Like
Comment
Share
One America News Network Feed
One America News Network Feed
35 w ·Youtube News & Oppinion

YouTube
Trump Appears on 'The Joe Rogan Experience' | TIPPING POINT ?
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 6312 out of 56666
  • 6308
  • 6309
  • 6310
  • 6311
  • 6312
  • 6313
  • 6314
  • 6315
  • 6316
  • 6317
  • 6318
  • 6319
  • 6320
  • 6321
  • 6322
  • 6323
  • 6324
  • 6325
  • 6326
  • 6327

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund