Trump Considers THIRD TERM As President, Bannon Says There IS A Plan ft. Cliff Maloney
BUY CAST BREW COFFEE TO SUPPORT THE SHOW - https://castbrew.com/ Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com Host: Tim Pool @Timcast (everywhere) Guest: Cliff Maloney @Maloney (X) My Second Channel - https://www.youtube.com/timcastnews Podcast Channel - https://www.youtube.com/TimcastIRL
So we got some big elections that are happening right now.
And there's big concerns about whether or not the right is going to win in Virginia, in New Jersey.
We also have the Proposition Prop 50 to redistrict in California.
Trump has talked about, I'm sorry, the DOJ is sending election monitors to these locations.
I want to get into that, but the first thing I want to ask you is, just to get the spicy bit up front, Trump hasn't ruled out running or somehow getting a third term.
And he was just interviewed.
He's on Air Force One and he says, let's go up against AOC.
She's low IQ.
There's rumors of a plot where Trump would run as Vance's VP.
And then once Vance wins, he resigns or something, and then Trump becomes president again.
Yeah, and I think what he's doing is genius because they're going to continuously be focused on that.
Look, if somebody makes up something about you and it's not true, you know, this idea that you're a dictator, and then you can go and continuously make jokes and normal people know that you're joking and the left just because it's, look, you know, I told you, look, he's doing this.
I think considering what we've seen so far, I would entertain the possibility.
So when Bannon brought this up, he said there's a plan at the appropriate time.
He'll announce it.
The 22nd Amendment says you can't be elected more than twice.
And I think for most people, like obviously you're saying it's probably trolling.
Most people probably assume he's just goofing off and he's poking the bear.
But there is a possibility of appointment, which bypasses any argument on the Second Amendment.
It says elected.
What if Trump is appointed?
What if with what we've seen?
So now we're transitioning into these election monitors and what I want to talk to you about.
We are seeing the DOJ is sending election monitors out.
They want to make sure there's no funny business.
This is actually fairly common for the DOJ to do, but the Democrats are losing their minds over it.
Newsom said Trump is rigging the election.
What happens?
You know, before we get into all of that stuff, just segueing through, what happens if come 2028, just before the election, something happens discernibly, be it clear evidence of some kind of rigging or even terror attacks, which calls the results into question.
And there is no definitive winner between the Democrat and the Republican.
And it's not because of any kind of tie or any kind of numerical outcome, but because no one can be certain the results are correct after something happening at polling locations disrupts the process.
Well, one, I mean, I don't want us to ever be Zelensky or Ukraine and cancel elections.
I think you got to move forward, even in the midst of tragedies, wars.
You got to elect the leaders that are serving the people.
Two, I think the DOJ, what you just said, Tim, is 100% correct, right?
The left will take this as some hysteric moment of overstep by the federal government.
We've been doing this for decades.
The DOJ has sent people to these polling locations to monitor them for decades.
And even just in 2024, they passed the COCO Act, which pretty much enhanced what the DOJ does to say that congressional staffers can go in and they can watch and secure the election.
So look, we have a legal process.
The legal process is going to handle some of these things.
There's a lot of unprecedented things that could happen.
And a lot of it's kind of blurry and unclear.
But we still have a country.
We still have a republic.
We still have different separations of power.
And I think the judicial system, we got to make sure people can trust the election, but that's going to be who will decide whether these electors are certified, whether each state is happening.
Yeah, look, I think that a lot of the national issues we saw in 2024 are very similar in Jersey, right?
If Republican Jack Chitterelli gets elected, you're talking about lower energy rates.
You're talking about ending the wokeness.
You're not going to have men in girls' sports.
The immigration issue, he's going to be working with President Trump.
And honestly, just the whole role of government.
New Jersey is out of control.
If you compare the tax rates across the board, whether it's individual taxes, corporate taxes, business taxes, it's unsustainable.
I mean, Tim, I've had about 10 different of my individual donors who have told me in New Jersey that if Mikey Sherrill wins this election, that they are moving their company to Florida or Tennessee or somewhere else where they can do business.
I think people look at New York as being horrific.
New Jersey's taxes are off the charts.
And I just think people there with the cost of living, the biggest benefit you're going to find is if Republican Jack Chitterelli gets elected, it'll be a huge boost to working blue-collar New Jersey.
I was in Jersey for a little while, first in Bergen County, and then we moved down south to like the Woodbury area, just outside of Philadelphia, but on the Jersey side.
And we were trying to launch all of this stuff that we were doing in Jersey, but it was impossible.
And I would argue that we actually dodged a bullet and got lucky.
We were looking at buying property.
And because it's so difficult to run a business in Jersey, we ended up saying, maybe this isn't the right idea.
Like we tried to buy a building.
It was a disaster.
We were disappointed.
And it was a great building.
It's a big office and we were going to do so much amazing stuff.
I was reading about New Jersey's youth brain drain.
Young people flee the state.
It has failed the younger generation.
And I was like, how do we turn that around?
Come on, we can make New Jersey great again, right?
Nope.
No, we could not.
So unfortunately, maybe if we stuck around, we could have helped, but I decided to get out.
And now, of course, we briefly went to West Virginia and then we ended up in, now we're in West.
We went to Maryland.
Now we're in West Virginia.
And it's unfortunate, but the state has just been horribly, horribly mismanaged, in my opinion, corrupt.
It makes it impossible for you to run a functional business.
Why would someone stick around?
So I'm hoping, you know, what we saw with Jeff Van Druze switching parties all those years ago, those trends continue, much like, you know, what we saw in my neighborhood in Chicago, despite Chicago being deep blue, my neighborhood, which was blue in 2016, is now red staunchly for Donald Trump.
I'm hoping we'll see some of that in New Jersey and we can start fixing all of these problems.
And look, Tim, you know, the pendulum has to swing back, right?
Eventually things get bad enough that normal people, regardless of party, right?
Now, this isn't even a partisan thing, but when it becomes so corrupt and when the government is just making things so difficult with red tape, eventually people push back.
And look, if you had to look at different places in the United States, forget the policies, just talk about the actual land and opportunities and the seasons.
New Jersey is a beautiful place to live.
You've got the beaches.
You've got all of these just, it's so much, it's just ripe for good business.
And these politicians have just made it so impossible for young people, for individuals.
Like you said, even just trying to start a business, some of these regulations are just out of control.
And why would you ever pick a state like that when you have those other opportunities not too far away?
And that's the problem they're having is no one staying in New Jersey.
Let's talk about if you are a, let's say you're a moderate and you're like, I don't know, I don't like crazy people having guns.
Well, New Jersey is just plum nuts.
Okay.
It is the craziest place.
I had a guy try to break into my house.
He was a pedophile and he was demanding that you or hoping I would interview him and tell the world about his story and how he was framed or something.
I don't know.
It was three in the morning and he tries entering my home.
I call the police.
Fortunately, they're nearby.
They come, take the guy, they stop him, they find him.
I get one of these cops.
He says, if it were me, I'd answer the door with a shotgun.
And I said, oh, okay, then what?
These cops explain to me.
In New Jersey, if someone breaks into your house and screams that they're going to kill you, you are not allowed to shoot them.
Only when you are cornered with nowhere to go, if the person is expressing an intent to kill you, can you use legal force?
And I said, and then what?
The cop told me you'd be arrested and charged with a felony for murder.
And when you're when you finally make it to trial, you can explain to the judge why you were innocent and try and use self-defense as your claim.
But in this state, the victims are penalized and the criminals run rampant.
And so, you know, with that combined with the business issues, I said, listen, by all means, you want to have strict gun laws, whatever, fine, but at least allow people to defend themselves.
And the state doesn't.
It's more than just the governor.
You need the state legislature to shift.
You need every conservative-minded, every moderate, every reasonable person to go and vote.
Yeah, and I think you just hit on the two major things we're trying to do, which is one, you got to flip the governor's mansion, but then we've got four to five legislative districts that have to flip to give some control back to what I would call the rational folks on guns in New Jersey.
You're over the target here.
It is the most radically run state.
The gun grabbers have full control on the policies in the state.
Let me explain this to you.
You know, since Charlie's assassination, for all of these public events, especially more high-profile, we had an event in Wildwood, Benny Johnson, Jack Pasovic, Scott Pressler, myself.
We all had security with us.
And when I talked to the security team, this is a group that's not based in Jersey.
And I told them the event is in Jersey and we were going to need body men with us.
You should have heard the sigh from our team that was like, oh my gosh.
Because even in New Jersey, the only carve-out, the only carve-out to being able to protect and carry a gun with somebody that is supposed to serve as security is you have to be an ex-policeman.
You have to be a retired state trooper.
It's like the only carve-out.
Or maybe those are the people you can go to.
But to me, to think you literally are hiring security and those people, imagine what citizens have rights to.
If people that are former law enforcement are the only ones, that's bonkers.
Yeah, the ruling in the ruling pertaining to New York where they allow you, like states now have to issue permits.
When I lived in Jersey, they told, so for the first thing that happened was I was trying to get a gun because we had these threats.
I was informed it wouldn't matter anyway.
They told me, if you shoot a guy who breaks into your house, you're going to go to jail.
You're going to be charged with murder.
And you can plead your case to the judge and maybe you'll get bailed.
But so I said, what am I supposed to do?
And they said, flee.
I'm like, flee where?
I'm in my home.
And what I was told by the cops, they were like, imagine telling a judge, I'd rather kill a guy than stand outside somewhere.
You think they're going to let you go for that?
They're going to convict you.
And it's the craziest thing.
First, I go to the police.
They all lie to me on how to get a gun.
Finally, I figured out if you want to buy a gun, ask the guys who sell them.
They told me what to do, how to fill out the paperwork.
And then it was, it was relatively quick.
It didn't take that long.
But you got to get like ID'd.
You got to go to a police station.
And if you want to be able to actually carry the weapon, forget it.
You have to be famous.
I'm not kidding.
They told me you have to prove there is a reason you need to carry it.
And that means you are a famous individual who is wealthy.
That's it.
In the state of New Jersey, back, this is several years ago, like 2018, I think.
In order to carry a weapon, concealed, open, or otherwise, you have to prove you are rich and you have to prove you're famous because just rich ain't enough.
No one's going to target you.
Just famous, maybe that'll qualify.
And that is an insane standard that it's ridiculous.
Now, that being said, it's not just New Jersey, though.
I know you guys are working up there in New Jersey, but what do you think about what's going on in Virginia?
Because let me tell you, we're talking about self-defense and protection.
I'm a few minutes away from Virginia.
Let me tell you how worried I am and my family because we drive down the road and we see signs for Jay Jones everywhere.
And this is a guy who said he wants the children of his political rivals murdered and he wants conservatives murdered.
And he wants to own law enforcement in that state.
He didn't lose an endorsement.
He barely went down in the polls.
If this guy wins, it is a terrifying reality for what's going to happen to anybody, anyone conservative-minded.
Yeah, I think this is a huge moment for Virginia to decide which direction they're going to go.
I lived in Virginia for a couple of years, Northern Virginia.
I always thought it was a pretty good place to live.
Northern Virginia is a little crazy with a lot of their laws.
But if this Jay Jones guy wins, I think it's just going to send a message that not only has the Democrat Party lost its way in the party leadership, but a lot of the party voters.
I've always been a believer that a lot of times it's the radical activists or the radical donors.
And that's what kind of the politicians react to.
If voters in Virginia decide that a guy who fantasized about killing a political opponent and his kids, if he gets elected, I'm going to have a real trouble.
I mean, that's going to be difficult for me to understand how you justify it.
Like, I get it.
You know, you vote along party lines, but it's not like these voters are going to the polls, Tim, and don't know.
This is the number one story.
Every single voter knows about it.
If you want to do a split ticket because you can't vote for him, but you're a Democrat, I can at least understand that.
But to cast your vote for a guy who says he wants to put a bullet in the children's head of your opponent, that's insane to me.
And the fact that we even have to say it, think about how wild that is.
20 years ago, I hope and I think this person will be run from public life.
Now, Democrats are figuring out a way to spin it and justify supporting them.
And this whole idea that they are the party of peace, I think not only did 2024 kind of move the needle on that, but every day we're seeing more and more of this doubling down on the bad bets.
But it's just who the parties become.
Tim, I really don't know if they're going to be a national party unless they start to pivot away from the crazy stuff.
But the radicals have them by the horns right now.
They're doubling down on all the woke nonsense.
And I'm here for it, right?
As somebody trying to elect liberty-minded Republicans, sure, but I'm just waiting.
It's not really a joke, but you know, when these Democrats call people on the right Nazis, my response is, I know you don't actually think I'm a Nazi.
And when they say, well, how do you know I don't think that?
Because if I was, you'd vote for me.
We've seen it in Maine.
When they falsely accuse a conservative of being a Nazi, what they're really saying is to the normies, don't vote for him.
But I got to be honest, you know, I think it was Crystal Ball, you know, podcaster said, she'd rather vote for the guy with the regrettable tattoo.
That's how she described it, than a politician who supported actual genocide.
And it's like, well, look, that's fine if you want to accuse Israel of genocide.
They're both.
Like both candidates are representing that in your view, if that's what your argument is.
But they're voting for it with a smile on their faces because I don't think they ever really opposed it, especially the anti-Israel cohort on the Democratic side.
I think that's largely what motivates them, to be honest.
And I think this guy in Maine, again, by all means, criticize Israel.
But I'm going to say in this particular instance, this guy's very anti-Israel.
He probably hates Jews and he's got a totem cough on his chest for 18 years.
That's not an accident.
You don't accidentally get that.
I don't believe it for a second.
And I think a lot of these Democrats are probably thinking, yeah, okay, well, we hate Israel too.
And so they're going to vote for him for that reason.
Well, and I think in the past, you know, people would want to distance themselves from radical lunatics like this.
But now they look at the idea of, well, the Supreme Court is that important, right?
Passing legislation in the U.S. Senate is that important.
This is our guy.
They think loyalty matters more than decency.
I mean, that's the Democrat Party of today.
But like you said, this guy's had that tattoo for 18 years.
The mental gymnastics you have to do to be able to spin why you still support that person, because behind the scenes, you know, that's your best shot at winning the seat is wild, but that's what they do.
And the right, the MAGA group has an element of this to a certain degree, but it's a minority on the right.
Some prominent individuals will defend Trump literally no matter what he does, even when he does bad things or makes mistakes.
The left is the dominant.
I was talking to a guy, maybe you'll end up hearing about this, but there's a guy that I know.
He's an older guy, he's a boomer.
And he was complaining to me that my Tim Katz signed the press corps press agreement.
And his question was: if every other news organization refused to do it, it's wrong for you to do it.
And he's a lot, he's entitled to his opinion, but his opinion is based on what the people do, not on what is true.
And this is what I see largely of the Democrats.
They don't care about policy, don't care what is true.
They care what their group think is.
And if the group says we are taking an action, don't you dare do otherwise.
Otherwise, you are our enemy.
That's all they're voting on.
So if a progressive guy's got a literal Nazi tattoo and seems to be a Nazi, they're like, doesn't matter.
Group thinks it's okay.
We support him.
That's what we are trying to defeat.
Now, you know, the challenge for you, Cliff, and for everybody else who's voting is trying to convince moral moderates and conservatives to vote based on the merits.
It's very difficult.
For liberals, it's just do as we say because we're the majority.
And Tim, you're hitting on something that most people don't understand, which is when they changed all the rules during COVID to have these longer elections.
And I'm not even saying they did this intentionally.
They probably did.
But what happens is they made it more about collecting ballots and just getting people to play on their team because you have more time to do that.
You have less time to individually target one day where you can message and figure out how do you talk to people about issues, get them to care.
When you have these long election seasons, it really helps those that do have the group think because they don't even want you to spend time.
It's just vote for our party, vote for our party.
And we as Republicans are finally doing the same thing.
I mean, obviously we're talking about issues, but it benefits them because they're just rack up as much as you can.
They don't even want you to look at the name of the candidate.
Just vote for the party.
Republicans want to talk about the issues.
It's a much tougher sell.
Doesn't mean we shouldn't do the work, but we got to grind to get those votes because the Dems just kind of, they get in line at the trough, man.
You've got this Prop 50 in California now where they want to basically eliminate, what is it, the remaining Republican seats in the state.
And I think they'll be able to do it because this is what happens when you create a uniparty state, a single party controlled state.
Over a long enough period of time, moderate to conservative individuals flee the area, be it a city, state, county, or otherwise, making it easier and easier for one party to win every election.
And then they entrench what remains of their politics.
They're going to turn California into a universally Democrat uniparty state.
And then they're going to try and manipulate federal elections to a great degree.
What are we seeing with the Republican response?
I mean, you think the Voting Rights Act, there's some speculation that the Voting Rights Act is effectively overturned by the Supreme Court.
Republicans could gain 20 seats.
Democrats could lose 20 seats, creating a permanent Republican majority in the federal government.
I think the narrative the left tries to say is that, oh, for years, the left has been fair and now all of a sudden the right's being aggressive.
It's completely bonkers.
The left has used the rules to benefit them when it comes to gerrymandering for decades.
And Republicans have always been afraid of being called racist.
We're afraid of being called misogynistic.
You know, oh, if we do this, come on, guys, fight with the rules you can fight with.
And a lot of this is not even at the federal level.
Yes, they've just done that with the Voting Rights Act, but a lot of this governors could take action today.
Legislatures could take action today.
You just saw it in North Carolina.
They're pushing with the state legislature to change it.
But we need to be on offense in every state.
That doesn't mean we're doing anything illegal.
But the whole narrative that the left follows the rules and now we're going to try to steal seats, they have been following the rules and gerrymandering to benefit them for decades.
It's time we fight back too.
Follow the rules, gerrymander how you need to.
Every seat's having the same amount of population, but do what they do to create the maps instead of being afraid of being called some sort of name and fight to win.
I got to be honest, seeing the response to Charlie Kirk's assassination, seeing Jay Jones's inner thoughts and desires about murdering children.
I'm pretty sure if you went to Democrats, this is the scary thing.
Let's go back in time.
I'll put it like this.
There were accusations that people who were vote counting were cheating for the Democrats.
And the left argues there's no conspiracy that's crazy.
And my response is there doesn't need to be a conspiracy.
Democrats just know what to do and they're willing to do it.
So some random woman who hates Republicans, she's in a polling location counting ballots and she goes, I'm going to disqualify this Trump vote because this is smudged.
I think it says Bowdoin, but he means Biden.
It's good.
And as long as that bias exists among Democrats and not among Republicans, Democrats are going to favor themselves in every election.
It's called a standalone complex where all of these people take an action in a singular direction without being prompted to do so.
I think that's a problem we face.
If you go to Democrats and say, do you, I bet if you poll Democrats, should the Democrats cheat to win elections to stop Republicans from getting power?
I bet you'd get at least a third to say yes.
And the next third would think yes, but say no because they'd be embarrassed.
And it reminds me of when we pull people on the left and say, is political violence sometimes, sometimes justified?
And the fact that even more than 0% of people say that is whackadoo.
But yeah, I think you're right.
I never heard it breaking down like that.
And I think you're right, where it's like you have enough of these people radicalized and thinking that for the betterment of the democracy, as they would call it, we must do this.
We must cheat to win.
It doesn't mean there's some Wizard of Oz pulling the strings.
It's just they have the opportunity there.
And look, we see this in county after county.
This is why I believe we need the most extremely secure elections possible, the most transparent, because yeah, you're going to have bad actors, right?
You're going to have individuals doing this.
And there's not really a solution other than open the books, figure out systems that people can trust.
And at the end of the day, you want your citizens to trust the results of the election.
And everything Trump's doing is enhancing transparency, period.