March 19, 2026 - American Journal - Breanna Morello
02:37:06
The American Journal: Trump Threatens To ‘Blow Up’ World’s Largest Gas Field, Denies Approving Israeli Pars Strikes! Energy War Hits Breaking Point As Tit-For-Tat Strikes Rock Gulf Energy Infrastructure, Saudi Trust In Iran “Completely Shattered” - FULL SHOW - 03.19.2026
Brianna Morello and Dan Lyman dissect a chaotic week where Secretary Hegseth confirms $200 billion for the Iran war, claiming 7,000 targets struck, while Tulsi Gabbard faces congressional scrutiny over intelligence assessments. The episode exposes alleged pay-to-play schemes involving $220 million in ads, FISA court abuses, and DHS leadership controversies surrounding Kristi Noem's replacement. Amidst these political fires, callers demand the removal of 400,000 foreign truckers to save American jobs, arguing that current immigration policies prioritize profit over national security and worker safety. Ultimately, the show suggests the administration's aggressive foreign policy and domestic mismanagement are creating an untenable crisis for both the economy and constitutional liberties. [Automatically generated summary]
Revelations of that, you know, the elites at a very high level, and we actually know the basic number of them as well, are doing human trafficking, human rape, and human sacrificing of children because they're the closest to God.
And when I read this, I mean, it's unthinkable.
Like, you don't want to believe it.
And so I mentioned it on Joe Rogan, but I also mentioned that I was starting an AI company.
And what shocked me is after the show, more people wanted to talk about the AI thing.
And more people were upset about, you know, that I was starting an AI company than they were about, you know, this nightmare of elites eating babies.
And I mean, we've seen people who have spoken about it, who have, you know, been who have participated in it and who have left.
You know, it's a kind of an initiation that you go through to become, a confidence initiation that you go through to become part of a team.
And that's when I realized that this is not something that's unique to the elites, that human nature involves these kinds of hazing initiations, or else we wouldn't see it happening since childhood.
Yes, quote, I'm telling you, they're uninteresting, they're vicious, they're vitriolic, they're really, really not good people, and I'm willing to say that on the record, close quote.
Well, I'm not saying the entirety, but the ones who have controlled Hollywood for the last 40 years, that quote could be attributed to the campus left as well.
It could be attributed to people who are in charge in Venezuela right now.
Anywhere where the left gets control, you start to see political correctness run amok.
You start seeing dissenting views quashed.
They use projection.
Right before they do so, they start attacking the people that they're about to go after of being guilty of the very things that they do.
Yeah, and they're willing it into happening and they're showing everyone an example of what it would be so that, again, the revelation of the method, you see what's there and it makes it okay for it to happen.
We watch our allies mocking us on the world stage.
We need to know.
Were those questions asked?
How did you answer them for the President of the United States?
And did he listen?
I understand that the administration may come to the Congress to ask for funding of $200 billion for this war.
As you answered those questions for us today, I'd ask you to remember that old saying: if you want me there for the landing, make sure I'm there at the takeoff.
Good morning, Chairman Crawford, Ranking Member Himes, members.
I'm here today to present the 2026 annual threat assessment and joined by my colleagues, the directors of the CIA, the DIA, FBI, and NSA.
This briefing is being provided in accordance with ODNI's statutory responsibility.
What I'm briefing here today does not represent my personal views or opinions, but rather the assessments of the intelligence community of the threats facing the United States, our homeland, and our interests.
In this assessment, we're following the structure of priorities that were laid out in the President's national security strategy, starting with threats to our homeland, then shifting to global risks.
The defense of our homeland is of the utmost importance to the American people, and efforts by this administration over the last year to bolster homeland defense have yielded significantly positive results.
For example, the strict enforcement of U.S. policies at the U.S.-Mexico border and regionally have served as a deterrent and drastically reduced illegal immigration.
Based on customs and border patrol data, January 2026's monthly encounters.
I stand here today speaking to you, the American people, not through filters, not through reporters, not through cable news spin.
A dishonest and anti-Trump press will stop at nothing.
We know this at this point.
To downplay progress, amplify every cost, and call into question every step.
Sadly, TDS is in their DNA.
They want President Trump to fail.
But you, the American people, know better.
Yes, there are reporters in front of me, but they are not our audience today.
It's you, the good, decent, patriotic American people.
You, the hardworking, taxpaying, God-fearing American patriots.
The media here, not all of it, but much of it, wants you to think, just 19 days into this conflict that we're somehow spinning toward an endless abyss or a forever war or a quagmire.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Hear it from me, one of hundreds of thousands who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, who watched previous foolish politicians like Bush, Obama, and Biden squander American credibility.
This is not those wars.
President Trump knows better.
Epic Fury is different.
It's laser-focused.
It's decisive.
Our objectives, given directly from our America first president, remain exactly what they were on day one.
These are not the media's objectives, not Iran's objectives, not new objectives, our objectives, unchanged, on target, and on plan.
Destroy missiles, launchers, and Iran's defense industrial base so they cannot rebuild.
Destroy their Navy, and Iran never gets a nuclear weapon.
Our objectives from day one.
To the patriotic members of the press, nobody can deliver perfection in wartime.
This building knows that more than anyone.
But report the reality.
We're winning decisively and on our terms.
Iran is a vast country, and just like Hamas and their tunnels, they've poured any aid, any economic development, humanitarian aid into tunnels and rockets.
That's what they did with Hamas.
Iran has funneled decades of state resources, not to their people, but into missiles and drones and proxies and buried facilities.
But we are hunting them down methodically, ruthlessly, and overwhelmingly, like no other military in the world can do.
And the results speak for themselves.
To date, we've struck over 7,000 targets across Iran and its military infrastructure.
That is not incremental.
That is overwhelming force applied with precision.
And again, today will be the largest strike package yet, just like yesterday was.
As I've said from day one, our capabilities continue to build.
Iran's continued to degrade.
We're hunting and striking death and destruction from above.
Iran's air defenses flattened.
Iran's defense industrial base, the factories, the production lines that feed their missile and drone programs, being overwhelmingly destroyed.
We've hit hundreds of their defense industrial bases directly.
Their ability to manufacture new ballistic missiles has probably taken the hardest hit of all.
Ballistic missile attacks against our forces, down 90% since the start of the conflict.
Same with one-way attack UAVs, think kamikaze drones, down 90%.
Now, the Iranians will still shoot, we know that, but they would shoot a lot more if they could, but they can't.
The last job anyone in the world wants right now?
Senior leader for the IRGC or Besiege.
Temp jobs, all of them.
And to borrow a page from Admiral Ernest King in World War II, we've decided to share the ocean with Iran.
We've given them the bottom half.
We've damaged or sunk over 120 of their Navy ships with battle damage assessments pending for many more.
See, oftentimes we have to wait a few days on battle damage assessment to get the real number.
Their surface fleet is no longer a factor.
Their submarines, they once had 11, are gone.
Their military ports are crippled.
Iran has terrorized the United States and our interests for 47 years.
Their core industries, not steel or agriculture, tourism.
Their core industries are state-sponsored terrorism, proxy militias, underground networks, ballistic missiles, and a violent, messianic Islamist ideology chasing some sort of apocalyptic endgame.
A regime like that refusing to abandon its nuclear ambitions is not just a regional problem.
It's a direct threat to America, to freedom, and to civilization.
The world, the Middle East, our ungrateful allies in Europe, even segments of our own press, should be saying one thing to President Trump.
Thank you for the courage to stop this terror state from holding the world hostage with missiles while building or attempting to build a nuclear bomb.
Thank you for doing the work of the free world.
Yesterday's ceremony reminded us why we fight.
Not for nation building or democracy promotion, but to crush direct threats to America, Americans, and our interests.
We fight to win, and we are winning on our terms, following our objectives.
My 13-year-old son popped into my office last night while I was editing these remarks.
He asked about the war and the families I met at Dover.
And I looked at him and I said, they died for you, son, so that your generation doesn't have to deal with a nuclear Iran.
It's the truth.
And they did.
So to the families who said, finish this, we will.
And I say the same to every American who wants peace through strength.
May Almighty God continue to bless our troops in this fight.
And again, to the American people, please pray for them every day on Bending Knee, with your family, in your schools, in your churches, in the name of Jesus Christ.
Ladies and gentlemen, good morning, and thank you all for being here.
I also had the honor yesterday, as the Secretary said, of traveling up to Dover with the President to welcome home our six fallen.
It was an honor and a privilege for me to be there and to say thank you to their families.
And I want to mention their names this morning.
From the 6th Aerial Refueling Wing out of MacDill Air Force Base, Florida, but stationed as part of an active associate unit at Birmingham, Alabama, Major Alex Klinner, John Alex Kliner, Major Ariana Savino.
She was posthumously promoted from captain to major, and Technical Sergeant Ashley Pruitt, the boom operator on that crew.
From the 121st Aerofueling Ring, Ohio Air National Guard out of Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base in Columbus, Ohio, Captain Seth Koval, Captain Curtis Angst, and now Master Sergeant Tyler Simmons, who was also promoted and the boom operator on that crew.
To a person and every family member I spoke with yesterday, they all shared that their family members love serving.
They loved being part of a great team and a crew, and they loved airplanes and aviation.
Our nation's tanker crews really are Aung Sung heroes, incredible warriors who put their lives on the line so we can continue to take the fight to an enemy.
I've personally witnessed their courage and tenacity many times, from the morning of September 11th, where they answered my call for some help, to the skies over foreign countries where they've come forward out of their safe tanker track to give me gas when I simply could not leave a ground force that was engaged in a firefight.
They've answered the call and come forward time and time and time again.
I'm filled with incredible pride and gratitude for all that the tanker crews do, our pilots, our boom operators, and the maintainers.
And to the families of our six fallen, know that we share your grief.
Our nation will never forget their sacrifice and we will never forget their names.
Our entire joint force mourns with you today and will continue to remember their incredible gift of a great example for all of us.
Now let me turn to an operations update.
U.S. CENTCOM remains on plan to achieve our military objectives and remain unrelenting in our pursuit of Iranian missile capabilities, UAV capabilities, and their Navy and as the Secretary said, their industrial base.
Each day we continue to attack deeper into Iranian territory.
As reported by U.S. Central Command yesterday, the U.S. military dropped 5,000-pound penetrator weapons into underground storage facilities, storing coastal defense cruise missiles and other support equipment.
These weapons are bespokely designed to get through concrete and or rocks and function after penetrating those barriers.
We continue to hunt and kill mine storage facilities and naval ammunition depots.
We continue to hunt and kill afloat assets, including more than 120 vessels and 44 mine layers, and the pressure will continue.
We're flying further to the east now and penetrating deeper into Iranian airspace to hunt and kill.
We were just trying to bring you the Pentagon press conference that took place just moments ago.
And there's a lot of questions that I had, a lot of questions, and they've since been answered.
So we're excited about that.
The Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, going in front of the cameras and saying, actually, it's true.
It's true.
The Washington Post reporting that they were looking for $200 billion, that's billion with a B, dollars to fund this war in Iran.
He's saying, this is the price you got to pay to kill bad guys.
And so that is what the Pentagon is going to be requesting.
Now, I did reach out to the Pentagon prior to that press conference to get a specific comment on the WAPO report.
And they didn't want to talk about it.
And they kind of said, no comments.
And now we have the Secretary of War confirming that the Washington Post report is in fact true.
So your taxpayer dollars, $200 billion is what the Pentagon's asking for.
And I think it's at the same time we've just hit, what, $39 trillion in debt.
So it doesn't seem to make any sense.
I don't see the numbers adding up or at least adding up to be beneficial to the American people at least.
But we'll keep following that as it develops, of course.
Also, Pete Hegseth commenting on a lot of things regarding a lot of different reports, confirming some things, denying some things.
The question, the Q ⁇ A, I'd say, is quite interesting.
Someone did actually ask about war crimes being committed.
And then he did shuffle over to another reporter once that question started getting asked.
So there's that.
There's that.
We're going to dive into the latest regarding Iran in just a little bit.
We'll also bring you some of the most important clips from that Joe Kent, Tucker Carlson interview.
We'll play it.
And I'll give you a little bit of perspective here.
As many of you guys know, I am a Pentagon reporter.
So I do talk to a lot of folks inside the Pentagon.
And I have been doing this for months now.
And there's a lot of red flags going up.
And I still don't have a strong stance on either side of this one right now, only because I'm waiting on physical evidence.
There was a report that came out that Joe Kent, it's very convenient, apparently under FBI investigation for allegedly leaking classified information to members of the media.
What media outlets?
Well, we don't know.
We don't know.
But, and we'll get into details about this, but just keep in the back of your minds.
Over the weekend, Tucker Carlson came out as well.
And Tucker said, hey, the CIA has been looking into my messages because I've been speaking to someone in Iran.
We don't know who, but he's been speaking to somebody in Iran.
And they're expected, he's expected to potentially be charged that there's going to be a criminal referral.
Now it has to do with him not registering as a foreign agent.
And again, I did do what journalists are supposed to do.
I've reached out to the CIA for comments on all of this.
And it wasn't just reporter hat on here.
It wasn't just me sending over an email and hoping somebody responds.
I did text people personally who are on the communications team, and I know they received those text messages, but I didn't get a response.
Three, three attempts.
Again, we don't know the details as to what Tucker Carlson was referring to there or if he's actually in communications with the Iranian government directly.
That would be deeply concerning, though, if that's the case.
Also, keep in mind, Tucker has been accused about this type of subject matter several times.
Remember when he was trying to land an interview with Vladimir Putin?
I mean, he is a journalist, so that would make sense.
But potentially communicating with the Iranian regime, you know, it's a little sketchy, a little sketchy.
We'll dive into the details.
We'll also dive into those who are trying to defend the president's push in Iran right now.
We've got those signed bites locked and ready to go.
Also, yesterday there was a couple of really key sample fights that I don't think a lot of people were able to see because the Joe Kent news kind of just consumed the news cycle.
So we're going to dive into stuff related to that, like Tulsi Gabbert being asked about the Fulton County raid and why she was present.
We got that information for you.
Also, there was a really interesting exchange that took place yesterday.
It had to do with Gabbert being grilled about the intimate threat as they keep saying, oh, there's a threat that Iran is going to strike and we need to act now.
A Democrat did really get, they did really kind of corner Tulsi Gabbert on that one.
And again, I don't think Tulsi is trying to lie.
It doesn't seem that way to me.
We'll play that clip for you as well.
Plus, tomorrow on the show, we're going to have Jeff Clark on the program.
Jeff Clark just left the Trump administration just a few days ago.
So many of you guys know I broke that story.
Obviously, it was the exclusive that we broke in regards to his resignation letter.
Now, Jeff Clark is someone who has been targeted by the government, by the Biden regime.
He was one of the co-defendants in Fulton County.
The president did give him a position in his administration.
But Jeff Clark has walked away from it all.
And it was quite the head scratcher as to why.
We'll have him on the program tomorrow, but we're going to play a clip of him talking about whether or not we're going to see any major arrest.
Now, obviously, Jeff Clark has skin in the game because he too was arrested.
He too had his home raided.
And it was because of the law, the Fulton County lie, that was pushed.
That was pushed.
Well, Jeff Clark's been vindicated, but not completely because the DC bar is still going after him.
So it'll be good to have him on the program tomorrow.
But we've got a couple of clips I want to play for you.
Jeff Clark is an absolute patriot, and it's an honor to call him a friend.
Plus, we're also going to dig into Tina Peters a little bit because Tina Peters was found not guilty on something that happened while she was incarcerated.
Now, again, I don't even know why Tina Peters is still in prison.
The president still posts messages voicing his support for Tina Peters.
But guess what?
She's still in prison.
And I know the difference.
We'll go through this extensively.
I get it.
It's a state issue.
It's the Colorado, state of Colorado, versus Tina Peters.
But man, oh man, can we hold back federal funding?
Can we at least try to fight for this 73-year-old woman?
Stop the truth social posts.
Save this woman.
We'll get into the details of the latest update in her case.
Again, I'm just so fed up with seeing this.
This woman deserves to be free.
She didn't do anything wrong.
She was trying to blow the whistle.
She was trying to preserve evidence.
And this is how they treat her.
Dan Lyman will also be joining the show later in the program.
Dan's an incredible Infowars reporter.
I got a lot to talk about with Dan.
You know, Senator Mullen, I'll get into this in a little bit.
Senator Mullen did not have a very convincing confirmation hearing yesterday.
Even one Republican coming out and saying, I'm not going to support him.
I'm not going to support him.
I'm going to ask Dan Lyman about that.
Plus, we'll play a couple of clips from his hearing to see maybe you were convinced that he would be a great leader for DHS.
All right, so there's a lot to dive into.
Don't go anywhere.
If you're going to go anywhere, though, all right, I'll let you go to this one place.
It's called theAlexJonesStore.com.
Head on over to the shop right now and make sure you stock up on all your favorite supplements.
Again, folks, when you head on over to the alexjonestore.com and you become a VIP member, you're actually helping us with our very next operation.
As many of you guys know, Friday is my last day, and then I will be working with Alex on building his news division.
And that's only possible when you guys purchase a supplement over at the AlexJonesStore.com.
So head on over to the shop right now and stop up.
Welcome back to the American Journal.
We're excited, you're all jumping on this today.
All right, we're kicking things off the top of the show.
We're doing a little bit of a recap.
As many of you guys know, a lot's been happening in the news cycle over these last few hours.
Because there's a lot to catch you up on.
So let's start diving into all of that.
The president yesterday actually surprised me, because he put out a tweet on or I guess, a post he would say on truth social regarding uh, Israel and uh, the southern, the South Pars gas field in Iran.
Now he's going after Israel a bit, is what my take on.
It was saying that they they struck the area out of anger.
Now, apparently and this has been a back and forth between the corporate media as well as the White House itself going back and forth on this uh, apparently they're saying that Israel did not get permission from the White House to strike this area.
Specifically, when they talk about the details about all of it though, they say now that Israel will not retaliate.
Now, the reason why all this is so relevant is because, although obviously the objective here was to uh to use this area apparently to go after Iran uh, specifically Qatar has actually felt the retaliation from all of this, and so the president putting out this very, very strong strong, strong statement, I do not want to authorize this level of violence and destruction again.
This is a fuel pipeline, I believe a gas pipeline.
Israel attacked Iran's gas field, so it's a gas field.
Uh, Iran retaliated twice against Qatar for that.
The second one was just confirmed yesterday, late yesterday now Trump coming out and saying that he didn't approve of it.
He actually didn't have any foreign because he didn't have any um, the advanced knowledge would be the best way to put it is what he's claiming, and the reports contradict that, because Axios is actually reporting that senior Israeli and U.s officials said that the United States had prior knowledge of the Israeli strike and even approved it in an attempt to pressure Iran.
The Iranians retaliated against Qatar's gas fields and now apparently, according to Axios, Trump is now changing his course.
Now again it's back and forth anonymous sources.
It's so frustrating because and I get it nobody wants to go on the record on any of this.
You know, Joe Kent put his perspective out there into the public space and I mean they're destroying him, they're ripping him a new one.
Everyone's piling on.
Just watch Dan Bongino bash him this morning like he called him an absolute disgrace.
If the man hasn't served this country, put himself in harm's way 11 times, we're gonna go after him, of course, if first they acknowledge the fact that Joe Kent's uh wife Shannon died and then he went after him and his character.
It's actually pretty disturbing when you see all of this happen.
The pileup yesterday on social media is disgusting.
It makes you want to have nothing to do with any of these people.
Both sides, both sides, because we could have disagreements, we could have disputes.
But then there's the personal digs.
Then there's the character assassination attempts where they try to just destroy you and your family.
Uh, after finding out what Joe can put in that letter, of releasing it publicly, now all of a sudden we are hearing about an FBI investigation into Joe Kent's again.
They're saying it started prior to his his position on all of this, before he resigned, that this was predated.
But folks, I mean, can we just calm down for a second and stop trying to go after people?
Can we wait until the facts rise to the surface before we just go out there and slaughter people, destroy their character?
I've covered this extensively.
I've covered people who are wrongfully accused by the federal government, and in a little bit i'll bring you some examples of just that.
They're accused of things, and it happens too within the Trump administration.
So don't get me wrong.
Okay this, this isn't just the Biden Regime thing.
This is.
This is.
This happens across all administrations.
People are accused of things and then they use the massive amount of media resources.
They have to go after people and just assassinate their character and then you find out months later that it wasn't true.
But it's too late, the damage is already done.
So, with all these reports coming out, I just beg everyone to hold on.
Don't get nasty.
Don't go attack someone.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
None of us do right now.
We're dealing with anonymous sources.
Anonymous sources.
Everyone's got a source, a senior official, an Israeli official.
Everyone's got a source, but nobody wants to put their name on it.
And then I try to ask questions, and I don't get responses.
I don't get responses because nobody wants to put their name on anything, even if they're at the official capacity within the communications department.
Nobody wants to put their name on anything because it's an absolute mess right now.
So bear with me.
But I do want to get to clip one because in clip one, DNI Tulsi Gabber was testifying yesterday.
We did play some of it for you, but this portion I think is really, really important because they're trying to pin her down as to what kind of threat was Iran to the United States.
But most importantly, what warranted it to the attack start now?
Like, why do we have to do this right now, right?
DHS is partially shut down due to the funding issues.
We're obviously having issues because we've imported sleeper cells.
Islamists are amongst us all now.
We've had four terror attacks in the last couple of weeks, Islamic terrorist attacks.
Let's be very clear about those.
And so why was the decision to strike Iran now a top priority?
Again, I mean, we were told months ago, what was it, Midnight Hammer?
When they struck the first time in Iran, we annihilated their nuclear program.
I mean, that was what we were told.
But then fast forward, all of a sudden now they're a threat we have to attack.
It doesn't make any sense.
And they're trying to, they're trying to pin Tulsi Gabber down on this one.
And I have to give credit credit too.
I think this is actually a really good back and forth exchange.
And you noted in your opening statement, you're here fulfilling a statutory responsibility and that your testimony, quote, represents the IC's assessment of threats.
That opening statement, as submitted to the committee in advance of this hearing, stated that as a result of last summer's airstrikes, quote, Iran's nuclear enrichment program was obliterated, end quote, correct?
And the opening statement you submitted to the committee last night also stated, quote, there has been no effort since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability, end quote, correct?
The White House stated on March 1st of this year that this war was launched and was, quote, a military campaign to eliminate the imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime, end quote.
That's a statement from the White House.
Quote, the imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime.
Was it the assessment of the intelligence community that there was an imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime?
False, this is the worldwide threats hearing where you present to Congress national intelligence, timely, objective, and independent of political considerations.
You've stated today that the intelligence community's assessment is that Iran's nuclear enrichment program was obliterated and that, quote, there had been no efforts since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability.
Was it the intelligence community's assessment that, nevertheless, despite this obliteration, there was a quote imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime?
No, it is precisely your responsibility to determine what constitutes a threat to the United States.
This is the Worldwide Threats hearing, where, as you noted in your opening testimony, quote, you represent the IC's assessment of threats.
You are here to represent the IC's assessment of threats.
That's a quote from your own opening statement.
And so my question is: as you're here to present the IC's assessment of threats, was it the assessment of the intelligence community that, as the White House claimed on March 1st, there was a quote imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime?
And I have to say, it was great questions and great answers.
I mean, I get it.
Tulsi Gabber's in a tough situation.
She can't disclose too much information.
And I do understand just that.
Again, you can't put out all of the information.
And you're already on thin ice with the president.
You can't put out all the information.
But it was very telling.
It was very telling.
I learned a lot about all of this from that exchange.
What do I mean by that?
Well, I think it's very obvious that there really wasn't a threat that warrants there to be strikes immediately, as in three weeks ago.
Doesn't seem that way.
We haven't seen any evidence of that.
We're still being told it's classified.
It's classified.
It's classified.
But this own White House was bragging about their strikes that they did months prior.
And I thought those strikes were actually pretty damn good.
I'm not going to lie.
I mean, the fact that we were able to go in there without any type of U.S. casualties, quickly eliminate the threats, and then leave, I was happy.
No American casualties.
I get it.
I'm not sitting here.
I'm not trying to softball the issue.
I don't think that Iran isn't a threat to the United States.
We all know it is.
We all know if they were to get a nuclear weapon, they would kill us all.
But did they even have the capacity to create that nuclear weapon?
Again, I mean, doesn't seem to be the case.
We'll be taking calls later in the show, and we'll make sure to ask our fellow veterans, all of you veterans out there, I want you all to call in later and weigh in on this one because this is a big one when it comes to all of that.
When he heard that Tulsi Gabber exchange, I don't know what you guys thought about that.
So I'll be taking your calls later in the program.
And I also had it too, by the way, to kind of walk us through the supplement budget request that was sent over.
The Pentagon has requested the White House to approve that $200 billion funding.
Put that in here.
We heard Pete Hegseth, though, confirm that just moments ago at his press conference.
When I reached out, by the way, to the Pentagon, they didn't want to give me comments.
And I get it.
You know, I actually don't get it.
That's me being nice.
I don't understand why they couldn't confirm this with me this morning.
I guess maybe Hegseth wanted to break it himself.
But I did reach out and speak to the press secretary this morning, and she did say that they didn't have anything to say on the matter.
And then Hegseth himself saying, Yeah, we're asking for $200 billion because you have to kill bad guys.
Yeah, do I want to kill bad guys?
Yeah, I think I want to kill really, really bad guys.
But I don't know what the goal is here completely because it feels like, I mean, the president himself, and the chaos is due to the lack of messaging that's a unified messaging that's coming from his administration right now.
And it's just to be fair and balanced.
Again, you guys know we've supported the president of the United States, but how do we sit here and justify all of this from going down?
I don't know.
I can't sit here and tell you that I have a clear understanding as to what we're doing right now in Iran because I don't have a clear understanding.
I don't.
I don't.
And so back and forth, we hear all these excuses going back and forth.
The White House messaging has been very, very confusing on all of this.
And there's a lack of transparency.
And again, I get it, right?
Classified information, can't tell everyone about everything.
But I mean, you've taken out the bulk of the regime.
We should be able to get some more breadcrumbs of information.
And I warned all of you weeks ago that there's going to be slanted polls.
Now, there's a group of pollsters out there who I know for a fact do want to coddle the administration.
And a lot of them are probably going to be getting paid, but not announcing the sponsorships that they're doing with groups that do want to create a little bubble around the president.
What do I mean by this?
Well, I truly believe, in my opinion, that they're creating a bubble around President Trump.
And they're trying to let him know that the American people stand with him on this war in Iran.
Now, listen, I mean, I don't know if it's the fringe movement only that doesn't stand with him.
I know right now I'm just sitting here wondering, what are we actually doing?
And I'm not trying to take too of an aggressive stance on all of this, but I tell you, I don't have all the facts, but I don't like what I'm seeing so far.
And so by day by day, we try to go through all the information that's being put out there in the public sphere and we try to go through it all, but it's a little difficult.
It's a little difficult to give people a clear understanding as to what's going on here.
So I want to play clip two for you next because this is a CNN poll and they're trying to say that MAGA supports President Trump.
Now, listen up.
I have never seen such a divide within the MAGA base.
And if you're trying to create a bubble around President Trump, putting out polls like this, which cater to his ego, as many of you guys know, he loves when people say positive things about him.
He promotes it all the time on true social.
And I get it.
We all like a little good that's thrown our way.
So that's not me throwing shade his way.
But the reality of it is, are they creating a bubble so the president thinks that this is going to help him win these midterm elections?
And it seems like when CNN's putting out polls like the one you're about to see, they might be intentionally trying to create that bubble around him so he doesn't have any outside influence to tell him, stop, sir.
Sources say the only people they interviewed were Mark Levain, Lindsey Graham.
Yeah, it's very, very likely.
Probably everyone who works within the war complex who are bankrolling and all of this.
I mean, the guts on these people.
100%, 100%.
There's a reason why NBC News conducted that poll and CNN are teaming up to push that to the president because midterms are up ahead and Americans are fired up right now.
That's what it feels like here when it comes to the cost of living.
So again, I strongly believe that they're intentionally pushing out bad polls that the president has no idea how the American people truly feel.
Because he goes up there and he's like, everyone's loving me.
He doesn't really probably have time for truth social, like real truth.
Well, truth social is probably not.
It's an echo chamber.
Maybe Twitter.
Because I've never seen the base divided this much.
Oh my gosh, Mark Levain, get this guy out of here.
Get this guy out of here.
This, this, this story gave me a good chuckle only because it includes that.
Nancy Mace.
Many of you guys know the South Carolina congressional member, Nancy Mays, never misses an opportunity to make something about herself.
And it's quite impressive on how she's able to do this all the time.
But there's a report that was just dropped in The Guardian yesterday, and it gave me a good laugh because it's just such a Nancy Mays story.
Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mays has drawn some criticism from the White House for conducting independent rescue efforts to evacuate Americans stranded in the Middle East amid the U.S. Iranian war.
Apparently, she's flying people out of the area.
And it's pissing off the State Department.
They're like, lady, we've got this.
We've got this.
But you've got to make these stories about yourself.
And the only way you could be the main character of every single story is by consistently inserting yourself.
And Nancy Mace does an incredible job at just that.
It's so embarrassing, folks.
It's so embarrassing.
From the prayer breakfast where she's talking about having premarital sex and having to roll off her husband or sorry, it wasn't her husband, it was her boyfriend slash maybe fiancé.
I don't even know.
And she does this in front of a room full of Christians.
Then there's the other stuff, you know, when she's riding the bus, she's in pajamas and makes it all about herself again.
And there's the other one where she's running out crying because of the Epstein victims, because again, Epstein victims, the women who were actually raped by Epstein and his friends, they can't have all of the attention.
You've got to bust out and run crying in front of all of the media cameras.
They'll take another exit.
Go through the exit where the cameras are on you, Nancy Mace.
And then there was a, I think it was like an ex-fiancé who she accused of storing nude videos of her.
And then on X before going to the House floor to talk about her personal incident where she had a legal immunity for making the claims against these men.
Say, hey, I'm going to show the world my nudes.
Join me on the House floor in just a few moments.
It's main character syndrome.
You know, if you, if you, and this is why I doubt her story, because if you are a true survivor of sexual assault, you don't crack jokes like that.
You don't say, I'm going to show the world my nudes.
Everything's about her.
And at first I was on board when she was going after the trainees entering women's bathrooms.
But then it's just like, it's too much.
It's too much.
So good news is she's trying to rescue Americans who are currently stranded in the Middle East.
Bad news is if you're the State Department, you're not very happy about this.
Oh, there you go.
Those are, everyone, that's me naked.
Take a look at this one.
If you're listening audio only, you probably have no idea what's happening.
And I could promise you, it's not me naked.
It's Nancy Mays in a blurred out image, of course.
But you have to sit here and wonder what's going on here.
By the way, and I'll just keep highlighting this issue.
She made those claims because she had immunity.
So she made those claims in Congress where she can't be sued.
So the men that she accused tried suing her, tossed out.
Then she went on certain conservative shows like OAN's Dan Ball and Steven Crowder show.
And even though Steven Crowder pushed back, it didn't matter.
They still filed defamation lawsuits against them because they can't sue her.
I don't think Nancy Mays is issuing an apology, by the way.
From my understanding, too, I don't think those men have even been charged with any crimes.
But then she said, oh, it was a corruption issue.
Deiji's office in South Carolina.
They won't help me.
Local PD won't help me.
Capitol Police won't help me.
Everyone's corrupt.
But she had an abundance of evidence, she claimed.
Oh, Nancy Mays, the gift that keeps on giving.
All right, in a little bit, we'll dive into the Joe Kent stuff because I've got some exclusive details I'm going to throw in there for you guys as well.
Give you some, I guess, give you some background as to what's been going on behind the scenes over at the Pentagon as well, because there's a consistent pattern here.
And I know a lot of you on Acts yesterday were wondering, why am I talking about leakers?
That's the common theme here that when I call for comment about people being fired from this administration, I got off the record all the time.
Oh, they were leakers.
We had to get rid of them.
There were leaguers.
Well, three of the most recent leaguers have been vindicated.
And it was all over the headlines.
And nobody seemed to have cared after they were vindicated, after they were cleared of any wrongdoing, bashed their names publicly.
But now that they've been cleared of, don't talk about it.
Move on.
Move on.
It's an absolute disgrace.
We'll talk about that in a little bit.
I want to get to this one, though.
Jeff Clark, a good old buddy, former member of the administration, just recently left.
He'll be joining us tomorrow.
In clip 14, we'll play that for you in a second.
In clip 14, he's asked by another good friend of mine, Jesse Kelly, about whether or not he believes that arrests will come or not in regards to the lawfare individuals who targeted both Jeff Clark and hundreds of other Americans.
Well, Jeff Clark gave his honest take in that moment.
This Arctic Frost investigation was unethical, to put it mildly, but was it criminal?
And I asked this completely loaded question, Jeff, because I want to see people go to prison for what they did to you and others, but I don't want to sell people a bill of goods either.
Well, I think you, you know, I think that's two things, right?
One is the question of will it actually happen at the end of the day?
But the first question is, could it happen?
And I believe it could happen.
I do believe that these people conspired for completely illegitimate purposes to try to attack and take off the board important allies of President Trump like myself, like John Eastman, like Mark Meadows, and Scott Perry, a congressman from Pennsylvania.
And, you know, they did that because of our political views.
They discriminated against us because of our political views.
They conspired to try to injure us however they can in crazy lawfare efforts.
And I do think that that could be charged.
And I hope that eventually it will be fully investigated.
We see, obviously, Senators Grassley and Johnson probing more and more into the documents, getting more and more documents out of the FBI.
And I applaud Kash Patel for allowing those documents to get out.
And, you know, it's entirely possible that that whole situation could be prosecuted.
And, you know, I don't want to oversell your viewers.
Like, will it actually happen?
You know, that's going to be a decision for the political leadership of the Justice Department.
So I won't jump ahead of them on that.
But I think they could do it if they wanted to.
And in my view, my public recommendation is that they should.
Yeah, I don't think the defense industry will get rare from now on.
It's not a ban.
Commercial industry.
Yeah, commercial industries will get it.
But you had a major car maker here go down.
They shut down this a few months ago for two months.
They didn't have the rare earth magnets from China.
They got restarted, but like they really had to get Trump on the phone to call China.
So the defense industry won't get it.
They're going to put export controls.
So China is a very controlled economy.
You have to have licenses for importing, for exporting.
They're going to make sure, okay, Ford, you're going to buy, or GM or whoever, you're going to buy 50,000 rare earth magnets that has X amount of grams of rare earth.
That's all you're getting.
So they're going to make sure this doesn't go into the U.S. defense supply chain.
I took an intelligence briefing and I was stunned to find out the amount of penetrations that had been happening at our bases up there by Chinese nationals that were in the United States.
These individuals were going to the gate.
Some of them were getting into the installations.
And when they were getting into the installations, they would have cameras and unmanned aerial vehicles in the trunks of their cars.
So, and these things were also happening off the installations, flying in and around our installations, in and around our training areas.
We have an enormous training area up in Alaska.
The Donley and Yukon training areas is probably the largest ground and air space that we have in the United States Army, and it's in Alaska.
And so Russia and China are serious about their activities up there.
I think Russia has always been serious about it.
I think China has woken up to its seriousness about it because of the gains that it can be made.
And then I also think that's securing our northern flank from threats, be they missile or be they economic threats where we don't have access of our reach over the Arctic Ocean and that we get penetrated by adversaries in ways that would put the United States and the Western Hemisphere at risk.
Trying to catch you up on all the things related to Joe Kent.
Joe Kent.
Don't know what to make of the issue, but we'll kind of dive into the details.
We'll go back and forth about what we know, what I know, what I'm hearing from sources, what I've heard from sources in the past regarding very similar situations.
But let's tee it off right.
Last night it was announced that Joe Kent was under FBI investigation.
Now they're saying that this investigation started prior to Joe Kent's resignation.
They've also, we've heard the White House say it, that he wasn't having any briefings with the president regarding the war in Iran.
So they're ultimately telling you that he doesn't have any background knowledge in any of this.
Now, it's really hard for me to wrap my mind around, but listen to the details coming from that report regarding the ongoing investigation into Kent.
So four sources with direct knowledge of the situation tell me that Joe Kent is under active investigation by the FBI with over allegations of leaking classified information.
And one of the most notable things about this is I'm told that this predates the resignation.
He resigned yesterday, obviously, citing the war in Iran.
And so that's, I think, important to note if that is in fact the case, that this investigation has been going on for weeks, if not months, according to the people I've spoken with tonight.
So we don't know whether there's an active investigation there, but I think what's also important to point out is we were hearing from sources at the White House yesterday who were arguing to us that Joe Kent was being accused of leaking.
And so this sort of started coming out yesterday, and now we're learning that there is actually this FBI investigation.
Obviously, we have to wait for more information to come out if there is actual evidence of him leaking.
I'm told that that could be coming out soon, as soon as this week.
But certainly this investigation has been ongoing even before he resigned yesterday.
I'm told again that some of this information is going to come to light as soon as this week, and we should learn more.
And so I think those are one of the key questions that the FBI is going to have to answer, which is, of course, who is this information that was allegedly leaked to?
What is this information?
And I think one of the questions that I have had is: if he was leaking for this long and the administration was aware of it, why was he still in this role?
And so that's one of the questions that the FBI and the Trump administration is going to have to answer as well.
So it's obviously quite the interesting back and forth there.
But as you've heard, just kind of get laid out to you.
I mean, they're investigating Joe Kent and they're claiming that it's over potential the leaking of classified information.
Now, put this in the back of your mind, folks.
Over the weekend, Tucker Carlson did come out and say that the CIA, according to his sources that he's spoken to, is preparing to make a criminal referral against him for acting as a foreign agent but not registering to be a foreign agent.
So keep that in the back of your mind.
The timeline of all of this, given the fact that he did sit down with Tucker yesterday, kind of connects a little bit of the dots for you.
Kind of does.
Now, during that interview that took place yesterday, a lot was said.
We're going to sift through it all.
By the way, I reached out to the CIA three times, three times.
And when I say that, I'm not talking about being a member of the CIA or anything sketchy.
When you're a journalist, you reach out to the communications team and you talk to them, you ask them for comment, and that's exactly what I've done.
So I've sent two text messages, kind of put this in perspective for you all.
And I have sent an email and unfortunately have heard nothing back from the CIA regarding Tucker's claim, which tells me a lot.
It tells me a lot.
But back to Joe Kent.
Joe Ken's now being accused of being a leaker, but it's a long history of people saying, ah, you're a leaker, you're a leaker.
But Joe Kent said something really key in Soundbite.
We're going to play Soundbite 3B for you guys because I want you to listen carefully.
This is him talking about, I believe, the conversation he had with Charlie Kirk prior to Charlie Kirk being assassinated.
And he walked off and he went, I believe, into the oval.
So when one of President Trump's closest advisors who is vocally advocating for us to not go to war with Iran and for us to rethink at least our relationship with the Israelis, and then he's suddenly publicly assassinated and we're not allowed to ask any questions about that, it's a data point.
We've been told that this individual, Robinson, is a lone gunman, and maybe he is.
But the investigation that I was a part of, the National Counterterrorism Center was a part of, we were stopped from continuing to investigate.
And the FBI will say that they stopped that because they wanted to have, turn everything over to the Utah state authorities.
Everything's going to trial.
It's very, very sensitive.
But there was still a lot for us to look into that I can't really get into, but there was still linkage for us to investigate that we needed to run down.
I'm not making any conclusions.
I'm not saying because, you know, because of this, this happened.
I'm not saying that at all.
I'm just saying there's unanswered questions.
We know the pressure because of the text messages that have been made public that Charlie was under a lot of pressure from a lot of pro-Israel donors.
And again, we know Charlie was advocating to President Trump against this war with Iran.
All right, keep in mind, Alex Jones has been talking about this for quite some time now, detailing to you all at home how the FBI shut down that investigation.
you hear Joe Ken, he just confirmed everything for you.
I mean, we were told that everything was a-okay, nothing bad was going to happen, like everything was being handled appropriately behind the scenes.
And I know Kent was trying to look into the foreign avenue of Charlie Kirk's assassination, trying to see if there was foreign ties to anything.
So hearing it straight from Kent's mouth is quite telling, is quite telling.
Now, hear me out.
This is the reason why I wanted you to listen to that clip.
Okay, Charlie Kirk was very much against going to war with Iran.
He actually detailed it perfectly.
We played that clip for you where he said, listen, if you attack Iran, they're going to try to launch World War III and they're going to attack their neighbors to bring everyone in on this fight.
So that's the reason why you cannot attack Iran.
And what has happened since?
Well, Charlie Kirk has been vindicated because yes, they're striking all across the Middle East.
They're going after their neighbors.
We are seeing this play out firsthand now.
Charlie Kirk was spot on.
Charlie Kirk was anti-war with Iran and he wanted the president to try his very best to avoid it at all costs.
He was one of the very few people who were sticking their necks out to make sure the president wasn't going to go to war with Iran.
People have been pushed out of this administration though who didn't want war with Iran.
I'm talking about those three Pentagon leakers.
Maybe you remember this story.
Last year it was reported that there were three individuals working very closely with the Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth.
One of those individuals being Dan Caldwell.
And they were apparently leakers.
Now, it caught me off guard.
I don't know how the Pentagon was so certain that these three men were leakers.
And they ran a report saying, and they pushed it out to the media, they were going out, they're issuing their threats, saying that these three individuals were leaking information to the media, and that's why they were tossed out of the Pentagon.
Now, these three individuals had Pete Hegseth's ear.
They were very close.
They were senior advisors.
Dan Caldwell was a senior advisor to Pete Hegseth.
Dan Caldwell, by the way, is also anti-war with Iran.
And so were the other two according to those reports.
I haven't spoken to the other two, but according to the reports, they were very anti-war with Iran.
Well, every time I reached out in regards to what was happening to those three men, I was told by sources within the Pentagon that we can't tell you the evidence we have, but we could promise you that charges will be filed against Dan Caldwell.
We are more than certain that he was leaking.
That's what I was told.
That's what I was told.
Well, fast forward a couple of weeks ago, guess what happened?
Shocker, Dan Caldwell was vindicated.
He was not the leaker.
And now he's back to working for the administration.
He's actually working with Tulsi Gabber.
He's actually getting together all the classified information and giving it to the president for his briefings.
That's Dan Caldwell's role now.
Dan Caldwell was dragged through the mud.
He was attacked as a leaker.
And he has since been vindicated after an investigation.
I see people posting it now because I get it, right?
He was at one point accused of being a leaker, but he's been vindicated.
It's actually a massive injustice to put out that information without in the same headline while you're accusing him of being a Pentagon leaker to not say that he's been vindicated.
And I have no skin in the game.
I actually don't even know Dan Caldwell.
I did reach out for comment.
You know me.
I always find someone's phone number.
I did reach out for comment through Dan.
But I have no personal relationship with Dan at all.
I've never met the guy.
Seems like a nice guy.
But it never made any sense.
Why would Dan Caldwell, a man who has spent his career fighting for this country, wanting to work his way up in this space, obviously, in government, throw it all away to become a leaker, to work against Pete Hegseth didn't make any sense.
And Pete Hegseth the soundbites were actually kind of crazy.
He was very much convinced.
And there were a lot of people internally over at the Pentagon saying, hey, Brianna, there's a guy who's sitting around here who is a Lloyd Austin hangover who is the one who wanted to become Pete Hegseth's chief of staff.
And that is the person who was going after those three men.
And again, those were just people whispering.
It was made very public too.
It was splashed over a couple of outlets.
They were talking about this individual.
Pete Hegset denied it.
Pete Hegset at one point, too, this is according to reports, not him directly, wanted this individual to become his chief of staff.
The White House actually stepped in and said, no, no, no, no.
You don't have to fire the guy, but we're not going to make him your chief of staff.
And so that's the story of three leakers who have been vindicated.
But it's not just that.
When Gail Slater was pushed out of the DOJ, I was told by people close within the DOJ that Gail Slater was pushed out of the antitrust division and forced to resign because Gail Slater was a leaker.
I was told that she was leaking to Rob Barnes.
So you know what I do?
I call Gail Slater.
I call Rob Barnes.
The two of them say, we actually don't even have a personal relationship.
We did have a meeting scheduled, but I didn't know Rob Barnes.
Rob Barnes didn't know me.
I just figured I was taking like a meeting with an attorney.
She canceled that meeting.
It was on the books.
They leaked this information out there publicly because they wanted to drag Gail Slater through the mud.
And the phone call that did take place apparently had nothing to do with any personal information.
It was just, hey, we can't meet.
So no information from Gail Slater apparently went over to Rob Barnes, but it was still used to vindicate the firing, the pushing, the ousting of Gail Slater.
So I've got four people who have been accused of leakers that being leakers that I know of personally that have since been vindicated.
And so when I hear these claims that Joe Kent is a leaker himself, I'm not jumping to any conclusions.
In fact, I'm going to, and this is why I advocated for everyone on accessory to hold off and wait a few minutes.
But what I know is I've seen people have been accused of things that aren't true.
And so to pile up and to pretend like he's some treasonous, treasonous pig, as I always say, is not acceptable here.
It's not acceptable.
We haven't seen any evidence.
We were told based on the report that there's an FBI investigation that we might see some evidence within the next week.
I'm not jumping the gun on this.
I'm not going to sit here and say that Joe Kent is completely vindicated, but I'm also not going to tell you that Joe Kent is a traitor to this country.
And so you have to sit back and just wait for the information to go out there.
You can't just sit here and jump on things.
Again, the White House is going to defend the president.
That is their role.
And I'm not pushing back on that.
But you have to understand perspective here.
And everyone has a different perspective.
Joe Kent, from his position, he's going to have his perspective.
The White House is going to have their perspective.
I'm going to be sitting in the middle waiting for someone to show me some evidence.
And that's where I stand on this issue.
I'm not jumping the gun.
I'm not going to go after people and bash them as if they're somehow not loyal.
And this is the problem with the pileup.
This is the problem.
Everyone is so quick to just cancel people completely that nothing they've done prior has any meaning and value to this country.
It has to do with now the outrage.
How dare you speak out against President Trump?
Again, this could be a total op.
That's for you at home to decide once you see the evidence.
That's for me to decide once I see the evidence.
I haven't seen any evidence.
I'm not going to sit here and go back and forth on something when I don't know what's actually happening.
When I try to reach out for comment, nobody wants to talk because everyone knows right now tensions are high within the White House.
Tensions are very high.
Sources who I can normally speak to don't want to talk.
They don't want to make phone calls.
Why?
Because a lot of these people who I mentioned were leakers, they also strongly believe that their phones were being surveilled.
That would be illegal.
Especially if there's no investigation, ongoing investigation, that would be illegal.
Joe Kent, though, very likely that they're combing through his phone records right now.
But anyone else?
The leakers?
There's no reason for that.
So just something to keep in the back of your mind.
Now, let's keep digging into what their conversation was like yesterday.
Joe Kent tells Tucker Carlson the Trump administration misled the world about the war in Iran and the intimate, I can't even speak, I don't know why.
I mean, this would be more challenging to explain had the Secretary of State, the President, and the Speaker of the House not come out and said that we conducted this attack at this time because the Israelis were about to do so.
So that takes away the argument that there was an imminent threat, as in Iran was planning to attack us immediately.
We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action.
We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces.
And we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties and perhaps even higher those killed.
And then we would all be here answering questions about why we knew that and didn't.
And I think this speaks to the broader issue, who is in charge of our policy in the Middle East, who's in charge of when we decide to go to war or not.
In this case, with what the Secretary described and later on the President, later on the Speaker of the House and the way the events played out, the Israelis drove the decision to take this action, which we knew would set off a series of events, meaning the Iranians would retaliate.
Now, I think there's a potential there where we could have done several different things.
We could have simply said to the Israelis, no, you will not.
And if you do, then we will take something away from you.
I think that it's fine that we offer defense to Israel, but when we're providing the means for their defense, we get to dictate the terms of when they go on the offensive.
Otherwise, they stand to lose that relationship.
And the Israelis felt emboldened that no matter what they did, no matter what situation they put us in, that they could go ahead and take this action.
So as you hear there, and the whole interview itself was interesting, and we're going to keep playing little clips here and there, because when you listen to him, he's not actually talking about any classified information.
So what the White House is saying is that he didn't have access to it, but he's also not claiming to have had access to that information.
He's being very public and saying that this is all information that he's gone through in the public sphere, and that is what he's pointing to right now.
And so just keep that in the back of your mind.
And I want to play this other clip here in clip five, because Kent is also talking about how the Iranians weren't even close to building a nuke.
No, they weren't, you know, three weeks ago when this started, and they weren't in June either.
I mean, the Iranians have had a religious ruling, a fatwa, against actually developing a nuclear weapon since 2004.
That's been in place since 2004.
That's available in the public sphere.
But then also, we had no intelligence to indicate that that fatwa was being disobeyed or it was on the cusp of being lifted.
The Iranian strategy, it's actually pretty pragmatic.
The Iranians are obviously aware of what's taking place in their region, and their strategy was to not completely abandon their nuclear program because they saw what happened to Mumar Gaddafi in Libya when he said, hey, I've got no more nukes.
Unfortunately, that is what killed neocon, neoliberal warmongers.
That's the lesson that they showed everyone in the region.
And then conversely, the Iranians also knew that if they came out and said, okay, we've got a nuke, whether they were bluffing or not, Saddam Hussein, Iraq right next door.
So they kind of had-he was hung by his own people, you know, after a bloody, you know, war that's still essentially going on inside of Iraq.
So the Iranians' position, when viewed from the lens of the region, was actually fairly pragmatic.
They were preventing themselves from developing a bomb, but they still wanted the ability.
They wanted the ability to enrich.
They wanted the ability to have some components so that they weren't completely stripped of it.
And we always assess that they were either several months or a year, two years away from actually being able to develop a nuclear weapon.
And that's not because the Iranians are stupid people.
I think we can tell right now that the Iranians are anything but stupid.
Well, I think it's very obvious what's going on here.
And again, when it comes to all of this, we still haven't heard any justification.
We still haven't been told what the threat was.
We were told months ago that they completely destroyed their system, their nuclear system.
And now all of a sudden we're being told that they were just days away from striking and we had to do this now.
It's obviously a back and forth game.
And in clip six, too, yesterday, by the way, the CIA director, John Radcliffe, was asked about this by none other than John Cornyn, who is, by the way, a shill for the deep state operatives.
And that's the reason why he's fighting for his life in his reelection campaign.
Can't even make it past the primary without spending $100 million, but there's that.
He actually asked John Radcliffe and lays it out for him so that he could tee it up and try to take a knockdown on Kent's claims.
The head of the National Counterterrorism Center resigned saying that Iran did not represent an imminent threat to the United States.
Is there anything to indicate that Iran had ceased in its nuclear ambitions or in its desire to continue to build ballistic missiles capable of threatening American troops and allies in the Middle East?
I would think any fair-minded assessment of the situation, even based on open sources, would reflect the danger Iran poses, the regime poses to the United States.
Ultimately, we have provided the president with the intelligence assessments, and the president is elected by the American people and makes his own decisions based on the information that's available to him.
I think there's a lack of contrition, both about the violence that's perpetrated on me, really the violent episode he was involved in in the Senate committee where he's told the media, frankly, that he doesn't regret it.
He's also told the media there is, he said it again today, that there's historical precedent for violence that caning and dueling happened all the time.
And I pointed out, well, it was illegal 170, 200 years ago.
They would actually flee and they would do it in areas they could find where the law didn't reach.
Sometimes they would actually go to Canada.
Sometimes they go from one state to the other.
But the mass of civilized response, even in the 1850s and 1930s, was against doing.
That's why dueling was made illegal.
The fact that he can't bring himself to say that really we shouldn't settle political questions with violence, I think that would be a terrible example for ICE and for our border patrol agents.
We're in the midst, I think, of a crisis where there needs to be more direction from the top.
And a guy who brawls, a guy who can't even say he's sorry about, you know, wishing violence on me and really applauding the attack that happened on me, can't come to say that.
I don't know how he could, from my point of view, be a leader of ICE or workers.
But moments ago, the Senate committee actually voted eight to seven to move forward with Mullen as the DHS nominee.
So he did make it through.
By the way, the reason why they were able to get it through was because of Senator John Fetterman, who actually pushed forward and voted yes in favor of Mullen.
So that just happened moments ago.
So keep that one in the back of your minds as well.
Keep that one in the back of your minds.
Craziness going on all around the world too.
I'm watching a video on the side.
I'll get it up for our control room.
Sometimes I think things are AI, but Colin Rugg does a good job at this.
Sky5, it's a local news station, apparently pulled out.
And whenever you guys could get this up, it's give us a good little laugh.
This is my ADHD kicking in here.
A 500-pound man apparently fell into a 15-foot hole at a construction site.
And they had a holster him in to get him up.
And it's nothing but, oh my God, that is so embarrassing.
And if people are going through the process and trying to obtain it legally, because we do have naturalization ceremonies Monday through Friday in the century everywhere, we're going to continue working with those individuals.
I'll pass you the details, but it's something that we can talk through.
But just in general here, I guess what I'm just trying to get a sense from you is what do you think is appropriate in terms of ICE agents being able to operate?
For instance, do you think it is okay for them to operate and arrest people at hospitals?
Sir, I will always support my law enforcement doing their job.
I don't know the circumstances.
If it's a felony warrant that The person's at a hospital, then they'll go get pick up the felony warranty, just like local law enforcement does the same thing.
And so, in general, I think you need to be more specific on what you're talking about.
But if you're talking about just doing everyday law enforcement, I think there's a better approach.
Obviously, if you have to make an arrest and you have a warrant, you're going to go serve that warrant, you're going to make the arrest that they're at a hospital.
ICE is going to detain the person, but they're not going to stop them from getting medical treatment.
In fact, they're probably going to get better medical treatment than they would in their own country.
And that's why they're here in the first place, guy.
And it's like, why do you even answer these questions?
I guess you have to technically, but why?
Low IQ, low IQ.
But there's a new scandal popping off over at DHS.
We keep talking about it.
We cover a little bit of it, but there's more details emerging.
And again, these are all just reports.
I am actively looking to reach out to all parties involved.
So keep it on the back of your minds.
But NBC News just dropped a report moments ago saying exclusively that they have found out that DHS contractors informed White House officials that they were asked to pay Corey Lewandowski an unpaid special government employee acting chief of staff, like some type of like influence fee in exchange for immigration-related contracts and awards.
That's what they're claiming.
Now, again, I'm going to reach out to the White House too in all of this.
I'm reaching out to Corey Lewandowski for comment on all of this.
But Lewandowski, they are claiming allegedly demanding success fees or retainers from GEO groups.
Now, this is apparently according to a founder who apparently turned over this information, the company's billion-dollar annual federal contracts, what they were trying to dive into.
In a separate case, a marketing firm was required to hire Lewandowski, Link consultant, and redirect $20 to $30 million from multi-million dollar subcontracts as a thank you condition for work tied to the billion-dollar DHS deportation contracts.
Yeah, it sounds messy.
I'll tell you that.
Don't know if there's any truth to it.
We'll find out as we always do, though.
That's major.
Like, that's not, that's quite easy to prove as well.
If Corey Lewandowski is running a pay-to-play scheme, you're going to find out about that one.
And again, there's another report that just dropped as well from Politico.
They're claiming this one to also be an exclusive.
This one dropped an hour ago.
The Department of Homeland Security awarded $220 million.
Sorry, long day.
Still cracking up over the fat guy.
$220 million taxpayer-funded advertising campaign to two companies with ties to the Republican and Trump-connected political operatives, resulting in at least $23 million in commissions.
They're accusing a group called, and I haven't heard of any of these companies, so just bear with me, Safe America Media, which apparently formed just days before the bidding.
They earn at least $15.2 million in commission.
They were apparently linked to President Trump's 2024 campaign media buy.
And there was a second firm, people who think, but they're also saying received $7.7 million through a 10% commission on part of the campaign itself.
Now, again, you know me, I'm going to reach out to all parties involved.
Keep in the back of your minds, folks, though, and I'm going through the numbers.
I'm actually working on this report.
This is going to be one of my next reports that I issue where I break down for you how much money Chrissy Noma has actually saved taxpayers.
Because although they're sitting here and Democrats and the mainstream media is hyper-focused in the fact that they're having these allegations that she was doing possibly a pay-to-play scheme, she saved a significant amount of money for taxpayers.
It says the EI cuts.
See, they don't want to talk about any of this because this was all the wasteful spending under Democrats, DEI cuts.
Then there was Obama's quiet skies list, which I think cost American taxpayers like $100 plus million dollars a year.
So we've spent over a billion dollars in this program, which resulted in zero terrorists being arrested.
She shut that down.
There's a lot of cuts that were made.
So although they want to cover spending and say that this is reckless, and I do believe we should be fair and balanced, both sides.
If there's a pay-to-play scheme, let's call it out.
But you're not going to get, and we better not get it, I got to say, an arrest of Christy Dome and Corey Luganowski before we get an arrest of Alejandre Mayorkis.
As you know, I've addressed every issue you've raised in detail in a letter, but I'm grateful for the opportunity to do it in this forum.
As you stated, Congress provided by statute, ODNI, with the responsibility of election security and counterintelligence in 2021.
As you also know, ODNI has purview and could you just draw a picture of the pressure?
I am addressing the question.
ODNI also has purview and overview over two domestic related agencies, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, both of which have purview over election security responsibilities to ensure the integrity of our elections.
I want to correct one of your statements that you've made multiple times, which is false.
I did not participate in a law enforcement activity, nor would I, because that does not exist within my authorities.
This occurred the day that the FBI had it approved, their warrant approved by a local judge, and they began to execute this.
To address your question, sir, about the foreign nexus question.
In order for us to better understand the vulnerabilities in our election systems that may exist today as we look to 2026, and yes, we are very focused on trying to make sure that this election is one that the American people have.
The reality is that she has a right to be there, and I don't know where they're getting on all of this when they're trying to go after her for being president.
She could be there.
She's the director of national intelligence.
How dare you sit there and try to criticize her for being present for all of this?
It falls into her sphere of what she's supposed to be overlooking.
Election fraud, election fraud.
So again, it's just another round of just ridiculousness.
There's moments ago.
We're going to get this clip up and going for you, but it looks like the CIA director, John Radcliffe, has just been asked a very tough question in regards to the renewal of FISA that's expected to need its renewal in just a few weeks.
We'll get you that response in just a few moments.
As many of you guys know, I don't support the renewal of FISA.
I think it's absolutely ridiculous that we're even entertaining the idea.
Remember, again, FISA was used against President Donald Trump.
They used it against his campaign.
I mean, the whole Russian collusion hoax was cooked up, stirred up because of FISA.
So one would think, right, let's just do background before we play this clip.
One would think that the president wouldn't want a clean renewal of FISA because you're a victim of the federal government overreaching.
And so, you know, it's quite the interesting group now going out there and defending FISA.
I told you yesterday, I reached out to Jim Jordan's office.
Jim Jordan supports a clean renewal of FISA.
And I thought that was quite strange.
And then Speaker Mike Johnson says he supports it too.
Well, does President Trump support it?
Well, according to CIA director, hear it yourselves.
And it's been talked about many times, but up to 60% of the president's daily briefing is derived from FISA 702.
And we look at the successes that we've had in protecting the homeland and also the conflicts the U.S. has been involved with, the flawless operation in Venezuela, Operation Fury in Iran, troop protection, the successes we've had on the battlefield in Ukraine, the recovery and release of the Hamas hostages in the tunnels in Israel, all derived from FISA 702.
There is not a military operation that we've been involved with where FISA 702 was not, as Director Radcliffe has said, been indispensable to the United States and the protection of our country.
Director Patel has also said FISA 702 is indispensable.
We're 30 days away from it going dark.
Director Radcliffe, can you clarify the president's position on an 18-month clean reauthorization and how that's going to proceed moving forward?
Congressman, thank you and thank you for highlighting this issue.
So the president is in favor of an 18-month clean reauthorization of FISA 702.
And I would add to that, I'm heartened by the fact to hear that the chairman of this committee and the ranking member are in agreement with that.
And I know there's bipartisan support for that, and there should be.
And I know this is an important vote for you to take, but I would ask that you all consider when you do that, that when you look at the fact that former DNIs and former CIA directors and former FBI directors and DIA directors and NSA directors across Republican and Democrat administrations are in support of FISA 702 in its current form.
These are the people that are making the decisions to keep Americans safe.
And so I wish the reauthorization was longer than 18 months, Congressman.
I think that this is something that I wish you all would consider for longer than that, so that regardless of who the president is, who the president is in the future, he or she would have the benefit of, as you said, a tool that's indispensable across administrations provides more than half of the important, actionable intelligence that the president and the commander-in-chief relies upon.
The fact that American citizens can be spied on through FISA is absolutely disgraceful.
And the fact that we have lawmakers out there, we have all, obviously, the Intel community is a defender.
They love it.
The CIA loves it.
They love it.
But if you're someone who loves the Constitution, if you're someone that loves your personal rights where the government can't spy on you, maybe you've got a foreign friend that gets it there and make a quick little connection to your foreign friend and then go spy on you.
I mean, I said this also affected BLM protesters as well.
They were spied on illegally through the FISA courts.
And so why do we continue to extend it without fixing these issues?
And again, yesterday we had Congressman Andy Ogles on.
He said he doesn't support FISA if these issues aren't fixed.
There are a small group of Republican lawmakers who get it, who get it.
And it's frustrating to hear that most people just don't understand what we're talking about here.
We're talking about it being weaponized.
And the president is a victim of this, folks.
The Russian collusion hoax was all due to this.
This is a major issue.
I don't understand why we're debating this.
We're just going to keep extending it, keep allowing these rogue agencies to go out there.
This is why people think the president doesn't have control over his own federal government right now.
Because we're just sitting back, you're scratching your head.
You're going, well, what's the benefit of this right now?
And they always say the excuse as to why we have to renew FISA without making any of these edits is because it's used for his intelligence briefings, literally different aspects of the FISA courts, the warrants, everything.
By the way, I think it's like a 90-plus approval rating whenever you try to slide over and get a warrant signed on through the FISA courts.
When they try to defend it, they say, oh, we need it because it's what we use for the president's intel briefings.
And most people don't even know they're spying on you, but they're able to do it.
It makes me not want to talk to anyone who's not an American citizen because you can see how aggressive they are with going after innocent Americans using FISA.
It's politically motivated.
I mean, Ogles told us yesterday that somebody who has some like personal beef in their own background, their own life, like it had nothing to do with their role, used it for their advantage.
So just keep that in the back of your minds.
This is what's going on right now in this country.
And we have people who are just too spineless to go out there and say, probably shouldn't renew it.
Probably shouldn't.
All right, we're keeping our eye on a lot.
Dan Lyman will be joining me in about, let's just say, five to seven minutes.
Dan Lyman's one of our incredible reporters over at Infowars.com.
There's a lot of stories he's working on, which we're excited to have him on board with today.
I'll also ask him a bit about the Mullen confirmation because he's all over the topic.
You know, his beat these days is ICE, Border Patrol, immigration.
So we look forward to talking to him about the president's nominee to run DHS in just a few moments.
In the meantime, though, if you're going to go anywhere, the one place I'm going to let you go to, the AlexJonesStore.com.
Head on over there right now because when you become a VIP member, we extend a number of great offers your way.
One of those great offers is Iodine.
You get it for 50% off when you're a VIP member.
Now, again, when you compare the cost of becoming a VIP member, let me just pull up the benefits to this.
It's $30 a month.
Okay.
That's how inexpensive it is.
But we're going to thank you for supporting us and we're going to give you a $40 store credit.
We give you the $40 store credit.
So stop what you're doing.
Head on over.
ThealxjonStore.com.
We're literally thanking you by giving you free money.
If you don't sign up for this now, I don't know what else to tell you.
It's a great offer.
We're literally giving you $10 free dollars for supporting us over at thealexjonesstore.com.
Welcome back to the American Journal.
We're going to be taking your calls in about 25 minutes.
If you want to join the show, 877-789-2539.
That's 877-789-2539.
Specifically, if you're a veteran, I definitely want to hear from you guys in regards to the Joe Kent latest.
I want to hear your perspective.
What do you guys think about all of this?
So 877-789-2539 is the number to call into the show.
We want to hear from you.
Dan Lyman will be joining us in just a few moments.
He is one of our incredible reporters over at Infowars.com.
We look forward to having him on in a minute because he's got a lot of stories he's covering.
But I want to get to this.
This is the update regarding Islamic terrorists who decided to try to carry out a terror plot on a Michigan synagogue last week.
Well, Fox News has just released a report that I think is very enlightening.
We can confirm Fox News has obtained this brand new photo of the Michigan synagogue attacker, Ayman Mohammad Ghazali.
If we can pull this up right now, I'm told he sent this photo to his sister, to his family in Lebanon the day of the attack.
I'm also told that rifle that you see him holding right there is the same rifle that he brought with him to the attack, and it was the one that was recovered at the scene.
Now, you might see some blurring of the photo.
There was some Arabic writing over that photo that referenced martyrdom and vengeance.
We've decided to redact what was written on that photo in order to not further amplify that message there.
But again, this is a man who was born in Lebanon, who entered the U.S. legally in 2011, and then was naturalized into a U.S. citizen in 2016.
And keep in mind, the IDF reports that his brother was actually a rocket commander for Hezbollah living in Lebanon, and that his brother had recently been killed in an airstrike in Lebanon.
There had been some speculation that he carried out this attack potentially as revenge for the killing of his brother.
But Joey, we can confirm that this photo was sent to his family the day of the attack, and that is the gun that he brought with him to that attack.
Thankfully, this attack did not pan out the way it appears he hoped it would.
He drove that truck into the school, was immediately confronted by armed security there.
There's conflicting reports on what happened next, but the local sheriff believes he then turned the gun on himself and shot and killed himself.
But that is the latest update we have on this case, Joey.
Just another low IQ human being doing what low IQ human beings do.
Imagine receiving that photo.
First off, if the members of his family are here in the United States, too, probably should arrest them for not reporting out to police.
That would be one thing.
I don't know if they're foreign, though.
But, you know, imagine that.
He lost his brother because his brother was a low IQ, Hezbollah, terrorist.
And they just lost another son because he, too, is another low IQ fool.
Imagine the gojonas on someone to think that they're going to carry out this terror plot and it results in nothing.
Probably took his own life because he was so embarrassed that he was such an imbecile.
Sent that photo to his family as if he had something to be proud of.
Just another way that God takes out the trash sometimes, folks.
Just let it happen.
Let it happen.
Again, in a few moments, we're going to be taking our calls.
877-789-2539.
That is the number to call into the program.
Again, 877-789-2539.
That is the number to call if you want to join the show.
A lot of interesting things that happened yesterday as well that I want to make sure we dive into.
Yesterday, Kash Patel was actually asked a very specific question as to undercover agents.
And I'll kind of give you a little quick little synopsis on this.
Yesterday, he did say that the FBI, under his leadership, has increased the number of undercover agents.
He credited this expansion along with more funding to running their online operations.
Cringe.
He says that this was also utilized to prevent terrorist attacks, three of them that were ISIS-inspired in California, Texas, and North Carolina, and a Pennsylvania terrorist attack as well.
And keep in mind, too, he says that that was also utilized to go after that left-wing group, the Turtle Island Liberation Front, who are apparently planning a bombing.
So that's what was said yesterday.
Again, the FBI taking your money and using it to get more undercover agents.
Why don't you just like fund people like people that go after pedophiles?
I'd rather that money go there.
A lot of these ISIS plots they continue to tell you about.
They're just their agents leading mentally ill people to plot terrorist attacks that they're actually not capable of carrying out.
That's according to our good buddy, Steve Friend.
All right, folks, a lot happening over here in just a few moments.
Our lines are lighting up.
Dan Lyman is also joining the show.
Don't go anyway.
Welcome back, the American Journal.
Sad you're all here with us.
We'll be taking your calls in just a few moments.
877-789-2539 is the number to call.
That's 877-789-2539 is the number to call into the program.
And I really want to hear from our vets.
I want to hear from you specifically because there's a lot going on with Joe Kent.
I want to hear how you feel.
I don't have any level of expertise in the issue.
I'm just a reporter.
So I give you the information and want to hear what your perspective is.
So 877-789-2539 is the number to call.
But before we dive into the callers, my good buddy Dan Lyman is on hold.
Dan is one of our incredible reporters on InforWars.com.
He also is behind BorderHawk.news.
And we'll get to him in a second because I want to play this clip for you.
Tom Homan is asking, was being asked a question that I think is very, very relevant.
Right now, as many of you guys know, President Trump has pushed Chrissy Noam out of DHS as the secretary.
And she is, well, he's trying to move Mullins, Senator Mullins, into her position.
We played the clips for you as to what took place yesterday during his confirmation hearing.
Now, the problem with this is, you know, I was critical of Noam when she took on this position because I didn't understand why she was being nominated because she didn't have law enforcement experience.
And that was my perspective.
And the same thing kind of goes for Mullins a little bit, Mullen a little bit, because when you listen to the specific details of it, I think it's quite interesting because Tom Hohman was actually asked about that.
Tom Homan is the border czar.
And I think it's weird that he's not running DHS.
Borders are obviously not a position you need to be confirmed by the Senate on.
So yesterday he was asked specifically about the lack of experience that Mullen has.
Take a listen.
unidentified
You know, one of the questions for him was, how will you be different from Christy Noam?
What would your answer be to that, knowing both of them?
I don't think I can't put down what the difference is.
I can tell you that he's focused on the mission.
He has spoken to leadership within the DHS already.
He's heard their ideas.
He's got to speak to a few more, but he's hearing what they think the issues are.
How can we fix it?
He's counting on the experts who's done this job for decades to advise him on the next steps to take.
And that's big.
He's coming.
He don't know the immigration game very well, but he's counting on people with 30, 40 years experience to guide him away.
So I wouldn't point that out as a difference.
I just point that out that that is the way it should be as a secretary, counting on those who've done this for decades and listening to their past conflicts, listen to what works, what doesn't work.
For instance, I've worked for six different presidents.
I've seen hundreds of policies come and go.
I know what policies work, what policies don't, and he wants to know that.
So that's important to the men and women who wear that badge and gun that he's hearing their voices.
All right, it's an interesting back and forth, of course, and joining me to discuss and kind of reflect on the hearing that went down yesterday is my good old buddy, Dan Lyman.
He's an incredible reporter over at Infowars.com and also BorderHawk.news as well.
Dan, it's good to have you in the program today.
Mullen obviously was in the hot seat yesterday and he's officially moved forward.
He got eight to seven, well, eight votes, which is what he needed.
John Fennerman, the senator from Pennsylvania, crossed over and gave his blessing.
Even though Ram Paul, not a big fan of Mullen, your reaction to him being the president's nominee, because again, he really doesn't have that level of expertise that one would assume that DHS, at least a DHS secretary, would actually need.
And Dan, I'm just like over here wondering why do we keep doing this to ourselves?
Christy Noam, I personally do like her, and I think she did actually a really good job for someone who didn't have the expertise, but it also felt like they set her up to fail.
I mean, I sat back and watched.
I mean, yes, and I know she got a lot of criticism, and we did too.
My female friends in law enforcement weren't very happy with the beautification of her and dressing up in the ICE attire and then, you know, DHS.
And obviously it was very glam.
And they took it personal because they said, listen, we can't dress like that because we're out here running, catching perps.
And, you know, you can't have your hair down.
You have to have it tied up in a bun because, again, it could catch onto something.
It could be a sway that someone grabs you.
So there's a lot of different things here.
And they weren't happy about that.
But I think when it comes to the deportation numbers, if the numbers that were put out there were accurate, I mean, according to them, I think within the first year, they got 3 million people to leave, but that was due to self-deportations as well.
The odds weren't in her favor.
I mean, she was poorly funded given the fact that millions of illegal aliens were intentionally brought into the country for that reason.
The immigration courts are flooded.
She had to battle it out with these left-wing groups who were obviously fighting on behalf of the illegal aliens.
And it was very, very public.
I just, in my perspective, and I'll kind of let you weigh in on this, Dan, I don't think she was given the materials that were necessary to help her thrive.
And then she also had someone behind her, too, who didn't have a level of expertise either to take on this position.
Yeah, you know, I get the impression that Mullen is like a reaction to, you know, Noam in many ways behind the scenes, sort of a, let's take this thing in a whole, a totally different direction.
We're going to remove this grandma Barbie doll from her position and replace with a brawler, a fighter, a guy who has an image as a fighter, at least, who was a former professional fighter, of course.
So they're going in a completely different direction from a marketing standpoint, I think.
But as you mentioned, I mean, it doesn't seem like he's been particularly interested in this issue or is particularly well versed.
And, you know, I guess it should have been expected that whoever was going to run DHS under this latest Trump administration was going to be under fire 24-7.
It seems to me like there is still this tug of war going on within the administration.
And we've been hearing a lot about that from our sources at ICE, at DHS, at Border Patrol, that essentially there are two schools of thought.
And one is sort of the kind of measured, worst of the worst, Tom Homan slash, you know, Chrissy Noam approach to, you know, we're getting the worst criminals off the streets.
And that's good and that's important.
But this isn't mass deportations.
That's not what we're seeing.
And you see on the flip side of things, there was that sort of Gregory Bovino character who was leading U.S. Border Patrol and the operation at large.
And he seemed a lot more enthusiastic about mass deportations.
Every single one has got to go.
If anyone recalls his speech, I believe it was before the operation in California.
This is our city, he told the men, and that was on camera.
And that's the kind of attitude that I think a lot of people who expected mass deportations, that's the attitude that we wanted to see.
That doesn't mean Gregory Bovino was a perfect character.
However, seeing the way that ICE operates, and they do do a good job at targeting criminals, the way that they operate and the amount of resources it takes for them to effectively take even just one criminal alien off the streets, it's overwhelming.
It's immense.
And there's just no way that that sort of approach can affect a mass deportation agenda.
I think we need a kitchen sink agenda thrown at this entire thing.
We need the ICE tactics, the more measured behind the scenes surveillance-based operations.
And then we need, in my opinion, a Gregory Bovino in every major American city with hundreds or thousands of good men who are willing to execute that agenda and clean these cities out and move on from there to the smaller cities and from there to the towns and the villages, because this country is absolutely infested with illegal aliens.
And there is no way that the tactics that have been employed so far are going to be effective.
And I think we see, unfortunately, the administration seems to be backing off of the mass deportation agenda because supposedly they're worried about the midterm.
Supposedly they're worried about optics.
Well, they weren't worried about any of that when they went in and started bombing Iran, you know, launching what is a deeply, deeply unpopular initiative there, again, in the Middle East, spiking gas prices.
I mean, talk about just a base level issue that will turn off many voters as we approach the midterm elections.
Seeing four, five, $6 gallon gas is really going to put a sour taste in their mouths about the current administration.
And so, I mean, we're just seeing fumble after fumble while the administration seems to want to kind of take a different course on the deportations.
And it looks like Mullins is going to be the safe pick, the guy that it looks like will just kind of get DHS out of the national headlines as he has stated that he wants to do.
I think that's a mistake.
The media is going to pursue them regardless.
I think that the only way forward is just a blitzkrieg across the country removing tens of millions of illegal aliens.
And, you know, Dan, if you're like the rest of us and you understand that the president's being thrown like really bad polling numbers to justify actions like in Iran, you know, Iran and it was a great joke.
Savannah Hernandez had a great tweet about it.
CNN and MSNBC are trying to push this poll saying that 100% of MAGA supporters back President Trump right now.
100%.
So we can't even dispute that because apparently we are the fringe side of all of this, those who do not support what he's done lately.
And 100% of MAGA support it.
I feel like we're in like an echo chamber where they're intentionally trying to only project the positive messaging to him to keep him going, even though the rest of us are like, we went off this ride.
This is not what we signed up for.
And I think that's what's kind of playing out right now.
Also, by the way, Erasmus reports just sent me over a poll and it goes a little something like this.
37% of voters believe that Trump has been successful in cleaning up the deep state, including 10% who think he's actually been very successful.
So that's only 37%.
But when you compare that number to how many think that he's been unsuccessful, 52% of Americans think that he has been unsuccessful at cleaning up a deep state, including 34 who believe, 34% who believe his efforts have not been successful at all.
So when you go through the numbers, Dan, it looks to me like the American people get it.
This is probably the polling data that they won't place in front of him.
They'll just keep this little echo chamber going.
But I think most Americans get it.
We're upset.
We're infuriated that nothing is happening on the front of these fights.
And so, you know, that's just another piece of proof for our audience.
Dan, let's pivot a little bit because you have been putting up great work over at Infowars.com.
And I wanted to make sure we brought you on to highlight just that.
There's the first story that I wanted to get to about a special interest alien from Pakistan carrying a Mexican residency caught sneaking into Texas.
Now, that has all of the alarm bells going off in my head.
You know, one area where the administration has been very successful is the securing of our borders.
And that's just indisputable at this point.
That doesn't mean it's perfect.
There are still people getting through, still gotaways.
But you get the sense that very few people are making it through.
Very few people are even attempting.
There is still plenty of action along the border, but it's just nothing like it was during the Biden regime.
And but with this one, it was a little concerning.
And it's a strange story because this gentleman, I don't know if any of you guys can flash the article on screen.
Supposedly he's from Pakistan.
And that's the documentation that he provided when he was taken into custody in Texas.
Texas Department of Public Safety troopers working along U.S. Border Patrol were able to track this guy down with a canine team and a brush team.
And so supposedly this guy is Pakistani.
He has a permanent residency card issued by Mexico.
That's concerning.
He doesn't look very Pakistani to me.
He certainly could be.
He looks more Hispanic to me, to be honest.
And a lot of people speculated about that in the comments, but they also speculated about his attire.
He was wearing, he had a fresh haircut, freshly shaved beard, and his attire looked a little slightly more sophisticated than your average illegal sneaking across the border if they're not wearing camouflage.
And so certain people that work in security and in various military veterans were speculating that he's trained, military trained, possibly.
But that's all speculation, of course, because we don't have that info.
But the concerning thing, of course, is that if he's from Pakistan sneaking into the country, we have a rise in jihad terror attacks across the United States.
Whether or not the government wants to admit that, whether or not the media wants to report on that correctly, I mean, we've had the shooting in Austin.
We've had several migrants from Africa from Islamic countries.
We had the recent storming of a school or a guy showed up at a school in tactical gear, an Iraqi-born migrant showed up at a school in tactical gear, fully armed.
And so I think what we're seeing here is the start of the response to our involvement in the Middle East is triggering these lone wolves, these sleeper cells, whatever you want to call them here on U.S. soil.
And so it's disturbing to see supposedly a guy from Pakistan who might be military trained sneaking into the country.
Yeah, for taking an unauthorized tour of the U.S. Capitol, which they pay for through their taxpayer dollars.
Give me a break, these fools.
It makes me so angry.
It makes me so angry, Dan.
These people are just so outrageous that it's not really surprising, though, that this is what's going on, that they free these types of animals and put them back onto our streets, hoping maybe that there's another terrorist attack that carries out.
By the way, there was that other individual, too, who carried out that shooting, the Islamic terrorist in Virginia.
He was someone who was incarcerated.
I think it was the first term under the Trump administration recommended, like, I think it's 17 to 20 years in prison for him because he was supporting ISIS through giving them material.
And then the Biden regime released him.
And as a thank you, he went and killed a great patriot.
And I believe he injured two others as well before a group of, I'd say, very patriotic men grabbed him up and killed them themselves with their bare hands, which we're very thankful that they were able to do.
But again, this is what's going on.
We constantly release these people, give them the second opportunity to kill, and they take it.
And for some reason, people just don't understand that.
But that's the situation we're in right now, especially we'll get to this next one too.
When we talk about we keep giving people chances to kill American citizens, I want to talk more about the CDL issue because ICE has arrested an Indian driver accused of critically injuring an American pedestrian in Indiana.
I saw this press release get sent out by DHS and I was just like, we have another one, Dan?
No, I mean, it's just, it's almost every day at this point.
So, and just hearkening back to a story that we just got the info on from a couple weeks ago, this horrific crash in Ohio, where a father and his 11-year-old son were killed by a trucker.
We all knew right away it was something fishy.
We didn't hear anything about the driver.
Well, we just found out the other day he was a Haitian illegal.
But pivoting over to this story, we're finding out so many of these drivers are coming in from India.
They're all named Singh, suspiciously.
And so this one's just awful.
This driver, a legal alien, who entered the country under unclear circumstances.
So we don't know when or where he entered, but he did receive a non-domiciled CDL by the state of New York in early of 2025 and was driving a big rig when he ran over a pedestrian, allegedly ran over a pedestrian who was left in critical condition.
My understanding that that man is still in critical condition, I'd have to check on that because we did this a couple of days ago and circle back and find out what happened with the victim.
Absolutely horrific.
And just ran this guy over and thankfully was arrested at the scene and turned over to ICE.
Another story out of Indiana.
So we're hearing, we're seeing a lot of these stories, these trucker stories coming out of Indiana.
Very disturbing.
We see all this hype right now.
This is another thing where I'm not really confident what the administration is doing is some good movement, but it's not enough.
Everyone's talking about, oh, they're pulling 200,000 illegal alien truck drivers off the roads.
No, that's not what's happening.
They are not going to be given an opportunity to renew their CDLs when that time comes.
And for some of them, it's not until the 2030s.
What happens when the next administration comes in and says we're just rolling that one back?
But none of these, these guys aren't being pulled off the road.
Maybe a few will.
And the estimates are that there are far more unqualified foreign drivers, many of whom are in the country illegally.
American Truckers United understands that number.
It could be three or four times the 200,000 number.
And so these guys are going to be still on the roads.
even into the 2030s.
And my understanding is there's even a five-year grace period in many cases when their licenses lapse where they may not, you know, they might just get a slap on the wrist, even if they're arrested in 2030 or pulled over in 2030.
So this whole thing, it feels like smoke and mirrors to me.
Truckers are one of the most easily tracked down drivers on the roads.
They drive in vehicles that have to go through way stations.
They have to go to loading docks, ports.
You know, they're in, in most cases, their vehicles have electronic tracking, logbooks, and all that.
And so you would think that if the administration can identify or the federal government or local governments can identify, let's say, just non-domiciled CDL drivers, they should be picking these guys off left and right at way stations, just pulling them over on the highways.
There should be a full-scale national effort to get these guys off the roads.
And I don't get the sense that there is.
You hear things about, you know, a couple day operations here, a couple day operations here, and they pick up a couple hundred.
Well, apparently there's 200,000 or 500,000 or 700,000.
And these guys are killing American citizens nearly every day.
They're wreaking havoc on our roads.
Everyone is losing faith in the truck driving industry when so many people grew up like you and me, you know, thinking that truckers were some of the safest, most, you know, careful and professional drivers on the road.
That's all out the window.
They're wreaking havoc.
And it is, it's scary.
I mean, you drive just a couple hours on a highway, you're bound to encounter incidents and you're bound to see truckers making very dangerous maneuvers, if not crashing.
And so that's happening all across the country.
So this whole 200,000 CDL thing, let's see how it turns out.
But I mean, I think it's just a slap on the wrist right now.
And also keep in mind, too, a lot of these truck drivers also have H-1Bs as well.
And they haven't canceled those.
People within the administration have told me that they don't want to see a complete economic crash of the trucking industry.
And they feel like if they were to pull back all of those at the same time, that it would completely crash and the economy would collapse as well.
I don't think that's the case.
But again, if we're that reliant on foreigners, then I think we have a bigger issue here to kind of dig into rather than just allowing this to continue to happen.
Dan, I'll give you about a minute, but you could have your reaction to that one.
Yeah, well, I mean, they're not worried about the economic impact, the ramifications of dropping bombs on Iran.
So, you know, it's pick and choose.
And frankly, like you said, if we're that reliant on foreign labor, then the whole system needs to be dismantled.
That's unfortunate, but this is not a pathway forward.
This is not going to be successful for the American people.
And frankly, this is a self-perpetuating crisis.
If you continue to allow tens of millions of people who are in the country illegally to remain here and have children Children and have growing families and continue to scam Americans and scam the system.
Well, frankly, you know, there's 50 to 100 million people that don't belong in this country, but those 50 to 100 million people, they need deliveries too.
They need food.
They need their Amazon.
They need all manner of, you know, things that come on trucks.
So if we need so many extra truckers to be bringing these people their goods and services, well, if we remove them from the country, we don't need those truckers as well.
We never needed them in the past.
And the fact that we supposedly need them now, that there's a driver shortage when we know, of course, that there are plenty of Americans, especially American males without college educations, who will happily drive for the wages that were once offered on the road that are starting to, you know, starting to crumble because in some cases, these guys are driving for 50% less, you know, 60% less, according to ATU.
And so, you know, this is a self-perpetuating crisis, like I said, and all roots back to immigration.
It always does.
And an overcrowded nation that is full of people who don't belong here and who are just clogging up our system and overweighing, overloading everything.
Our infrastructure is going to hell as well.
And putting more trucks on the road doesn't make that any better either.
Well, Dan, I mean, the fact that we have to sit here and debate this and try to ask the administration to get rid of these people is really just frustrating.
But every time I see a truck driver driving in the left lane, I know that they are not an American citizen.
It's very obvious they're not.
And they're just sitting there doing 80 miles per hour on the highway, zigzagging in and around.
These aren't Americans.
I need to get rid of these people.
And, you know, there used to be a time where the trucking industry, I remember talking to folks about this, they used to make great money.
And it's really upsetting that they have not been able to do just that.
We can make it work.
It's just going to be a little painful at first.
We're okay with painful.
When we're talking about gas prices, though, and striking Iran, they're okay with that type of pain, but not the pain that puts America first and gets rid of these third world imports.
Dan Lyman, thank you for joining us.
As always, do an incredible job at Infowars.com as well as PorterTalk.news.
Yeah, I wanted to just confirm everything that Dan was just talking about.
I'm a tenure veteran.
Right around 10 years, I drove.
I got started right when they started implementing the e-logs and tracking all of the hours of services.
It was right when the good old days when drivers could actually clear six figures and be respected.
And those days were over right when I was getting started.
But everything that Dan was just saying, that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Look, I have over a million safe miles.
So let me just tell you what my experience was during my decade of driving.
They cram three of these foreigners with these H-1B non-domicile CDL holders after putting them through some here today, gone tomorrow's CDL school, and they get a BS license.
They then cram three of these guys in there so that those wheels on that truck do not stop turning.
The only reason that they stop turning is if they're stopping to get fuel or if they're actually responsible enough to put the truck through the proper maintenance.
And that's a big if.
I cannot tell you a single time that I got pulled into a waste station to have my BOLs checked, my bills of lading, and there wasn't some DOT guy in there just losing his mind because he can't communicate with the guy from India or wherever he's from because he doesn't speak a word of English.
That's how this works.
And they pay those guys a fraction of what they would pay one American driver.
And the old timers, the veterans that have been doing that for 30, 40 years, they only stick with it because they literally can't do anything else because they live their lives on the road.
They don't have any sort of life outside of that.
Because again, I spent the most money I ever made in my decade of driving, I didn't, I barely, I almost cleared 50K, almost gross, 320 plus days on the road.
You people have absolutely no idea how bad it is out there because yes, you guys are absolutely right.
Everything that we that we buy off of the shelf comes from a truck.
And if they were to actually get rid of the easily 400K of these people that are here driving these trucks, if they did get rid of them, yeah, everything else would crash.
We would have an economic crash.
But you know what?
It would be worth it because then we would actually be employing our American truck drivers that give their lives for this country.
And I quit because I got sick and tired of it because unlike those old timers out there, I actually had some backup plans.
I was actually able to go back and fall back on some other things and I had some support elsewhere.
But the majority of them don't.
And it's disgusting.
It sickens me.
This country is so far off the rails.
I feel like I was born into a country that I was taught about that never even existed.
I mean, I mean, remember back in the day when we used to be told like truckers are making six-figure paychecks, and that was really impressive.
And, you know, when we talk about the financial burden, the economy, economic burden that's going to be felt by this, I always say, to me, it's a cop-out.
It's a cheap excuse that they use.
They throw out there because we are told now that gas prices are through the roof, that this is something that we must just endure.
It's short-term pain.
You heard the White House having all their little people out there to say just that short-term pain for the long-term cause of just completely annihilating terrorism, Islamic terrorism, even though we've imported them into this country already, and they always seem to distance themselves from that argument.
But when it comes to all of this, I think most Americans would be okay with feeling a little bit of an economic burden if it meant we're purging out people who are non-U.S. citizens who don't care for American lives to bring back American jobs.
And yeah, Josh, it's an absolute disgrace.
And thank you for calling to the show today.
We appreciate your time as always.
And we're thankful for you jumping on and talking to us and giving us the breakdown, the behind-the-scenes breakdown.
It's an absolute disgrace.
And Savannah Hernandez over at Turning Point has been doing a deep dive into all of this and trying to figure it out because she's been following it.
And sadly, I don't think the Transportation Department's given her much.
They just give you a bunch of little fluffy statements, pretend like they're out there really doing something.
But I don't think that they really are.
Dan called it out perfectly.
Those 200,000 illegals who are driving on our roads, non-U.S. citizens, whatever you want to call them, they are consistently going to be on our roads because it's when their IDs expire.
And New York has handed these IDs out like literally with no verification process at all.
So we have no idea who these people are.
Josh, thank you for calling to the show.
We greatly appreciate it.
All right, let's get back to the top of the program.
I told you I tried to get in this week and talk to you.
So I ran, I'm not happy with it.
And exactly what the previous caller was talking about, fuel prices are going through.
I live here in the state of Michigan.
I am a professional truck driver.
I've been around trucks for all my life.
I'm 50 years old.
And I'm actually a specialized type of truck driver.
I have my hazmat.
And in the state of Michigan, we have the highest rating for weight we can haul on the roads.
My truck, I can haul 154,000 pounds up to 168,000 pounds.
I got two trailers.
It's called Michigan Gravel Trains.
And I haul heavy equipment.
I haul gasoline.
And it is such, and back in early 2000s, I was running a heavy duty record.
Now, what that is, is they haul semis and go out and clean up accidents.
And back then, there were illegals driving truck.
I would go to a job site.
I would have a Jamaican or somebody that couldn't speak English or communicate with me when I'm trying to tell them, hey, you need to turn your steering wheel this way.
Turn off your parking brake.
I mean, there were so many things.
And I think in Michigan right now, our fuel prices are $5 a gallon for diesel fuel.
The trucks I run get three miles a gallon.
We have 100 gallon tanks.
And you think about the amount of money that companies are going through again now.
We're losing jobs here.
It's ridiculous.
Like right now, I'm laid off because there's no construction work out there.
Nobody wants to.
And so what these illegals have done, I got out of freight hauling years ago.
I hauled it for a little bit.
You would pull into a warehouse where there would be different companies that you'd be loading out of, and it would look like a foreign country between Russians, between, because all sorts of foreigners.
Like it wasn't just Indians.
It wasn't just, it's everybody.
Like they just flooded it.
And it's a really sad situation.
And I, you know, I was going to talk about something else, but this is something I'm very knowledgeable in.
Like I said, I've had to go through in order to haul hazardous material, you have to go into ports.
You have to go to the TSA and you have to get fingerprinted and you have to get licensed.
You got to be cleared for that.
But the thing I worry about is if they're coming into this country and they're giving them new social security numbers and stuff, they can get their Twit card.
They can get their hazmat endorsement because they're going to be considered criminal free, right?
They're not going to be considered an illegal alien because they got issued these.
So, a lot of times I think about like, man, and I see it.
You can go drive down the highways in Michigan.
You can go up, pull up beside them that they got their door has a piece of paper taped to it.
They're probably an illegal.
And I mean, they're flooding the rest areas.
Like companies will have, you know, they don't have a place of business.
So they park their trucks at all the rest areas and all the gas stations and stuff, all the truck stops.
And so it's a Dan's right on the money.
And he's a, you know, and there's so much more to it than just the simple fact that we have these people.
And that's another thing is that we, as American truckers, are held to a higher standard.
I got 42 tires on my truck.
I got inspections I got to do.
I got two trailers I got to inspect.
But yet these illegals can run these junk trucks down the road, their bumpers falling off, stuff dragging down the road, their axles slid all the way forward or all the way to the back, running over stop signs and people's driveways.
And there's nothing, there's no accountability.
And that's so there's something called motor carrier here in Michigan.
There are very few motor carriers with the state police that are supposed to be commercial truck enforcement.
And then every county and townships will have like a waymaster, they call them.
But there's so many trucks and a lot of them are on the highway that they, and then you're seeing a lot of these foreigners that are starting to take secondary roads, trying to avoid the highways where the motor carriers sit watching truckers.
And so it's bad.
And especially here in the state of Michigan, it's bad because they're really not busting people.
And they're right.
If 200,000 truckers got yanked out of their seats tomorrow, our economy would crash.
Everything depends on the trucking industry, whether it's hauling a piece of equipment, whether it's hauling food, whether it's hauling anything.
It just crashed.
So, but that's what I got to say.
I'm just going to keep on trucking here and dealing with the high prices.
And Mullen, I'm going to tell you right now, I am not his fan.
I don't care what anybody says.
He's had too many issues.
I don't think he belongs in DHS.
I am sick of these pics that are just, I want somebody in charge of something that knows what they're doing.
You know, when we look for these Americans who are supposed to have these jobs, I mean, I, like teenagers, what happened to teenagers having jobs?
I had my first job at 14 years old running a cash register over to Pizzeria and taking orders.
I mean, that's my first job.
And so a lot of these positions aren't being filled either by, that could be filled by teenagers, American teenagers.
I mean, it's pretty disgraceful.
And, you know, I had friends who would do like car washes and stuff too.
Like, those days are long gone.
It just feels like we've replaced everyone with illegal aliens because we say, oh, they accept low pay.
It's just, we have the capability of being able to fix these issues, Matt.
And as you know, and I've just outlined, I mean, it's just a matter of: are we willing to take on a little bit of a burden to make sure we could do just that?
It's up to the American taxpayer.
Are you done with being replaced by illegal aliens who do not love and respect your country?
Or do you want to just keep living this life?
It's getting worse and worse.
Not getting any better.
Matt and Arizona, thank you for calling in.
We appreciate your time.
Savage Dog in Georgia is on hold as he always is, always makes his way to the top of the stack.
Number one, yeah, I'm not a Mark Wayne Mullen fan.
You need a stoic somebody, you know, to head a law enforcement agency.
You don't need some, you know, some guy that's going to, you know, want to throw down the Tom Holman.
That might end badly for Mark Wayne.
But I say we clone Tulsi Gabbard and make her secretary of everything.
Number two, the trucking thing.
You know, everybody so far today is talking about how it'll be such a catastrophe: 200,000 trucking driver jobs gone.
Well, that's a quick, easy fix.
First, you subsidize 100% anybody going to trucking, any American going to trucking school and pay them a stipend to go there because that might be a factor.
Well, it's like six weeks' school and they can't afford to take that kind of dunk in their pay.
So pay them.
And there, you got your 200,000 replacement or whatever until until everything's full and good.
And then, but number two, and this, I've always said, why aren't we using this tool in the toolbox for mass deportations?
But, you know, as it applies to trucking anywhere, fine into oblivion or and or imprison any employer who hires one of these people.
They're party to murder if they hire somebody, an illegal who kills somebody on the highway.
So, you know, let's use that tool and toolbox and then we get the mass deportations done and all these Karens running around acting like YE5-0 tracking down, you know, out-of-state tags.
They'll be out of a job because, you know, they're just, they're busy arresting people at, you know, employers.
So that's my, I guess, four cents, two cents on each one.
So here's the point of my call.
I want to issue an apology to you and all of the listeners.
Every time I call, seems like I'm like, you know, about Iran.
I'm kind of like ooh rawing and let Trump cook.
And, you know, like there's one time I called and said, I don't see any downside to this war.
Well, that all changed starting two days ago, listening to Robert Barnes and Mike Adams.
You know, Mike Adams talking about what's going to happen economically to the world if the strait is closed.
And then Matt Bracken talking about the military at how it's pretty much impossible to successfully invade Iran unless you're willing to lose 100,000 troops.
Couple that with the memo that came out, which we've all forgotten, that the troops received, you know, from their commanders that this is a holy war.
We're going to bring about, you know, the second coming.
And it's obvious that Israel is in control of pretty much everything in our government.
I think that Trump is not listening to anyone who isn't a yes man.
Ask Saddam Hussein how that worked out for him.
And, you know, then they talk about this: that the original Ayatollah that got killed, well, he had a fat law against nukes, and you know, he would have never allowed it.
It's their rule that they can lie to non-Muslims as long as it furthers Islam.
You know, there's really actually no argument for this.
And so I want to apologize for, you know, if I, if I changed any hearts and minds before, I want to change them back.
And I know you've been on the fence, and it's there's really this is looking real bad.
Unless, like I said before, we've got some kind of super super weapon that we haven't unleashed that actually can do a job.
I think the mission should change from anything interior of Iraq and take a hundred miles inland from the strait and hold that as a militarized zone.
Maybe Saudi Arabia, Jordan, you know, other Arabic states can arm this and actually prevent Iran from hitting any ship in the strait, thereby freeing it completely.
And that's the one problem with Iran that I see.
The nukes, I don't think, are as dangerous as being able to take hostage the strait if so many countries rely on what's coming out of there.
You know, if you listen to Mike Adams, you know, it's not just gas or natural gas, it's aluminum, it's fertilizer stuff.
It's, you know, it's all kinds of stuff that's not getting through.
So my suggestion for the exit strategy would be for Trump to come out and say, well, first, you know, if we've got some kind of super thing, we can take that 100-mile buffer on the straight straight secure, and now tell Israel, you know what?
I just feel like, you know, all these things with Trump just keep piling up.
You know, the FISA courts, you know, you've got to wonder, even the trucking issue, it's so similar.
You know, like he's just not taking care of that industry, even though he promised to.
And it's, you know, H-1B visas go down the line.
I mean, there's so many things that he seems to be failing in, or just, who knows, curling up into a little ball.
We really will never know, probably.
But I think we're just smoking hopium at this point to not realize that he's, you know, may sound a little extreme, but like he seems to be like an Illuminati agent of chaos at this point.
He just set everybody up, you know, and yeah, I don't know.
Well, yeah, just the fact that, I mean, it's, you know, he, so he, he run clearly, like, this is part of why I'm saying he's an Illuminati agent of chaos.
He, he, he, he's the one that got harmed by this the most.
And then now all of a sudden he starts a war and he threw through, you know, CIA director Radcliffe, he, he, who, you know, Trump appointed originally the last time around.
So now here he is back again.
So I guess he was happy with his work.
You know, it's, it just seems like like it was all just a staged thing, you know, like the law fair and everything.
I mean, I would take it that far.
I've heard people say this online in different venues.
You know, a lot of them are Nick Fuente's acolytes.
And at first I was smoking the hopium and I didn't want to believe that.
And now, you know, he just so easily rolls over, like as if he never got harmed at all by this.
Yet we all got dragged, you know, any of us, obviously you and most of the info warriors out there were just, you know, just, you know, just following it, just killing us all the, all that law fare along the way.
I mean, it was difficult to watch.
I mean, I understand the law.
I'm not a lawyer, but I understand the law actually quite well.
I've been to court many times defending myself pro se, et cetera.
I mean, I don't want to go into all that, but I mean, these cases had absolutely no legal merit whatsoever.
Yet people that don't know anything about that just got dragged into it like, oh, oh, maybe he really did something wrong.
You know, I mean, even if you could say, you know, he did something slightly wrong, like, okay, maybe he most likely did have sex with this porn star.
It doesn't make it a federal offense.
I mean, it's just insanity.
It's pure insanity what they tried to pull over.
And I really believe, you know, kind of stepping back now, because I was, I mean, listen, I was a huge Trump supporter.
I listened to him announcing on Oprah, you know, back in the 80s with my mom watching TV and thinking, wow, he really would make a great president.
You know, so I was right on board immediately this second he stepped down the elevator or rode down the elevator.
And I just feel like, yeah, wow, I was wamboozled.