June 26, 2023 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec
48:43
EPISODE 503: WHY DID SEN GRAHAM INTRODUCE AN ARTICLE 5 FOR UKRAINE IF A NUCLEAR FACILITY IS DESTROYED?
On today’s can’t miss episode of Human Events with Jack Posobiec, Poso breaks down exactly why the 2020 Election loss for Trump was an inside job and it’s not the reason you might think! Jack is also joined by Tony Shaffer to discuss the attempted coup in Russia by the Wagner Group; is this the end of Putin, or just the beginning? Poso is then joined by The People’s Pundit himself, Richard Baris where they break down the latest Republican Primary polling out of Iowa - all this and more on tod...
We are in the fight for America's future and we are assembling a team to fight back.
Turning point action this July 15th and 16th is where the assemblage will take place.
Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, Dan Bongino, Steve Bannon, myself, Charlie Kirk, Senator Hawley, Senator Vance, Matt Gaetz, Benny Johnson, Vivek Ramaswamy, Scott Pressler, Mike Lindell, Harmeet Dhillon, You need to be there.
Go and sign up immediately.
TPaction.com is the site.
TPaction.com.
Use promo code POSO and you will get a discount.
Secure your tickets immediately.
Don't be coming to me saying, can you get me in after this thing sells out because it will sell out fast.
And I will see you down in Florida this July 15th and 16th for the greatest assemblage of patriots this country has seen since Valley Forge.
We are in a fifth generational conflict.
We are in a fifth generation.
For every lie they tell, we're going to get in their face and yell two truths.
This is Human Events with your host, Jack Posobiec.
In a rant, he claims that the Russian military targeted and killed a quote, huge amount of his Wagner forces.
These are the chaotic scenes posted by the Wagner mercenary group.
This could very well be the unraveling of the Putin regime.
The leader of the Wagner Group, Yevgeny Prigozhin, has ordered his forces to halt their march to Moscow and return to their camps after taking control of a southern city.
Before I even arrive at the Oval Office, I will have the horrible war between Russia And Ukraine totally settled.
I'll have it done in 24 hours.
The biggest story of the week was that WhatsApp message from Hunter Biden.
If it comes true what the IRS whistleblower is saying, we're going to start impeachment inquiries on the Attorney General.
But what's got everyone talking is the bombshell WhatsApp message they gave the committee.
The one that implicates Joe Biden.
I've never spoken to my son about his overseas business.
This is the final battle.
We will defeat crooked Joe Biden.
We will liberate America from these villains once and for all.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard today's edition of Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
Today is June 26, 2023.
Anno Domini.
Folks, we've seen a lot of chaos over the last 48 hours.
We put out a bonus broadcast, a special broadcast of Human Events over the weekend, breaking down the shocking and stunning events of Russia, This Purgosian-Wagner Group situation, the Purgosian affair, l'affaire des Purgosines, as you might say in French.
What went down?
What was happening?
We're going to have Lt.
Col.
Tony Schafer on very soon to talk about this in full detail, and did intel on either side play a role in this?
But we have to talk about this new piece out of the New York Post.
Was 2020 an inside job?
Now, Speaker McCarthy was out there early this morning in an interview telling us That if the FBI, excuse me, the IRS whistleblower is truthful, that they will be opening an impeachment inquiry on Merrick Garland.
And let's ask that for a question.
Why was it that this investigation on Hunter Biden was not handled by the FBI?
Why was it sent to the IRS?
Why wasn't it done by FBI, DOJ, the rest?
They said this is a tax matter.
I'll tell you why right now.
It's very simple.
Because even before you get to any of the situation regarding the actual conduct of the investigation that the IRS is talking about, These whistleblower and very brave agents coming forward.
They're telling us, number one, that unequivocally, they were blocked from conducting any subpoenas, any raids, any action whatsoever on the Hunter Biden investigation.
They wanted to do raids in multiple states with multiple subpoenas on Hunter Biden throughout the course of 2020 because the FBI had already verified the laptop a year Before we had it on War Room.
A full year before we released that laptop, before the New York Post story first came out, the hard drive from hell, all of it, a full year before it had been verified.
But the FBI didn't want to look into how Hunter Biden was getting his money.
The FBI didn't care about the FARA, the flagrant FARA violations.
The FBI didn't want to touch any of it.
They said, oh, we're just gonna make sure...
That he has to pay his taxes.
This is really a tax issue.
We're not going to ask questions.
Did the FBI even open a single counterintelligence file on Hunter Biden and his family when they had evidence all the way back in 2017 that they were taking bribes?
Where was the counterintelligence investigation?
They opened one into Flynn.
They opened one into Trump.
The FISA, the Carter Page, the Roger Stone.
The FBI was in on it.
The DOJ was in on it.
And for all those people who say, oh that was Trump's DOJ, that was Trump's DOJ.
Shut up.
You understand what's going on here.
And we've had the receipts.
And we're going to continue dropping the receipts.
Because I was putting out, all the way back in 2021, the receipts on how Bill Barr and Chris Wray went into the Oval Office of the White House, lied to the President, and said that we would not go after Antifa.
Okay, we've got the receipts on all these guys.
And that's what we do here.
But we're going to ask the question, and we'll have Richard Barrison later in this show, later in this hour.
And I've been pulling triple duty today, alright?
This is the third show that I've done that.
I think I've been peered on every show here on Real America's Voice before this one, except I didn't call in.
I should have called in to the morning show.
Have the trifecta.
Go for the Quadrophenia next time, folks.
I'm not going to stop working and you cannot stop working because we have a lot of work to do before we can set things right in this country, before we can understand everything that's going on, and of course we need to understand the events of Russia, Purgosian, did the CIA, did U.S.
intelligence have any role there?
I'm going to bring on Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaffer next and ask him that very question.
Stay tuned here, Human Events.
I'm always listening to Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
Alright, we're back here at Human Events.
Folks, I have to tell you that every day, the parallel economy is growing bigger and bigger.
This is the best news for conservatives and traditional Americans.
Why?
Because we are sick and tired of all the woke propaganda and programming being jammed into every product we consume.
Big mobile companies?
They're no different.
For years, they've been dumping millions into leftist causes, and we've had to take it because you need a cell phone, and you probably thought there's no alternative.
Well, now there is.
Patriot Mobile is America's only Christian conservative wireless provider offering dependable nationwide coverage on all three major networks.
So you get the best possible service in your area without all the woke politics.
When you switch to Patriot Mobile, you're sending a message that you support free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life, Second Amendment, and our military veterans and first responders.
Their 100% U.S.-based customer service team makes switching easy.
Keep your phone, keep your number 2, just go to patriotmobile.com slash poso.
Get free activation today with promo code POSO.
Ask about their coverage, guarantee while you are there and you will get the same dependable service and take a stand for your values.
Make the switch today, patriotmobile.com slash poso.
I want to bring on today, he's becoming, he's becoming a regular here on Human Events and we appreciate his time and his expertise, Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer joins us now.
Let's hit a girl Schaefer now.
You and I, by the way, we haven't been trading messages on this, but I think we have a similar read to this idea that anyone who, and we saw this Peter Zeehan and Ann Applebaum and Jennifer Rubin and all these people who are paid to focus on the Kremlin, Malcolm Nance, you know, focus on everything that's going on in there.
And they were telling us that this was the end of Russia, that it was going to lead to a civil war.
So Peter Zeehan said that a civil war was going to break out and that Tucker Carlson would endorse Purgosian.
Malcolm Nance went a step further.
I love reading that guy.
He's got a new podcast out now.
I've actually started watching it.
I'm one of his ten listeners.
I need to check it out.
No, Wagner troops were going to start executing their own officers and then join the Ukrainians to invade Russia.
This is amazing!
I just love hearing what comes through this guy's mind.
But I think you and I are both of the same mind here that this thing was never going to erupt into anything like that, that Putin's got a much stronger control over his regime and this is either going to end in a deal or a one-way ticket to a cruise missile.
That's basically what ended up happening.
We're told now that Purgosian has been exiled to Belarus.
But what I wanted to ask you about was, there's this question all along.
Was this real?
Did this actually happen?
Was this a rogue mercenary who was taking a run?
Was it a gangster state where one of the upstart gangsters is taking a run at the leadership?
Or was this some level of an intelligence operation?
I'd love to pick your mind on that because, you know, they say, oh, you know, you guys are conspiracy theorists.
What do you think intelligence agencies do?
All right.
They conspire.
They conspire a lot for control over everything.
So, Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer, take it away.
Well, thanks.
Well, you know, my friend Jerry Doyle, the late Jerry Doyle, radio talk guy and actor, said when he looked at my world, it was like a wilderness of mirrors.
And it really is.
And you know that from the beginning.
It's like there's things that are real, things that appear to be real, things which are completely basically mysteries within mysteries, enigmas within enigmas.
So this is the current situation as far as I'm concerned.
And by the way, back on Malcolm Nance, did he defect to the Ukrainians?
Didn't I see him in the Ukrainian garb or something at some point?
Maybe I missed it a little bit.
He's back now.
He's back.
Anyway, he's back.
For some reason he decided not to participate in the counteroffensive.
It's very sad.
That must be why they're getting pushed back.
Wow, that's sad.
I'm disappointed in Malcolm.
Anyway, back on topic though.
So imagine, if you will, the TV series Sopranos meets The Hunt for Red October.
That's what you have here.
You have gangsters like Purgosian, who are oligarchs, working with Putin, who's both a gangster and an oligarch, in a system that we have no cultural link to.
Their system is one of parentage, of all these things where they buy off each other, they bully each other.
This is not your father's Soviet Union.
This is not our democracy or our republic.
It's different.
And so what we've seen, I think, is Prigozhin, who was a favorite of Putin.
Putin picked him to run Wagner.
Wagner is a tool of Russian foreign policy.
It was created out of the DNA of the GRU.
They took some GRU officers and kind of converted them into Wagner officers.
And Wagner performs Many of the functions that Blackwater used to use for the U.S.
government and some other things which Blackwater did not do relating to more direct work relating to places like Syria.
They also work with the Chinese.
They provide personal security details for the Chinese leadership overseas.
There's a there's a link for you.
And so Purgosian was the trusted guy to run the books.
He's not a military guy.
He's a chef.
He was a guy that actually spent time when he was 18 in prison for being a thug.
But, you know, thugs stick together, apparently.
And Purgosian came up from Petersburg with Putin to become essentially part of what Putin created post-Boris Yeltsin.
That's why they're close.
That's why I think I would attribute him getting away, that is, Purgosian getting away with really bad-mouthing The, the war, uh, the army and things like that.
So that's, that's what I think is going on.
And, and to your point, Jack, the reason I knew it was going to be short lived and I am not paid by anybody.
You know, I, I worked independently.
I wasn't like, uh, Ruben and Nance and all these other folks get paid to say things.
Uh, my assessment was he didn't have the three things necessary.
That is Purgosian didn't have the three things necessary to prevail first.
He did not have.
The other oligarchs on his side, he'd not grease enough skids.
He didn't give enough of Tony Soprano's magic by paying people off or knocking him off in advance of what he wanted to do.
So that was he was out with that.
He wasn't going to get the second element, which is the military.
The generals were not going to go along with this.
He alienated most of them by his antics in Ukraine.
Uh, he was the blunt end of the, of the hammer.
Yeah, Groschen and his guys were taking it on.
That was their job.
But, uh, the way he went about trying to get the military to give him more resources just alienated everybody.
And third, most importantly, he didn't have the Russian people behind him.
Putin actually invoked the 1917 revolution in his Saturday, late Saturday, early Sunday speech.
And you and I both know, Jack, when, when a world leader invokes a major national event like Biden, Mentioning 1776, something like that.
It's a major signal that this links to their history.
And I think what Putin was trying to say is, remember 1917 and what happened.
In 1917, the October Revolution resulted in a number of years of civil war.
Civil war lasted until, I think, 1926.
After the October 27 1917 revolution.
So I think Putin was warning everybody.
You don't want to go along with this knucklehead.
It'll just be bad.
I think since those things think didn't go in and progression is favor.
It was going to be over very quickly.
So.
Well, and that's exactly right.
And plus, this is a guy, look, he just comes off this massive victory in Bakhmut.
And of course, he's seen as, you know, kind of a populist.
There's a lot of people there who, and particularly with the soldiery, who say they like this more hardline approach.
There are people, he's been saying, and I've been watching some of his messages, saying that we need to go harder on Ukraine.
I would have won this thing in six months.
These guys up in the Kremlin, they're bean counters, they're trying to do things carefully.
I know.
We should go hard.
But that's not the strategy the Russian military wanted to follow.
That's right.
Exactly.
And for people who think that if this guy was going to take over the Kremlin, that somehow it would be better for Ukraine or better for NATO or better for the world.
I think they have another thing in common.
You know, they think Putin would use tactical maneuvers.
This guy would take him right out of the box on day one.
And so it seems, though, None of the officers of the Wagner Group actually took part in this.
We're still trying to get an exact number.
We may, probably never will get an exact number.
of how many actually did.
I've heard some people say it was 1,000.
I've seen people say as many as 4,000.
It does not appear that any of the officer corps actually agreed with Purgosian in this.
And of course, you have to imagine yourself, sitting in the bank of one of those tanks, going about, what, 50, 60 miles an hour down the highway, got to stop to refuel, got to have the basic logistics, 20 hours up to Moscow, going that speed.
And you're thinking, are we really going to do this?
Is this really a good idea?
If you're, you know, 20 years old, 22 years old, you just got out of prison on one of these contracts and this is your next move?
Yeah, I don't think so.
And then finally, of course, you know, being sent over to Belarus, we're still not sure the outline of this deal with Lukashenko.
Is there going to be, you know, is Wagner going to still be a force within The war?
Are they going to be doing internal security?
Is he being sent by...?
We just don't know.
But I guess my question to you, and we have about two more minutes till the break, could this have been potentially something that was Western-backed?
There's been a lot of talk about that, a lot of rumors, but we have no way of knowing for sure.
But could it have been, with your intel hat on?
So two things.
First, uh, the gang of eight, the Intel folks from both sides of the house were briefed recently on something.
I think this was the something they were briefed on.
I don't know that, but I suspect it.
And I think what happened, Jack, the reason that, that Purgosian was so confident is I think he told, uh, the West us what, what he was about to do.
And he basically probably said in his very over the top manner, I'm going to do this.
Are you with me or not?
And I think that's why.
He did what he did.
He thought maybe there would be an extended Western support.
Remember, he picked up the Western line on a number of things he was saying publicly.
He was actually reinforcing the Western narrative.
Well, why would you do that without motivation?
Well, I think the motivation was to try to draw in NATO or the West.
And so I think that was why Purgosian was doing what he was doing.
The question becomes, what, if anything, did the West promise or not promise?
Remember the moment the Russians brought this up, I think within the last Eight hours, the Russians brought it up, saying we're interested to see if there's any Western involvement in this.
The Biden White House immediately said, oh, nothing to see here, which is always like, really?
Nothing to see here?
So we'll see.
But I think, Jack, this issue is the only reason Purgosian is still breathing.
I think there's a Polonium-210 cocktail in his future, Purgosian.
But I think that Putin is holding off on that because he wants to know, too, what did Purgosian say or not say regarding Well, I think that's exactly right.
And we'll see who's waiting for him in that hotel in Minsk, where we're told that he's traveled to now.
Stay tuned, folks.
We are going to continue this fascinating conversation with Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer.
He's peeling back the veil on the shadowy world of intelligence operations in Eastern Europe.
Stay tuned.
Human Defense continues.
Alright, Jack Posobiec, we're back here at Human Events.
Now, Lt.
Carl Schaefer, the last time I had you on, we were talking about the Harkova Dam incident, the breaking of this dam, the explosion, which by the way, has still completely been uninvestigated, resulted in the deaths of thousands.
of Russian soldiers as well as civilians who live on both sides of this river.
Right.
But one of the big key questions I was asking you was, what does this mean for the security of the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant?
Because this reservoir that that dam held back, right, people put it all together, the reservoir was the coolant source for the power plant.
Every nuclear power plant needs a ready water source, a large water source at hand in order to continue.
That's why in the Navy we're able to use nuclear power very easily on our ships and subs.
Every U.S.
Navy sub currently in operation is a nuclear-powered sub.
Our aircraft carriers have two reactors inside them.
And it's because of this.
But if you take that water source away, then the power plant does, even if it's offline, even if it's disconnected, right?
The nuclear energy is still being, those rods are still active, right?
We learned this, of course, from Chernobyl, which was also and is also on the territory of Ukraine.
The question then becomes, and David Sachs on Twitter, who I follow on Ukraine, not on everything, but I follow him on Ukraine, he says, is a Gulf of Tonkin moment at hand?
Shortly after returning from his last trip to Kiev, Senator Graham, along with Blumenthal, introduced a resolution providing Article 5 guarantees.
To Ukraine, in the event that, among other things, a nuclear facility is destroyed in Ukraine.
So, you called it, Tony.
This nuclear plant seems to be at the center of something.
What's going on?
So, the center, because it actually generates a lot of power for the region.
I mean, for everybody.
It's a big source of power.
You don't want to mess with that.
But to your point, I think you have neocons and neolibs trying hard behind the scenes to get some hook.
And that puts us, the United States, in direct conflict with Russia.
I just don't think it's wise.
But let's just focus on the power plant for a second.
To your point, Jack, there's a series out right now on Netflix called The Days.
The Days, it actually covers Fukushima.
So if people want to understand what you just said, that's a great way of looking at it.
It goes through and talks about the nuclear pile and water.
If you don't have coolant, what happens?
Well, it melts down.
That's why if you go to any nuclear power plant in your neck of the woods in Pennsylvania or down here in North Carolina where I'm at, you see the white steam coming off the nuclear power plants.
That's coolant.
That's just water basically being used to drive steam turbines.
This goes back to steam locomotives created.
Yeah, it's water vapor and it goes back.
The basic premise for these nuclear plants go back to the first steam locomotives At the turn of the 19th century.
So this is just basically energy.
And if you don't have water to cool and control the energy, it'll get out of control.
And that's what's going on at the Zaporizhzha nuclear plant.
You have a certain amount of coolant that was available that was coming in from the reservoir.
Now there's about, I'd say about two weeks left of that because it's not being replenished.
And I think that's a real danger here.
And that's where Uh, some of the folks on the US side may be trying to create triggers to say, Oh, the plant melted down because of the Russians.
Now it's time for us to jump in because, you know, nuclear, it's all, it's terrible.
And I think they're going to try to use that narrative to get us more directly involved.
I don't think, again, I don't think it's necessary.
I don't think it's wise, but it is something to be concerned about relating to the region and stability at this point in time.
Well, I think that's exactly right because look, I mean, this is something over on the Navy side.
We had the great Admiral Hyman Rickover, the father of the nuclear Navy, one of the first military officers anywhere in the world to embrace nuclear technology the way that he did.
All the way back in the 1950s, right?
Right after the bombs were dropped, Rickover comes in and says, this is what we're doing.
He became one of the most storied legendary Navy officers in all of history because he said, by sheer force of will, by sheer force of will, he was able to push nuclear power That's what powers the United States' ability to be able to project our aircraft carriers and, through that, American force projection throughout the world in terms of international affairs.
So, it's all predicated on this basic notion that you have an extremely capable and extremely accessible water source.
If you cut that off, and then the question, of course, look, Russia has already, this was in the opening days of The invasion.
That power plant in Zaporizhia, which is right across from Ukrainian-held territory in Kherson.
This was one of their first takeovers, one of their first targets because they identified it obviously as a strategic target to control for power and everything else.
The Ukrainians have been chilling.
The Ukrainians at one point, by the way, attempted to conduct an amphibious operation that they then lied about because it was a complete failure just a couple of months ago in order to retake this thing across the river.
The Russians were waiting for it.
I have to imagine that their defensive emplacements for the nuclear power plant in Zaporizhia are just as good or better than they are on the defensive lines, again, in the same region where they're conducting the counter offensive, just in another section of the Oblast.
But what would the potential fallout be, literally, in this case, fallout be of an actual shelling of the reactor itself?
A nuclear reactor by itself is not necessarily dangerous, as you point out.
There's certain things, you can scram it.
Normally, scramming a nuclear power plant basically takes all the rods and puts them into carbon to basically shut it down.
It takes some time for it to cool down, but the idea is that there's control rods and there's this big pile of carbon that's supposed to basically damper the nuclear energy reaction.
This all will happen.
But even if you do it safely, shut down safely, Jack, you lose the power.
Nobody wants to lose the power either side.
I think this is where there's some real danger.
I think the both sides are doing things to be provocative.
Nobody is clean here.
But I do believe that this point, the Ukrainians see more benefit of making this a hazard that people have to pay attention to.
Because if you if you scream loud enough and say this is a danger, people may come in and help you.
And I think that's what the Ukrainians are trying to do right now.
And so, and the Russians, I think, recognize the importance of this facility.
They're doing everything they can to strengthen it.
I think this is part of their layered defenses.
Jack, you and I as military guys, I think, have looked at this probably a little bit.
The Russians have been brilliant in adapting certain basic World War II techniques of building trenches and adapting it for the 21st century.
They've completely baffled and stymied The Ukrainian breaching operations, by the way, they've kind of flipped the script on on these things.
So the Russians are smarter than your average bear, so to speak, if I could coin a phrase.
And I think they've outperformed, overperformed expectation of what was expected from the Ukrainians going in.
to do the counter offensive.
And I think the Russians are going to hold tight.
And I think they're going to figure out a way to keep this, this, this, this nuclear power plant going critical, if even it means them doing something.
Trust me, Jack, they remember Chernobyl.
They don't want that again.
So I think they're probably working on this more than we understand at this point.
That's exactly right.
And Chernobyl being itself so close to the territory of Belarus, that also raises this question of, so Prigozhin has been sent to Belarus.
We're told that he's holed up in a hotel there.
I guess the question is, who was waiting for him in that hotel room when Prigozhin showed up?
Was it the Wagner guys or was it FSB saying, please take a seat, Mr. Yevigny.
Please take a seat, Zhenya.
We're going to have a little conversation over the course of the next few days.
But then it also gets us to this quote because, of course, there's no big, you know, fanfare.
Lukashenko's not exactly going out to meet him because, as we said, he's gained a certain degree of popularity with the common man, with the soldiery, because of his victory in Bakhmut.
But at the same time, just like with MacArthur going up against Truman, you take a run at the big dog and you are going to be on a one-way ticket out of there.
That being said, Belarus also has just received nuclear weapons.
We were told that these were transferred at some point over the past few weeks, and so the question on a lot of people's minds is, is Belarus ready to make a move?
Is Wagner Group part of that?
Or is all of this just a more shifting of the chessboard to prevent NATO from doing anything in Belarus?
I think it's about NATO.
Look, Purgosian was more of an administrator than an actual field commander, Jack.
Purgosian was a bully, he was a chef, spent time in prison.
He was one of the oligarchs that came up with Putin.
So I think the military control, the reinsertion of the military control over Wagner is probably long overdue.
One of the reasons that Prokofiev was doing what he did is because Putin needed a completely plausible, deniable organization that could do things which basically violate Russian law on a daily basis.
Let's face it, Wagner violates Russian law.
That's why they're there.
They're the blunt force instrument to do Russian foreign policy.
in ways that they cannot do legally within their political system.
So I think they've been pulled back out of Purgosian's control back and given back to the army, whatever that means at this point.
I don't think it's gonna stay that way.
But the larger issue relating to what happens to Purgosian and where this goes regarding foreign policy, Well, I think it is all about Putin reminding NATO, you don't want to do things which will expand the conflict.
I remember there's two other things that we have not talked about today.
First off, if he survives the coup, that is, or the insurrection, Putin, that is, will he maintain his power?
Well, after 91, When Gorbachev had the attempted coup, he didn't last very long.
Yeltsin came in.
On the other hand, in 1961, Charles de Gaulle had an attempted military coup.
He did fine and went on to leave France for a long time.
Erdogan And Erdogan was able to stave off a strong electoral challenge just a couple of months ago.
Tony, we're coming up on our hard break.
Where can people go to follow you and get more of your fantastic analysis?
Londoncenter.org and ProjectSentinel.net.
And Jack, as always, I enjoy our conversations.
I hope we can do it again real soon.
God bless Tony, we'll have you back on because this story is not going away.
Folks, by the way, just to mention it, Nancy Pelosi, mainstream media, that's what a real armed insurrection looks like, by the way.
It's going to be very hard for all of you to paint President Trump and January 6th as insurrectionists after we've seen what the real thing looks like.
Because subconsciously, you guys have painted all of yourselves in a corner.
Richard Barris joins us next for a breakdown, not on the insurrection, but a breakdown on the campaign, the horse race, everything that's going on in the new states.
Stop buzzing in my ear about the boring people at your office.
I'm trying to listen to the new human events with Jack Posobiec.
Alright, we're back here at Human Events.
Now, we're talking about international affairs.
We've got to bring it back to the affairs of state here in the U.S.
President Trump, two massive speeches, barn burners over the weekend.
Richard Barris joins us now, the People's Pundit.
And, Rich, I've got to ask you, because, you know, you've been coming on here since we've been doing the live show, week after week, and you're telling us that you are seeing that it doesn't look like there's a lane for any of these anti-Trump primary candidates.
You're saying that there's some shakeup potentially at the second tier.
People are looking to look at, you know, vice presidential track, that sort of thing.
But you've been walking us through chapter and verse.
And yet I see the comments online.
People are saying, Barris doesn't know what he's talking about.
Barris is nuts.
Barris is making up stuff.
He's just saying stuff that Trump people want to hear, etc, etc.
And then I go and look at Politico this morning, and Politico, as an entire article, which, and last time I checked, Richard, let me just ask you real quick, you know, point blank, do you control Politico?
Are you stenographing?
Are you ghostwriting for Politico?
You don't force them to, you know, right?
They said everything exactly as you've been telling us.
For these weeks they finally come around because people are used to when they watch human events and when they're paying attention Richard Barris being weeks ahead of the mainstream media.
They said that the DeSantis campaign, their chances in New Hampshire are collapsing because they are hitting a ceiling called Donald J. Trump.
Yeah, I don't control Politico, Jack.
You know, I'll just tell you this.
I don't speak for candidates or anything like that.
I speak for the majority that I speak to every day.
It's always been amazing to me.
They don't have the voice in the media that others have.
And they are the majority.
So, you know, we are ahead of everybody because I'm listening.
You know, it's really that simple.
I'm just simply listening.
You know, and if people would do, you know, and I do shows, I go out there, I go on your show, go on another show, and I talk, but I spend most of my day listening.
And I think that's the big difference.
Well, walk us through this piece, walk us through New Hampshire, and of course I have to ask, is this something that's localized to this early state?
Of course, New Hampshire being the first state that gave Donald Trump a victory all the way back in 2016.
He did not win the Iowa caucuses.
Is this something that's localized to New Hampshire, or are you seeing the same kind of trend throughout some of the other early states?
Paint that picture for us.
There is, like I said last week, a constant reshuffling of the bottom tier candidates, and DeSantis' fall over the last, let's say, month or so, a little bit, it's been more than that, but Let's say a month or so, is now going to start resonating in the state.
So, national polling tends to lead statewide polling.
That's why the argument that we would hear from DeSantis and other people, you know, that campaign and other people, that national polls don't matter.
It really comes down to the states.
You gotta look at the number in the states.
I don't know.
I mean, you know, Politico said it.
Rookie move here, rookie move there.
Everybody knows that national trends tend to lead.
The states, and we are starting to see that in other places.
South Carolina, Tim Scott, Nikki Haley, have a significant share of the vote compared to DeSantis.
There's been several polls, and ours as well, which show that he is threatening to fall into third place in some of these.
New Hampshire is just the latest, where Chris Christie is starting now to nip on his heels.
And Chris Christie is launching an all-in campaign on New Hampshire.
This idea, you know, that somehow, again, it was the first state that gave Trump a victory in 16, but he did it with like 33% of the vote.
Jack, we're not talking about that this time.
You know, this is a proportional state, but his lead is so big, it would be win or take most.
I mean, that's where we're at.
You have to reach a threshold in a lot of these states to either gain delegates, And as I pointed out on the show last week to you, last two polls in New Hampshire very clear that he's at risk of not even getting a single delegate.
And he's stumbled away.
Actually, just to throw in on that, that's something that, and I have to put this out more myself, is that the Iowa caucuses are also not winner-take-all, and even though we always say that, oh, Trump didn't win Iowa, Trump didn't win Iowa, Iowa ended up essentially being a three-way between Cruz, Trump, and Rubio, and Trump was well within the mix, I think he was at 24%,
And then Cruz ended up getting like 27%, so it's very much closer to a three-way tie than a winner-take-all victory.
Why does that matter?
It matters because of the delegates.
Yeah, we have all of these equations for most of these states already that are in stone that we know on the map that we've been sharing.
People can find that on peoplespundit.locals.com, and you can do the math yourself.
I mean, at this point, first of all, if the polls were right and we were to hold the Iowa caucuses today, Trump would take a bigger share of the delegates in Iowa than we've seen candidates take in years.
I mean, you know, when we're talking about, not 2020, when he was running as an incumbent, I'm talking about supposedly competitive cycles, where that's not the case this time.
20% of the vote in the caucus, Jack, when somebody gets 55 is going to end up with you in that second tier candidate getting most of those delegates, but you actually being able to space yourself out a little bit.
It would not be like Cruz's victory where he got two, three more delegates more than Trump.
That was it.
But going into New Hampshire, they've always, the DeSantis people have always viewed Iowa as pretty big.
That's why they went with the six week abortion ban because New Hampshire, they did not think is fertile territory for them.
But the Politico article is wrong about that.
It's not because of how moderate or how conservative the electorate is.
It comes down.
To the percentage of the working class, white working class.
That's why it's not fertile ground for DeSantis against Donald Trump.
He actually doesn't do well among working class.
His support comes largely from a minority of college educated voters, not even a majority.
And I got to say about that article, Jack, this is the dig.
About the DeSantis campaign.
For those who don't know what we're talking about, the stumble was getting into a fight, yet another unforced error where they don't listen to criticism and they got into a fight with the Federation of Republican Women in New Hampshire.
It's probably the most important group in a primary, a Republican primary in New Hampshire.
Traditionally, you do not schedule events that compete I'm sorry, I'll go to Iowa.
I'm sorry, I'll go to South Carolina.
They decided, fine, we won't be in Concord.
We're going to go into another part of the state.
What's your problem?
mad, two people had to leave because they openly criticized the DeSantis campaign.
And instead of saying, I'm sorry, I'll go to Iowa.
I'm sorry, I'll go to South Carolina.
They decided, fine, we won't be in Concord.
We're going to go in another part of the state.
What's your problem?
This is the deal with these early states.
These people want special attention.
They are used to it.
That's what they get.
You don't get into a fight with them over it.
You accommodate them, you know, and that kind of, um...
That kind of unforced error.
Just like when you're running a presidential campaign, you don't overhype.
You don't overhype your announcement.
Wait until I announce and I'm going to somehow close a 40 point gap.
You don't do that.
That's amateur hour.
You don't overpromise and underperform by hyping something.
You don't do that.
You underpromise and overperform.
You don't get in a fight with important grassroots groups.
You just go your separate way and say, OK, I'll wait for my turn.
They just don't seem to be taking this criticism, and that's what the Politico article is really about.
And it's becoming a dig, you know?
It is.
It's now a story.
I mean, when you look at something like that, like holding one of these, you know, cross events, and you're saying, oh, it's in a different part of the state.
I mean, New Hampshire's not a big state, right?
You know, and by the way, how hard would it be?
They come from everywhere to come for Jack.
Right, right.
So how hard would it be to simply, plus they're going to get people out of, you know, parts of the more conservative parts of Massachusetts that'll drive in because they like the candidate, they want to see him, you'll get money out of that, you'll get dollars.
I don't think Massachusetts is necessarily a state where you're going to get A lot of support in general later on, but of course, there's going to be a draw if you have those names, if you have those candidates.
By the way, same deal with parts of Maine, because lower Maine is right there.
You are going to find supporters that end up driving in.
So, this is a huge event.
It's not hard, but again, it comes down to, I think, these questions of... We're coming up on our break.
I want to hold you over for the final segment, though.
Because this is coming up on a question that we hear over and over.
What's going on with these campaigns?
And it seems as though with all the money in the world that they seem to keep making error after error when we're told that these are supposed to be the competent ones.
These are supposed to be the ones who can get the job done.
And yet we see these constant error after error.
Whereas Trump, he gets up there and he's been knocking it out of the park Week after week.
Now, obviously, he's facing legal trouble, but that's largely out of his hands.
I don't think he wants to be doing that, but we're going to stay tuned with Richard Barras because we're going to talk about what the latest is in this primary.
The fight, the hunt, is on.
When I grew up in the hood, I rolled with bloods.
And them boys had a saying.
You can't be listening to all that slappy whack.
Trim out his eyelets, a bam, ship.
Nippy, bam, bam.
Like human events with Jack Posobiec.
All right, we're back here, Human Events.
Richard Barras, we're walking through this inexplicable series of self-owned, self-goals, self-inflicted wounds, whatever you want to call it, from this DeSantis campaign in New Hampshire.
Certainly something that, because of social media, is now going to get blown over throughout all the different early states.
These are people who talk, and the question I have is, how do you go from Admittedly, DeSantis had a fantastic run just a couple of months ago.
What, six?
We're six months out, seven months out from his victory in Florida to a situation like this.
Were they not able to just be, was the idea that they were just going to take that 2022 campaign from Tallahassee and then expand it nationwide?
What's going on?
Well, there's a couple of things.
I think people read too much into the 2022 victory in Florida.
First of all, there have been demographic things happening in Florida long before Ron DeSantis ever got there.
And that was something we argued before 2020 when, you know, we were facing polls.
Every time we had Trump ahead, we were facing other pollsters putting Biden up by six points or more.
And we were trying to explain Florida's changed.
It's changing.
That's the way it is.
It was also a midterm, by the way.
And he was running against somebody that neither the left nor the right likes.
Charlie Crist is, statewide, is an incredibly disliked guy.
He's viewed as a turncoat.
Rubio was able to beat him for a reason.
Then he stuck his finger in his mouth to see which way the wind was blowing during the Obama era and turned into a Democrat.
Nobody likes him, and not even the Democrats particularly are fond of him.
So, too much was read into a midterm victory in a gubernatorial election, which is very different.
Then a presidential election, they have zero predictive value, Jack.
Zero.
And the inability to take criticisms and to constantly just attack every time you're given constructive criticism is a- Larry Hogan, of all people, brought it up last week.
This is a major problem.
Because of that, what I was speaking about in the last segment, in a state like New Hampshire, because of that, you know, rookie move, whatever you want to call it, when it came to hyping the announcement and then it failing, He lost endorsements.
There were two New Hampshire lawmakers who rescinded their endorsements for Ron DeSantis and endorsed Trump.
Their statements were very telling.
If this campaign cannot run a campaign announcement, they cannot run the country and the White House.
So I'm going with a proven guy I know can do it.
And it was just so damning.
And instead of thinking, maybe we need to retool here, they don't.
I had a consultant, a Republican consultant, a friend, I'm going to Texas later this week.
I was talking to him about the trip, and he said, you know, what's the deal with this campaign?
Is the plan just to, like, piss every Trump supporter off, make them hate him, and then beg him for their vote in general if Trump isn't on the ballot?
Like, what's the plan here?
I don't get it.
Well, and the other question is, and I keep having this, to pick up what something that you had said as a saved round from the last segment, 40 points.
There's a 40 point gap, there's sometimes it's a 30 point gap, a 25 point gap at them, you know, at the least.
They never seem to be able to cross this and, you know, it's funny we're just talking about, you know, how the Ukrainians weren't able to get across these Russian defenses in the last segment.
It strikes me as being similar that what is the argument to say that you are going to be able to go up against those odds and win?
I just don't see it.
Yeah, and I gotta say, it's not a 30 point gap.
It's even a 30 point gap now in the NBC News poll, which should, everyone should know, is jointly conducted by Hillary Clinton's old pollster and Ron DeSantis's pollster, the polling firm.
So, they were one, we have pollsters put into different categories when it comes to the primary.
Are they Biden bullish?
Are they Biden bearish?
So, in other words, or Trump bullish, Trump bearish.
In other words, do they show support for a certain candidate or candidates at a higher or lower level than the current consensus?
And the NBC News poll was among, one of two, the most bullish DeSantis polls out there.
I mean, look, obviously.
Now even they show that he has fallen.
Eight points after the indictment and Trump has risen.
Five points.
So now they're in the territory where the consensus was a month ago, a month and a half ago.
So they're either right and everybody else is wrong, Jack, or they're now even slowly starting to come to the realization that this is a, you know, this is a 30 plus point race.
This is not like a normal primary.
We have not seen this.
And it's a very different situation.
We have a president who is still largely beloved by the party running again.
And that's not happened in our lifetime.
Rich, let me break in very briefly here.
We do actually have breaking news just coming in.
A couple minutes left in the show that Putin and Lukashenko are now saying that they will be making national addresses Tonight, obviously Putin to Russia, Lukashenko to Belarus.
Rich, with the question of all this nuclear war, nukes to Belarus, the nuclear power plant in Zaporizhia, this idea Trump's out there saying World War III is looming large, I mean, do you see this as playing into, put it this way actually, obviously it plays into his campaign rhetoric, but Biden really needs some kind of win over there in Ukraine or else that's going to be a huge moment when Trump is on the debate stage with him.
Do you think that's going to really shake out in the race here?
Do you see that in the numbers?
Both primary and general, this is going to be an incredibly strong issue for Donald Trump.
Folks, there's a reason why the Commission on Presidential Debates Cancel the second presidential debate in 2020.
Everybody knows that we're not concerned about COVID.
It is the traditional foreign policy debate for presidential elections, and one in which the incumbent president typically comes out and shines.
Obama versus Kerry, right?
We saw that.
He lost the first debate, came back strong in the foreign policy.
Obama, I mean, Bush v. Kerry.
Well, while mocking, by the way, while mocking Romney for demonizing Russia, we should point out.
Well, exactly!
And then, right, and that, but it's still played because you look like you're the commander-in-chief, you have more knowledge of this stuff.
When it comes to Trump, this is something that most people are aligned with Trump on.
They do not want to fight with Russia, you know, and they don't want to support Ukraine at the risk of getting into a fight with Russia.
They do not.
Not even Republicans anymore.
No, that's where the American people are.
Rich, we're coming up.
We're at the end of the show, man.
Where can people go to get the rest of your analysis on this and all the other data that's out there?
peoplespundit.locals.com.
I'm on Truth and Getter and Twitter, but that's the central hub, Jack.
Locals.
peoplespundit.locals.com.
See you over there.
Make sure you go over there, join Rich, join this community.
Folks, we got a lot of news going on.
We've had a lot of news going on.
I'm in contact with sources who are on the ground.
I'm in contact with a lot of people that have been sending me stuff.
Make sure you stay tuned here.
Human events every day.
We will be back tomorrow, same time.
If you want to share this, everyone, get it to Rumble, get it to the podcast side.
Make sure you're also getting your tickets for The Sound of Freedom because the show has come out.
