July 21, 2023 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec
49:18
EPISODE 522: EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH VIVEK RAMASWAMY
On today’s episode of Human Events, for the first time ever, Jack Posobiec interviews a Presidential Candidate - Vivek Ramaswamy. Poso pulls zero punches and asks Vivek all of the tough questions, from Ramaswamy’s alleged, relationship with George Soros to his supposed affiliation with the World Economic Forum and Klaus Schwab. In this epic interview find out exactly where Vivek Ramaswamy stands on the conflict between Ukraine and Russia as well as red flag laws - plus get exclusive insight i...
I want to take a second to remind you to sign up for the Poso Daily Brief.
It is completely free.
It'll be one email that's sent to you every day.
You can stop the endless scrolling, trying to find out what's going on in your world.
We will have this delivered directly to you, totally for free.
Go to humanevents.com slash Poso.
Sign up today.
It's called the Poso Daily Brief.
Read what I read for show prep.
You will not regret it.
humanevents.com slash Poso.
Totally free.
the Pozo Daily Brief.
We are in a fifth generational conflict.
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.
The judge in that case, Eileen Cannon, out of Fort Pierce, Florida, has set a trial date for the 20th of May.
So that's a good six months prior to the election.
Now the FBI interview detailed inside was of a highly credible source who said that Burisma hired Hunter Biden to protect the U.S.
through his dad from all kinds of problems.
The sad truth is that 60% of the shootings, the robberies, the homicides in America are committed by black people.
The sad truth is half of the homicide victims in America are black.
We stated several months ago that we have reached full capacity.
We have no more room in the city.
Largest investment to combat climate ever, ever, anywhere in the world.
Over $368 billion.
We know the urgency.
Nuclear tensions between the U.S.
and North Korea escalating as the U.S.
shows its military support for South Korea.
The Russians had time to build up and to build these defenses in depth.
Defense is the stronger form of war.
So we knew this was going to be a tough slog.
Joe Biden can't even walk up a flight of stairs on Air Force One.
And he can't put two sentences together.
The last thing that this incompetent administration should be doing is risking war with a nuclear-armed Russia.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard today's edition of Human Events with Jack Pasovic.
Today is July 21, 2023.
Anno Domini.
Folks, we told you that President Trump was going to see that film, The Sound of Freedom.
We sat there.
I was able to show you the photo of him sitting front row center, two and a half hours straight.
Didn't get up.
Didn't go to the bathroom, nobody brought him popcorn, wasn't looking at his phone, wasn't on truth social, etc, etc.
He sat and watched that video, that movie.
For two and a half hours, Jim Caviezel on one side.
Tim Ballard on the other.
And then just today, moments ago, he released a new video saying that after seeing Sound of Freedom, he is now vowing that he will add the execution and death penalty for child trafficking to the top of his agenda.
I want to talk about this and also talk about a lot more getting into The horse race of 2024.
We're going to make sure that we get Vivek Ramaswamy up later today.
But first, we've got Richard Barris, the People's Pundit, coming up.
Rich, I got to ask you, so there were, and we'll get into more in the next segment, but you got Governor DeSantis the other day says he's in, announces he's investigating Bud Light in the state of Florida.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump comes out with a response, not a response, but comes out with his own plan saying, I'm going to execute child traffickers.
Isn't this kind of dichotomy almost endemic of the two campaigns we're looking at here?
You just took the words right out of my mouth, Jack, and thanks for having me on as always.
You took the words right out of my mouth and There are stories yesterday and today, NBC, Vox, others, you know, that Ron DeSantis is rebooting his campaign again.
It's the third reboot in just under eight weeks.
All campaigns reboot, but they don't reboot every two or three weeks.
So the real question is, is this really a reboot?
Because we've heard this before.
And then we see something like this.
And the truth is, this is the problem.
They said they're going to focus less on Florida-centric, what he did in Florida, and make more of a national culture warrior insurgency campaign.
Can you do that if this is, again, the direction you want to go into?
Voters are, right now, looking at their president that they love, and the Republican side they love, being targeted by Some, you know, prosecutor in Fulton County, Georgia.
They want to indict him on racketeering.
And they want to indict Trump on some old Civil War era sedition charge, Jack Smith.
And they're looking at this and they're saying, you know, that the administrative state has got to go.
This is a problem.
And Ron DeSantis is talking about investigating Bud Light.
I mean, Jack, well, again, Trump is Laser focused on some of these other issues.
This movie made a splash with the Republican base.
There's no doubt about it.
And I think the Republican Party views people like Jack Smith and others as instruments of the administrative state that protect the status quo.
And that very status quo is one that allows and frankly enables this very, very dark element to the economy that we don't like to talk about.
And there's been one person who has been a champion against that stuff.
I just don't see how, you know, going after Bud Light, it rises to that level, Jack.
I just don't.
It just, no, no, no, I feel like it doesn't.
And it also feels like it's sort of, um, you know, in the online parlance, we're coming up on a break here, but you know, in online parlance, we would call that kind of a dead meme that, you know, we, we remember, yeah, Bud Light, it was like the meme of, of June.
And now we're into July.
It's kind of a dead meme.
We get it.
Right.
You know, the LGBT beer got it.
We're canceling it.
We're moving on.
But why do you keep going back to it?
You got to go to the next thing.
You got to get bigger.
And there's no bigger issue in the world than child trafficking.
Coming up next, more with Richard Barris.
Horse Race 2024 continues.
I'm always listening to Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
Folks, what if I told you that the parent company for a major diaper brand was paying the travel costs so that their employees could have an abortion?
Look, it's the one thing to reject your customers.
It's another thing to support their termination, killing your customers.
If you're a parent that is sickened by woke corporations supporting the destruction of American values and our most precious blessing, our children, Meet EveryLife.
The pro-life diaper company, EveryLife, believes that no matter where someone is from, what they look like, what they planned or unplanned, EveryLife is a miracle.
EveryLife offers high-performing, premium diapers created with your little ones in mind.
Let me tell you something.
The poso boys go through a number of diapers.
These things are made without fragrances, dyes, lotions, latex, parabens, thalates.
Visit EveryLife.com and use promo code POSO to get 10% off your first order today.
Even if you do not have a baby in diapers, we have one in diapers, you can support EveryLife's mission with their Buy for a Cause Bundle, supporting families in need of essential items That's a great organization.
I'm glad that we partnered with them.
I'm glad that Human Events has partnered with EveryLife.
I'm glad that Human Events has partnered with Every Life.
That's fantastic.
Look, Rich, we gotta talk about DeSantis in the context of this primary.
Look, I was up at Bedminster the other night.
People have seen the photos.
I was talking with Jason Miller and other members of the campaign.
It was interesting because on the same day that they're announcing further charges are coming, this January 6th stuff is coming, talking about the date.
We do have a date now.
It's going to be May.
These guys seemed pretty excited.
They seemed pretty happy.
They had some pep in their step.
They didn't seem worried.
So when we're talking about the position of the president with the primary, of course we have to keep in mind, and I did get to speak with him very briefly, and he was happy.
He was making jokes.
He's still got a gauntlet to run, and so do you think at this point that any Well, I think that that gauntlet includes members of your own party, which is something I think the Trump campaign needs to do a better job being aware of.
That's just being point blank.
Glenn Youngkin into the race?
Do you think it'll have any effect on the primary or is the primary done?
Rich Barris.
Well, I think that that gauntlet includes members of your own party, which is something I think the Trump campaign needs to do a better job being aware of.
That's just being point blank.
There's no doubt, Jack, that these candidates really did bank on this strategy of indictments hurting the former president.
You know, at this point, I've said this before, I'll say it again, this guy's been indicted now more than John Gotti.
In many cases and cases to come that we're hearing.
He's been indicted on charges that are just as bad.
I mean, soon we're going to hear about racketeering and even worse, sedition.
I mean, that's how ludicrous we're, we're getting to here.
They always figured that they, the Republican electorate would fatigue and we're just not seeing that right now.
And we just did Iowa.
We had sent that to you.
It is before some of this newer news, but it was a monstrous lead after all the money that the, DeSantis' campaign has spent.
Here's the problem.
They're just not playing it right.
So you heard a statement Ron DeSantis made the other day about when the latest indictment came up.
I mean, we're actively starting to see things that have been privately mentioned bubble to the surface and come out publicly now.
So the adoption of January 6th committee talking points by Ron DeSantis and his campaign, he said that clip's being taken out of context.
There's more to what he said.
It doesn't really matter if what he said before is he still shouldn't be indicted over it, but he could have done more.
This is more indication that they have wanted these indictments.
They need these indictments.
So I just don't know how Republican voters are going to conclude that you are the one to take out the administrative state or fight the administrative state if you are literally partnering with them to beat Donald Trump, because that is what you're doing, whether it's in You know, whether it's an open dialogue partnership, Jack, or just something that's hush-hush and part of the strategy, they are effectively still your partner in your strategy to beat Donald Trump.
And I just don't think voters are going to react positively to that, okay?
They're just not going to.
Which is why, even if Trump doesn't rise anymore from DeSantis falling in some of these polls, we see other people like Vivek increasing.
And by the way, even Tim Scott took some of DeSantis' support from Iowa this month.
So, uh, you know, there's just, it's a, it's a, it's a failed strategy.
This, it is, it is fundamentally misunderstanding what Republican voters are worried about, what concerns them, what make, you know, literally what makes them afraid about the future.
And I don't, again, you know, hearkening back to the last segment, I don't see that as a reboot.
I just see that as more of the same.
And in fact, many of the changes that I'm seeing- - You're rearranging the deck chairs.
You can rearrange the deck chairs all you want, but if you are not changing your trajectory, look, you've even got Scott and Rich, credit to you because you were the one who came out and you were the very first person that we had on the program that said the name Scott Walker.
You said, "This is starting to look like Scott Walker." And I said, "I don't know." I feel like with social media, I feel like the profile's bigger.
I never felt like Scott Walker had that connection to the grassroots that it seemed like DeSantis had early on.
But then Scott Walker himself actually came out yesterday and said that the DeSantis campaign is making the same mistakes.
Rich, where do you see the trajectory for this right now?
For Governor DeSantis?
Jack, the retooling is really an excuse because they're running out of money.
That's the truth.
They're firing staff.
They're saying they're going to be less Florida-centered and we're going to have smaller events with more intimate settings.
Well, everybody knows that Ron DeSantis isn't good in intimate settings.
That's well known.
That's not Rich Barris's opinion.
That's a widespread opinion, well known.
He is not good in these intimate settings.
And it's not that he's trying to connect with voters more in intimate settings.
They can't afford big events anymore.
Let me just say this out of the Iowa poll.
Something that Scott Walker made a mistake that he made that is even worse now for somebody like Ron DeSantis to make.
Scott Walker believed that he could, like, attack or upset the Trump vote, which was a much smaller, die-hard vote in 2016 than it is now.
We just pulled Iowa.
Iowa goes back to being a battleground state if Ron DeSantis is the nominee.
Suffolk just pulled Ohio.
It goes back to being a battleground state if Ron DeSantis is the nominee.
Just like their chief pollster said, they found exactly what we found.
If you look at the Trump vote, DeSantis has effectively upset these people.
And he can count on about 70% of them to vote for him.
That's it.
Meanwhile, Trump takes every single, almost every single primary vote for Ron DeSantis.
So they're falling into that same hole.
Plus, when you compare it to Walker's campaign, Walker's burn rate was lower.
And he didn't even make it to Iowa.
Yeah, he didn't have the fundraising apparatus, but he's still burning the money at a lower rate than Ron DeSantis is burning it.
And for people who keep saying things like, well, he still outraged Trump, he really didn't, because one out of every six of those dollars can only be used to the general election.
They can't even be used for the primaries.
So the situation is more dire than people are making it out.
Again, PAX can't run campaigns.
I've said this now for weeks.
I kind of knew this was coming when it, you know, when it comes to this financial burden, their insolvency that they may now be facing.
They didn't even know themselves, according to NBC News, until June 30th.
So they have consultants and team members spending money hand over fish, Jack, and they didn't know until it was time to itemize it and send it to the FEC.
Think about that.
That's the kind of situation that campaign is in.
You're gonna take out a former president like that?
Even with all of those indictments?
You know, that only Trump can take out.
Look, when you start with a huge amount of money like they did, when you start with that huge treasure chest, but you received it from high dollar donors, and then you don't do the work, the long hard work of understanding the electorate, meeting them where they are, going out and making the case, and this is what I will say for a Governor DeSantis in my mind, And I've seen it in interview after interview.
He tells you what he would do if he were president, but he's never once articulated how he intends to defeat Donald Trump in the primary.
I've never heard the explanation.
They just kind of, and when you talk to, you know, sources associated with their world, they just kind of act like it will happen.
Like, oh, Trump will sink because of the indictment, and after the break when I get into this story, this news story, you know, racketeering is being thrown around.
It just isn't happening, Rich.
It's just not happening.
They take it as if it's, you know, it's a, you know, they take it as if it's a given that Trump is about to implode in the polls.
That ain't happening, folks.
Even the comments to NBC and Vox and others, they're cookie-cutter responses you've been hearing for months out of Brian Griffin and others.
Ron DeSantis has routinely been underestimated.
He was always the underdog, and yet he still wins, and we're used to this, and he would never have beaten Adam Putnam.
That's what we heard back then.
The problem, again, the new campaign manager is basically just cookie-cuttering, changing a few words.
Same story as if it's just some unnatural force is gonna come and knock Trump out, not them.
And a big part of that statement, every time it came out of Brian's mouth, is that none of that would have happened without Donald Trump.
So all of this stuff they pin him as the underdog, that he somehow climbed this insurmountable mountain, he didn't climb it.
Donald Trump climbed it for him.
That's the truth.
That was always an indisputable fact.
So I think you're right.
And then also, we were talking a little bit about this before, Jack, they're talking about what they want to talk about.
That's been a major problem with this campaign.
I want to talk about how great I was during COVID, even though that was never going to land because it never really was true.
Now, they want to talk to you about issues they think you should care about and in ways that they think you should care.
That's not what Trump does.
Trump talks about the issues the voters want to talk about.
This issue with human trafficking that he's latched onto now, calling for the death penalty, this is an extension of the border and the political class being allowed to basically be lawless.
He tied it directly to the border.
He tied it directly.
He saw the film.
We were there with him in Bedminster.
He understood that this is directly tied to the border.
This is the most obvious, and it's depicted in the movie as well, that it's, that they use the border for this.
Although at the time when he was still president, they were using Official crossings, and nowadays you just go anywhere.
We're coming back.
Richard Barris are going to breaking news after the jump on the racketeering charges on Donald Trump coming in Georgia.
I encourage people to if you're interested in foreign policy, you got to follow Jack Posobiec.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, welcome back here.
Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
Folks, I gotta tell you, look, we were on travel.
We were on travel for about a week there.
Was down at West Palm Beach for the Turning Point event.
It was incredible.
We went up to Bedminster.
We had this amazing Uh, just historic night with President Trump, being able to watch the Sound of Freedom with him, with Jim Caviezel, Tim Ballard, uh, with, um, with Eduardo Barrastegui, who's the producer and one of the actors in the film.
But I gotta tell you, when I came home, I said, you know what, the first thing I, I reach over to Tony and tell you, I said, sweetheart, I want that blackout coffee back.
Because we left the bag at home, and then we got home, I said, I need my blackout because we've been traveling, we've been running around, need the blackout coffee.
That is how we power human events.
That is how I power everything that I do.
Look, up until, what was I up until last night?
Something, you can see my Twitter account.
I was up pretty late last night watching Oppenheimer get back on the saddle today, up bright-eyed, bushy-tailed this morning.
I can only do so because of My Blackout Coffee.
Blackout Coffee will be a nuclear bomb going off in your morning.
It will get you higher than my personal rating for Oppenheimer.
I didn't actually care for the movie.
But you can go and get your three-bag subscription.
Three bags right now with 20% off.
Promo code POSO20 for your first order.
So you can get the three bags a month.
Sometimes you do four bags a month.
I don't know.
It's up to you.
But go to blackoutcoffee.com.
POSO20.
20.
Rich, we got to talk about it.
So, Donald Trump, Fannie Willis, this prosecutor down in Georgia, racketeering!
A racketeering charge, a RICO charge, against President Trump.
Find the votes.
Look, we remember the call, we remember the story, we remember all of this.
What I want to ask you, Rich Barris, is does Or do, I should say at this point, do these charges, the convictions, Georgia, New York, Washington D.C.
with January 6th, which is coming, Mar-a-Lago, which we now know will play out during May.
We're obviously in completely uncharted territory here.
Completely uncharted territory.
I don't think it has an effect on primary votes.
I just don't.
I really don't.
And if anything, we've seen it has sort of a Streisand effect.
It makes people galvanize their support for Trump.
My question to you is, what is the effect of this when it comes to a general election?
How do you think the general public sees this?
So I'm so glad you asked about the general because I think that gets left in the dust a lot.
So there's no doubt that they think it may have helped him in the short term for the other indictments.
But if we keep piling them on, eventually voters will get fatigued.
Voters will, you know, back away.
They'll get scared.
I mean, it's effectively fear, Jack.
But here is, this is how I would answer this, because I have a running theory about why Donald Trump is doing so much better than he did in 16 and 20 with certain demographics.
And they're younger, they're more non-white, and that trend is not just in the primary, it is in the general election.
So I'm glad you asked about that.
What I would say is this.
I think what it does do is increase this Trump or bust vote.
So right now, we're not really seeing that much of a deterioration in his national support.
What we are seeing is this increase in a voter in this voting group that said, you know, if Donald Trump is on the ballot, I'll vote for him, but I won't vote for anybody else.
And they don't look like That typical demographic has in the past and my running theory is very simple.
These are normies who never would vote for a Republican candidate for president.
They may not even vote that much at all.
But because Trump is being persecuted by the system, prosecuted by all these, it's like one after the other after the other.
He's they're making him relatable to people that you never would think Donald Trump would be relatable to.
And I really don't know how else to explain it other than that.
And it gives the average person, you know, in their minds, you know, somebody that finally Understands maybe like what they're dealing with, you know, maybe they're not dealing with a federal prosecutor, but there's something in society that pushes them down, that constantly tries to hold them back and persecutes them.
And I really think that this is why, I mean, I've been talking about this more and more, but this could end up, I mean, Jack, Republicans really need to think about this when it comes to the outcome of the general election.
They could seriously fracture their party.
They're in real danger of these voters who now understand, relate with Trump, feeling like, you know, the Republican Party is just not their home.
And, you know, they could disappear.
They could fracture off like a Ross Perot kind of situation.
Only I think this would make this fracture would make Ross Perot look like a paper cut.
You know, this is, I think, maybe changing the equation Well, Rich, let me tell you, because I've seen a lot of people throwing around this Monmouth poll that came out yesterday.
Everything's really a net.
We're looking for a net loss or a net gain.
I don't know if they're turning off indie normies enough to counter that yet.
We'll just have to wait and see.
Well, Rich, let me tell you, because I've seen a lot of people throwing around this Monmouth poll that came out yesterday.
They're saying if Monmouth has this thing out, you know, 910 voters, national survey.
And they're saying that it's over for Trump.
He's slaughtered.
Even if there's third party spoilers, this this what they call it, the no agenda, no labels, you know, Huntsman mansion deal gets involved that.
Oh, no, no agendas.
My buddy, my buddy Adam Curry there.
That what is your take on the Monmouth poll?
Because this almost seems like an outlier, because we've been seeing Trump and Biden Neck and neck, up until this all of a sudden, and I'm looking at it going, wait, I read the polls every day.
I did not see some, I didn't, I didn't see anything to show this huge jump all of a sudden.
What is your take on this?
This is Mamath.
For those of us who have been doing this for years, this is what Mamath does.
Two months ago, they'll have Trump up a few points.
They'll have his favorability rating doing better.
The next month, they'll have him down by five, which by the way, is two points better than they had him doing in their final poll in 2016.
And his favorability rating will be at, like, 26%.
When everybody else has Trump's favorability rating recuperating, you know, a lot more than that.
Nobody is in the 20s.
Except for, you know, Marquette.
I feel like they have been an outlier.
Not feel like.
They have been.
And when your favorability for Donald Trump is lower than Mike Pence, you've done something wrong.
And everybody should automatically be able to look at that and see that, obviously, It's very easy to have a response bias with 900 registered voters, you know, on a phone survey.
Very, very easy.
It's obviously, in my mind, it's obviously an outlier.
Even on bad days in our polling, we can't get Trump's favorability below 38, and typically we're more negative than others.
We have him 45, 51, 47, 52.
So we actually have more negative than others, like Rasmussen and Harvard and Emerson, all of which have shown a bounce back, and every former president's image bounces back.
Trump's bounced back quicker than most.
George W. Bush, for instance, a great example, very unpopular when he left, now is slightly popular.
Trump's was quicker to recover, probably because he was still involved in politics.
And then also there's a very clear AB choice with voters.
How was it under Trump?
How's it now under Biden?
So, I mean, to me, that's an outlier.
I didn't see anybody doing or making the same points when ABC News last month had Trump up by seven.
Right.
We're going to see these.
And that's why the consensus of polling is important.
Trends are important.
You know, again, not all polls are created equally.
No, I think that's right.
Now, let me ask you this then.
So this is something that I had a conversation with somebody last night, high level, but it was sort of one of those late night conversations of a what if, and I'd love to get your perspective on this.
I think I'll ask Vivek this question as well when he comes out later today.
Do you think they actually tried to put Donald Trump behind bars?
Oh, yes.
Oh, yes.
Absolutely.
And I always did think they were going to come out with the sedition because I think Republicans, establishment Republicans, want cover to be able to go to some of the governors to try to remove him from the ballot, to try to get a convention fight if that's necessary.
They will do anything to stop this man from winning.
And that includes I mean, by pulling what we are seeing now, which we have never seen in the history of the country.
We literally have a sitting president with credible whistleblowers alleging that he is interfering with investigations with his son.
He's taken money from every nation Rudy Giuliani said he took money from, by the way.
I appreciate you bringing that up, because Rudy has been very, very vindicated on a lot of this.
Completely vindicated, and I'll even throw a shout out to my old colleague Chanel Rione, who went over to Ukraine with Rudy Giuliani at the time, interviewed Shokin, all of it.
Not to get around the whole rabbit hole of that, but I feel like what these whistleblowers are saying, I'm like, I saw this with Rudy three years ago.
And because of all this, when you understand the full context of everything.
But if they move to put Trump behind bars, if they say there's a prison sentence, if he goes behind bars for one day, what does that do to our country?
Uh, Jack, you know, I know everybody always says this is the most important election in, you know, in history.
To me, this one kind of really is because if they put, uh, you know, I almost defer to the Mexican president on this.
If they put major political opponents behind bars for things like this, when they're the ones who are alleged to have committed very real crimes, even this very same crimes, they're trying to allege the former president committed.
Then that means really we're not picking our own leaders anymore.
And they've effectively won.
And to me, I don't really care who his name is.
I don't care if it's Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders.
To me, especially as a public pollster, why would I even have a job anymore, Jack?
I mean, if that's what's going on, if the administration or the administrative state is determining the state-sponsored or state-approved slate of candidates that you're allowed to vote for, then I don't even want to be a pollster anymore because I'm participating in a charade, and this is not self-governance.
So I'm going to find myself another career.
I kid you not.
Because that's not what George Gallup's vision.
No, no.
This is not what our founders envisioned at all.
And I talked about this on stage at Turning Point last week, that this will blow the country apart.
And I'm not saying that I want that.
I'm saying that I think that is what will happen.
Rich Barris, where can people go to get your writings, to follow up on the conversation, and to get in?
What's the invitation for your community?
peoplespundit.locals.com.
Jack, I'm on Twitter, I'm in Getter, but the Locals community is where it's at.
If you have been a member of it, you are intimately familiar with what we were just talking about with this Trump-only vote and the very real potential that the Republican Party could fracture this year and the impact or the implications that all of what we were just discussing in these couple segments, what this means going forward.
So, check it out.
peoplespundit.locals.com.
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.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, welcome back here, Human Events.
We promised you that this would be coming this week.
We are now very excited to bring on for you, again, we were just down in Turning Point last weekend.
Huge response, huge response from the crowd, huge response at the after party that Tanya Tay and myself actually attended.
We got to see him working the crowd, doing his thing.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining the program here, Vivek Ramaswamy.
Good to see you, Jack.
How you doing?
Good to see you as well.
So right out of the gate, man, are you a World Economic Forum plant?
Is George Soros running your campaign?
Where are the rat lines?
Where are the strings?
So I will say that I'm running for U.S.
President.
People should ask the hard questions.
I'm going to be transparent at every step.
World Economic Forum.
What is my relationship with them?
Answer?
None.
Absolutely none.
Other than being probably their top critic in the United States.
Read the two books I've written.
Look at the company Strive that I started to compete against their ESG agenda.
Why are people asking the question, though, Jack?
It's because they bizarrely listed me on their list of young global leaders, this prestigious award they give to young billionaires and otherwise.
I rejected the award.
I repeatedly rejected it.
And then a few months later, my name still pops up on their website.
Turns out they've done the same thing to Elon Musk, to Glenn Beck, to others.
But anyway, in my case, I don't believe in standing by.
I respectfully ask them to take it down.
When they did not comply, I sued them.
I believe in taking action.
And I think I'm the only person who has actually sued the World Economic Forum.
And I expect just on the hard facts of it, we're going to be successful and demand that they make a hard commitment that they never do this to somebody else again.
That's the World Economic Forum.
You want me to hit Soros as well?
Absolutely, please.
Yeah.
So another FAQ that has popped up, you brought it up as well, is what is my relationship with George Soros?
Very clear answer.
None.
Zero direct or indirect relationship, other than being one of the bigger critics in this country of the disastrous policies that he's been funding over the last decade, especially after 2016.
Why are people asking the question?
There was a separate scholarship that I won at the age of 24, 25, when I was going to law school in my mid-20s, in my early 20s, when I didn't have the money, and it was a merit scholarship that hundreds of kids win, that was partially funded not by George Soros, But by Paul Soros, a relative, his brother, who by the way is now long dead, who by the way had, this is long before George Soros completely went off the deep end and really went toxic in the last decade.
And to be perfectly honest with you, I would have had to be a fool to turn down that scholarship at the age of 24.
Anyone that foolish, I think, should step nowhere near the White House doing trade deals on behalf of this country either.
But I believe in standing for the truth.
People are asking the questions.
I believe in being transparent.
And so that's the long and the short of that one.
Well, I appreciate that.
Now, in the very last... and I've heard you give the answer as well before.
Now, in the very last segment, we broke this story that's coming out now out of Georgia, racketeering charges on the president, for President Trump.
I think that a lot of these charges, they're starting to roll together.
They're starting to gel together, I think, in the voters' mind.
You're running on a campaign right now.
Let me ask you this, though.
We've got the judge, the judicial, I should say, schedule for President Trump's trial during the primaries of 2024.
What effect do you think it would have, and maybe not even so much for your campaign, but just on the country, if we could actually see a former president of the United States on trial, potentially even going to jail in the middle of a primary?
I think it would be disastrous, Jack.
I'm just gonna be really direct with you, right?
I am running to be our next president.
I believe that we will be successful.
It's why I'm in this race.
Many people think, the other FAQ that I often get from people is, do you have some backroom deal with Trump?
No, we like each other, we're friends, we respect each other, but I'm running to be the next president.
And it would be a lot easier for me if Trump were eliminated from competition by the federal administrative state, which, quietly, I think a lot of other Republican candidates are indeed rooting for, as is the donor class.
I think it would be a national disaster for this country if that happened.
The one that I think is potentially most dangerous of all, Jack, is actually the supposed, we'll see if it comes, the January 6th related indictment, because that one implicates Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which mentions the word insurrection or rebellion, which can actually eliminate someone from running or even being removed from office.
We saw that happen to a county commissioner in the state of New Mexico, which I think is jarring and alarming.
And if anybody doubts, you know, a lot of people don't follow politics, what I explain to even a lot of my friends who are outside of politics and say, well, you know, I'm sure he did something wrong, right?
I say, think about it the other way around.
The fact that there are all of these prosecutions happening at the exact same time, right as he's running for president, on strained legal theories that have never once been used before.
What does that tell you?
It has nothing to do with the law.
It has to do with an anaphylactic immune response against an antigen in the form of Trump that threatened the system.
OK, and I think that once you see it that way, it's hard to unsee it, even if you're not in the world of politics.
I've been able to actually get a lot of my friends to open their eyes who aren't in the world of politics to understand the injustice of this.
And I think it's bad for our country.
The example we set for the rest of the world is we are that shining city on a hill, or at least we're supposed to be.
The way we lead the world, the way we contribute to the rest of the world, is that when America is strong and prosperous and healthy at home, that sets an example to the free world abroad.
Imagine if you have a lead candidate in an election, even in this primary, battling charges in jail or at trial.
That undermines global trust in America as the leader.
It undermines the trust of our own citizens in our own process.
And it's a disastrous precedent, which is why I've said in no uncertain terms that if I'm elected president, we have a long list on day one of people who get pardons.
Julian Assange is on that list.
Ross Ulbricht is on that list.
Peaceful January 6th protesters, as well as any January 6th protester who had due process rights denied, are on that list.
But President Trump is also absolutely on that list, and that includes, by the way, the New York charges, which people say that's a state charge.
No, that invokes a federal law, so there's legal precedent for that being a pardon as well.
That's why I've been crystal clear about it, Jack.
What about Snowden?
Where are you on Snowden?
I would pardon Snowden.
He's also on the list that we published.
Okay, I mean, I think if you're going to hold us any type of understanding or a truth commission on these national security agencies and what they've been doing in terms of domestic surveillance, you're going to need Assange and Snowden to testify.
I've long stated that, you know, you don't make it an unconditional pardon.
You make a deal.
You say, let's come forward.
You give us what you know.
Assange as well, by the way.
Give us what you know and you can.
And then guess what?
Then you get your part.
It's as simple as that.
You're stealing my lines in a good way.
That's exactly what I've said, is actually we have to look after the American interest.
And that's what we get out of this as Americans is information, transparency, and accountability.
And the funny thing, Jack, is you and I, people may view us as Republican extremists or whatever, I don't view the partisan label as anything, actually.
This used to be a liberal talking point back when I was in college.
And by the way, I was on the same side of this even back then and for much of my 20s.
I've been at the same position on believing that the federal national security state and the federal police state is fundamentally corrupt.
And whether that was under George Bush and Dick Cheney, or whether it's under Joe Biden or anybody, any other administration today, It's not even about the political class.
It's about the unelected bureaucracy that needs to be exposed for its own corruption.
And I just think it is so important.
I do think it's important we win this election in a landslide.
And that's why I think it's important, Jack, that we talk about it in these terms.
This is not a Republican or a Democrat issue.
This is a 1776 issue.
A conviction in the belief that we, the people, Are the ones who actually decide who governs, not an unelected, effectively monarchical bureaucracy that reflects the old world view.
We fought an American revolution for that reason.
And I think that is the choice in this Republican primary.
I think there are other earnest candidates who are in this that will tell you they want to come in and reform the police state or reform the bureaucracy.
It is my conviction that reform is impossible.
I stand not on the side of reform.
I stand on the side of revolution.
And I think that is the choice in this primary.
We've got to see it with clear eyes.
Do you want reform?
If so, go with somebody else.
Do you want revolution?
If so, that's what I'm leading.
I believe in the principles of the American Revolution, and we should not apologize for the ideals that actually make us ourselves.
We've got one minute until break.
Let me ask you directly, because I promised the crowd that I would, I promised everyone that I would.
Good.
Do you believe that if given the chance, they will move to put Donald Trump behind bars?
I think they will.
Yeah.
I think that this is the ultimate goal and destination.
They will not stop absent the intervention of real leadership.
That's why it's important that someone like me, for example, who is running against Trump for the nomination, who has more credibility to stand on the side of principle against self-interest, actually stands up and makes those legal arguments.
I've tried to be as rigorous as I have on the pages of the Wall Street Journal and otherwise.
That's why I called on RFK.
I was hopeful, maybe a little disappointed that he didn't come out the same way.
I think it adds more credibility to say, this is not about politics.
This is about principle, and that's where I stand.
All right, we're coming up on a break.
We're going to continue.
We're going to get into DeSantis, Ukraine.
Next segment coming up, Vivek Ramaswamy joins us here at Human Events.
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-trematizolitsabam-ship-nippy-bam-bam like Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
All right, we are back.
We've got a couple of minutes left with Vivek Ramaswamy.
Let's do a little bit of rapid fire, because I know you've got to run.
This is also our last segment.
First question about these polls.
You've been riding high in the polls.
You've definitely gotten a boost.
I'm very biased on this, but you came and spoke to Turning Point Action, and I think that is definitely responsible for some of that, showing that you were willing to go in and meet with the grassroots the way that you did.
But I do also want to ask, and I don't think I've actually heard you answer this question yet, Why do you think that you have been able to come up so fast relative to Governor DeSantis not being able to close the gap, whereas you've been able to show that you can?
Well, I think that every advantage comes with its disadvantage.
So he has a giant super PAC that's funding his campaign, and that's a big competitive advantage in being able to put ads up on television across the country.
I've made a $15 million investment, more than that, actually, of my own hard-earned money, but it pales in comparison to the amount in his super PAC.
But the flip side is I want to be independent.
I do not want to be constrained in what I can and cannot say between what the mega-donor class of the Republican Party wants their candidates to say.
There's a reason why I'm the only person who showed up in Miami and the only person, you know, one of the few people who showed up at Turning Point, answered the questions as candidly as I could with Tucker on stage.
I'd rather be unconstrained and speak the truth and lose the election than to win by playing some political snakes and ladders.
It's not how I want to win.
And so I think for the other candidates, there are also other candidates, not just DeSantis, I'm not picking on him.
This is the super PAC primary.
I think more than any election in history, even more so than the Democratic primary last time around, this Republican primary is the super PAC primary.
And I think the problem with that is that creates a series of super PAC puppets.
And the Super PAC puppets have a competitive advantage because they can buy a ton of airtime, as they're doing right now.
I mean, there's a $40 million ad buy that Tim Scott Super PACs reportedly have made.
Other Super PACs have bought national Super PAC money.
But that also restrains what you can say.
It restrains the truth that you're able to speak because the donor money in Spigot, the mega donor money, turns off.
If you're speaking the truth as unsparingly as I am.
And so you know what, each side has their own competitive advantages.
I stand on the side of speaking the truth, doing it unsparingly, doing it without constraint.
If that's what the people want, great, I'm going to be the next president.
If not, that's the people's choice, not mine.
That's the way I look at this.
Well that's actually a great jumping point for my next question then because it seems like on the question of Ukraine you've been one of the only candidates willing to put forward an actual solid plan and obviously it's a negotiating process so you know that's a good opening bid.
Do you think that's the reason that some of these other candidates have been so vague about their responses to the Ukraine crisis?
Yes, absolutely.
I mean, I have... I can personally tell you from experience, there are large donors who have said they cannot support me given my position on Ukraine, which is a bit of a mystery, Jack, because...
I don't think these are people who have large holdings in Raytheon or Lockheed or something, and it's their financial interest.
It's something else going on, and when we have more time, we should probably dive into the psychology of it.
But the fact is, the donor class does not permit you to take the position on Ukraine that I've taken on.
I think the only people who can take it on are people who have independent money, like Trump and myself, and we're the only two who have.
You know, there are other candidates who told Tucker one thing and then immediately switch after their donors tell them to change their mind.
But my view is, we've got to advance American interests.
Here's the deal I would do.
Fact is, in a good deal, everybody has to get something out of the deal.
Here's what Putin gets: a hard commitment that NATO will not admit Ukraine, and freezing the current lines of control in a Korean war-style armistice agreement.
But here's what we get in return: Putin has to exit his military alliance with China.
Right now, we're pushing Russia closer into China's arms.
I say do it the other way: restore normal economic relations with Russia.
Actually, make a hard commitment that NATO won't admit Ukraine.
And then I would, you know, some details, move the nukes out of Kaliningrad, which borders Poland, get the Russian military out of the Western Hemisphere, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua.
But yes, this is the starting point for the contours of a deal that I think will advance American interests, will end the Ukraine war, resources that we should use to protect our own border instead of somebody else's border halfway around the world.
But Jack Thurton ramps, most importantly, This is how we deter China from going after Taiwan without going to war over Taiwan.
Because China's bet is that they can go for Taiwan when Russia's actually in their camp.
But if Russia's not, they're going to have to think twice before making that move.
And that's not a donor class approved talking point.
But you know what?
This is going to be, I think that is the choice.
We're going to see it on the debate stage.
Super PAC puppets versus somebody who actually speaks independently.
It's going to be up to the voters of this country to decide.
One side gets to buy a lot more TV ads than the other, but I have the advantage of being unconstrained and speaking truth.
And I do think that's what's driving our rise in the polls, thanks to conversations with Tucker, the Turning Point event, and otherwise.
That's what we're going to rely on in order to succeed here.
Let me hit you a couple rapid fire questions.
Okay.
Red flag laws.
You familiar with red flag laws?
Yeah.
What's your position on that?
I'm against them.
I'm a Second Amendment hardliner, but since this is rapid fire, take a look at my NRA speech.
That lays out the history.
I don't adopt these as sort of political positions.
I'm grounded in history, and so I laid out a detailed historical case for that in my NRA speech earlier this year.
Great, great.
What about vaccines, vaccine mandates?
Dead set against vaccine mandates.
And I think that that was one of the major learnings from that last pandemic.
And I also want to point out a hypocrisy, Jack, that other people haven't yet pointed out.
And I know this because I've interfaced with the FDA, which is a disastrous and corrupt organization.
The same laws and agency that say you don't have the right to try, for example, not to forget a mandate, you don't even have the right to try a medicine.
How about immigration?
been through 10 years of testing, that's how dangerous that could be, is the same agency in the same government that says that if there's a vaccine that's pushed through in less than a year, not only is it safe enough for you to try, it's safe enough to be mandated upon you on the basis of a lie.
And that's a hypocrisy that I don't think others have pointed out, but I think is the most obvious hypocrisy of the entire policy.
How about immigration, specifically a question of legal immigration?
Yeah, so I am unapologetically a hardliner on using the military on the southern border.
On legal immigration, I stand for merit-based immigration.
Is that a bunch of tech guys in Silicon Valley?
No.
Actually, most of our job openings are in other functions that are unfulfilled.
But to me, there's two parts to merit-based immigration, and the second part doesn't get talked about much.
One is contributions of skills to this country, but the second is civic commitments to this country.
So I would take the citizenship test of knowing about the Constitution, the separation of powers, the history of the U.S., and bring that to the front end and make that a requirement even to get a visa to come into the country.
And by the way, I also think that every high school student who graduates from high school should have to pass that same civics test too.
So that's where I land on that.
Yeah, I heard you mention on TimCast, by the way, that you'd also introduce that for voting under, I think, 25 or 26?
Yes, yes.
So I would decriminalize the selective service requirement for men between 18 to 25, where you have to register on pain of criminal penalties.
I would decriminalize that.
Oh, hey, looking at the time here, we are just about out of time.
