On today’s can’t miss episode of Human Events with Jack Posobiec, Poso breaks down all the breaking news surrounding Trump’s latest indictments. Mike Davis joins for an elevated legal breakdown of the charges and the possibility of the Supreme Court weighing in on the case. Chadwick Moore, author of “Tucker” joins Human Events on the heels of Tucker Carlson interviewing Devon Archer for an insightful discussion about cancellation and Tucker’s exit from Fox. Poso is also joined by Joel Gilbert...
I want to take a second to remind you to sign up for the Pozo 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 Pozo.
Sign up today.
It's called the Pozo Daily Brief.
Read what I read for show prep.
You will not regret it.
humanevents.com slash Pozo.
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.
Christ is King!
Today, an indictment was unsealed, charging Donald J. Trump with conspiring to defraud the United States Conspiring to disenfranchise voters and conspiring and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding.
That was one of the most demagogic presentations I've ever seen in a high-profile criminal case.
Anyone who listened to that, any normal person reacting to that, would assume that Trump was alleged to have carried out the Capitol riot.
The most jarring thing about this indictment is that it basically just accuses him of disinformation.
This is a disinformation indictment.
This is going to, unfortunately, tear apart our country and divide it even further.
But to some extent, that's what the Democrats try to do.
They try to highlight our differences instead of what we share as Americans.
It's not just one of the most significant indictments.
It is the most significant indictment against Donald Trump.
It is the most significant legal case of our lifetimes.
A New York Times poll confirms the current political reality.
Donald Trump can win a rematch with Joe Biden.
The top line number, Mr. Biden, 43%.
Mr. Trump, 43%.
Many of the people celebrating this second indictment are just simply dismissing the implications for free speech.
Those are quite dire and real.
Donald Trump was not responsible for what happened on January 6th.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard.
Today's edition of Human Events with Jack Posobiec, today is August 2nd, 2023.
I know, Domini.
We do not live in a free country.
We live in an occupied country.
And from that understanding, we need to plan our steps accordingly.
Which side are you on?
Which side do you want to be on when the history books of this era are written?
And make no mistake, the books will be written to favor the victors.
If they win, they will describe the populist nationalist uprising Of the 2010s and 2020s as a blip, as a temper tantrum, as the cry of, what do they say on MSNBC, the diminishing white majority as power slipped out of their hands.
What do they think about you?
They don't think about the men and women that go to work every day, Take care of their kids.
Lace their shoelaces.
Just want to put food on the table every night.
That are sitting there and seeing a candidate who is finally speaking to them.
Who's finally putting their interests first.
One man with credibility, with celebrity, with influence, with stature.
That actually has the ability to influence the entire system for good.
In fact, has been talking about it for over 30 years.
And they want to take that man and they want to make him die in prison.
The regime wants Donald Trump to die in prison because they want MAGA and the populist movement to die along with him.
Are you going to let them do that?
Are you going to let the Department of Justice, the Biden regime, Jack Smith, and all of these other cronies, the political machine that's operating throughout Washington?
We've seen the money.
We get how it works.
We've seen the laptop.
We've had the testimony of Devin Archer now.
We get it.
Are you going to let the machine pick your candidate for you?
Are you going to let that machine tell you that there's someone you're not allowed to vote for?
That there's someone you're not allowed to support?
I have a question.
If this machine is so powerful, if this machine is so far-reaching, why is there only one candidate?
One man.
That they will act like this towards.
If I were an undecided voter, if I were somebody who was looking at this system for the first time with fresh eyes, with new eyes, and if I were coming in cold, I would say, who's the candidate that the regime hates the most?
Who's the candidate that terrifies them?
Who's the candidate that keeps them up at night?
And then that's the person that I would throw my support behind.
Mike Davis joins us next.
When I'm working long hours, I'm always listening to Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
Alright folks, we're back here.
Jack Posobiec live, Washington D.C.
What have I told you?
That the parent company for one of the major diaper brands out there was paying the travel costs so that their employees could have an abortion.
It's one thing to reject your customers, but it's another thing to support the termination of them.
If you're a parent that's sickened by woke corporations supporting the destruction of our 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, planned or unplanned, EveryLife is a miracle.
EveryLife offers high-performing premium diapers created with your little ones in mind.
Their diapers are made without fragrances, dyes, lotions, latex, paravans, flay aids.
Visit EveryLife.com.
That's EveryLife.com and use promo code POSO to get 10% off your first order today.
Even if you don't have a baby in diapers, you can support EveryLife's mission because with their Buy for a Cause Bundle, supporting families in need of essential items such as diapers and wipes, each Buy for a Cause Bundle purchased is donated Alright, I want to bring in now Mike Davis from the Article 3 Project.
Now Mike, a lot of people have been going around today looking at this, slicing and dicing this indictment of President Trump.
This idea that it seems like they're criminalizing his speech, they're criminalizing his attempts to challenge an election following, oh by the way, legal processes to do so.
There's also been a narrative that I've seen floating around a lot in the last 12 hours or so since this thing has dropped about the Supreme Court.
So Mike, I'd like to ask you, what, if any, would the role of the Supreme Court be in this case?
While this case will proceed, we have this Obama-appointed judge, Tanya Chudkin, who is going to oversee this trial.
She has shown in the past That she is unfriendly to President Trump, so there's no chance that President Trump is going to get a fair trial in Washington, D.C.
You have this Jack Smith who is a partisan hitman who has been brought in by Biden and Garland to take out Trump legally because they fear they can't beat Trump politically in November 2024.
You're going to have motions to dismiss the indictment.
Judge Chutkan will deny them.
She'll deny Trump his ability to put on his full defense that he wants to put on.
The D.C.
jury, which is like 95% Democrat and 99% Trump deranged, will find him guilty.
Judge Chudkin will convict him.
It will go to the D.C.
Circuit.
They will affirm the conviction, and then it will have to get overturned by the Supreme Court.
And Jack Smith is used to getting overturned by the Supreme Court.
He was overturned unanimously by the Supreme Court after Jack Smith pursued a political prosecution against former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, a likely Republican presidential So, that stands then.
in 2016.
But here's the problem, Jack.
The Supreme Court is not going to resolve this case for several years.
And the Democrats know this.
Biden knows this.
Garland knows this.
Jack Smith knows this.
This is about election interference for November 5th, 2024.
So that stands then.
Is there any way that President Trump, and I've said this before, you've said this, I think everybody kind of gets it.
You bring any charges against President Trump, you put that in front of a D.C. judge, jury, just like trial after trial of anyone who's had even a remote connection with President Trump, D.C.
jury, that jury pool finds you guilty.
It's 10 out of 10, or I guess 12 out of 12, I would say in this case.
That said, so we do expect a conviction coming up.
Is there any way for him to expedite this process?
Could he expedite it?
There are certain things called a writ of certiorari.
Can you walk us through what that means to expedite the process with the Supreme Court if he indeed does intend to go down that route?
Well, that's a very good question, Jack, because we're in uncharted territory.
Generally, what happens is you have the U.S.
District Court hold the trial.
The U.S.
Circuit Court, in this case, it would be the D.C.
Circuit Court of Appeals, would handle the appeal.
And then the Supreme Court actually has discretionary review in most cases, meaning the Supreme Court does not have to take cases.
And so when you file a petition for writ of certiorari, you are asking the Supreme Court to exercise It's discretionary review.
I can't imagine a scenario where the Supreme Court would not take this case and decide this case on the merits, but the issue is timing.
I don't see a path where the Supreme Court can take this case and resolve this case before November 2024, and that's the whole game here by Biden and Garland and Jack Smith is to try to take out Trump Before the presidential election and they don't care what happens.
They don't care what the Supreme Court does after the presidential election and so really
If these cases are going to get resolved, whether it's Alvin Bragg's lawfare in New York, or Trump being charged for the non-crime of a businessman settling a nuisance claim, or Trump being charged for the non-crime by Jack Smith, a former president, having his presidential records, which is allowed by the Presidential Records Act, or Trump being charged for the non-crime of objecting to a presidential election, which is allowed by the Electoral Count Act,
of 1887 and twisting arms politically as allowed by the First Amendment.
Jack Smith is pursuing that.
Fannie Willis down in Fulton County, Georgia, is going to pursue that later this month, likely.
The only way this is going to get resolved, this Democrat lawfare, is by the American people saying, "Enough is enough.
We're not going to let Democrat prosecutors and Democrat judges and Democrat juries pick the President of the United States.
We get to pick the President of the United States and the American people can do that on November 5th, 2024 by saying we're going to end this lawfare and put President Trump back in the White House.
So let's look at this.
And, you know, they say over and over again, amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics.
So logistically speaking, is there a possibility for them or for the Trump legal team in this sense?
Because we understand that he's been summoned tomorrow.
I don't know if that's changed yet, but he's been summoned tomorrow in Washington, D.C.
That could be changed.
Of course, we saw it changed for the Miami court appearance.
We also saw it changed from New York court appearance in the state level charge.
So is it possible then that when it comes to the trial date that he could even argue to push this back because he could point out that the same Department of Justice and the same special counsel has already given him another trial that they're going on at the same time?
Yeah, I mean that's going to be interesting how they juggle this.
We have Alvin Bragg's trial up in New York.
I think that's set for March of 2024.
I think the Mar-a-Lago trial is set for May of 2024.
You have Tish James, the New York Attorney General, bringing her bogus civil fraud lawsuit against Trump for the non-fraud of President Trump paying back banks in full.
And so I don't know how that would be fraud.
You have Fannie Willis who's likely to bring another indictment down in Fulton County, Georgia.
And just if you step back, remember Jack Smith, Merrick Garland and Jack Smith waited 31 months to bring these charges against President Trump.
What is the rush?
I mean, they clearly brought these charges to time them because President Biden was facing his own serious, incredible allegations of foreign corruption, that Biden and his family took tens of millions of dollars from China and Ukraine and Romania and other trouble spots around that Biden and his family took tens of millions of dollars from China and And so all of a sudden, Jack Smith wants to bring superseding indictments in the Mar-a-Lago case.
And then this new indictment for the January 6th case, I mean, they're going to have to juggle all this.
And President Trump has to be able to put on his defense.
And by the way, this case is not some simple case that Jack Smith is bringing here.
It's bogus as a matter of law, but factually, it's very complicated.
You're looking at seven co-conspirators.
You're looking at seven different states.
You're looking at dozens and dozens of potential witnesses.
President Trump's going to be able, has to be able to call these witnesses and gather evidence for his defense.
And who knows?
I mean, I doubt that Judge Tanya Chudkin, this Obama-appointed judge in D.C. overseeing this trial, is going to give him a fair trial.
But, I mean, she at least has to pretend, I would think, that he can gather evidence to present for his defense.
And that's going to take quite a bit of time.
I mean, there's no chance that this is going to get resolved in six months like Jack Smith thinks.
This is going to take, you know, well over a year.
And then you're into the presidential election, and then what happens then?
You're going to make a leading presidential candidate sit in a courtroom during a presidential election?
That's just not going to fly with the American people.
Well, I think that's right.
I've even seen some people out there, folks, I would say categorize them more as the National Review bunch, and I know you remember I got into it a little bit with Andy McCarthy over the last indictment, that even those guys are saying, well, hold on a second, we were on board with some of the Mar-a-Lago stuff, and I know Uh, you and I dissected their analysis, but those guys are even saying, wait, this thing is a joke.
Now you're diverting your energy and your time into this nonsense as opposed to simply focusing on the Mar-a-Lago stuff.
So even the Never Trumpers are now getting worried that they've split their time.
Mike, final minute to you.
I mean, this is that Jack Smith is the Michael Avenatti of the Democrat lawfare against President Trump.
He is a clown.
He is.
He's proven in the past that he brings bogus cases against Republican presidential candidates or likely Republican presidential candidates like he did with Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, he doesn't care if the Supreme Court reverses him unanimously.
He obviously doesn't have any shame.
You know, he's back for round two.
Merrick Garland brought him back.
He's a scud missile that Democrats use to take out Republican presidential candidates.
We're on to his game this time.
It's not going to work.
The American people are going to put President Trump back in the White House after November 5, 2024, and all this lawfare is going to end.
Folks, go and file Mike Davis.
Go and support him.
Go check out all of his writings.
Mike, I know you've got a pretty extensive dance card today in terms of your interviews, so I appreciate you taking time with us.
Thank you so much, Jack.
All right.
Thank you.
Stay tuned, folks.
Human events continues to roll on as we question what is justice in America today?
Talk about influences.
These are influencers and they're friends of mine.
Jack Posobiec, where's Jack?
Jack, he's done a great job. - All right, ladies and gentlemen, we are back here, Washington DC, Jack Posobiec, human events.
This is amazing because we had the next interview already planned, but we have breaking news that directly ties to the interview.
So I'll walk you through it in a second here.
We've got on Chad McMorris.
He's the author of the new book, the fantastic new book.
Apparently, it's so hard to get, you can't even buy it on Amazon right now.
That's how much it's flying off the digital shelves.
But we also see that Tucker Carlson, just as this show started... We're going to have to word with Tucker, by the way, to not drop episodes while my show is on, because, Tucker, we're going to have problems, man, if you keep doing this.
2 p.m.
hours, my hour.
So he just dropped, though, an interview with none other than Devin Archer.
And in the interview, Tucker presses him, and Devin Archer admits to Tucker that the phone calls were an abuse of power, a soft abuse of power.
So let's bring in Chadwick Moore to get more background on how it is that Tucker is able to do this, and everything that he does.
Chadwick, thanks so much for joining us here at Human Events.
Hey man, great to be with you.
Thanks for having me on.
So tell us, what was the process for the book?
Was this something where you were outside looking in?
Did they bring you in?
How did it come about?
Yeah, so my publisher reached out to me and said, this was over a year ago, it was early last spring, and said, we want to do a book about Tucker, and we want you to write it.
And I was honored and flattered, and I didn't know if Tucker would go for it or not, and I called him up.
You know, at first he said, "Oh, I don't like that kind of attention.
I'm not very interesting." And, you know, and then he sort of talked himself into it.
And he said like, "Oh, you know, I read your columns and you're a great writer." And, you know, after about 45 minute phone conversation, he was like, "Yeah, let's do it." So we were off since then.
And, you know, he, you know, I feel totally honored and privileged that he gave me so much access that he trusted me to write this book.
He hasn't asked to see a word of it.
He hasn't wanted to see a word of it.
He's totally trusted me to write the book that I felt was appropriate.
And I got to spend tons of time with him and his family and his staff and his friends, his enemies, during the last year to work on this.
And it was a pretty amazing opportunity.
So when you're talking about this full access, obviously then you were there for this, this last, you know, I imagine you, as far as I know, you were actually working on the book before the show was canceled and before all of this was coming down.
So were you able to actually capture that in real time, those moments in the book?
Yeah, I mean, one of the one of the things I was able to capture in real time, I was physically with him was when all of the text messages were being released from the Dominion lawsuit.
So these were, you know, the text messages about Trump.
And also one of the times, you know, Paul Ryan was talking smack about him on a podcast at the same time.
Uh, so I was with him when all of this was going down and I was getting that reaction in real time and also got to ask him about it, you know, and what he really meant and what his real thoughts are on President Trump.
And, uh, and I put all of that into the book.
Uh, and then also, you know, we were basically done with the book when his show was taken off the air and we pushed back publication so that I could update it so I could interview him a few more times and really capture the aftermath and what he was going through, uh, what his thoughts were at that time and what he was up to immediately afterwards.
That's incredible.
So, you know, and I know this episode just dropped.
I was able to watch it, you know, sort of during the break there.
You know, the 2X speed, as I love to, this Devin Archer interview.
But just from seeing Tucker, understanding his process, what do you think it says that even after he's lost, you know, his perch there on, you know, running the, you know, Tucker Carlson tonight in primetime, that he's still able to get these highly sought-after guests?
How does he do it?
Yeah, so this is a great question and couldn't be more relevant than to what just dropped, and I haven't got a chance to watch it yet.
I was teed up to watch it, and then I had to jump on with you, and I will.
But what I think it signifies is, I mean, I feel like this moment feels historic.
For many reasons.
Wow.
And I think it feels historic because I think it's a moment that I think April 24th, 2023 was the moment that independent media surpassed mainstream media.
And I think Tucker Carlson is a the figurehead for that.
And this is what really shows it is that he is able to get the most highly sought after interview and drop it before anyone else at any of the mainstream networks, anyone at Fox.
And I also think that this is historic because and again, Tucker being a figurehead for this, that this will be the first presidential primary that mainstream media plays a really insignificant role, especially on the Republican side, maybe specifically on the Republican side.
And, you know, as we get into the general election, that will probably change, but mainstream media isn't really going to have a big say on who the Republican primary candidate is.
Fox, I think, would prefer it to be one candidate over the other.
But their power seems to be completely gone, and really Tucker's at the center of that.
This interview that just dropped really shows that.
I mean, this is the most — and also the summit in Iowa from a few weeks ago.
I mean, that was incredible viewing, and it was not on the mainstream cable networks.
Look, and I remember pointing this out at the time that when the Hunter Biden laptop story dropped, that was something that I was going on 24-7, Steve Bannon, Raheem Kassam, the only person it felt like in mainstream media that was really picking this up when it mattered, October of 2020.
Was Tucker Carlson not only was he covering it, but he even went and had Tony Bobulinski on for that bombshell interview.
So he gets Tony Bobulinski, he gets Devin Archer, he's getting every single one of these individuals that's directly tied to this.
And I think what we're actually seeing through the lens of this is picking apart And it's something that Tucker talks about a lot in his books, which I have read, just the way Washington, D.C.
actually works and the sense of how the sausage is made behind the scenes and where that comes out in the front.
And so you can see him, by the way, in the interview.
I know you haven't watched it yet, but he says to Archer, he said, did you ever question that, you know, why it was that all of these Foreign organizations wanted to work so much with you guys.
Did you ever question that?
You know, possibly it was the influence that you wielded or that your your connections wielded because you were directly tied to the vice president and he's even calling in during these speaker calls.
So I guess Seems like the interview was taken after his testimony because he's obviously referring to it.
And Archer even admits at one point that, you know, looking back in retrospect, it was a soft abuse of power.
I guess you could say that.
So, I mean, Tucker uses, it's a great At Guantanamo, we would have called it an interrogation technique in his interview because he's just reeling him in, makes the guy feel like he's completely comfortable, completely setting the table, and then boom, gets him to admit it.
And you can only do that when you're an absolute master at your craft.
And I think that's what we're seeing here.
Absolutely, and you know, back to you and Steve Bannon.
I watch your show all the time, and Bannon's show as well, and I love them both.
And Tucker's show was really that bridge between stuff that people like you and Steve are covering and other people online that nobody on cable news would touch.
Tucker was always this sort of bridge between the internet and the mainstream.
And certainly as someone, as you just pointed out, as someone who's kind of a Washington insider, he had lived there for his entire adult life.
He knows all these people intimately.
In my book, actually, I write about his friendship with Hunter Biden.
They used to be friends.
And one of the things that they really bonded over was sobriety.
They're obviously two different types of sober people.
Tucker being one that's, you know, happy every day to be sober.
Hunter being one that's one cocktail away from a bender.
But I write about all that in the book.
But he knows these people very well.
And I like your analogy that, you know, seeing how the sausage is made.
He has that insight behind the scenes that basically everyone in mainstream media who's in Washington knows that, but they refuse to report on it or they don't want to report on it.
But he didn't.
He has done that and continues to.
Well, and to your point, right, you know, and I've heard Tucker speak of this as well that, you know, to truly be a populist, and he doesn't even necessarily consider himself one, but he says you have to understand who that sort of ruling class, those insiders, those DC insiders are.
And to his credit, he doesn't describe himself as an outsider.
He points out, no, I'm an insider, but then comes forward with a perspective of, and it's because I'm an insider, that's how I can tell you, you're getting screwed.
These people are screwing you left and right.
And, you know, do you get a sense at all in the book of, was there a moment?
Was there a time?
Was it Iraq?
I know he talks about where he kind of shifted on that view of things.
Yeah, Iraq was a big shift for him because he was sort of a Beltway neocon.
He was always sort of a civil libertarian.
He's always been a live and let live guy.
But he was definitely pro the Iraq War at first.
It took him going to Iraq in 2003 on assignment for Esquire magazine.
He was embedded with civilian contractors in Baghdad that he really had a huge shift in his thinking.
And that's when he really started to break away from Beltway conservatism.
You know, he basically said he realized that neocons are just liberals with guns.
And I think the second break probably was not really one of his own doing, but it was when Trump came along, and that's when he became an outsider in his own social class.
You know, he became a class traitor, which is what his neighbors in Washington called him when I interviewed them.
People again see him as a class traitor because he was on the side of Trumpism, even though he wasn't, you know, an absolute Trump cheerleader, a blind cheerleader, he was certainly on the side of what Trump stood for.
So, you know, I think it was him, you know, he broke away from the Beltway in certain ways, but then also he was excommunicated when the times shifted and when the politics shifted and when Washington became so angry and upset about an outsider becoming president.
I think it's incredible.
It's so great that you've got the book out when you do.
We're coming up on a quick break, but I want to go back in because I want to talk about some of the news of the day, not only the indictments, but also we're going to look into this question of the role of independent media versus mainstream media.
President Trump has been asked directly, so we have breaking news, President Trump sat down, had dinner with the heads of Fox News last night, and apparently they're begging him to come and debate on the debate stage that will be held in Milwaukee coming up just about 21 days here in 21 days time.
And so the question on the debate is, and I've heard it from both sides, and I've heard the political calculus and with my political operative hat on, I can say, well, when you're this much up in the polls, you don't have much to lose.
The other side has much to gain.
So the value proposition is that.
You know, you can sit this one out, see how the other side does, you could counter-program, etc.
But then there's the other angle, and this is the one I argued when I went on Don Jr.
a couple of weeks ago down at Turning Point Action when I said, Donald Trump is known for dominating the narrative and dominating people's mind space.
And any time that Donald Trump isn't available, isn't there on the screen, isn't there with these other candidates, showing them to be jabronis, throwing them out of the ring like he did in 2015 Royal Rumble style, then it's a missed opportunity.
Because everybody sees him in his element and he can show off his skills.
Let's stay tuned.
Chadwick Moore.
More next.
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, we are back live here, Human Events, Washington, D.C.
We're on with Chadwick Moore, the author of the new book all about Tucker Carlson.
So, Chadwick, it's amazing that, you know, we have all this breaking news going on right now.
We've got Tucker dropping the new interview with Devin Archer.
Then we've also got news This is out of Jonathan Swan, Jonathan Swanney and Maggie Haberman over at the New York Times.
It turns out that last night, even after the indictment dropped, President Trump held a private dinner with the top leadership at Fox News as they lobbied him to attend the first primary debate.
The dinner was between Mr. Trump, Fox News President Jay Wallace, and the network's senior executive Suzanne Scott.
This is held in a private dining room at Mr. Trump's golf club up in Bedminster.
I was just at Bedminster a couple of days ago for the Sound of Freedom event.
Fantastic dining room, highly recommend.
A little hard to get to, a little hard to get in, but that's what he likes.
He goes up there for the summertime.
But walk me through the decision-making process.
And you guys have been I would say you more than most a little bit vocal on the decision-making over at Fox News.
Do you think they're trying to hold on to relevance or do they view this as something that's perfunctory?
Or are they worried?
Are they actually worried about the rise of independent media?
Walk me through your analysis of this meeting.
Yeah, all great questions, and there's no way to say for sure, but I would guess it's because they're super desperate for relevance, and they don't want to offend—I mean, they, you know, the leadership obviously doesn't like Trump.
They don't want him to be president, and they didn't want him to be president the first time.
They absolutely did not.
So I think it's probably they're desperate for relevance.
They want to try to hoodwink maybe 80 million Trump voters into thinking that they're still on their side, so they'll still tune in to, I don't know, Harris Faulkner, whatever show is still on Fox News.
So that seems the most likely to me.
I don't know why else they would want to be begging him for such a thing.
But Trump hasn't been too kind on Fox lately, and I've seen some of his social posts that weren't very nice about Fox.
So it'll be interesting to see what direction he goes in.
But then again, you know, I don't know if Trump feels like he might need to go to the mainstream, you know, right now to reach some voters or not.
I'm not sure.
work.
Well, I think that's sort of the debate of it, right?
So the debate on one side, if you're just looking at it through the normal political lens, is to say, hey, you're up this much in the polls, you're up 30 points, 40 points in some of these early states, including Iowa, which is obviously the target of any of the pre-primary, pre-caucus polls or debates, so you'd want You want to make sure security relate if you're over 50 percent, you're basically at a ceiling.
And so the only direction you could go in is down.
So why not skip the debate and not give anyone another opportunity to come up?
But this is and I've looked at this and I know you've looked at the Trump movement in the same way that I think the normal rules don't necessarily apply.
Because I think with Trump, you kind of have to be out there a lot.
So I actually went and I said to Don Jr.
on his show the other day, I made the argument that he should be out there.
He should be out there flying the flag, dominating these candidates, and then actually, you know, taking potshots at him.
That was what won him the nomination back in 2015-16.
What do you think?
Yeah, I would like to see him debate, you know, maybe not necessarily on Fox, but not only would it be entertaining, but I think he, I personally think he should be out there debating.
Such a good response.
But I do agree that it's great to see him out there.
I mean, but also Trump shines, first of all, he shines in debate.
We've seen that.
But also he shines the most when he's not doing these one-on-one sit-downs like he did with some Fox guy recently, but when he's out there talking to people, when he does his Waffle House stops.
When he, you know, stops at the at the McDonald's or wherever.
I mean, man, that's like the best footage you ever get of Trump.
And it's so great to see that.
And then secondly, I would say the debate stage.
We all like seeing him debate.
And also, I think it would just be it would be a good idea for him to do it.
I agree.
But maybe not on Fox.
Maybe maybe somewhere else.
And I think that's actually something else that makes sense, because to what you're saying, this idea that mainstream media and independent media is the real story here.
And I've said this, we interviewed Congressman Marjorie Taylor Greene yesterday, and we had this discussion that somehow veered into the conversation of, it's almost like the division anymore isn't necessarily left or right.
It's actually people who believe corporate media and people who don't.
Yeah, I love that.
That's, I mean, there's so many things that, you know, the whole paradigm has shifted.
And Tucker Carlson came to his biggest prominence yet under this paradigm shift, where the left and right don't mean the same thing.
But yeah, that I think is one of the hugest divisions is, do you believe corporations or do you not?
And that was a part of Tucker's big appeal was he was anti-corporatist in the most corporate of settings, which always was shocking to everyone, especially that the corporation allowed him to say the things that he did.
But that is really a huge divide, and the fact that it's mainly associated with the right now.
I mean, the left—I mean, I grew up around the left, and they were the first ones to call it corporations.
Now they absolutely love their corporate media.
It's really hilarious and sad and slightly terrifying to watch.
And it's the right that has rejected their corporate media and the official stances and is more for independent thinking, free speech, and independent outlets.
And it's amazing to see.
I hope that it continues.
I hope that, you know, that this moment feels right, that this is a moment where mainstream media just becomes completely irrelevant and secondary to what's happening on independent media.
And President Trump has the power to make that happen, whether his campaign or not thinks that it's smart, whether his campaign thinks that it's smart or not, but he could certainly forego the mainstream media, I believe, go straight to independent media, and it wouldn't really hurt him at all.
No, and I think you're starting to see that.
That's obviously been, by the way, RFK's plan going out right now, because he's doing a little bit of corporate media.
He certainly is going on Fox, he's going on NewsNation, but he's on, like, every podcast right now.
Every single podcast, you see RFK over and over and over, and I think it is a new path.
And obviously, the original version of independent media, of course, was books, and you've got your book.
So tell me, what is What's something in your book that we find out about Tucker that we didn't know before?
What's something that, you know, when somebody gets the book, they say, you know what?
I never knew that about Tucker.
Or just, you know, any story that, you know, that is kind of being told for the first time.
Oh, for the first time?
Well, I mean, it's, it's, there are obviously things in there for the first time, but one thing, I mean, this isn't, he has spoken about this maybe once or twice, but a lot of things people don't realize is the story of his mother who abandoned his family when he was six years old.
She wanted to be, go off and be a hippie.
She wanted to be like an art world groupie.
So I've heard him, I've heard him kind of, you know, use this as a throwaway line.
When he came down and spoke at Turning Point, he sort of says this, And then he doesn't really extrapolate.
He just moves on and says, you need to have strong families.
But it seems like there's obviously a pretty, pretty long story there.
Yeah, and I really got into it.
And I actually interviewed people who knew his mother.
She died in 2011.
And then I got, you know, I got Tucker's wife talking to me about how she felt this affected Tucker.
Tucker's very strong about it.
I mean, Tucker said to me that, you know, he feels lucky in a lot of ways because some people, you didn't have to grow up in the same house as a crazy person.
And some people would have to have grown up in that same house, and maybe he wouldn't be the same person that he was had he had this, you know, sort of addicted, crazy mom around.
And so I got kind of more of the story on that and his wife's impression of it, what happened the day that his mother died and, you know, how he found out and a lot of that stuff in the book.
But I think that's an interesting part of his story that people, a lot of people don't know, some do.
And then I really got to dig into that a little more.
That's incredible.
Where can people go to get the book?
Are you guys doing any events?
I know there was an Amazon issue, but I think it's coming back up.
I don't even know what's going on with Amazon right now.
It's all so weird.
If you order direct from the publisher at TuckerTheBook.com, that's a guaranteed you'll get the book as soon as possible.
Amazon, I think, right now they're sending weird messages.
You can still try Amazon Books-A-Million, still has lots of books.
Walmart, I'm told, is sold out.
I don't know when they're getting more.
It's a good problem to have, I guess, if a lot of people are buying your book.
But for sure, guaranteed right now would be Books-A-Million and direct from the publisher.
And then you can keep watching Amazon over the next day or two and see if they update.
Chadwick Moore, where can people go to follow you myself, my friend?
Uh, Twitter, or X, I'm on X. Oh, X!
The social media formerly known as Twitter.
I don't know, you think they could do like, I don't know, Twitter by X, or tweets by, I don't know, something.
I know.
I'm waiting to see how this plays out in the culture because we're still grappling with how we discuss tweets and exes and all this stuff.
What if it's a Roman numeral?
What if it's like the Roman numeral for ten?
It's ten!
Yeah, we're all teners and send me a ten and I ten in this.
So we're teners?
Send me a ten?
I don't know.
I think, I think it's, I think people are going to still call them tweets.
I just, I, you can't, you can't change something that's, that's basic nomenclature like that, that fast.
Change the company, but it's the parent company of Twitter.
I think if we can leave it at that, I think we'll be fine.
All right.
What can I say?
We've all got the addiction, but Hey, there's worse addictions to have.
And Hunter Biden is certainly an example of that.
Thank you very much.
And by the way, don't be a stranger here on Human Events.
I want to get you on more for more of your, more of your analysis as we move through the next The next series of events that we know are going to be quite extensive, folks.
Stay tuned because we've got an interesting segment coming up next about Michelle Obama.
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, trimatazolatsabamship, nippy bam bam, like Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
All right, Jack Posobiec returning live here, Washington, D.C.
We've got a very special segment for you guys coming up with a new movie that's out, new documentary, Michelle Obama 2024, her real life story and plan for power.
And we've got the documentarian, director and writer of that, Joel Gilbert, joining us.
Joel, tell us about your theory of the case.
Does she actually get in if Joe Biden has something that goes wrong?
One wants Joe Biden, not the Democrats, not Republicans.
Everyone thinks he's toast and he's not really running.
He has no campaign office.
And I started following the Obamas like 10 years ago.
And I noticed that when Trump left office, Michelle started following the exact same formula to run for president as Barack had.
Barack wrote two autobiographies, Dreams for My Father and The Audacity of Hope, before he ran for president.
Sure enough, Michelle wrote Becoming, her life story, and then another autobiography called The Light We Carry.
Both are on Netflix as well as TV specials.
Barack had a voter registration organization called Project Vote in Chicago.
Sure enough, Michelle started When We All Vote, and she's been running around registering people to vote now for several years.
And of course, Barack was the keynote speaker who introduced John Kerry at the 2004 Democrat Convention.
Sure enough, there was Michelle introducing Joe Biden.
That's the position they give to the person they think will be the nominee at the next convention.
So I think Michelle has set herself up To run for office.
And the Democrat Party has also set it up for her.
Instead of having to campaign in 100 counties in Iowa, like you normally would have to do, they moved the first primary to South Carolina, where half of the Democrat Party electorate are African American.
And also, it's a state that Michelle claims as her adopted home state because her grandparents are from South Carolina.
And the Democrat National Convention, of all places, is in Chicago for a hometown girl convention.
So I'm predicting that Biden will drop out in November for any number of reasons.
It could be health, it could be Hunter, it could be impeachment.
And we've got December 23rd as the deadline to get your signatures in to appear on the Democrat Party ballots.
So I think November is going to be the key month where we see Biden drop out and the party will turn to Michelle Obama, who's prepared everything for that moment.
And she's the only person that can get signatures together very quickly, as well as raise a lot of money.
So that's why I got the, it's both a book and a film, you know, Michelle Obama 2024.
And I actually go into her whole background story, which is completely different than what she's been pushing.
She's been pushing for years, The idea that she grew up on the south side of Chicago.
She didn't.
She's from South Shore on Lake Michigan, a middle class area.
She loves to make up stories of how she suffered discrimination, was held back in life because of her skin color.
All made up stories.
She was a very elite kid from a political family.
Her father was a precinct captain.
Michelle actually grew up afraid of black people.
She got beat up by kids who accused her of acting white and talking white.
She even writes in her book, getting into a fistfight with a girl who called her an Oreo, meaning you're black on the outside, but you're really white on the inside.
It's like a major insult.
And I chronicle how in Michelle's professional career in Chicago, she exploited the black community.
She worked for the mayor of Chicago as assistant planning commissioner, and her job was to knock down the projects at Cabrini Green.
She made 20,000 blacks homeless and gave away the land to these Democrat donor developers like Tony Resco.
And then proving how callous she was toward the Black community, Michelle was hired by the University of Chicago Medical Center to deny access to Black people from the South Side who came to their emergency room.
They were losing money because a lot of them were uninsured.
So Michelle would kick them out, put them in these vans.
It was called patient dumping, which was illegal.
And Michelle would dump them back on the South Side in these crappy clinics.
So Michelle has a horrible history of exploiting the Black community and running away from them for her education as a child.
But she tries to push this phony narrative, I'm just one of these ordinary black folks.
So my film and book just totally blow the lid off of Michelle's real life story.
And I think black voters are no fools.
I think if they understood what she did to the black community in Chicago, they would not support the Obamas.
You know, I've always said it's interesting to me that, you know, when you talk about Donald Trump, that some people could tell you, they could tell you off the top of their head, just the average person, where he went to school, or at least where he's from, some of his businesses.
But when it comes to the Obamas, it feels like the public perception of them is so controlled that, and no, no, I'm not getting into birth certificate territory, right?
But it's just we don't even know the basics.
It's just regular people don't even know the basics about them because there is this controlled narrative.
Well, that's why they wrote these autobiographies.
Both of them wrote two autobiographies so that the media can simply repeat whatever the Obamas have presented about their life story.
Barack Obama's, you know, life story was pretty fabricated.
He was raised by white grandparents.
He grew up in Indonesia.
His roommates in college were Pakistanis.
He had no connection to the black community, no experiences.
Ironically, Michelle is the very same, because she ran away from the black community to go to high school.
She could have gone to an all-black high school one block from her house.
She went to a magnet school.
Same with her brother, went to a Catholic school, all white kids, very expensive, because they had nothing in common with the black community.
So both Barack and Michelle are very insecure about their Their relationship with the black community.
And to cover for that, they make up these phony stories to manipulate black and minority voters, and they inflame racial discontent by embracing Black Lives Matter and embracing all these causes because they're so insecure.
No, I think that's right.
And certainly we saw in the second term of the Obama administration, this really was the birth and the flourishing of Black Lives Matter and many other of these hashtag campaigns because of the work of Michelle and Barack.
And it makes so much sense to me that To your point, they have this sort of academic view of the black community as opposed to, what's the phrase, the lived experience that we keep hearing again and again.
Joel, where can people go to get a copy of your book and to watch the video?
On Amazon.com you can get the book version or the DVD and you can actually also live stream the movie right now on Amazon Prime Movies and also live stream on SalemNow.com You want to watch the trailer and read all about the book and the film, it's MichelleObama24.com.
MichelleObama24.com.
Did you have any trouble getting it onto Amazon Prime?
No, I didn't.
I'm hoping they won't, you know, toss me off for some reason.
I've had other films that have come and gone with, you know, they were political in nature.
So hopefully that'll last a long time, but it is on Amazon Prime right now.
They must think it's supporting Michelle Obama for 2024.
That's what it is.
Joel Gilbert, thank you so much.
Everyone go and watch this.
I'm going to go watch this because this is an incredible film, great filmmaker.
