April 8, 2025 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec
40:35
TRUMP ASSASSIN ATTEMPED TO OBTAIN ANTI-AIRCRAFT MISSILES FROM UKRAINE TO SHOOT DOWN TRUMP FORCE ONE
Here’s your Daily dose of Human Events with @JackPosobiec Support American family farms and join the Moink Movement today at https://www.moinkbox.com/poso RIGHT NOW and the Human Events audience will get FREE wings FOR LIFE. They’re the best wings you’ll ever taste for free, but for a limited time. Go to https://hometitlelock.com and use promo code POSO250 to give you a FREE title history report so you can find out if you’re already a victim AND access to your Personal Title Expert —a $25...
I want to take a second to remind you to sign up for the Posto 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 posto.
Sign up today.
It's called the Posto Daily Brief.
Read what I read for show prep.
You will not regret it.
humanevents.com slash posto.
Totally free.
The Posto Daily Brief.
This is what happens when the fourth turning meets fifth generation warfare.
A commentator, international social media sensation, and former Navy intelligence veteran.
This is Human Events with your host, Jack Posobiec.
Christ is...
There's a major meeting going on between us and Iran, and that'll take place on Saturday, and it's at top level.
And if diplomacy fails...
Is the United States under your leadership ready to take military action to destroy the Iranian nuclear program and remove this threat?
I think if the talks aren't successful with Iran, I think Iran is going to be in great danger.
And I hate to say it.
Great danger because they can't have a nuclear weapon.
Here's some good news.
U.S. stock futures are looking much better this morning following yesterday's close where things seemed to level off.
And global markets appear to be seeing a rebound today.
And China is pushing back against President Trump's threat to impose 50% tariffs.
The foreign ministry spokesperson said today, quote, Resorting to pressure, threats, and blackmail is not the right way to engage with China.
The U.S. Supreme Court has handed President Trump a victory, letting him and his administration use the 1798 law that historically has been employed only in wartime to swiftly deport alleged Venezuelan gang members as part of the Republican president's hardline approach to immigration.
This is a landmark.
Victory for the rule of law.
And this is what we've been arguing on behalf of President Trump from day one.
These are enemies of our state, of our country, and they should be deported.
I think there was this concern among some folks that Donald Trump would come in for a second term and kind of be a lame duck.
He ain't no lame duck.
If anything, he's a soaring eagle.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard today's edition of Human Events Daily here live, Washington, D.C. Today's April 8th, 2025.
Anno Domini.
In a filing last night in court down in the federal district of Florida, Ryan Wesley Ralph, the individual who was involved in the second assassination attempt on President Trump, was given a huge new piece of information.
We've got now more evidence on his background, his dealings, and what exactly he was up to down there in the weeks and days prior to the assassination attempt on President Trump.
Remember, this is the September 15th assassination attempt, not the Butler, Pennsylvania assassination attempt.
This case has yet to actually go to trial.
Tried to kill Trump on his golf course, but he was stopped, Secret Service fired shots at him.
They missed or perhaps were deflected by this rudimentary body armor that he had built up in a hide site.
And then he vanishes only later to be apprehended.
What we do know about him was that he extensive ties And travel within the country of Ukraine.
And in fact participated in the Ukrainian International Volunteer Force.
What was Ralph doing in Ukraine?
He was attempting to recruit individuals potentially from Afghanistan and other parts of the world, even Taiwan at one point he talked about, to bring them to the battlefield in Ukraine.
We now know, and this is the biggest bombshell, that he attempted to contact a member of the Ukrainian military.
or someone associated with the ukrainian military to purchase rocket propelled grenades rpgs or stinger missiles known as an anti-aircraft missile now what does this coincide with well this time frame was back in august of 2024 what else did we hear going on in the fall late summer and fall of 2024 we also heard those scares about president trump's aircraft trump force one Members of
Trump's campaign team were even using decoy planes during the campaign because they were worried about what?
Anti-aircraft missiles.
All of this leads to more questions as to who exactly was it that Routh was talking to, who exactly was it that either didn't report this or put it back forward, and what did the US government know prior to the assassination attempt What
America First truly means.
Welcome to the second American revolution!
All right, Jack Posobiec, here we are back live, Human Events Daily, Washington, D.C. We're live on Real America's Voice.
I also want to bring in the third hour of the Charlie Kirk program on the Salem Radio Network.
Folks, did you know that over 80% of the U.S. meat industry is controlled by just four companies, but that China controls the largest portion of the U.S. meat industry?
Americans want to know where their food comes from, and we don't want to be reliant on any foreign country for the food that we put on our family's table.
That's exactly what Trump's tariff policy is all about, bringing businesses back to Americans and American farms all across the country.
So that's why Human Events has partnered with MOINC.
The business model is simple.
MOINC's meat comes from animals raised outdoors, where a pig is free to be a pig.
You pick the meat you want, and it's delivered right to your door.
MOINC's farmers are given an honest day's pay for an honest day's work, and they deliver exactly what you want at prices you can actually afford.
Support American family farms and join the Moink movement today at moinkbox.com slash poso right now.
And guess what?
You'll get free wings for life.
These are the best wings you will ever taste for free but for a limited time.
Spelled M-O-I-N-K box dot com slash poso.
That's moinkbox.com slash poso.
Want to invite on?
Now we're very excited to have on the program Oren Kass.
The chief economist at American Compass.
Oren, how are you, my friend?
I'm doing very well.
How are you?
All right.
Thank you for joining us.
Now, you've been going viral lately.
You're on The Daily Show.
You're all over X. This tariff policy that's been rolled out by President Trump, it's been something that has a lot of people sort of in a tailspin because I don't really think that people are understanding it from the perspective of the economy.
They say Trump is just lashing out.
He's... He's fighting on behalf of workers, but perhaps he's misguided.
What is your response and what has your view been of the policy as it's rolled out?
Well, I start with the definition of the problem, because I think one of the most important things that President Trump has brought to all sorts of areas in American politics is focusing on things that are really wrong in this country that have gone unaddressed for so much time.
And globalization is a perfect example.
For the last 30 years, we've had economists and politicians saying, we just need more free trade.
We just need to embrace China.
And promising that that was going to create more good American jobs, promising that was going to be good for American industry.
And it was not.
It has been, I think, incredibly harmful.
It has hollowed out our manufacturing sector.
It has cost millions of jobs.
And we are finally now admitting that.
And I think President Trump has done an incredible service in saying this cannot go on.
We really need to change how the international economic system works.
We need to make sure it actually works for the United States.
And as importantly, something most politicians won't do, he's saying, look, and this is going to have some costs, right?
It is going to require some sacrifice in the short run to dig out of this hole, and that is worth doing.
And so I think having an administration willing to push in that direction is incredibly important.
And then you get to the sort of details.
And I think, you know, I have some concerns about some of the details.
We can talk about, you know, what is exactly the right way to go after this.
But it is just incredibly important that we finally are going after it.
And so, right, the idea being that there's a lot of people who have been saying that the status quo, that the concerns of so much of America, it doesn't really matter, that everything's certainly fine, that people are just, you know, everything's sunshine and roses.
But in reality, the status quo does have these massive structural issues to it.
Like it or lump it, what President Trump is at least attempting to do is address these types of problems that have been going on for far too long.
Again, the hollowing out of middle America, this massive overspending, monetary policy where it's been go to the Fed whenever there's an issue, inject that liquidity into the market.
And at some point, this was always going to come to a halt.
At some point, this debt was going to have to be paid.
And this is the way that President Trump and his team have decided to come together and face it, but actually address something, whereas the previous administration, of course, were sitting there and lying to you, blue in the face, telling you that nothing was wrong.
That's right.
And you see that in these sort of fights, you know, certainly among economists, there are so many people who will just say, well, look at, you know, look at gross domestic product, GDP, it's gone up a lot.
So obviously, free trade has been great.
Or, you know, look at how much stuff we have.
Look at how cheap big TVs are.
They really do think that the sort of definition of flourishing is just how much stuff you have.
And look, I like stuff too.
I don't think we should be living in log cabins in the woods.
But I do think we have to think a lot harder about some of these trade-offs and recognize that there's more to life than just as much cheap stuff as you can get from China.
Whether or not there are good jobs in communities across the country that allow people to support families, whether or not we can make the things we need in this country to defend ourselves, to be resilient in the case of some sort of global crisis.
We gave that all away, and thank goodness we will hopefully start to get some of it back.
And so this is something where, oh, by the way, I'm told that we actually have the clip.
Guys, let's play for the audience the clip of you explaining this to Jon Stewart on The Daily Show.
If we think this sort of liberal world order system Mm-hmm.
So if we accept that things are going to change, we should have a perspective on what we want to follow.
-Mm-hmm. -And, you know, something that I've been writing about Because, again, it's a very fair critique.
They have not been as clear about it as we should want them to be.
What I think we should want, and what, like I said, folks in the administration like a Marco Rubio or a Scott Besant, who I think do write and speak thoughtfully about it, Mm-hmm.
But what we want to have within our sphere is a few things that in the past the U.S.
didn't necessarily ask for.
We're going to want balanced trade, where in the past we were happy to let the manufacturing go elsewhere.
We're going to want others to essentially own their own defense burdens.
That doesn't mean we're not partnering and working together, but that everybody takes primary responsibility for their own defense.
And these are, again, just some of the things that you've been talking about here on the program, laying it out, this idea that it feels to me almost like it's sort of like those old studies that you read about imperial overstretch of the Roman Empire or something like that.
We're paying for the defense of so many areas that are far beyond the core of our heartland that it's actually the heartland itself that is paying the price as we overextend ourselves.
Does that kind of get to what you're talking about?
Yeah, that's a great way of putting it because this is the sort of imperial plan that the U.S. has pursued.
After the end of World War II and then even more so after the end of the Cold War, we really were the hegemon.
I mean, you know, in the 1990s, it was the U.S.'s world.
And the calculation that we made was we benefited from that.
And that if we had to pay more for other people's defense, but it meant that we were the only incredibly powerful military, that was a good trade.
If we had to let manufacturing go to other countries, but as a result, they were friendlier to us, as a result, they sort of kept peace and a friendly economic environment, then that was a good trade.
And it's an interesting question whether it was even a good trade back then.
But the reality is that it is certainly not a good trade now, that the costs have really built up for the United States, the benefits have really gone down.
And that as China rises in the world, even if we liked that world, we just can't have it anymore.
The world is going to be different.
And sometimes it takes some policies that cause disruption to move in response to that, to not just wait until you're overtaken by events.
But to actually take the initiative in moving toward the new system that would benefit our country.
That would actually benefit the people who live here, perhaps at the expense or at least at the deference of those who can maybe shoulder their own burden.
We're on with Oren Kass.
We're discussing these issues with him, the tariffs.
He is the cheap economist.
Over at American Compass.
Stay tuned.
We'll be right back for more on his new column that's just out today.
You guys got to go read it and go follow Oren at OrenCast at X.com.
I'll be right back.
Today, you know, you talk about influencers.
These are influencers and they're friends of mine.
Jack Posobiec.
Where's Jack?
Jack? He's done a great job.
All right, we're on with Jack Posobiec.
This is Human Events Daily, welcoming you back in the Salem Radio Network, Hour 3 of the Charlie Kirk Program, as well as Real America's Voice.
We're talking with Oren Kass, Chief Economist at American Compass, as well as the writer of the newsletter Understanding America.
He is out today with a brand new...
column that says, stop freaking out, Trump's tariffs can still work.
And so, in the piece that you go through, you know, walk us through it a little bit, because I think what's interesting is you describe Liberation Day almost like D-Day in the sense that you get the shock and awe, but also the understanding that D-Day was merely day one of a longer campaign.
Yeah, we've really been talking so far about the idea here.
What's really wrong?
Why we need to change course?
And the importance of having an administration and a president that see the problem and are prepared to do something about it.
I think that being said, there's a lot of fair criticism of some of the details of what they're doing, particularly because if you're going to do this kind of move that does have a lot of costs, Before you get the benefits, it's really important to try to keep those costs as low as possible and make sure you get those benefits as high as possible.
What I talk about in the piece is just a few places where I think there's really good opportunity to correct course.
One of the most important is just the idea of phasing in some of these tariffs.
Especially with all these countries that we have been trading in ways that really support their manufacturing.
That's what we've been doing for the last 50 years.
And it's entirely fair to say, hey, we actually would like to make a change.
I think it's a lot harder to just say, and you face a very large tariff starting today.
Now let's talk about what you might change.
That creates a lot of cost a lot faster than they could possibly do anything.
So one thing that I suggest is, look, especially all the countries that have clearly come forward and say, yes, we understand things need to change.
We're ready to negotiate.
It would make a lot more sense to say, okay, we have a six-month period here to negotiate.
If we are not happy with the offers on the table, Then these tariffs start to go into effect six months from now.
And if over the six months after that, you don't get where you need to be, then the full value of tariff is in place.
And that would both give a chance to make progress without cost, and it would give all of the businesses that have built up these supply chains that have made these investments in the past time to start adjusting themselves.
We want them to start investing in America, and we want them to start today.
But starting an investment in America today doesn't mean your factory starts running today.
We do need to account, I think, for the fact that there is going to be a transition period here.
I think that's certainly right.
Now, I wanted to key in as well on your section on China because you have an interesting idea, sort of a three-step plan for the tariffs on China, but ultimately would culminate in just a real disentanglement of the U.S. and Chinese economies and ultimately with the revocation of China's permanent national...
The permanent normal trade relations status and even most favored nation, which is something that it's really the backbone of all of globalism.
Do you think that's achievable?
I think this is one of the most achievable things.
You know, the original sin in a sense of globalization was when we granted China PNTR status in 2000, 2001 time.
That's what allowed them to join the WTO and opened up the floodgates of offshoring.
We should do the reverse.
We should recognize that China is an adversary.
It is not a market economy, and we should not have free trade with it.
And this is a surprisingly Really an idea that has a surprising consensus.
It is a bipartisan recommendation of the House Committee on the Communist Party of China.
It is a bipartisan recommendation of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.
And there is already bipartisan legislation in Congress to do this.
And by the way, one of the co-sponsors of it was Marco Rubio, who is now the Secretary of State.
So if you were to embrace that approach...
First of all, you could go through Congress, which would make it permanent, right?
If we actually change this stuff in the law, everyone will know we mean it.
This is for good.
Whereas I think one challenge with just doing it with action from the president is people are always going to wonder, well, you know, what if he changes his mind tomorrow?
And then the second thing I think is that legislation that they have has this very thoughtful sort of phased in approach where they say, look, we want to get You know, really all the way up to 100% tariff.
What Trump is now threatening for China basically is in the legislation.
We want to be at 100% for what we consider critical goods.
And that would effectively cut off imports of those goods.
But what it does is it has a schedule of how to go there over five years.
And if we were to pass that law, there is no question that those tariffs would in fact be going into effect.
Businesses would have to move out of China.
We would get the things that we want.
And it would put the entire thing on lock.
Oren, where can people go to follow you and get more access to your writings?
My organization is American Compass.
We're at AmericanCompass.org.
I tweet at Oren underscore Cass, and my sub stack is Understanding America.
Absolute great follow.
Please come back anytime or in cast from American Compass.
the case out for making tariffs worth it.
*Music*
And Jack, where is Jack?
Where is Jack?
Where is he?
Jack, I want to see you.
Great job, Jack.
Thank you.
What a job you do.
You know, we have an incredible thing.
We're always talking about the fake news and the bad, but we have guys, and these are the guys who should be getting policies.
All right, Jack Kosova, here we are back live, Human Events Daily.
Folks, did you know that scammers can literally steal your home right out from under you?
The FBI calls it house stealing, and it's a growing real estate scam which targets American homeowners.
Here's how it works.
Criminals forge your signature on one document and then use a fake notary stamp, pay a small fee, and file with your local recorder's office.
And just like that, your home title has been transferred out of your name.
Then they can take out loans using your equity as collateral or even sell the property back behind you.
And you won't even know what's happening until you start getting collection or foreclosure notices.
Let me ask you something.
When was the last time you checked your home title?
Probably not.
If you're like me, the answer is never.
And that's exactly what scammers are counting on.
That's why I trust Home Title Lock.
Their million-dollar triple lock protection helps keep your home and your equity safe.
Here's what you get.
Immediate 24-7 monitoring of your property.
Urgent alerts if there are any changes.
And if fraud should happen, their U.S.-based restoration team will spend up to $1 million to fix the fraud and restore your title at no additional cost.
Here's the best part.
I've teamed up with Home Title Lock to give you a free title history report so you can find out if you're already a victim and access your personal title expert at $250 value just for signing up.
So go to hometitlelock.com and use my promo code POSO250 or click on the link in the description below.
That's hometitlelock.com, promo code POSO250.
To get protection and peace of mind that you reserve.
Alright, there's been a lot of stuff going on over at the Supreme Court.
Gotta bring in Mike Davis' Article 3 project to walk us through all of it.
Davis, where do you want to start?
Well, I would say this.
I think that the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice...
...is finally starting to get his judicial house in order after this unprecedented lawfare by these activist judges.
President Trump won a broad electoral mandate to cut government waste, fraud, and abuse to secure our border, to deport illegal immigrants, especially terrorists.
And these activist parties have been going to these activist judges and sabotaging President Trump exercising core Article II powers with these...
Unprecedented injunctions and TROs that aren't TROs, temporary restraining orders that aren't temporary.
I think the Supreme Court, Justice Amy Coney Barrett in particular, learned her lesson.
On the fact that just because an activist judge calls something a temporary restraining order, it's not temporary.
And so therefore you can immediately appeal it.
And so we can't sabotage the president exercising his Article II powers.
So we saw that with the TRO issue.
We saw that with Judge Boesberg getting slapped down by the Supreme Court when he exposed and sabotaged an ongoing military operation four Saturdays ago, putting American and allied lives in grave danger so he can save his terrorist buddies from deportation.
Look, this is going to be a slog every day, but these are key wins at the Supreme Court that should help get these activist judges in line.
And so when you're looking at all of this, are there any specifics to this?
So, for example, we were chatting a little bit in the break, but one of the ones I was looking at, the use of the Alien Enemies Act, I think the fact that that has been brought up and upheld by the Supreme Court is absolutely fantastic.
Now, I believe what they did ask for was that there's going to be a hearing process now.
How does that work?
Well, that's been the case law for a long time, that you have some sort of a due process.
It's not the same due process that American citizens get in the courts.
It's just a minimal process on these illegal immigrants and on these foreign terrorists.
Are they Trendyaragua, right?
And if they're Trendyaragua, goodbye.
That's your due process under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.
And President Trump is going to be able to get these dangerous illegal immigrants, these foreign terrorists like Trendy Aragua, these international gangbangers like MS-13, out of our country, out of our country.
It's going to make America much safer.
So here's what I ask.
Okay, so can we put the judges on the plane so they could make the rulings as they're actually rolled up?
Because, you know, I come from Philadelphia.
We used to have this, you know, down at the Eagles Stadium.
We used to have an Eagles court that if you were caught fighting, you were sent down to Eagles jail.
Not that I've ever been there.
Okay, I was.
Last year.
That's a different story that the audience knows well.
But you could have the judge right on standby.
And haven't there been times also, actually I think in Poland, now that it occurs to me, I think in Poland this is actually something they were doing.
They would have like a magistrate that would go out with border patrols Yeah, I think that's a great idea, Jack.
I think we need to put...
Judge Jeb Bosberg on a plane.
You know, he tried to expose these ongoing military operations.
And sabotage them and turn around planes.
Apparently he can fly planes because he, or at least he's an air traffic controller because he tried to turn around these planes over the Gulf of America.
So I think we should put Judge Boesberg and I bet you he has Green Beret law clerks.
I bet you they're not these Harvard law school nerds.
I bet you he has Green Berets as his law clerks.
And so let's send Judge Boesberg and his Green Beret law clerks down to El Salvador and he could be the jailhouse.
I think that's a really good use for Judge Boasberg.
Now that he's not persecuting American citizens after January 6th for the last four years, he can go from persecuting Americans to making sure that he's coddling trendy Aragua and MS-13 terrorists.
No, I think it's wonderful.
I think, gosh, there's lots of judges that I could think of that really ought to be sent down to El Salvador.
Probably a few to Guantanamo while we're at it.
Last time I checked, the United States government has plenty of aircraft, so plenty of available seats.
For these judges.
We probably would only take a couple of planes when we're really talking about it here.
You know, they could all go down.
And again, they could be handling their due process law.
They would be handling the hearings.
All of it would be done with the utmost standards while we send them down to El Salvador.
So, Davis, when we're looking at this, though, do you really think that what the court's doing here is, you know, as you say, they're trying to get the judicial house in order.
One of the big things that we were talking about with these nationwide injunctions really was this question, and in a number of these cases, it gets into the Separation of Powers Act, I think, or the Separation of Powers concept, with the idea that you have judges at a federal district level, you know, got like 500 of them around the country, that are making these rulings from their Small, you know, jurisdiction that affect the entire nation.
And this obviously isn't the system that we were told that we were building, that our founders intended on.
They wanted one president to be able to deal with, say, Trendyaragua.
That's an invasion force.
It's very simple.
So do you think that what they're doing is an attempt to actually push back on nationwide injunctions or is it more limited?
No, I think it's going to be broader here because, look, under Article 3 of the Constitution, federal judges have a modest but crucial role, and that is to decide cases or controversies.
of the parties before the court with redressable claims you have to have a party before the court whether it's uh the parties who are who are suing or class actions you can certify class actions with multiple parties but they have to be parties before the court and this idea that federal judges can issue relief beyond the parties before the court That means that judges have legislative power, which they clearly do not have legislative power.
The legislative power belongs to our elected members of Congress.
It's the most powerful branch.
It's accountable to the American people every two years in the House, every six years in the Senate.
We intentionally give the legislative power where we can control them through elections.
We don't give legislative power to unelected judges who have lifetime tenure and pay protection.
Their job is to protect the rights of minorities.
It's not to have majoritarian legislative power.
That's quite dangerous for judges to have that power.
Thank you.
And that's the entire point.
So for the Supreme Court, then that actually makes sense because that kind of gets into the jurisdictional nature of the federal court system and the hierarchy as it is.
So the Supreme Court is the court that's supposed to actually be setting the norms, setting the standards for the entire country.
That's the point of having the Supreme Court.
And this, Davis, this is also gets into a...
I could go down this rabbit hole for a while, but it also gets into the concept.
That the federal districts are creations of the Supreme Court, not the other way around.
Isn't that right?
Yeah, the Supreme Court has the judicial power under Article III of the Constitution, and then Congress can create lower courts.
Congress can create, Congress can eliminate lower courts.
They can't eliminate the Supreme Court.
They can't take away the Supreme Court's judicial power, but they can certainly eliminate these lower courts.
And these lower courts are supervised.
By the Supreme Court.
But if the Supreme Court does not step up and supervise these activist judges, if the Supreme Court does not get its judicial house in order, Congress will do it for them.
And I'm working very closely with Senator Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, my former boss, and Senator John Thune's office and Senator Mike Lee's office.
And many other House and Senate offices to bring much-needed reforms to these lower federal courts so these activist judges can't rain dead.
I'd have no problem with that whatsoever.
Mike Davis, tell us what you're working on over at the Article III Project and where people can go to get involved.
article3project.org article3project.org You can donate there.
You can follow us on social media.
The most important thing your audience can do, Jack, is take action.
Two action items.
Impeach. This D.C. Obama judge, Jeb Boasberg, for illegally and dangerously sabotaging an ongoing military operation.
He crossed the red line.
This is not judicial review.
This was judicial sabotage.
Number two, let's cut $2 billion out of the federal judiciary's $10 billion annual budget after the Supreme Court lets D.C. Biden Judge Ali sent $2 billion to his terrorist buddies abroad and elsewhere.
So let's make sure that there's political accountability.
If these judges want to take off their judicial robes and climb into the political arena and throw political punches, they can expect powerful political counter punches from the Article 3 project.
That's right.
And, you know, if that doesn't work, hey, perhaps if we can create these district courts through Congress, hey, perhaps we'll send them on a judicial reassignment to a special lower district court that's completely established within Seacott Prison down there in El Salvador.
Mike Davis, Article 3 Project, Jack Posobiec.
We'll be right back here, Human Events Daily.
Jack is a great guy.
He's written a fantastic book.
Everybody's talking about it.
Go get it.
And he's been my friend right from the beginning of this whole beautiful event.
And we're going to turn it around and make our country great to get you.
Amen. Yeah.
Another attempt on Donald Trump's life foiled after a stunning chain of events in Palm Beach County, Florida.
That includes an adept Secret Service officer just ahead of him at the Trump International Golf Course.
He was able to spot this rifle barrel sticking out of the fence and immediately engage that individual, at which time the individual took off.
Sheriff Rick Bradshaw says he left behind two backpacks with ceramic tile, a GoPro video camera, and an AK-47, which had a scope.
Take two steps to your right!
Driver! Walk straight back!
Keep walking!
All right, Jack Posobiec, here we are back live, final segment, Human Events Daily, Real America's Voice, Salem Radio Network.
Folks, did you know that Fast Growing Trees is the biggest online nursery in the United States, with thousands of different plants and over 2 million happy customers?
And I should know, because my family is one of them.
They have all the plants that your garden needs, like fruit trees, privacy trees, flowering trees, shrubs, and so much more.
Whatever plants you're interested in, Fast Growing Trees has you covered.
Find the perfect fit for your climate and your space.
Fast Growing Trees makes it easy to get your dream yard.
Order online and get plants delivered directly to your door in just a few days without ever leaving home.
They're alive and thrive guarantee ensures your plants arrive happy and healthy.
Plus you can get support from trained plant experts on call to help plan, help you plan your landscape, choose the right plants and learn how to Now look, we love this stuff.
I mentioned before how we had some tree damage.
President Trump dealing with some tree damage from the storms down at the White House today.
So we're going to be doing the same thing with fast-growing trees.
This spring, they have the best deals for your yard.
You can get up to half off on select plants and other deals.
And if you're part of the Human Events audience, you get 15% off their first purchase when using promo code POSO at checkout.
That's an additional 15% off at FastGrowingTrees.com using promo code POSO at checkout.
FastGrowingTrees.com promo code POSO.
Now is the perfect time to plant.
Use promo code POSO to save today.
This offer is valid for a limited time and terms and conditions may apply.
So, you know, as we're looking more at this Ryan Routh situation, we have to go back and understand who Ryan Routh was, the information that we already had about contacts that he had while he was on the ground in Ukraine.
This filing came out late last night, so we even haven't had time to completely go through But what's absolutely clear here is that there's a lot more to this story than was initially reported.
And here's something that's very interesting.
And I'm going to leave it where it is.
I'm going to tell you what it says.
And we're not going to go deeper into this right now, but we certainly could.
The actual document, the actual filing, the line of the document, does not say that he was discussing...
This procurement of anti-aircraft missiles.
What did it say?
They said that he was attempting to procure anti-aircraft missiles, Stinger missiles, from Ukraine so that he could use on Trump Force One, President Trump's aircraft during the campaign.
We also know that President Trump's aircraft was threatened or there were concerns about threats during the campaign so much that a decoy plane was used by campaign officials.
But here's the actual text of the filing.
It says that he was using Signal, using the encrypted Signal app to communicate with someone who he believed to be associated with the Ukrainian military.
Who was he talking to?
Who was he actually talking to on the other end of that conversation?
Now, think about it.
He had just come from Ukraine.
He knew plenty of people over there.
He had networks over there.
He spent a lot of time over there.
He was working with the Ukraine International Volunteer Force, the International Volunteer Center.
So, who is he talking to?
In fact, he's also mentioned in a number of mainstream media articles, including one in the New York Times, referencing Malcolm Nance and others who were over there, these other grifters.
So, was the person he was talking to directly associated with the Ukrainian military?
Were they a volunteer?
Or, perhaps, was this someone who was an American who was working with the Ukrainian military?
Is it possible that he was working with somebody or talking with somebody who was using an alias?
Or someone who was using some kind of cover identity?
Because you never really know, especially in those parts of the world, you know, active war zones, who you're meeting and who you're dealing with.
People misrepresent themselves all the time and they have every incentive to do so.
Especially when you find a guy, an impressionable guy, like Ryan Wesley Ralph, who you want or hope can be turned into an assassin.
No use of no use on the actual battlefield because of his age, but maybe, just maybe, you could get him to go back into the United States and turn on President Trump, the person who looked like he was going to win the election and who looked as though he was going to wind down the war in Ukraine.
I want to know.
Who was Ryan, Wesley, Ralph really talking to?
The American people deserve this, and President Trump deserved these answers from the intel community, and hopefully, hopefully, we have the right people in place, and I believe we do with this team, to actually get those answers.
