Badlands Media - Badlands Media Special Coverage: 9/3/26 - VP Vance Briefs Press on Iran, Fraud, and Midterms

Episode Date: September 3, 2026

JD Vance takes over the podium in his first solo White House briefing since the departure of the press secretary, and it is a marathon. He opens with fraud task force wins, over 2,000 shut down fraudulent trucking licenses, and a new 65 billion barrel oil reserve born out of the Venezuela deal, before fielding a genuinely sprawling round of questions. Expect a candid breakdown of the ongoing Strait of Hormuz shipping standoff with Iran, a defense of why gas hasn't hit $3 yet, some surprisingly personal banter about weight loss and sauerkraut, and a firm but friendly response to questions about his friendship with a certain controversial commentator. There's talk of manufacturing's hot streak, Supreme Court packing fears, East Palestine, and even a lighthearted moment about who gets called on without a seating chart. It's policy heavy, occasionally funny, and covers an impressive amount of ground for one afternoon.

The badlands, what are the badlands? Explain those badlands. That's a hell of their name. Good morning, everybody. That's good afternoon now. Good to see you guys. So let me give a few updates on a few things that are really mad to the administration that we're very proud of. So first of all, you probably saw the announcement earlier in Michigan, earlier this week in Michigan, that we have taken over 2,000 fraudulent CDL mills out of business, which makes America's roads safer and also protects the jobs of American truckers.

And so if you're an American trucker wondering why it is that the last administration facilitated illegal aliens driving semi-trucks on our roads, or if you're an American who just sares a road with somebody who isn't properly qualified, we've made the roads safer. We've seen trucker wages go up by 7.5%. And that effort was obviously led by our anti-fraud task force because so many of these people were engaged in effectively fraudulent driving. They were getting these diplomas, these CDLs through fraudulent means. we stopped that. We're very proud of it. And I want to give a special shout out to Secretary Sean Duffy at the Transportation Department for helping us in facilitating that work. And it goes into our broader effort, which is we're trying to make sure that your tax dollars and basic institutional trust is protected by your government. Whether it's a guy who gets a commercial driver's license to drive on the road or whether it's a person applying for Medicaid or Medicare benefits, the people who get these things should be legally entitled and should qualify. And for too long, we had a government that basically just gave out your money, the American taxpayer's money, to people who didn't qualify for it. We've put a stop to that, having found, I think, north of

$200 billion in fraud, and we're going to keep, of course, working on that in the months and years to come. The second thing I want to talk about a little bit is the Venezuela oil deal, which I know some of you will have questions on, but I think it's just an amazing testament to what a smart foreign policy could look like and how it feeds back in to good outcomes for the American people. So as a lot of you And I think even some of the more liberal outlets in here had talked about, we had for a very long time the Biden administration draining the strategic petroleum reserve purely for the purpose of lowering gas and oil costs. There wasn't an international crisis. There wasn't, you know, a foreign nation that was trying to disrupt world energy markets. There was just an administration that was trying to juice gas prices for the midterms.

And what that meant is for Americans, our strategic petroleum reserve under the administration got extraordinarily low. now we're using, of course, the successful Venezuela operation and some of the friendships and some of the relationships that developed in the wake of that operation to create what is effectively a new 65 billion barrel of oil reserve for the United States of America. And the way that that's going to work is that private companies, American companies can go in there, generate a lot of oil revenue. Obviously, that's going to mean world oil markets get only more supplied that will lower cost for Americans. That means a lot of revenue is going to go to the people. of Venezuela, but also thanks to the deal struck by Marco and Pete Hegseth and others in the

administration, it actually sets us up to where the American people will directly receive some of the royalties as well. So it's good for Venezuelans. It's good for anybody who's buying gas, and it's good for the American taxpayer as well. So it's very much a win-win thing. We're very proud of it. And I also just think that it gives supply stability in the energy market. I think if we've learned anything over the last six months, but importantly, if we've learned anything over the last 40 years, it's that these things, the supply of critical minerals and resources really matters. We had an administration for a very long time that underinvested in this stuff, and now we're trying to change that, and we're doing so quite successfully. A couple of other

final points. So for all the kids at home and their parents, importantly, today is, I believe tomorrow, is the last day of the second lady's summer reading challenge. So let me give a little plug for the second lady who I think has done an amazing job and we've had an amazing outpouring of support but you've got us return your summer reading challenge stuff in by tomorrow you can go to whitehouse gov in order to do that and as a just on a personal note obviously usha's been very busy this summer we now have a six week old baby who is happy and healthy so honey i love you i'm very proud of you and amazingly you keep uh you keep everything together despite the chaos and despite the craziness I will now take questions from all of you.

Let me start here with Nick, who I believe is in the new media chair. Nick, what do you got for me? Thanks, Mr. Vice President. Today is the first White House press briefing since the departure of the great Caroline Levitt. A key part of her legacy, the finding part, was bringing more voices, not less, into this room. And that's something our founder, Andrew Breitbart, certainly believed in. From the first briefing, she added this seat, the new media seat that I'm in today. What does the president, what to you and what does the White House plan,

to do to continue that legacy and to empower new media. Sure. So before I answer that question, let me just say a word about Caroline Levitt, who is an amazing person, an amazing mom, was an amazing colleague here at the White House, and was not just a person who stood up here and answered your questions and I think did so admirably, but was also just an amazing part of the very cohesive team that we had working here in the West Wing. Just an amazing person. She texted me this morning and wished me good luck, because obviously going up against all

of you is a very, very dangerous business, but she's, she's going to do great in whatever she, she does next. And we're very grateful to her. So Caroline, if you're watching, which hopefully you're not, but if you're watching, thank you for your service. Thank you for your friendship. And thanks for doing a great job. And yes, one of her legacies, one of her many legacies, I would say, is that she opened up this room to non-legacy media. And why does that matter? I mean, if you look at one of the biggest transformations that have existed in this country of the last 20 or 30 years, it's the rise of digital technology. Now, that means a lot of different things for a lot of different people. But for this industry, what it's meant is that a lot of people

have been able to get access to information, have been able to get access to telling stories to the American people, not because they have a credential or not because they have a connection, but because they have something interesting to say. And I would certainly put you in that category, Nick, and obviously our friends at Breitbart, but for too long, this room, and I think this city have tried to lock out non-legacy media. They've seen it as a threat to themselves. And we actually think that it's an amazing way to democratize access to information.

You should not have to have a fancy credential or a lot of money to tell a story to the American people. And if you think of like the heart of the First Amendment is that all of us are allowed to speak. But if only some people are actually given a microphone, if only some media outlets are actually given access, then it strikes not just the heart of your ability to tell a story. It actually makes it harder for people to get

access to their First Amendment rights. And with all due respect to all the people in this room, there were a lot of Americans who felt like they were not properly represented by the information that was on the airwaves of the traditional media. So we're going to say committed to that legacy. We're going to build on that legacy. And I think that you and a lot of other new media types should certainly expect to have a lot of access in the months and years to come, just as the traditional media does. And I do think, you know, not to brag on my boss too much, but I, I do think the president has set us about to be the most transparent administration in history. And we have done that with flying colors. If you just look back to the last administration, I mean,

even the Democrats in the room, and I know you guys, if you're being honest, most of you are Democrats, you would have to admit that the level of access, the level of access to the President of United States, the vice president, the senior team here, it's just completely off the charts. Now, why does the president do that? He doesn't do it just because, you know, he wants to or it's fun. though I think he definitely has a little bit of fun with it. He does it because he believes that part of governing a constitutional republic is to make yourselves accessible to the American people. So we do that.

And we're going to do that with non-traditional media. We'll continue to do it with traditional media. And that will certainly be a big part of our approach as we continue to govern the country. And I think govern it well. Great. Peter. Are we talking to you as the vice president or the press secretary? So I'm not Marco.

I've not yet accepted any additional jobs. though I guess the fraud task force is my co-chair, is my second additional job. It's funny, before I came out here, I was talking with the president in the Oval Office, and he said, be careful. I want you to do well, but if you do too well,

I might make you the press secretary. So I've got to screw up a little bit because I'm busy enough as it is, but I'm very much up here as the vice president of United States. I jump a political one and then something a little bit more upbeat. Okay. Politics can be up deep. It can be upbeat.

Peter? It's almost, It's almost Labor Day. Labor Day is traditionally the real kickoff for campaign season. Midterm voters are looking for somebody to blame for high prices on things like gas, energy. Why shouldn't they blame Republicans? Well, I'd say a few things. First of all, if you look at how endemic inflation became during the Biden administration, and this is not to cast blame because I don't really care who's to blame for it. I care about how to fix it. And that's what we've been working to do. So inflation, to the last administration hit a record high of about 9.5%. And it's funny during the 2024 campaign, the president and I would say, this is the highest inflation in American history. And people would come back and say, no, no, no, it's not the highest inflation in American history.

It's just the highest inflation in the last 60 or the last 48 years. It's like, well, that's still very, very bad. So what happened with that is that when prices get baked in like that, it takes a little bit of time for us to undo some of the damage. Now, you know, we have done a lot of things in order to build upon the great success of the first Trump administration and deliver wins for working people. No taxes on Social Security, no taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime. We've seen $19 trillion of new investment coming to the country, but most of that is building new factories and new facilities. Those factories are being built.

So if you're construction worker, that's great. And obviously, we love our construction workers. However, it takes time to build those factories and employ the rest of the work. and then, of course, to make the stuff that's going to be made at those factories. So I guess my point is that because America's inflation problem wasn't created in a day, it was created by very bad policies of the Biden administration, trillions of dollars of new spending that was going more to fraudsters than it was to the American people. It takes a little bit of time to rebuild the foundation of America's middle class economy.

I think we've made incredible strides. But our argument to the American people is, look, it's very simple. You don't even have to listen to what we say. listen to what the Democrats have said. If you think that inflation is a problem, if you think affordability is a problem, number one, we're doing everything that we can to bring down prices, but what do the Democrats say?

They say that they wanna undo taxes, they wanna increase taxes on Social Security and tips. If you're worried about affordability, how is the Democrats tax increase gonna make your life more affordable? One of the things I'm most proud of that the president has done is Trump RX. If you look, we have almost 800 medications now that are part of Trump RX,

this most significant reduction in prescription drug costs that we've seen in 60 years. And again, that's going to accelerate as this program actually gets implemented. The Democrats did nothing. So while they're out there bragging that they're going to reverse the very policies that are making some of these prescription drugs more affordable, we're saying we're going to double down on the policies that are going to make prescription drugs more affordable. So I think if you just listen to what the Democrats are saying, what they're telling you is that every inflation problem that you're worried about

today, they're going to make worse and they're going to undo our very good efforts to try to bring down the inflation and to make that reduction in inflation sustainable. And I did just want to ask you, there have been reports about this, but I have not heard you talk much about it. You have lost a ton of weight lately. How much sourcrow do you eat in a day? Oh, my Lord. Okay. So when you're the vice president of United States and one of the first questions at a press conference of the White House is how much weight you've lost, you must have gotten very fat. That's one thing that I take from that question. So I'll tell you a little story, Peter. So every Lent, I try to like, you know, I'm a devout Christian. I try to take it very seriously. So I try to do some kind of self-denial.

And so I was talking to my wife on Fat Tuesday, Marty Grawl, and I was like, I think I'm going to give up sugar and I think I'm going to give up social media. Okay. So if I wanted to tweet something, I'd tell these guys to tweet something for me and I'd, you know, otherwise try to to stay off social media. So I call Bobby Kennedy. And I'm like, I know you're really into health. I'm thinking about giving up sugar. What do you think? And Bobby Kennedy says, no, no, no, no. I've got something that's way better than that and way more intense. And basically it's like, yeah, I eat a lot of high protein stuff and I eat a lot of sourcrow. And let's just say that if that was fat Tuesday, fat Wednesday never came. So my advice to you is that if you want to lose weight, call Bobby Kennedy.

And if you want to enjoy what you eat, do not call Bobby Kennedy. Yeah. So, man. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. On July 2nd, Treasury Secretary's best cent was asked when Americans could see $3 gas again. He said maybe by Labor Day. Things haven't worked out that way, but do you have a new timetable for Americans on when they could expect lower gas prices? And should they not expect to see $3 gas again until at least 2027?

Well, in defense of Scott, he said maybe by Labor Day because we're talking about things that are inherently. unproductive. And I think it's important, you know, I'm a strong believer that the American people are our fellow citizens and we should speak with them honestly about these things. And the fundamental reality is that the reason gas prices are so high right now is because the Iranians are shooting at commercial shipping. Even by the way, when they signed an agreement that said, we're going to stop shooting at commercial shipping. They almost immediately went back to shooting at commercial shipping. And I actually think that this drives home a couple of points. Number one, it's why things like the Venezuela oil deal are so important is because we've learned that we can't be overreliant

on anybody for the world's supply of energy and gas. It's one of the reasons why the president has pursued an energy dominance agenda because, yes, gas prices are higher in the United States. They're way worse everywhere else in the world because of what the president did, particularly during the first administration, to make us more energy dominant. I also think it drives home, frankly, the ridiculous atrophy that we saw. all in our European allies and their inability to actually do anything to help keep world energy markets supplied. So when the Iranians shoot at commercial shipping, obviously that means some ships don't want to go through. A lot of ships have gone through. We've got about 15 million

barrels out of the Strait of Hormuz just yesterday, despite the fact that the Iranians continue to shoot, I should say. What does anybody in the world done? Why is it incumbent upon the United States of America to be the only country in the world that? that can actually ensure world energy markets continue to stay supplied. And the answer is because we're the only country that has the capability of doing it. And so what the president has said is we really have two options here. We could leave and the entire world would be way worse off because there would be no guaranteed access to oil and gas. By the way, the Gulf Arab countries are telling us that would be the worst thing in the world.

Or we can accept the Iranians are going to shoot at ships like crazy people and we're going to do what we have to do. in order to ensure that their efforts don't lead to a worldwide energy crisis. Now, we've been quite successful up to this point. Gas, frankly, could have been much, much higher were it not for our efforts. But I'm not going to make a promise about when it's going to return to $3. What I will say is that we have to remember, why are we doing this? Number one, it's so that Iran never has a nuclear weapon. And number two, what we're doing right now is protecting commercial shipping in order to ensure

that we don't have a worldwide energy crisis. The only reason, the only reason we do not have a worldwide energy crisis is because of the leadership of the president, but also because of the fine work of our military from Pete Hegsteth on down. But the Iranians are doing what the Iranians do. I think that they're losing their capabilities by the day. I think they're realizing, by the way, that their control over the Strait of Hormuz is effectively gone and it's a diminishing asset. So if you go back three months ago, how much oil and gas was coming out of the strait under Iranian threats? It was back virtually nothing.

Now it's almost back to where it was before the conflict even started. So my advice to the Iranians is stop acting like crazy people and stop shooting at commercial shipping. And in the meantime, we've got to do what we've got to do despite what a foreign country is going to do in the straight of one moves. And the Iranians say that an attack on a wedding celebration earlier this week killed several people, injured dozens of others. I know CENTCOM says it's investigating, but have you been briefed on that attack? and was the U.S. responsive. So I've been briefed to the extent that I know that we're investigating. I've seen the same public media reports everywhere else. I will say that the Iranian state media has not been a very good scribe about what's happened in the conflict thus far.

So I'm extremely skeptical of this. What I can't say with 100% confidence is that unlike the IRGC, the United States never targets civilians in combat. We never will do that. We never have done that. And unfortunately, obviously, sometimes things happen. But in this particular case, I don't think that we have any information one way or the other. We're investigating it because obviously we care. We want to know. And if we do make mistakes, again, this is a big difference between us and Iran. When our military makes mistakes, they learn from them to try to get better from them.

So we're investigating it very fully. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Do you share any of the concerns of Secretary Driscoll and several Republican lawmakers about the current state of the Army, specifically about the departure of so many generals and other top officials? Well, first of all, look, Dan is obviously a very good friend of mine. I think he was a great secretary of the army. Pete is also a very good friend of mine, and I think he's an amazing secretary of war. And, you know, fundamentally where there are a lot of issues where I agree with Pete on, the issue where I'm in the most strident agreement with Pete is that we needed to have a culture shift at the Department of War.

We have to ask ourselves a very difficult question and it has nothing to do. I want to be clear. This has nothing to do with the amazing troops that we have, the amazing military officers, non-commissioned officers and enlisted personnel that we have. But America has fought a lot of wars since I've been alive, 42 years. And we have won almost none of them until Donald J. Trump became the President of United States. What does that say about the culture of military leadership, the way that we did planning? And what does it also say, frankly, about the political.

leadership that we've had in the White House at the Department of War for 40 years of, frankly, military misadventures. What Pete came in wanting to do was revive the warrior spirit in the United States of America. And I think you see evidence of that happening in a lot of different ways. Two important ways is, number one, we have recruitment at all-time highs. We had real recruitment problems under the Biden administration because people didn't want to join a woke military. And what I mean is they didn't want to join any military that was geared towards. a particular political narrative, they just wanted to join a military

that was willing to defend America's interests and do so at the very highest levels of professionalism and excellence. That is what the military under President Trump's leadership is geared towards doing. The second way that I judge just that esprit of core,

that warrior spirit that you see at the Pentagon is when you go out and talk to troops today, they talk about how much better it is, how much prouder they are, how much more they feel supported from Washington, as opposed to, frankly, oppressed by Washington. We're trying to bring the best and the brightest into the United States military

and support them in every way that we can. If you recall under the Biden administration, guys were getting fired because they were making their own health care decisions, and the Biden administration was treating them like they were convicted criminals. We're not doing that. We're taking things in a much different direction. So I feel like the military is in a much better place than it was 18 months ago. Of course, there's a lot of work still to do.

And of course, some of that work is going to take. years because frankly the rot got so deep under previous failed administrations. Sorry, I'm sorry, I'm always confused a little bit by the chaos here and unfortunately I'm old and blind now but let's go to Kerry Pickett. It's called for the president's impeachment and many accused them of trying to jeopardize U.S. Israel relations. What do you say to those who are uneasy with your close relationship with Carlson and claim that you're avoiding addressing a lot of these issues which may be causing divisions within the GOP?

Well, look, I'm not avoiding addressing anything. Everybody knows that Tucker Carlson and I are friends. And I think it's very obvious that Tucker has said some things that I disagree with. He said some things about the President of the United States that I think are just wrong. I think yesterday somebody sent me a clip that said that he would support El Sayed over Rogers. I think El Sajad is a crazy person. And I think whatever your views on Mike Rogers specific policy prescriptions, I'd like to have a non-crazy person like Mike Rogers representing.

Michigan, United States Senate, rather than a crazy person like El Sayed. That said, my attitude towards this, and I try to practice what I preach. And I remember when I became the vice presidential nominee, one of the hardest things for me, personally, is not when people attacked me, but when people attacked my wife, including friends of hers who knew her heart, who knew what a good person she was. And I remember thinking of myself, what a travesty it is, that in the United States of America, we let political disagreements define who our friends are going to be and not going to be. So, yeah, Tucker is a friend of mine. Tucker is a friend despite the fact that we disagree on a number of things.

And I'm not going to play the game where I throw friends under the bus because I have political disagreements with them. I think that is a terrible place for the United States to go. And if you have a disagreement with somebody politically, even over a deeply held issue, you should still be friends with that person. because the whole republic depends on people of different perspectives, being able to talk to one another. That's how I try to live my life, and I encourage everybody else to do the same. All right. Let's go to, well, the problem is, okay, here's the thing. You guys can see the list here.

It doesn't, you know, you can take your zoom up lens here. It doesn't, nobody's even circle. Nobody even circle. But if Carolyn Levin was still here, she would have told me who to call upon. But clearly that hasn't happened here. I am going to go. I'm going to go to Nick Popley from time. President Trump asked on social media, when are the Iranian people going to rise up and fight?

Is the administration considering either arming or giving other direct support for Iranian dissidents? Wasn't it Peter Ducey asked this question this morning on Fox News? It's a great question. And what the president said is exactly. exactly what I'm going to say, which is, of course, I'm not going to talk about that. There are a lot of things that we're doing, a lot of things that we're doing, of course, to try to apply pressure on the Iranians, to get them to stop shooting at commercial shipping, accepting that they're still going to try to shoot at commercial shipping.

Obviously, we're protecting a lot of ships, which is why we have not had a worldwide energy crisis. I can't repeat this enough. But for the leadership of President Trump and the hard work of our troops, we would have had an energy crisis because the Iranians refused to stop acting like terrorists. the Strait of Hormuz. Now, that said, there are a lot of, of course, additional tools that we have at our disposal. Some of those the president will use and some of them he won't. But I'm not going to advertise exactly how we're going to engage with the Iranians in the months and years to come because it frankly would take away the president's decision space. But everything that could happen is on the table. Economic pressure, military pressure, diplomatic pressure, covert pressure. Of course, these are things. These are tools in the president. but part of the reason their tools in the toolkit is because the vice president hopefully is not dumb enough to stand up before you know all of you and a million Americans watching at home and say exactly what it is that we plan on doing okay all right I'm gonna go to Emily Gooden or good one is good one is good in yeah okay I wanted to ask you why are you going to New York on 9-11 instead of the president is because it's the 25th anniversary is there some special security concern we know the president's

been a target before? No, I don't think it's a special security concern. Though actually, I will follow up with Secret Service just to get you an actual answer on that, but that's not what I've heard. I mean, you know, you have a vice president, you have a president. And there are two very, frankly, we'd like to be three or four places on 9-11, but you can't have one person be in multiple locations at the exact same time. And so we just decided as a team that I would go to New York for 9-11.

And the president would stay in D.C., of course, to commemorate what happened at the Pentagon. because that was a critical part of the tragedy of 9-11 as well. I will say that as much as it's tragic and it was a terrible day, I am looking forward to it because it's such an amazing honor to be able to get to go to New York and to share in that moment, you know, where the parents and the kids read the names of the people who lost their lives. I did it once before, I think during the 2024 campaign. It's one of the most amazing experiences of my life.

And I encourage every American, particularly the people who are, are young enough to not really remember that day, just to tune in for a couple of hours and see what it meant. And I think that sense of commonality and common purpose that we all had on 9-11, that's something that we should really try every single day to get back to. And if even just for a day, even if just for a few hours, I would encourage people to tune in. I'm also, as you guys can probably guess, I'm really looking forward to hang out with Joe Biden. I'm sure that we'll have many, many intense intellectual conversations. And, you know, it'll be great. We'll have a great time with Joe Biden, the other press next.

Go ahead. Mr. Right, President, thank you. A minute ago, you said that there is not a global energy crisis because US is helping commercial ships. Given that you don't have diplomatic talks with the Iranians to make them stop shooting commercial ships, are we talking about an indefinite naval blockade? Isn't that costly and hamper's US revenue elsewhere?

And how will the president declare an end to the war if the U.S. naval blockade is still in place? Well, first of all, the phrase and into the war, I want to push back on that just a little bit, because major combat operations are currently not ongoing, and they haven't been ongoing in a very long time. In fact, what we did just a couple of days ago is that we made it harder for the Iranians to shoot at commercial shipping, again, in order to ensure the flow of oil and gas into world energy markets. So, you know, we have, again, a lot of tools at our disposal, but what we're talking about here is trying to maintain some basic balance in these world energy markets. Now, you ask about these things, don't they cost a lot, et cetera, et cetera. Well, look, the alternative, I think, costs a lot more, which is what the Gulf Arab countries have begged us not to do and what a number of other countries have begged us not to do, including those in Europe who will publicly criticize us on the one hand,

but then privately acknowledged that if we weren't doing what we were doing, nobody else in the world could do it. We are the only country in the world that can ensure, as you heard the president say, the control over the Strait of Hormuz, the Iranians would like zero million barrels to come out of the Strait of Hormuz. Last night, 15 million barrels came out of the Strait of Hormuz. That's because of the United States of America. And if we don't do it, nobody else would do it. And if nobody else did it, we would have a catastrophic world. crisis and our message to the Iranians is simple. It's been the same for the very beginning

is you've got to stop shooting at commercial shipping. They've got to stop. It's that simple. And your point about negotiations, the president's been very clear. We're not talking to them. And we're not going to talk to them unless they stop shooting at commercial shipping. That's, I think. Darren, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. So President Trump, you post on truth, social, let data rain. But there's a Fox News poll with 70% of respondents voters saying that they do not want a data center in their area. So how do you bridge the disconnect there before the midterms in about two months? And also, second part of the question, if Democrats do take control of Congress, then do we lose the AI race to China? Well, look, I think it's a very good chance

that if the Democrats take control of Congress, we will lose the AI race to China, but we'll also lose a lot else. You will see higher energy prices. The Democrats have promised. that they will raise taxes on working Americans. The Democrats have promised that everything that we've done to protect American industry and rebuild American manufacturing, that stops as soon as the Democrats have real political power in this country. There's a lot that would go wrong if the Democrats take control of the House or the Senate or, God forbid, both.

But let me just say, on the data center question, you asked how do you split the difference or how do you bridge the gap or I forget exactly how you phrased it? But look, man, the simple answer is the way that you bridge the gap is by, following the president of the United States's lead. What was the most important thing that we've done on data centers? He, excuse me, came out and said, we have to have rate payer protection. If you're going to build a data center, you have to feed power back into the grid as opposed to taking power out.

I'm a strong believer, and I've seen the same polls that you're talking about, that the political backlash over data centers, a very large chunk of it, not all of it, of course, but a very large chunk of it is that people associate data centers with my neighborhood's going to get worse. In particular, my power bills are going to go up. The way to bridge that gap is for people to do what the President of the United States has enabled. He's made it easier to build a nuclear power plant or any other power plant next to a data center. He's made it easier for people to put power back into the grid as opposed to take it out. And there's a broader and deeper issue, I think, that's much bigger than data centers.

And it's the United States, what the president is really trying to train, frankly, American industry to do is to build again. We cannot be a country that says we're not going to build more power. We're not going to build more rockets. We're not going to do anything because the regulations of the cost or the risk are just too high. There's a chart that I'm obsessed with. And it looks at the amount of energy generated by the PRC, the People's Republic of China, the amount of power generated by the United States of America. you look at that chart in about, I want to say, 2005 is when China finally started producing the same amount of power as the United States of America. That was before that they produced way

less. They caught up to us and then they passed us. And today, China produces three times as much power as the United States of America. The way to get around that is as President Trump's leadership has showed to become a nation of builders again. We've got to build more power plants. We've got to make the regulatory state easier to work with. And of course, we've done that. You've got to make it easier to reinvest in the United States of America. That's what we're doing every single day. We cannot be a country that says we're not going to build anything anymore. But this backlash on data centers, I think that it is downstream of the fact that the United States doesn't build enough power, or at least it didn't until about 18 months ago. But obviously

that stuff takes a little while to come online. It's going to come online really fast under the president's leadership. Okay. All right. Let's go. to um okay well somebody said left side uh let's go to joey garrison okay mr vice president uh you're speaking wednesday night at the midterm convention in Dallas several republican candidates in close congressional races have said they don't plan to attend the convention or they're being non-committal about attending why do you think some of them are making that decision and do you have any concern about there being absences from some of the battleground midterm republican candidates no that is concern me. I mean, look, so when you're running a congressional race, especially in a very tight

race, you have so many things that are local that you're focused on. You've got fundraising. You've got money you've got to raise. You've got staff that you've got to deal with and obviously give directives to. And then most importantly, you've got to go out there and meet voters and message to voters. I think the unfortunate reality of the national media for this midterm convention is, like my speech will get covered a fair amount. The president's speech will be covered a ton. we can make the argument as much as possible that if you elect congressional Democrats, you're going to see higher prices, worse energy, higher taxes, and more fraud. The president and I can go and make that argument on national TV.

We don't need a congressman in a tight race to be there in all cases. Sometimes it might be better if that guy's out there raising money, but I think people are going to make a determination. What is the best way for me to spend my time as a candidate? Fundamentally, the president and I get one vote each, just like every other American. And what we want is every person in a tight race to go out there and make the best case they can to their constituents so they can get reelected. And so we can do more good for the American people. That's the goal.

Mr. Vice President, they've got two questions for you. First, the widow of an airman who was killed in the Iran war says she's having trouble getting some of the benefits that they are, they should have access to because it has not been officially declared at war. Can you and the president personally ensure that the family of Alex Klener gets all the benefits that they should. deserve given he died serving the country. Yeah, so what's her name? You said his name is Alex Clinner. He's an airman who was killed in the plane that went down over Western or So what I'd say, Caitlin, is please if you, especially if you have the private contact

information, we will reach out to her directly as soon as this is over and make sure that she gets what she's entitled to. Obviously, you know, our heart breaks for every single person who lost their lives in this, in this operation. And, you know, as much as our heart breaks, I can't possibly fathom a, you know, you know, young widow, what she's feeling and dealing with it. And so we want to be as helpful as we can and ensure she gets everything that she's entitled to. So we will certainly work that on the back end as soon to that. And my message to her would be, we love you. We're grateful for the sacrifice.

And we very much take very seriously our commitment to get you what you need to get. Yeah, she's got three young children. Secondly, in terms of the war and the timeline, given this administration has put timelines out there before what you just said about no negotiations happening with Iran. Will this war be over by the time of the midterm elections? Well, Caitlin, again, I don't, I wouldn't call it a war. Right now, there is no active shooting. I recognize there has, there have been places where this is flared up. Major combat operations, again, major combat operations lasted for about six weeks. And since then, we destroyed, of course, their nuclear facilities with midnight hammer. With Epic Fury, we destroyed their defense industrial base for producing

weapons and also a lot of their conventional military. And then we made it harder for them to rebuild that nuclear program. But when you ask, when will this end, you're asking me a question, like, when will the Iranians stop shooting at ships? I think the reality is, I don't know the answer to that question. You'd have to ask the Iranians. When will the Iranians shooting at ships stop having an effect on world energy markets? And the answer is, it has less effect day by day. So what we're going to do is not depend on the Iranians behaving responsibly or negotiating in good faith. What we're going to do is use the tools that we have at our disposal to ensure that the American people, one, never have to deal with a threat of an Iranian nuclear program, and two, that world energy markets are properly supplied.

But so does the Iranians when this war ends? Well, if the Iranians keep on, but Caitlin, if the Iranians keep on shooting at commercial ships, again, we have, I think a responsibility, but certainly we're the only ones with the capability to ensure that the Iranians are not destroying world energy markets. And our attitude is we're not going to set an artificial timeline because let's just say hypothetically, let's say I told you three months. Let's say I told you three days. Okay. And then the Iranians start blowing up oil and gas ships and the United States is the only country with the capability to ensure that those oil and gas ships get to market. Well, what I would say is it would be irresponsible for us to write out

our strategy and our timeline for an Iranian nation that simply cannot honor its commitments and cannot stop shooting at commercial ships. Yeah, you have CNBC. Yeah, Mr. Vice President, James Carvel famously said that when he dies, he wants to be reincarnated as the bond market because you can intimidate everybody. We've seen higher bond yields throughout the year this year. And I'm wondering if you can tell us how the U.S. government thinks about the bond market right now in terms of its impact on U.S. ability to borrow to finance our massive deficits and also on its impact on your decision-making about the Iran War and also American spending. Well, you know, obviously the President cares a lot about interest rates. And I think one of the main reasons he cares a lot about interest rates is because he wants Americans to be able to afford a home. When interest rates go higher, that means that borrowing costs are high.

and that's particularly true if you have a mortgage. So our view, and this has been a consistent message from the president and the rest of the administration on down, is that we believe that the Fed should be lowering interest rates. We feel quite confident that if you look at the inflation numbers, if you look at the CTI numbers, that it's proper and responsible for the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates. So that is a very important thing.

It's something that we care a great deal about. I would defer like the deeper questions about the bond markets, Scott Bassett, who probably knows more about the bond markets than anybody that I've ever talked to. But obviously, we care about this issue. We're doing a lot of things to try to keep those interest rates down, but it would be nice to have some help from the Federal Reserve. Okay. All right. Okay. So does Andrew Feinberg have a question of less than 30 seconds? No. Okay. Then we'll go on to roll call. Roll call. Yes, sir. Mr. Vice President, obviously frustration show at times recently with Senate Majority Leader John Thune. You worked with John Thune when you were a senator.

There will be leadership elections after midterm elections in the Senate. Today, will you endorse John Thune to be the GOP leader in the new Congress? Man, it's just not my business. It's the business of Republican senators to determine who their next leader will be. I will say about John Thune that we have a very good relationship. He has a very good relationship with the President of the United States. That doesn't mean you don't disagree with people from time to time or have a preference or a priority. that's going to be different from the Senate majority leader. But it's really not my business weeks, months before a Senate election, to talk about who should be the next Republican majority leader.

I suspect John Thune will run again. I suspect that he'll get the support of a lot of his colleagues. But I would defer to those folks about who their next leader is going to be. The most important thing, and I think John Thun would agree with this. I know the president agrees with this is we got to keep the Republican Senate majority. Because if we elect Senate Democrats, what are they going to do? We all know what they're going to do. They're going to try to raise your taxes.

They're going to try to stop us from preventing money going to fraudsters. They're going to try to investigate and investigate and investigate rather than legislate things that are in the best interest at the American people. So I think Senate Democrats taking over would be a nightmare. I think it would be bad for the American people. But ultimately, the American people are going to make that judgment. And when they do, then we can have a conversation about who's going to be the next Senate leader. Okay, let's go to, let's go to Libby Dean. Libby?

Yeah, Libby. Can you guys not hear me? Libby. Okay, Libby, go ahead. First a question on Iran, but also I want to ask you about East Palestine. On Iran, how concern should Americans be about these cyber attacks by Iranian hackers? And then also on East Palestine, you called for an investigation on Friday into that train you're element. I mean, it's been three years. News Nation has been talking with some of the people

who live in that community who say their health concerns have been suppressed. Would you consider an emergency declaration to give those people the federal help that they need while that investigation that you call for plays out? Well, in East Palestine, I wouldn't want to commit to something unless I would know that it would do some good. And so having been asked that question, I'll think about it. I've never thought about whether that's necessary to facilitate people getting what they need. But on the broader issue, you know, what we've learned over the last couple of months is something that I suspected, but frankly, could never prove, which is what the Biden administration radically underestimated the risks to the people of East Palestine and that their environmental

protection agency wasn't being honest with the American people about what the consequences of that train derailment were. So yes, we want that to be investigated. We want the Biden administration officials to be investigated about whether they were hedging, whether they were lying, whether they were doing something malicious. And that's what motivated the letter that Lee Zeldon and I sent. And then your first question was about, remind me, how concerned should Americans be about these cyber attacks by Iran? I see, yeah. So, you know, look, I'll tell you that we're concerned about everything because that's our job. And I think you always have to, of course, balance when you're an American citizen. You have to balance, obviously, assessing the real risks that are out there, but also going about and living your life because none of us can be too overwhelmed by risk or by fear.

What I would say is that we feel quite confident the homeland is safe. We also feel quite confident that the Iranians are going to try to do a lot of things that they don't have the capability to do and that your government. The American people should know that your government is obsessively focused on both anticipating any potential cyber threats, but also responding to them appropriately and ensuring they don't happen. So, you know, if you look at the Iranian ability to disrupt the normal lives of Americans, I think it's quite limited. It's not zero, but it's quite limited. I'd be much more worried about cyber attacks from other actors. But again, we're doing. and everything that we can to stay ahead of this stuff. And I think we're the best government in the world at anticipating and preventing cyber attacks. So what I would say to the American people is it is a risk that's out there. But I don't think it's wise to worry about these amorphous risks. You elect a government that's going to fight for you, that's going to defend you. And that's what we're doing every single day.

Let's go to Christian Daytok. That's me. You call them bring media. John. John. How on? Thank you. Sir, thank you. Two questions, one foreign, one domestic. First, since this economic D-Day

announcement pertaining to Iran, has President Trump spoken directly to President Xi asking him to stop Chinese banks from lending financial services to Tehran? So we've certainly had a number of conversations with the Chinese, and frankly, I think the Chinese have been responsive to some of the requests that we've made. I actually don't know whether the president has spoken directly to Xi, but we will get an answer for you and follow-up. Okay, thank you, sir. And then I know you don't want to talk about your own potential 2028 prospects, but Senator Ted Cruz and your good friend, Secretary Hadseth, apparently have been privately and publicly in the case of Senator Cruz positioning for 2028. Could you see yourself supporting

either one of them for a presidential campaign? That's an innovative way to ask the question, but I'm still not going to take the bait. Let me look, first of all, I'd encourage any Republican. If you care about the country, and I think all of us do, you should be focused not on a job a few years from now. You should be focused on the midterms. And that's the approach that I've taken. I think people sometimes don't believe me because they assume you're the vice president. You must think about this all the time. What I'm focused on, man, is trying to get as many Republicans as elected as possible so that we can do as much good as possible for the second two years of the Trump

administration. That's a long time. There's a lot of opportunity there. And this job is so crazy. Look at this guys. We're at the White House. That's the front lawn of the White House. We get an opportunity to come to work every day and make 350 million people's lives better. That's what we have to be focused on. And so politically, I'm very much focused on the midterm elections. I mean, Pete is a great guy. And yeah, I could see myself supporting a whole host of people. But most importantly, right now, I've got a lot of people that I'm supporting right now to get elected for. the November 2026 elections. And on Ted Cruz, I mean, look, man, he's just clearly Ted is a very authentic and likable guy, and I'm sure he'll do great. News week. News week. Can you tell me,

Maria, if I just left Fox News, is she going to be the next White House press secretary? I don't know, man. No, I don't think so. You know, I just saw the news literally as I walked out before. I love Maria. I think she's an amazing person, amazing talent. I don't get involved in the personal drama of media stations. In fact, I'd like to invite Peter Ducey to come up here and answer a question about what happened to Maria. But I think whatever she does, look, she's going to do great and I wish her all the best. She's a very, very dear friend. I haven't even talked to her, so I don't know the backstory about why she's decided to leave Fox News. I'm going to do a, I'm going to do a couple more. I'm going to do a couple more. I'm going to do a couple more.

I've got with, okay, on the side here, okay, pink tie, pink tie. There you go. That's why I wore pink tie today. That's right. You would see it. Anyway, nine justices, we all know growing up since grammar school. There are nine justices on the U.S. Supreme Court. Yep.

How long does it stay that way based on what happened yesterday in the house? What do you mean? You know, going forward, how confident are you that will remain at nine? Well, look, our commitment in the Trump administration is that we would like to have nine Supreme court justices. That's the way that it's been for a long time. And we think that's the way that it should stay. We also know that Democrats have explicitly promised that they will pack the United States Supreme Court if they're given additional power. And again, this is, this is why I think that the choice in this election is not between this set of policies that are

good and this set of policies that are not so good. The choice of the election really is between crazy people who are trying to rig the game and common sense people who you may have disagreements with from time to time, but at least they're rooted in common sense. The Democrats are saying, they're actively bragging that they don't like the rules of the game, meaning Americans vote for House members, Americans vote for senators, and then we all try to make the best government and the best rules and the best legislation in the interest of the American people. They're saying that they think that the rules don't allow them to run roughshod over the American Constitution, so they want to change the rules. They want to add additional states so that there can be more Democratic senators.

Note that they're not proposing to add territories that are heavily Republican. They just want to add the territories that are heavily Democratic. They also, of course, want to pack the Supreme Court. So how long will it last? I think, frankly, so long as Republicans are in power, we're going to have a Supreme Court that is good and honest and fair to the Constitution. Yeah, you right here. Thank you, Mr. Vice President.

You mentioned something very interesting earlier. You said you wanted to, the president was focused on creating a nation. of builders. The ISM manufacturing, PMI showed that manufacturing activity in the U.S. expanded for eight consecutive months. When you hit the trail, particularly in the bus belt, have you noticed the trickle-down effect of the tax cuts and the trade policy of the president having a positive effect on U.S. manufacturing? And does that make ideas like the foundry school, which you were talking about at the Institute of Peace, not much more important? Yeah. So let me just take a couple more questions here, but I appreciate you asking that. So what I think President Trump will be

remembered by, rightfully so, is for a renaissance in American building and American manufacturing, that he is the president who said 40 years of bipartisan policy where we ship American jobs, we ship American industry, we ship American pharmaceuticals, we ship everything overseas and hope that it's all going to work out for the American people. He said, enough. This is a terrible idea. And it happened because we were being taken advantage of. both by corporations that were shipping American industry overseas, but also by other nations that were getting rich by pursuing policies that the United States leadership was too unwise to pursue themselves. So you're right. The manufacturing index is at the highest level that it's been. By the way, after many left of center economists and many Democratic politicians predicted that the manufacturing index would fall to historic lows, it is now at historic eyes.

the tax cuts have been a major part of this. One of the most important data points in the economy. And again, this takes a little bit of time to bear fruit, is that you're seeing businesses buy capital equipment, buying the big machinery, buying the things that allow them to hire people and build more stuff. They're buying that stuff at a record level. And that's because of the working family's tax cuts,

because we invested in people who are building and making right here in the United States of America. When those pieces of equipment get online, and then you've got to hire the workers who actually run those, pieces of equipment. What does it mean? It means more products and lower prices for American consumers. It also means good middle class manufacturing jobs for American workers. But it's not, if I'm being honest, it's not just the carrot. It's also been the stick. I do not think that you could have the beginning of a manufacturing renaissance, or it not for President Trump's

willingness to penalize corporations and foreign countries that take advantage of the American worker. So it's been both. It's been the tax cuts that induce people to, to invest in our country, and it's been his willingness. And sometimes him following up with action to say that if you're going to shut down an American factory and put an American worker out of a job, then we are going to charge you a big fat tariff on anything you try to send back into the United States

of America. That's done as much as anything to protect American jobs and protect American workers. Go ahead. Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President. I want to ask you about the announcement made by Secretary Vess in fact on August the 24th, the economic outcast operation.

Since that time, besides the UAE, as any other country joined in isolating Iran in that way? And secondly, how can that operation be successful if you don't have China coming on board and isolating Iran? Well, first of all, you do have, I think the Chinese, the PRC being willing to play ball here. And we all know that.

this and I think it's an open secret for anybody who understands the People's Republic of China, say what you will about them. And of course, we have some policy disagreements. The president has a very good relationship with President Xi, but obviously we have some misalignment of interests, some issues where the president has to pursue our interests at the expense of everybody else. Say what you will about them. They are not the sort of nation that shoots a commercial shipping because they're not getting their way in an international dispute. They are in that way, I think willing to be a little bit more responsible. Again, I'm not saying they're doing everything that we've asked them to do,

but I think that the PRC has been much more responsible, certainly than the Iranians, and much more responsible than a couple of other nations as well. But it's not just the PRC. If you look at Turkey, if you look at Azerbaijan, if you look at UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, a lot of the Gulf Arab coalition. But if you look all across the world,

we're actually seeing a lot of countries. Sometimes they're not willing to say so publicly, but privately they're doing a lot of good things to help us ensure that the Iranians pay a penalty for firing at commercial shipping. Now, I have to remind you, it's not just that they're paying a penalty when they fire at commercial shipping.

It's also denying them the economic resources to rebuild their nuclear program if they tried to do so. Now, so far we haven't seen them try to do so, But part of what we're doing here is having destroyed their nuclear enrichment capacity. We're trying to ensure they don't rebuild it even if they try to do so in the future. And that's why this matters. We're protecting commercial shipping. We're protecting world energy markets.

But it's all in the service, all in the service of ensuring that Iran does not become a nuclear weapons power. Let me ask a final question of Mary Margaret, Mary Margaret O'Lean. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. I have two questions for you, if that's okay. Go ahead. On the first rotation of Milo, Donopoulos, and when did you learn about that activity? And then on the second one, could you give us your elevator pitch for why Americans should choose between, why Americans should choose Republicans over Democrats in the midterm elections? Yeah, so on Milo, I won't speak for the president, but I found out, I think like so many others found out, if you can imagine we are, because the last administration brought in so many illegal aliens, I don't. keep track of every single person that DHS supports.

So I found out about it publicly. I'm not sure if the president knew about it beforehand, but I'm sure we can follow up with the president and get you an answer to that question. It's interesting. I didn't expect to be asked that. That's one thing I did not talk to him about before I came out here for the briefing.

And then look, my elevator pitch is actually, it's very simple. Do you want to live in a country that has safety and security and prosperity? If the answer is yes, and I think most Americans do, then vote for Congressional Republic. over congressional Democrats. On every single issue, the Democrats have taken the side of fraudsters,

of criminals, and of far-left interest groups over the side of the American people. Let me choose just a few issues. Okay. So on fraud, we are trying to take money out of the hands of fraudsters so that people who rely on Medicaid or people rely on food stamp benefits, they're able to get what they need because we've ensured that Americans' people's tax dollars actually go where it's supposed to go rather than fraudsters. Democrats have fought for the fraudsters and Republicans have fought for the people who deserve these benefits and the American taxpayers who are paying those benefits. If you look at oil and gas policy, Democrats for a generation have gone to war against energy. We've tried to make it easier to build additional energy capacity, and we've done that

for the past 18 months. If you look at crime, we have had, I think, the most successful anti-crime policy, maybe in the history of, I can't think of a single 18-month period where you've seen violent crime dropped so significantly thanks to the work of a single administration. And every step of the way, the Democrats have fought us to open prisons. They've fought us to prevent us from putting people, violent criminals behind bars. They've fought us on basic things like funding and supporting law enforcement. They fought us on giving tax breaks to our police officers. So on every issue where we've been successful in promoting law and order, the Democrats have been for the criminals and we've been for the American people. And finally, just one other very, very important

issue. And that's building in the United States of America. This guy, Abdul El-Sayed, he says that he stands for working people. Well, if you stand for working people, then why have you supported the same policies that for 40 years shipped the Michigan auto industry to foreign nations? We are the people who have been fighting for the jobs of Michigan auto workers. We've been the people willing to stand up both to the big corporations, but the big foreign competitors and say you are not allowed to steal American industry anymore. So on all these issues, Democrats stand for somebody else. The Republicans stand for you. My argument to the American people is not that you're going to agree with us on every issue, but they're a bunch of crazy people, elect the common sense people to Washington and we'll keep on doing great work.

Thank you all. everybody thank you so much for joining us and don't forget to hit the thumbs up on this video and a special thank you to all of our advertising partners please remember to shift your dollars to support those businesses that support badlands media