The DeVory Darkins Show - Los Angeles issues SHOCKING ELECTION Announcement as Democrat gets EXPOSED BY CNN

Episode Date: May 5, 2026

Los Angeles issues SHOCKING ELECTION Announcement. This comes as Council member wants to grant non citizens the right to vote in local elections. Also, Democrat Senate Candidate gets exposed during interview with CNN. EPISODE SPONSOR: Go to http://kalshi.com/devory and get a $10 credit to trade on any market of your choosing! FOLLOW ME:⁠https://www.x.com/devorydarkins⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/devorydarkins⁠⁠https://www.rumble.com/c/devorydarkins⁠⁠https://devory.wtf.tv⁠BUY ME A COFFEE:⁠https://buymeacoffee.com/devorydarkins⁠SHOP OUR MERCH STORE:⁠https://store.devorydarkins.com⁠BUSINESS INQUIRIES:⁠[e-mail]⁠

In today's video, Los Angeles has done it again. They are now proposing a bill that would grant non-citizens the right to vote in their elections. Also, a Democrat candidate out of Michigan had a disastrous interview, and Senator Warnock out of Georgia is claiming racism based on the latest Supreme Court ruling regarding the Voting Rights Act. Let's first hear what's happening in Los Angeles. Take a listen. Local leaders pushing a proposal that would allow non-citizens to vote in L.A. City elections. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us. I'm Annabelle Sudano.

L.A. mayor-old candidates are now weighing in on that plan. Let's go to NBC 4 is Carmen Dickerson. She's live in downtown L.A. Outside City Hall with a breakdown of this proposal. Karma. Well, Annabelle, we do want to reiterate the conversation surrounds voting in local elections. This would not apply to federal elections. And it still has a long way to go. Nevertheless, even though it was just introduced yesterday, it is already getting a lot of attention.

People have many questions. So here's what you need to know. Currently, the city charter requires people voting in city elections to meet the voter eligibility requirements of the state of California, which is to be a U.S. citizen. However, Councilmember Hugo Sotomortor Martinez, whose district includes Hollywood, Silver Lake, and Echo Park introduce a motion to change the charter. That motion calls for amending the charter to allow the city council to expand voting to non-citizens for local elections like mayor and city council. He says it's too early to know if the proposal would include undocumented people. people as well as green card holders. He also says this proposal is about representation, but some opponents say voting is a right

fundamentally reserved for Americans. Yeah, I mean, where do we start? I mean, there's so many things wrong with this proposal, but let's just focus on the main one, which is the whole purpose of citizenship. If we're going to continue to grant rights to people who are non-citizens and these rights are the same as people who are citizens, then what really is the difference here? What is the purpose of having citizenship of the United States of America? I mean, it's really an interesting question, but why do they move to implement policies this way, right?

They do it because they claim they have empathy, that people who've been in the country illegally for quite some time have they have been contributing to society. So because they broke the law and they've contributed to society, we should bail them out and allow them to have the same rights as citizens. I mean, you guys let me know right up front. Just initially, as you hear this, what do you make of it? All right, let's go to the person who's really behind this proposal. Take a listen. I certainly recognize that we have folks living in this country who've been here 20 years. They've started a family.

They pay their taxes. Many of them are homeowners. But they don't have a say over the policies that affect their children and their families on any given day. The motion only asks to seek to explore whether we want to head in that direction. I think the details of who's going to be involved, how we're going to do it, all that needs to get sussed out. So let's just judge this proposal on its merits. The reality of this, it's an absolute fail. Okay, yeah, San Francisco program has run for seven plus years with marginal turnout and required years of litigation.

New York City tried it. That was struck down. The track record shows minimal real world benefit and consistent legal political backlash, meaning it's going to cost way more money than whatever positive benefit they're really looking for in the end. Now, politics-wise, this is great, especially if you are a progressive. This is right down your alley. You support this 100%. However, if you're thinking from a populist point of view, this is an absolute F.

How does this address the concerns of cost of living, homelessness, crime, housing, etc.? In fact, a lot of those issues have been impacted by illegal immigration. Now, let's go to the senator of Democrat, Alex Padilla, because I want to show you this is not just the local level. This is the federal level. Here he is being asked about voter ID in California. Take a look. You were the secretary of state for California.

You oversaw California's elections. you expanded vote by mail in California. What's wrong with the idea of voter ID? Something that like 80% of Americans support. Well, first of all, let's just be clear. When it comes to elections and election integrity in California, our elections are safe, they are secure, and want to keep them as accessible as possible.

To premise changes to how we administer elections based on the false narrative of massive voter fight is simply wrong. And so therefore, the SAVE Act or the voter ID measure that looks headed to the November ballot in California are a solution in search of a problem. Right? The SAVE Act is not a voter right, D bill. It is a voter suppression bill. So I want to play that

because he claims that the Save America Act is a solution in search of a problem. Well, one could argue this proposal in Los Angeles is a solution to a search of a problem, right? And you guys have heard me probably say this quite a bit over the past few weeks, which is that

Democrats have a bad habit of missing diagnosing manufactured problems. So we're seeing it in this particular story. They're manufacturing a problem by saying non-citizens should be able to vote and because they can't vote, that is wrong because they are contributing to our society. That's the manufactured problem. And the solution that's based on flawed data is, hey, you know, they should be able to vote. Here's how they should be able to do it.

And we're implementing this solution because the data says they're not able to vote. and if they were able to vote, we'd be able to get X, Y, or Z. None of that is proven. That's all just theory. But for Alex Padilla, we know what it's like as it pertains to voter ID. He's scared. And the good news for California, voter ID is on the ballot for that state in November. There is this effort in California that is focused more on voter ID.

What is wrong with the concept? If I show up to vote at my polling place, that I have to show an ID. When I have to show an ID to buy alcohol, I have to show an ID to get on a plane, I have to show an ID through so many aspects of my life. What's wrong with showing an ID to vote? Yeah, again, I go back to it's a solution in search of a problem. In California, our elections are safe. They are secure.

We want to keep them as accessible if possible. Well, but this could also keep eligible people from voting if you forgot your ID or you forgot to renew it, you know, the week before. Now it's all of a sudden it's expired and you're not allowed to vote. It's a solution in search of a problem. Okay, so based on his logic, you know, if my driver's life, you know, if my driver's license expired and I forgot to renew it the week before or I lost it or whatever the case might have been, but it's not renewed. And I got pulled over two weeks later. Do I deserve to get a ticket or not? I think I do, right? There's a reason why it's called the rule of law.

I told you guys, they don't believe in the rule of law as it pertains to what they want to do for the people that they care about. But as it pertains to people they don't care about, they're all for rule of law. But the same act does a lot more than just that. It would hand over to Trump's Department of Homeland Security. Here we go again. The information for every registered voter in the country, including the private information of every voter in California. Why? These test cases that they've run with states that have cooperated on a pilot basis ends up identifying eligible voters, United States citizens, them getting kicked off the rolls. So the political context for all this is Donald Trump and a Republican Party desperate to hold out to power in

November because their record has been so bad. Their only hope is to rig the elections. That's why they're doing this. All right. Let's go to our next update. This is a disastrous interview for McMorro. She is the Democrat candidate for the Senate out of Michigan. She's running against a radical candidate by Abdul El-Sahid. That's his name. This is a guy who campaigned with Hassan Biker, supports Hamas, et cetera. So this interview is really a moment in time that is so crucial because if she literally fails to gain any more momentum, he will potentially take over the primary and be the actual candidate, which could lead to a member of our Congress who supports Hamas serving. So here she is on CNN, getting confronted for not only voting in California elections after she moved, but on past

comments that is truly exposing her for the liar that she is. Take a listen. I want to dig a little bit deeper here because the K-File report showed that you wrote in your auto-25 autobiography that you, quote, relocated permanently to Michigan in 2014. But they're our social media posts of yours where you describe yourself as a California resident in 2016. And the reason why this is an issue is because you posted, you voted in June 2016 Democratic primary in California. And I don't need to tell you, but of course, you're required to vote in the state you're a resident of. So why would you be voting in California two years after moving to Michigan? So we decided to move to Michigan in 2014.

I was still working in Southern California. my then-boyfriend, now husband, was working in Michigan. Like a lot of millennials, moving takes time. It was a two-year process to finally settle in Michigan. And I registered to vote in Michigan in August of 2016 and voted in the general election in November that year. But you wrote you relocated permanently in 2014. And you also posted an Instagram post

that you had moved out of California. And that was before the June 16th primary in that state. Should you have voted in the 2016 primary? California? We still had our place out in Southern California. And as I mentioned, we had multiple jobs. Moving is ugly. I wish we could have just up and moved in one fell swoop. But that's not the case, just like it is for a lot of people. This is clear hypocrisy, as you guys know. And he's about to expose her for that. But the reason why this is so relevant is because, again, as I said earlier, her opponent, El Sahid. And for whatever reason over the past week, mainstream media has been

targeting her. CNN did a whole investigation into her past, brought up a bunch of tweets and statements that contradict what she says today. Why would they do that exactly to someone like her? Well, I think you know why that is. I think the Democrat Party in Mainstream Media, which is the arm of that party politically, is sympathizing with radical candidates. Why that is, I have no idea. Let's continue. Because you had criticized a Twitter user in 2024 for voting in Michigan after moving to California, you called it illegal then? Yeah, absolutely. If you are doing that intentionally after moving permanently to a place, that is illegal.

But in our case, it was a two-year process. And when I was finally a permanent resident in Michigan, that is where I registered, and that is where I voted. Okay. So it sounds like you shouldn't have said you relocated permanently in your autobiography. We made the decision to permanently relocate, but it does take time. And, yeah, could have worded it a little bit differently. Yeah, so let's take a look at the...

this. This is where she started. 85% chance on April 4th. Where is she at today? She is sitting at 36%, 35%. Abdul El-Sahid is up to 50%. What am I looking at? This is Kalshi.com prediction market that you can take advantage of if you want to actually bet on what's happening in America, particularly politics or elections. If you use my promo code DeVoree, they'll give you a $10 credit on your first $100. Again, that's Kalshi.com for slash DeVore or scan the QR code or hit the link in the description below. But anyways, El Saheed, yeah, he's up to number one now, 50% chance. Okay, so there were tweets of words where you seem to take a jab at rural America.

In 2016, a user posted, quote, I'm from the rural Midwest. All this talk about coastal elites needing to understand more of America has it backwards. You wrote in response to that user. This thread, I'm from rural New Jersey. This rings 100%. So do you stand by that sentiment? that rural parts of America can learn from coastal elites? I think we all need to understand each other better.

Trump has succeeded in weaponizing us against each other, convincing us that we are each other's enemies. I've lived all over the country. I've met a lot of different people, and I stand by that. Was it the most eloquent tweet I've ever tweeted? No, I've tweeted thousands of times. She's right.

She's tweeted thousands of times, and she has even worse tweets out there than what we're seeing here on CNN. But what it demonstrates is this disconnect from people in politics and how they just have this inability in regards to understanding the average American. Whether you live in the country or not, most people in politics don't understand you. And if they do understand you, they have a funny way of showing that and let alone proving it. Just a follow up on that question.

Do you personally see parallels between Nazi Germany and what's happening under the Trump administration? Yeah, I do. It is deeply concerning that we see an authoritarian slide. And as we talked about earlier, dividing people against each other to convince people that if you're not doing well economically, it's somebody else's fault is an incredibly dangerous place for us to be in. I don't think that a lot of people would argue that there are shades of authoritarianism here that we need to be deeply concerned about. So on one hand, she says we should understand each other. But on the other hand, she accuses the top administration. and people supporting the administration as being individuals who are likened to Nazi Germany. Now, I can't tell you how many times I'm disturbed by when they go there because it's truly a disrespectful statement to people who did experience Nazi Germany.

And I also believe it's giving way too much credit to the president and his administration. I mean, one could argue Hitler was really effective, okay, in his messaging. I know President Trump's great at selling, but I don't think. he's as great as Hitler was and in that regard. But hey, this is the way that they see things. Let's go to our next update, Spirit Airlines. So more fallout from this. Scott Bessent, Sean Duffy,

are speaking out today in their interviews, trying to set the record trade on what actually happened here. Take a listen. Sure, Maria. So this is just more of the mess we inherited from the Biden administration in 2020, September 22, Elizabeth Warren, who loves to write letters, sent a letter to the Justice Department, to the Labor, to the transport department, saying that they should oppose the merger with spared airlines. JetBlue wanted to buy them for $3.8 billion. It would have given them much more resiliency. And she and the Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, was probably the worst transportation secretary in history when he came to the office. They also were against the merger. And if JetBlue had,

had merged with Spirit, we would have all these jobs that were lost yesterday. We had 30 airport, 30 regional airports who have lost service. And I can tell you what happened here. It wasn't Treasury. It was commerce. It was trying to put something together. But the reason we were here was because the merger, the Biden administration opposed the merger. We shouldn't have been here in the first place. All right. Let's just remove the partisan out of this and just focus on the objective facts. Spirit Airlines was already in trouble before the merger was proposed in 2022 because they are a low-cost business model as an airline and the bigger airlines started to copy their business model within their own. So at that point, what's the purpose of spirit? Well, then JetBlue shows up out of nowhere looking to save them essentially and capitalize on this.

and in the name of saving jobs and in the name of competition and cost, the Biden-D-O-J blocked that merger, and Elizabeth Warren celebrated it. Then after that, officially after it was blocked in 2024, two bankruptcies occur within the matter of 12 months from that company. Then Iran happens where fuel costs go up, okay? And that pretty much is the nail in the coffin for that airline. And in the 11th hour, the Trump administration offered them a deal, $500 million, $90% equity. They couldn't take that deal. And the creditors and the people who they already owe money to wouldn't agree to that deal

because they want to get paid first before the government. That's really the story here. Let's go to Sean Duffy. Here's his response to the CEO of Spirit Airlines. Take a look. And Mr. Secretary just finally on Spirit Airlines, they ceased operating over the weekend. You have said that the war was not an impetus in putting Spirit out. out of business because they filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy last summer.

But the Spirit CEO said in his statement that the sudden and sustained rise in fuel prices ultimately left them with no alternative. Quickly, if you can. Sure. So Spirit tried to merge with JetBlue. The Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg administration in DOJ tanked that deal. Immediately after that, they filed for bankruptcy. They were having financial problems.

Martha, they filed for bankruptcy again last year. They were bleeding money. And so this was in their works for some time. They were going to have to liquidate. And so, again, I'm proud of the American airlines that have stepped up to take care of the passengers of Spirit. I'm making sure they can get home. The employees of Spirit have special access to apply for jobs with other American Airlines. So, again, I've stepped in, worked with the CEOs.

And again, this could have been chaotic. And under this administration, President Trump's leadership, there isn't chaos. there is actually a unified American approach to helping passengers and employees of Spirit navigate this crisis. Yeah, that's exactly everything I just said. But the problem again, and why I wanted to show you guys this particular story, is the framing from the media. Now, I'm going to take you to Margaret Brennan here on Face the Nation, CBS News.

And I want you to pay attention to the way that she poses the question to Kevin Hassett. Take a look. You mentioned past financial troubles unquestionably. Spirit did have them for many years, but they did have that restructuring. deal with bondholders back in March. In this statement, Spirit released explaining why they were shutting down, they said, quote, the sudden and sustained rise in fuel prices in recent weeks ultimately has left us with no alternative. Are other industries also at risk of collapse or other major companies due to this energy shock? Well, don't forget that Spirit Airlines was

Chapter 11 twice because they basically didn't have a business model that was working. That's right. And the other airlines are still operating. I just flew out here to discuss these matters at the Milken Conference at L.A. on United Airlines and the other airlines are operating. What they've done because they have thought ahead way more than the management of spirit is hedge their jet fuel purchases and so on so that energy short-term energy shock, don't have a big effect on their business. Certainly it will affect profits for the airlines for a quarter or so, but they're

very, very healthy right now. And it's the way that they frame it. They say, yeah, well, they had past troubles, but the war on with these rising fuel costs, don't you think that actually put Spirit Airlines out of business and that's the problem? Not that they had two Chapter 11 bankruptcies. Not that the people they owe money to

refuse to take that deal with the government. No, it's Iran. That's lazy, folks. And the fact of the matter is the rest of the airlines are still flying. People are still flying. The industry is not collapsing. In fact, one would argue what happened with TSA was more damaging to the airlines than these field costs. Now, to be frank here, we continue as a country with Iran and the Strader Hermos,

yeah, those field costs will add up over the course of six months. But I just think it's misleading when they frame things in that way. All right, one more for you here. Let's go to the Voting Rights Act, which part of it was struck. down by the Supreme Court, as you guys know. We should not be drawing congressional maps based on the color of, or based on people's skin color, that is. And so now we have, again, more Democrats crying racism over this.

And I just have to address it. Take a listen. And I want to point something out to you, which is that the current Congress, statistically, in 2025, has a record high number, 66 black members, according to Pew Research, including five Republicans. That's the most to ever serve in Congress. People will look at that and say we are in a different country than we were, as Roberts once argued, as you just pointed out. Now that we are in this redistricting arms race that both parties are playing with here, do you think that will hurt black representation?

I think that the court sadly poured fuel on this redistricting arms race. To be clear, you support redistricting that your party is carrying out. I do because Donald Trump, who is better at dividing us than anybody I know, instituted an arms race and redistricting. But I actually hate partisan gerrymandering. I don't like gerrymandering. Again, they are morally conflicted. In fact, I think I should say they're morally bankrupt because they can't make up their mind. You either support it or you don't.

First he says he supports it. Then he says, no, I don't support it. But I support it because of Donald Trump. Well, that doesn't make any sense. I was like saying, hey, listen, I don't agree with breaking the law, but I'm going to break the law because I disagree with the president. Okay. That's an insult on our intelligence. And here's the other thing, as you saw the way that she also, again, she's a piece of work. So she's framing this as, oh, yeah, 66 members of Congress are black. What's going to happen to all the black members of Congress? They're going to go away because of this ruling, right? But we could not unilaterally disarmed. He's the one who called Texas and said, literally, give me six more seats. And so California and other states had to respond, Virginia, in kind. But the solution to this, really, is to ban partisan gerrymandering.

Gerrymandering turns our elections on its head so that rather than the people picking their politicians or their public servants, the politicians are picking their voters. Right, exactly, which is why I'm asking you how you could support it. But I understand you're saying the context of the moment is an emergency. Let me ask you. Well, we could, I have a bill, though, Margaret. I have a bill. I saw that bill, yes. Right now that would get rid of partisan gerrymandering.

And so far, I've had no Republican takers. What about Democrat takers? Of course not. Listen, what you're going to continue here is that the Supreme Court is a rubber stamp for Donald J. Trump, which is totally false. What you'll also hear is what they've done is essentially, they have hindered black people from voting in America, which that's also false. This ruling has nothing to do with the action of voting. It has everything to do with drawing

congressional maps based on skin color, which is inherently against the U.S. Constitution, and it does discriminate against voters who are not black. Now, I've said this also, hey, why don't we draw maps based on a concentration of Korea town in your local downtown area? Can we do that? Can we draw some maps based on where people from India are living in certain parts of the town? Can we play this game no matter the skin color? It doesn't work that way. But to tell them that, no.

And again, people are going to eat that up, unfortunately. But you know what? Why don't you give me your guys' thoughts in the comments section below to the stories today? One, what do you make of Los Angeles moving to grant non-citizens the right to vote in their elections? This obviously wouldn't be at the federal level. But it would be at the city level. Give me your thoughts about that.

and then what did you make up Spirit Airlines? Again, who do you blame for what happened to Spirit Airlines? And that disastrous interview from that Democrat candidate, give me everything you got in the comment section below. If you did get value from this video, please make sure you like, share, and subscribe if you have it already.