The DeVory Darkins Show - Trump SURGES AHEAD after MAJOR POLLING UPDATE

Episode Date: May 16, 2025

President Trump SURGES AHEAD after a major polling update. Federal Judge out of California has issued another nationwide injunction. And, President Trump responds to Ex-FBI director threatening post. Episode Sponsor:Go to http://crypto.com/devory and play their Freedom Jackpot through July 4th and you might get a 1 Bitcoin payout! FOLLOW ME:https://www.twitter.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 a stunning update, CNN just dropped the poll showing that President Trump's approval rating is now surging. Another federal judge has issued a nationwide injunction, and the president has also reacted to James Comey in that threatening post from last night. Donald Trump's approval rating, his net approval seemed to be falling. He seemed to be Adios Amigos. People were writing his political obituary. He is rising from the dead like Methuselah. Look at this. Hello, Trump's net approval rating among voters. This is the Reuters ipso's polling. Look at this. In late April, he was eight points underwater. But look at where he was in the most recent poll among voters.

He's up seven points to a minus one point net favorability rating. This is not the picture. I think a lot of people were thinking that we would be painting in late April. I think a lot of people expected his approval rate to keep dropping, but at least a coin of order to sips house, it's in fact rising. See, it was just a month ago they were claiming that President Trump's approval rating was in the dumpster. So in this first story, this is great news for President Trump, bad news for Democrats,

And once again, mainstream media, they make themselves look like a fool. Now, on this screen, you're looking at the most accurate pollsters of the 2024 presidential election. Why is that? Because you'll notice they'll never use the top five when they're reporting the news on somebody's approval rating. So I'm going to skip all the way down to number 18. You know who that is? Ipsos. They had Kamla Harris winning.

They were off by an average of 3.5 points. And CNN is using them in this new poll, which is why they're claiming it's actually 49% approval rating when really it's probably 53 percent. Are you following me here? Yeah, okay. So, you know, this is just one poll, right? But let's take a look across an aggregate of polls. What are we seeing here? And I want to compare both to where Donald Trump is now versus where he was in late April, as well as where he was at this point in term number one. What you see is at minus six points. He is a little bit worse off than he is in the Epsos-Royder's polling. But he is considerably better than he was in late April when he was nine points underwater. And more than that, look at this. He's nearly 10 points

better than he was back in May 16th of 2017 in his first term. So what we see is Donald Trump's not just doing better than he was doing in late April of 2025. He's doing considerably better than he was doing at this point in term number one, about 10 points better than he was doing at this point in turn. Let's actually dive a little bit more into this poll because I think some of these questions should warrant your attention. Like for example, in your opinion, which political party has a better plan policy or approach to each of the following immigration. Republicans coming at 42% higher than Democrats, which are at 25%. Next one is on the economy.

Republicans come in at 36%. Democrats come in at 29%. Crime. Republicans come in at 37%. Democrats at 24. And check this out, 56% of Americans believe downsizing the federal government is something they do support. 52% agree when it comes to cutting U.S. to foreign countries. 49% agree that new tariffs or taxes should be placed on imported goods from China.

55% agree that we should increase the deportation of illegal aliens. And the other interesting thing about this segment from CNN is the chances of a recession taking place. They are now walking back their fear talking points. Take a listen. Take a look at the chance of a recession. It's actually falling. The chance of recession is falling.

In late April, it was 60% according to J.P. Morgan. Look at where it is now. It's less than 50%. How about Goldman Sachs? You see the same thing, 45%, now falling to 35%. The bottom line is, it is the economy, the economy, the economy. As the chance of a recession has fallen, as the trade wars have kind of collapsed a little bit,

at least with China Trump trying to make a deal, we do see that I do think that the voters are responding to this, and therefore we're seeing Trump's approval rating going on. The terrorists were really hurting him, and he backed off, and it may be helping him politically now. Sometimes Donald Trump has some pretty good political instincts. on X posted this. In just the past two weeks, recession odds have almost been cut in half, tanking from 66 percent to 36 percent. And if you take a look at Polly Market, which you

uploaded a video of it here, it happened that quick. I mean, literally, what is that? 21 days ago? It's crazy. So again, mainstream media likes to scare people when really they should just be reporting the facts and not trying to spin it. And the other interesting thing about this entire story is what Democrat voters are saying about their own party. Take a listen. New York Times at a focus group of Democrats. These are voters now,

okay? Here's four quotes. Ariel's age 23, Indiana. What do you think of the Democratic Party? Disappointing a little bit. Harold at a flow at age 54. Ariel took the words out of my mouth. He said, disappointing. Spencer age 30 out of Illinois. White

therapist. Useless. I'm sorry. Is his quote. Terrell, age 39. Texas black nonprofit inept is his quote. Yeah, I think my favorite response here is inept and then useless. I'm sorry. I mean, what do you expect exactly from these voters? I mean, they've been programmed to believe that President Trump is the devil. And now that he's been elected president a second time, they have to be disturbed emotionally, spiritually, you know, all of the things. So I'm not shocked by this. And I don't think it's going to improve until somebody from the outside comes in and totally does a paradigm shift on that party.

And just to be frank here, I believe the first step of making this paradigm shift, which I obviously am not looking to encourage the Democrats to do, is to stop obsessing over President Trump so much when he has a higher approval rating than you do. There's also a reality here. Just so we know, like this table spends a lot of time criticizing Donald Trump and a lot of it is very valid and needs to happen. But it is a fact his approval rating is 39%. It's higher than the Democratic Party. However, Democrats is 27%. people felt gaslit and lied to. 77% of Americans in 2023 said Joe Biden was too old to run again.

And they were told, sit down, shut up. He is the nominee. And then when it became untenable and he stepped aside, they anointed Kamala Harris. There was not a primary. There was not a Democratic process. And then when she lost, they said, don't look backward. We're moving forward. We're not even going to talk about why we didn't listen to you.

So the fact of the matter is President Trump is more relatable to the average American, even as a billionaire, than do. Democrat leadership. I think that sums up the entire story here. And that's why I had to play that clip because I think what Alyssa was saying was a sound argument. They obsessed so much over President Trump, gaslit American voters as it pertains to Joe Biden. Now they want to make money off the scandal. And then they want to continue to gaslight by saying, no, we're not going to talk about that. We're just going to move forward. And I actually believe at that time that he was sound of mind. Give me a break. Now, let's go to our next story. And this is more nonsense, okay,

the day, a new, disgusting ruling from another federal judge is blocking President Trump from laying off federal workers. And yes, ladies and gentlemen, this is a nationwide injunction. Take a listen. A federal judge dealing a major blow to the Trump administration's efforts to shrink the federal workforce, Judge Susan Ilston of California, ordering an immediate two-week halt to the White House's sweeping layoff plans, which targeted more than 20 agencies, including the Departments of State, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs. The administration has been working to cut over a trillion dollars from the federal budget and lay off more than 275,000 government workers, a move that has sparked protests and

hefty lawsuits across the country. Now, obviously, the Trump administration has appealed this to the Supreme Court, marking what? It's 15th High Court emergency appeal since taking office. A staggering number that has caused a pile up of applications as the Justice get into decision season for its normal cases. Now, think about this for a second, because the story isn't even about this ridiculous ruling from the judge. The story is nationwide injunctions. Look at the problem that is causing. Not only does the Trump administration

have no choice but to appeal it to the Supreme Court, but all of these judges across the country, they say two-thirds of the historical injunctions has been issued against President Trump. Ladies and gentlemen, we do have a problem. And what's crazy, one of the liberal justices, Alina Kagan, just three years ago, she was crying about this very issue. Take a listen. Some district courts have issued nationwide injunctions. And this happened in the Trump administration and it has also happened in the Biden administration. So this has no political tilt to it. But some district courts have, you know, very quickly issued nationwide injunctions to stop a policy in its tracks. And then you combine that with the ability of people

to forum shop to go to a particular district court where they think that that will be the result and you look at something like that and you think that can't be right that one district court whether it's in you know in the trump years people used to go to the northern district of california and in the biden years they go to texas and it just can't be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks and and leave it stopped for the years that it takes to go through normal process. Now, before we react to what she had to say, which clearly shows the hypocrisy, let me give you this message from today's sponsor, Crypto.com. Now, I'm still new to Crypto. You might be as well. But when I got in, which is when Trump dropped his mean coin, I actually made a solid return. But that's only because I use Crypto.com's platform. It's the platform I trust as a beginning trader. This app is insanely easy to use. And now it's my go-to for all things crypto. And right now, get this, they're giving away one Bitcoin, which is worth currently over $100,000.

And it's simple to enter. Just sign up using the link in the description below. And every $50 that you trade, you get one free entry. So $150 in trades, that's three entries. Think about that. Winners will be announced on July 4th, hot dogs, beer, and a Bitcoin. What else could sound perfect during Independence Day? It's not lost on me that Joe Biden was the president when she said that, and she was tired of folks going to Texas to enjoin what he was doing.

Dana, as you know, I don't mind being wrong, but I try to be consistent. It should not ebb and flow. Your view of nationwide injunction should not ebb and flow with who is in the White House. We need one standard. It literally makes no sense that one judge who can win with 50 votes and the vice president should be able to afford or undoing. do an executive agenda. He's right. I mean, it just violates common sense in all logic if you really think about it. Now, again, I think I said this yesterday. If you were a plaintiff and you obviously submitted your case and you want an injunction ruled on it, then it should be ruled in your

jurisdiction, meaning if it's in California, then it should only be applied to California. Now, during the oral arguments yesterday, that issue was brought up. And they went back and forth about the problems in that scenario. So I guess the answer might be, what is the lesser of the two evils? That might be the ultimate solution here. Now, let me show an example how bad this is getting since I brought up California. The AG just went on this morning. This proves our case about nationwide injunctions. And listen to the number of lawsuits they already have against President Trump. Take a listen. The President, the executive branch must act within this scope of the law. The laws are North Star. If all we have is political grievance,

or ideological or policy difference, we can't and we won't go to court. We'll get thrown out of court immediately. But when the executive branch, when Trump breaks the law, he will be held accountable in court, period, full stop. We won't back down from that. We are resolute in that commitment. Trump administration needs to follow the law. We filed 22 suits in 16 weeks because that's how many times he's broken the law

and violated the Constitution. So we come a far away to the point where we are now experiencing a coordinated political campaign, especially by California. So they can obstruct President Trump's agenda that majority of Americans actually voted for. And the flurry of lawsuits and emergency appeals reflects a strategy to weaponize the judiciary against the duly elected president of the United States. Ladies and gentlemen, that is a constitutional crisis because it's being caused by Democrats. And I'm just using their words against them.

And that's just with one state, ladies and gentlemen. If we factor it all in, this isn't about protecting the U.S. Constitution. this is about stopping President Trump. Now, just maybe, because I'm a reasonable individual, I would highly recommend them take a look at this next clip from Alan Dershowitz, who is a respected, one of the most prominent law professors from Harvard and what he believes should actually be taking place there. Take a list.

I don't think we're going to see a definitive ruling one way or the other on this because either ruling would create real chaos. If there was a ruling that says one judge can buying, then you're going to get judges with different interpretations and which one is binding. If you're going to say that judges can't bind, then it's going to take a long time to get the case to the Supreme Court. The answer is legislative. Congress should pass a statute creating a new court like the FISA court, five judges, and only they can issue nationwide injunctions. And if they issue a nationwide injunction, it should be immediately appealable to the Supreme Court.

and the Supreme Court could decide within 48 hours whether that national injunction is proper. The answer is legislative, not judicial here. And for the record, Alan was the youngest law professor at Harvard, and now you see why. I mean, I have to say that's probably the best solution I've ever heard of, because my perception is this is just a straight-up dilemma. It's just lose-lose. But that does make sense. But the problem is, well, Congress finally do their job,

because these days it doesn't seem like it on both sides. Now, let's go to our next story. This is a reaction from last night's debacle with the former FBI director, who is now under investigation by the Secret Service for posting the controversial photo of 8647, which a lot of people believe is inciting violence against the president of the United States. Now, here is the president in a preview of his upcoming interview with Brett Baer reacting to the post. Take a look. He knew exactly what that meant. A child knows what that meant. If you're the FBI director, and you don't know what that meant, that meant assassination.

And it says it loud and clear. Now, he wasn't very competent, but he was competent enough to know what that meant. And he did it for a reason, and he was hit so hard. Because people like me, they like what's happening with our country. Our country has become respected again and all this. and he's calling for the assassination of the president. Obviously he apologized and said he doesn't. Well, he apologized because he was here.

Look, he's a very bad. What do you want to see happen? What do you want to see happen? I don't want to take a position on it because that's going to be up to Pam and all of the great people. But I will say this, I think it's a terrible thing. And when you add his history to that, if he had a clean history, he doesn't. He's a dirty cup. He's a dirty cop.

And if he had a clean history, I could. I could understand if there was a leniency, but I'm going to let them make that decision. Yeah, now, as I stated last night, you're the ex-FBI director. It's got the number 47 in there. I'm not even referencing the number 86, okay, because I think that's just implied. But let's just act like he is that ignorant. As I say to yesterday, it says 47. I mean, anybody that sees the number 47 today, what comes to their mind, President Trump?

And by the way, President Trump is very aware. He's not going to blatantly say Pam Bondi investigate James Comey, the ex-FBI director publicly in front of a camera. He won't do that. And again, it just shows you how smarty is because he knows that would give the media what they want. And it's no shocker that MSNBC is downplaying this because that's what they do with everything when it comes to President Trump. Here is how they see it. Take a look. It's hard to know whether or not there, there.

I mean, Comey took the post down immediately. He apologized. It is still surprising to me. that he is so disliked on the right, considering the role he helped play in Donald Trump's original election in 2016. But this is certainly, you know, for those, you know, in Magasphere who want to talk about something else,

who want to be angry about something, James Comey provided a convenient target for them right now, and they're happy to do it. We should also note that after this, Willie, this brouhaha with the social media post, Comey went back on social media later the day to promote his new book, which is coming out in the next.

few weeks. Okay, so that is an interesting point that I'm more likely to buy than his claim that he was just ignorant about what this photo might mean. Okay, if you're going to go out there and promote a book, step number one is get people's attention. Well, he got people's attention. No question. So again, I'm more likely to believe that. Now, the director of national intelligence Tulsa Gabbard, she didn't hold back. She believes he belongs in jail. Do you believe Comey should be in jail. I do. Any other person with the position of influence that he has, people who take very seriously what a guy of his stature, his experience, and what the propaganda media has built him up to be, I'm very concerned for the president's life. We've already seen assassination attempts.

I'm very concerned for his life. And James Comey, in my view, should be held accountable and put behind bars for this. Even if you don't agree that he should go to jail for this post. Now, he should probably go to jail for other reasons. But particularly on what he did last night, the issue isn't even him posting it. The issue is how unhinged far left lunatics in America are today. They are willing to actually take up violence against political leaders. You already saw what happened with Tesla.

We know what happened with President Trump. And it will continue to happen. It's not just on the right. it's also on the left. Some Democrat leaders, including judges, have been targeted. And it's something that should not happen in this country. But where does it originate from? It's the words that we speak. And if we continue to speak them through repetition, people hear it. They start to believe it. And when they start to believe it, they start to act on it. That's the way that it works. Now, CNN has also joined the party, and they're downplaying this as well. Take a look.

All right. So you would approach this from the federal statute, because they've referred it to the Attorney General, the Secret Service, the FBI, the federal statute about making a threat against a government official through interstate commerce, meaning that they use the internet and social media. Then the bar is set at, is the threat a serious threat? Is it a credible threat? Did the person making the threat mean it and have the capability to carry it out? Is it the kind of threat that struck fear into the heart of the person being threatened? threatened. None of this seems to approach this bar. If I had brought this into the Southern District of New York as a threat, they would have said, we appreciate you stopping by, but

we don't see a prosecution here. So what you see is a lot of Hyper Bowl. But as my colleague Jim Murphy pointed out on this morning's news call, there are still stickers saying 86 Biden, meaning 8646, that are being sold on eBay. There's no call to say that those are threats. There's no investigation into eBay for selling them. They're available across the internet on other platforms. They're on sale at a reduced rate because he's not president anymore. None of the distributors are being investigated. So the question here is how much of this is government weaponization theater versus a real legal problem?

Let's go back to the New York court system because we know they cook the books to convict a former president at the time, Donald J. Trump. Right? we know how the judge changed the rules around so that the jury would still arrive at the conclusion that he wanted. Guys, this is not my opinion. It's all on record. So that's number one. Number two, okay, so you tell me how many assassination attempts happen against Joe Biden, against Kamala Harris? Zero. So I don't buy what he is saying. I get it. There is a difference here. Free speech is a thing. But again, if you're an ex-FBI director, not an ex- janitor who worked at the federal building down the street, I think, yeah, maybe there should be some consequences for you posting that. That's just me. So I want to know about you and what you think about these stories in today's video, particularly

this entire James Comey situation, that's number one. Number two, the new polling showing that President Trump's approval rating is actually positive, not negative, as they tried to make Americans believe just two weeks ago. And the disturbing thing that continues to happen in our country, these nationwide injunctions. Let me know what you think about all of that in the comment section below. Now, the other breaking story that you might want to look into that we've been. published yesterday was the CEO of Walmart and the shocking announcement that he made. Also, Democrats want reparations and they want it now. But wait till you hear the reasoning behind it.

If you're interested in that video and more stories from yesterday, all you have to do is click on it because it's coming up right now.