The Trish Regan Show - 🚨 BREAKING: Supreme Court Hands Trump THREE HUGE Immigration Wins — Haitians, Syrians LOSE Status! LEFT PANICS

Episode Date: June 26, 2026

SCOTUS just handed Trump THREE massive immigration wins in ONE week. Haitians and Syrians lose protected status, asylum seekers can be turned back at the border, and green card holders can be blocked re-entry — all 6-3. The left is melting down. Plus: fireworks on Capitol Hill as Dems fight back, Europe quietly pulling its gold out of US vaults (Dr. Kirk Elliott joins me with reasons why), and the devastating earthquake disaster unfolding right now in Venezuela. Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBlMo25WDUKJNQ7G8sAk4Zw?sub_confirmation=1 ✅ Help support independent journalism — become a TRISH TEAM member: ▶️ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBlMo25WDUKJNQ7G8sAk4Zw/join ✅ Get my newsletter and start investing today! Https://76research.com ✅🔔 CHECK OUT MY NEW SPOTIFY SHOW AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL DAILY EDITIONS: https://open.spotify.com/show/2blgbg4OaN5dqFhkBy12ii?si=HPdSujPDRrapZWtxbsgAjQ&nd=1&dlsi=979e048c08c04e13 sponsors: https://TrishLovesGoldandSilver.com https://BalanceofNature.com CODE: TRISH Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is quite a week. It's really shaping up to be a record week. Three wins now on the immigration front for the Trump administration. And boy, oh boy, the left is really losing it because, well, it turns out all the little things that they were concocting were actually not constitutional. So now they've all been basically been put out to pasture. And the Trump administration is coming through with some really solid stuff. The Supreme Court of the United States deciding to, today that guess what? It turns out all the Haitians and the Syrians that are here in this country because Biden just allowed everybody in, well, they can't actually be here if the president decides they cannot be because they have what's called temporary protected status. And that is

something that has always been intended to be part of the executive branch function. In other words, the president of the United States since 1990, going back to George Bush when this thing was first put in. The president of the United States has the right to say whether or not something is an extraordinary situation and therefore we are going to allow for certain people to come in. It started back in like 1990 El Salvador was in the middle of a civil war and so we wanted to bring some of these people in under this temporary protected status. But that was the president's prerogative. That is who had the power in this case. And so the left has argued, oh, well, you know, then it's just got to be forever, right?

You can't send any of these Haitians or these Syrians home, even if you think that things have improved materially enough in those countries to warrant them going home. I mean, they just thought this thing could stand forever, right? Forever and ever and ever and ever. And so now they're learning out, yeah, that's not the same. By the way, there's another wrinkle to this, because the second court case that came down and was decided today

is the reality that when you come to claim asylum, in the United States of America, there's some kind of debate because, you know, everybody's like turning everything upside down and nobody knows what day of the week it is anymore. The left was trying to say that you were in the country when you came to the border. So there's a whole semantics thing going on there. We're going to get into that because you're not in the country if you're just at the border. And that should be obvious, but apparently not to some of these folks. Anyway, the left is freaking out.

They're all upset. just look at what they're saying over at the New York Times. Supreme Court expands Trump's power over immigration, rulings allow president to expel some migrants and turn away others. That's actually, in the spirit of things, I'm going to tell you, like, that's actually kind of fair, because when I went over the Wall Street Journal, here's what I saw here. Supreme Court lets Trump strip humanitarian protections from many immigrants.

I think that's a little bit of a bias headline here, because again, if you follow the law, TPS, temporary protection status, that's always been something that's been afforded by the executive branch of the government. So the president has always had the ability to turn that on and off at his or her someday her whim, right? So this is why Bush decided, okay, we're going to have the people coming from El Salvador. And Biden said, everybody, you know, come one, come all. So you've got a little bit of bias being reflected there at the Wall Street Journal. Meanwhile, over at Bloomberg, what do we see? Well, they're just flat out. I guess this is their opinion column. The Supreme Court

just betrayed asylum seekers. Hmm. They betrayed the asylum seekers, but what about the people that live here in this country already? Do we not count for anything? Anything, anything at all? It is a win. It is a huge win for the Trump administration. It comes on the heels of the other win that we got. Was that on Tuesday earlier in the week when they said, hey, you know, if you are alleged to have committed a crime and you're a green card holder and you decide to flee the country, you're not going to be able to just waltz back in. No, we can actually end your status. We can terminate that green card. You've been arrested for a crime and you left the country. I mean, some of it kind of seems like no-brainer stuff, but the left, as I said, they're doing cartwheels. They get themselves twisted in all kinds of little knots.

Let's go to Fox here. They're saying, yes, a win indeed for the president. It's treated as a win for the Trump administration, which has wanted to wipe out temporary protected status for more than a million people who are living here in this country. These cases centered on a number of Haitian and Syrian refugees who were here in the country. And basically what the court has said is that they can't challenge this decision by the Department of Homeland Security, by the administration, that they're the ones who get to make the assessment about whether they leave or not. Yeah. Okay. That makes sense. Kind of makes sense. because that's the way it's supposed to be. That's the way it's always been. Again, as I told you, going back to 1990,

when they first put this thing in and they formalized it and they said it's up to the president. So why would that change? Seriously, why would that change? Because you've got some radical lefties that want to just have open borders. It's effectively what's going on. I mean, if you have a border.

Because this whole discussion and debate, the semantics of whether or not you're in the country or you're at the border. Wow. I mean, this one took the cake. I want to go to Samuel Alito, who wrote the majority opinion in this. By the way, everything was like 6-3, 6-3, 6-3, 6-3. You know how the kids all say 6-7, 6-7? My new thing is 6-3, 6-3, because you get these three, very, very biased judges who are extremely left and they're never departing from their lefty land. Anyway, over to Samuel Alito, who actually wrote the majority opinion here, and he's trying to explain to people the difference between when you're in the country or whether you're at the border. And there's a distinction that matters for the law when it comes to claiming asylum.

Here we go. I believe that both you and Justice Sotomayor and Justice Jackson on several occasions have used the phrase arriving at. I think you said you arrived at your house, but that's not the term that is in the statute. Do you think there is no difference between arriving at a location and arriving in the location? Does a person arrive in the house when the person is not in the house and is knocking at the door, asking to be admitted to the house? Yes, I think here the door is open. The officer is standing on the other side of the threshold.

I mean, it's sort of funny. I mean, if someone's coming to your house, right, as you said for dinner, and you let them in to your house, then they would be in your house. But if they're just ringing the doorbell, she thinks they're in the house, okay? And that they have every right to be in the house. Except that, by the way, the analogy is not perfect because in this case, we're not inviting anybody to dinner, right? they're just showing up unannounced and somehow these lefty crazies think that that allows for them to be able to come into your home you know like it's like suddenly i'm inviting the whole town over for dinner i don't think so right if i didn't invite them and they just show up they're certainly not going to come in my home and how can you say that they are in it i mean it's wild to me how they twist all

this but it's all in the spirit of trying to completely i think destroy what we have built and destroy this nation. I'll tell you, the six justices, the conservative justices have a very clean, very authentic read of the Constitution. And they're not going to allow for this to happen. Let's go over to Clarence Thomas, who spoke this week about the extraordinary gift we have with this country and how tremendous it is. And 250 years later, here we are going strong and think about what people went through to get us to this place and how we have an obligation. obligation to protect that. This is what those three justices are up against, a sentiment like Clarence Thomas's watch.

Give me liberty or give me death. That devotion has driven the great achievements and heroism of Americans in the 250 years since. Think of the frontiersmen who settle the West. Think of the families who built their little towns on the prairies. Think of the women who raised their children to love God and country and sent them off to fight wars. It is a devotion expressed in the final sentence of the Declaration, the willingness to do anything for our principles that has throughout American history been most indispensable. It is that devotion that we are missing today. and that we must find in our hearts if this nation is to endure.

Well said. In other words, we need that. I don't think some of these justices, Tanji Jackson Brown, really have that kind of deep in their soul. They have a very different view of what this country should be. I don't entirely understand it sometimes. It's really kind of hard for me to get inside their heads because I'm pretty clear on how I think we should be. and that is a meritocracy, a capitalist meritocracy

that provides equal opportunity for everyone, but not equal outcomes. And you have a wing of this country now, these socialist Democrats that just took over with Memdami in New York City that are really about radicalism. And they want to hurt this country, to tear it all down and rebuild from scratch so that they can afford all these opportunities

to people who I guess don't need to have to work for it, that don't want to work for it, that's their idea of justice. And don't forget, I mean, there's just some basic, basic things, okay? So in terms of the Syrians all coming here, the president's like, okay, well, things are kind of okay back in your country. It's time for you to skid-addle and go back home. We're no longer going to offer you the temporary protected status, in part because we are not confident on the whole assimilation process.

And you have only to look at, well, this video went viral, okay, this week, Elon Musk actually put this out on X. It's Houston. Okay, Houston, Texas. Take a peek. Uh-huh. Okay, so this is Houston, Texas. People are calling it the United Islamic Republic of Houston, okay?

Because everybody is dressed in their Islamic clothing and, you know, I'm sorry. But like, that religion, until they find a way to reform it, Dr. Judy Zasser, great. He's actually a real doctor. I'm not just a doctorate, but he used to come on my Fox show all the time, and he's Islamic himself, and he said, listen, this thing needs to get reformed, because we need a new version of this where we're taking the good stuff and get rid the bad stuff, because part of the bad stuff is stuff like, oh, if you leave the religion, it can be punishable by death. I mean, there's no other religion that says that kind of stuff.

So that is not exactly the kind of stuff that's going to make you very easily integrated in the rest of the United States of America, where we have a Judeo-Christian tradition. that rewards hard work, entrepreneurism, and thrives on a capitalist meritocracy. No, it's not going to work the way they're thinking about things. Brenda Gill, represented from Texas,

making this very, very clear, trying to spell it out, saying things that, you know, people get in a lot of trouble for saying. Because we've all been brainwashed with this nonsense and this DEI, I like to call it, Crapola, okay? Here's Brandon. If you point out what's happening here, if you're truthful about what mass Islamic immigration

has done to Great Britain, you're an Islamophobia, you're a racist, you're uncouth or unfit for dignified, civilized society, when the impact of that type of suppression of speech means that working class people have been brutally raped and tortured. And that's something that we deal with in the United States on a smaller level, but something we deal with now. If you speak out against mass Islamic immigration, you were denigrated and labeled a racist. And we have to be able to be truthful about these issues and straightforward that whenever you bring in large numbers of people from cultures that hold values that are entirely incompatible with our own. In this case, the belief that Muslims have more dignity and are superior to non-Muslims, that child marriages are okay, that Muslims can essentially subjugate other people, including young children sexually.

If you speak out against that, you're Islamophobic, we have got to get over that because you can see what the price is. And those working class girls are the ones who paid the price here. Yeah, you better believe it. He's talking about the rape gang reports there out of the UK. Again, a cultural difference that is just reality, all right? It's reality. And when you flood the country or a particular community, and we've seen this all over Europe,

with people that just don't see high to eye, don't see the world the same way that you do, you're going to have problems. a lot of problems and that's what we're seeing. But this is the third win this week, okay? So you had these two coming out today, basically the TPS status, which is estimated to affect somewhere around 1.3 million people. But specifically they were talking about the Haitians and the Syrians because the left was saying, well, this is discriminatory. And the court's like, well, there's nothing in there that's discriminatory. It's just that this is the rule. The president has the

prerogative to decide whether or not we're going to continue allowing temporary protected status for these people. The president is going to assess whether or not the situation is bad enough that they cannot go home. And you know what? This president has said they can go home. So they can go home. But they're trying to make it all about something else. Well, it comes, again, that's one today. The other today is in the in or out, right? Or you're in or out of the country. When you show up at the border, we have decided, because we need to police this thing, right? You can't have swarms of people to the tune of millions and millions and millions, 11 million showing up saying, I want in.

Of course, all these countries are like, you go for it. Well, we'll go to the US of A. They'll give you all kinds of benefits. Apparently, as soon as you show up on the border, you're considered in. So that has ended. It gives us an enormous ability now to control metering, as they're calling it, metering what's going on at the border. Because if someone just shows up, hi, how are you,

and suddenly is able to apply for asylum, you understand. and we've seen it in real time, the courts get backed up, it's just not actually something that can be done. So that's ending. But again, the other thing that happened this week was that we said, and this just seems like good old common sense to me, good old-fashioned common sense, imagine that. If you are a green card holder,

and if you are alleged to have committed a crime, and if you, after that allegation, decide to, you know, take off for Mexico or for a trip to the beach, we don't have to let you back in. You know, you were supposed to show up at court. We didn't want you to leave in the country. You left. Well, you're not allowed back in. I think that's incredibly harsh.

Well, the Supreme Court's like, nope. The DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, has the right to decide that. Just like they have the right to decide whether somebody can have temporary protective status. And they have the right to turn people away that show up at the border demanding asylum. this is just shall we say the rules of the road well that's an interesting looking shot i was going to show you what was going on there i don't know what happened tech wise speaking but i wanted to show you the um the ruling that came out earlier this week but here we go i think we have it here the six three decision again what i tell you six three six three forget six seven the six three decisions

scotis rules that dhs can strip green card holders lawful permanent residents of their legal status if they leave the country and travel abroad while they are facing criminal charges, even if they are just pending and not convicted yet. Now, the liberals, of course, dissenting. And so here we go, yet again. And what are they going to tell? Oh, they're going to say, we need to stack the Supreme Court. I do believe I even heard Chuck Schumer say that at one point. We need to just put more people on the court. That's their solution. You know who did that? And it failed miserably for that country. Venezuela. Hugo Chavez in Venezuela is one of the first things he did. Boy, gosh darn it, aren't they happy that they got us in their corner right about now, given the massive destruction? We'll talk

about that a little later in the program, but you really want friends like us right about now and not friends like Russia and China and Iran down there in Venezuela. Just horrible devastation. But back to the courts, that is exactly what Hugo Chavez did. As soon as he became elected president, he went in and said, I'm going to stack the court with all my cronies, and I'm going to. going to get whatever I want through. And so he just kept adding and adding and adding and adding. We don't do that here because guess what? We are not some kind of crazed banana republic, even though the left is trying to make us one for goodness sakes. We got real fireworks. Meanwhile, with DHS today on Capitol Hill, a very liberal Democrat decided she wanted to go after

Secretary of Homeland Security, Mark Wynn Mullen, and accuse him of, well, I don't know, allowing for all these children to go missing. And he's like, lady, who do you think found all the kids? Come on again, reality check. And boy, did he ever give it to her. I want to go to this? Watch. 3,900 children were separated from their family.

450,000 kids were lost through the Biden administration. You didn't say a word about it. Mr. Secretary, do not interrupt. Don't you point your finger at me. I will point my finger at you. Don't you be a hypocrite then. 3900 kids. You should be as upset about the 450,000 kids that were lost.

I am upset. say a word about it. For four years, you never said a word. Mr. Secretary. Could you put him in his place for, you should be put in your place. I'm going to put you in your place. Do not point your finger at me. Like I got kind of rowdy there. And then the guy was running the hearing is like, what are you doing? Mark Wynn-Mullen, you know, you're going to get your chance. This is there eight minutes. And so they're grandstanding there for eight minutes. And he's like, well, do I have to sit here and hear this? Do I have to sit here and have people just absolutely just feed a bunch of lies out there because they're looking for a darn sound bite. So obviously he was getting kind of annoyed. Overall, though, I think a lot of

people on the right have gotten very annoyed. And they've kind of had it up to here because you've got this la-la land that people are functioning in that really doesn't work in the real world. And this la-la land is actually very threatening, very threatening for our country, for our culture, for our economy, and for our security. Stephen Miller, last night on Fox, made this very clear. I want to play this bite. That's the communication challenge that we all have together, Sean, which is to explain to the American people that Democrats you grew up with, the Democrats that your mom and dad grew up with, the Democrats that your grandma and grandpa grew up with do not exist anymore

at all, not at any level of government. A vote for any Democrat anywhere for any office is empowering a party that wants to strip this country to the bone, to take away our security. our defense, our way of life. You know, just tonight, Sean, I saw a Democrat member of Congress online defending the Antifa terrorists in Texas who were just jailed for shooting an ICE officer. They actually shot an ICE officer. They were charged with terrorism and a Democrat congresswoman was defending the Antifa terrorists.

You see how crazy it's getting? It's like they hate themselves and they hate us. we can't function as a country like that. I mean, it's getting so bad. Boy, do they hate us. One of the women that could be the next congressperson from New York is blaming 9-11 on capitalism. Yeah. I mean, these people, these people shouldn't be in Congress. These people don't love our country. These people hate you and they hate themselves and they hate the United States of America. Just watch her. And so like, and finding that like, you know, the system of capitalism and racism and white supremacy, etc., have all, and Islamophobia have all been used, you know, to colonized lands, right, to take resources from other people. And so this is like a long trajectory. And we're just seeing the manifestations of that continuation, right, with 9-11. And so a lot of times when people are asking us to respond about, you know, attack, you know, attack. right? When if you look back like historically, right, you know, a lot of us come from lands that were

colonized lands where wars are being waged, right? A lot of times because of U.S. policy or the policies in Europe. And so I find that we can connect over that, but then also that, the idea that we have to apologize for like a terror attack that like a couple people did. And then there is no apologies or reparations for genocide and for slavery. Oh, you see what you want. She wants. She wants reparations. There they go with the reparations again. Something that a couple people did. Kind of sounds like Ilhan Omar, doesn't it?

Kind of sounds like this is what they have been taught, and this is what they're trying to teach America. America's not going to go for it. I mean, heck, I know America's not going to go for it because you know that show? You know that show that I cannot stand over on ABC, The View. even, even the ladies on the view are having a hard time.

Well, that woman I just showed in, her two counterparts that don't believe in any kind of law and order at all. They want total bedlam. These are kami, Islamic radicals that are trying to take over the country. And when even the view has had it, well, you know, they've gone too far. Watch. Listen, Mamgani does emerge as a kingmaker, but at what expense? just absolutely neutered Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer, who have the job of trying to win back the House and Senate for Democrats

by endorsing candidates against sitting House members. How did he neuter them exactly? Because what he's, so you're, I'm going to get into it, just let me get into this. So you just talked about these goods and services. You want the police to come. You want the fire department to come. Well, one of your new candidates, a Villa Chevalier,

who won last night, wants to abolish the police in all prison. She was asked four times, how would you deal with somebody who committed murder then? What is your plan? And she dodged and didn't answer. She tweeted that Obama is evil. Biden is a rapist in a war criminal and bleep Kamala Harris. These were not people running on an affordability agenda.

These were left-wing extremists that were elected last night at the expense of moderate Democrats. So a seat that you guys do need to win if you want to take back the house. I don't like the way she sounds at all. Well, that's what I'm saying. Well, she's not the party. She's one person. But that is the point is these candidates that were endorsed by DSA,

the Democratic Socialists were extreme candidates. And exactly. David Lorenzo, I just saw you're like too far for the view. Wow, right? What does that tell you? It tells you that actually in some ways, if we're going to look at a silver lining in all of this, I think the country is not where these extreme communist, radical, Islamic nut jobs are, okay? The country's just not there.

The Democrat Party's not there. I mean, Hakeem Jeffries, he doesn't know what to do. Joy Behar doesn't know what to do. They don't know what they got themselves. This is like a hot potato. I mean, I think AOC is going to look quaint next to these folks. So this is dangerous, yes, for the country, dangerous for the party, dangerous for New York. The question becomes, does it play on a larger level?

I mean, we saw it play out in Minnesota. And now Ilhan Omar is running the show, right? Timmy Wall's too scared to say boo. Keith Ellison wouldn't speak up to the massive $19 billion worth of a frog going on there. Why? Oh, because they may not get elected because apparently the smallies control it all. So you got to be very careful here. You got to make sure that people are aligned with us, that people are aligned with our values, that people want to come and make this country a better place, that they want to work hard. They don't want a handout. Too many of these people, Mamdami's disciples, they're all looking for hands.

handouts. And they don't think there's any crime that should be punished. I mean, are they bonkers? Are they crazy? I think they are. And I think the people that vote for them are seriously crazy. And I think the whole country is not crazy. And probably it's a good thing on the national stage that they're all just off in left field. I mean, Donald Trump said, these idiots won. For goodness I'm 16 in 0, right? Like, let's celebrate the win. So that's good news for him. It's good news for MAGA. I think when push comes to shove, you're going to have MAGA versus insanity. Now, where does the cookie crumble on that? I'm thinking MAGA, here's the president.

Well, they're going radical left. They're going, really, you know, you talk about the Democrat socialists. You took really, it's really a communist. These people, I watched that woman last night. That's not a socialist. I know socialist. That woman is a communist. And you know, what they don't say is that I was 16 and 0 last night.

But mine were a little more boring, a little more mainstream. There were Republican conservatives. But we were 16 at 0. And if you look over the last two and a half years, we're about 347 and just about 0. That's pretty good. But nobody writes that. But he picked three. They won.

They beat a guy named Dan Goldman, who's, you know, a loser. He was one of my prosecutors, one of my many prosecutors. that they used on me. Dan Goldman, not a good prosecutor, fortunately, but he's now looking for a job. I was very surprised to see, you know, because he's a pretty liberal guy, when they go more liberal than Dan Goldman, they're really into Never Never Land. Does this tell you that the Democratic Party's 2028 nominee will likely be or could likely be a Democratic socialist? Well, it should make it easier for Republicans. because most of the nation is composed of sane people.

They don't want to... You know, if you look throughout history, go back thousands of years, you've always had socialism and communism by different names. It's never ever worked. It's not going to work this time. Yeah, you know what? He's right. He really is. He's right.

In some ways, it's actually a good thing, right? For those of us over in the sane aisle, aisle. It's good that they're so crazy and they're so extreme. I was looking at some numbers earlier this morning and I think only 7% of the country actually fits this definition. So in other words, they may be getting swooped up in New York City with all their Brooklyn hipsters, but the rest of the nation is not there. And they're going to do themselves some serious damage. And they know it, by the way, they really, really know it, which is why you've got Hakeem Jeffries flipping out, freaking out, which is why you've finally got the ladies on the

the view admitting, well, that's not what we want. Gee, darn it, how did this happen? I'll get to tell you. Guys, this is a problem of your own making. You got us to this point. You're the ones that, by the way, abandoned the working class that was wide out in the open for taking by MAGA and Donald Trump. Because you're the ones that said open borders, come one, come all. I mean, this is the rhetoric that we heard even from the Supreme Court justices in their dissents today. They don't understand. They don't understand. They don't understand. If you show up to someone's house for dinner, aren't you in their house? No, Alito says.

You are at their house. You're not in the house. Duh. It's unbelievable. Unbelievable. We've been talking about gold. Have we not gold? Wow.

All these central banks over in Europe saying, give me, give me, I want it all back every single last time of it. Look at France for goodness sakes. Wow. France is going out and repurchasing all of its gold. out of the New York Fed. It took 129 tons of gold from the New York Federal Reserve between July 25 and January of 26. It's now storing all of its gold domestically. This is kind of important when you think about what's happening next month. The meeting in Ankara, Turkey, the NATO meeting,

and we've told everybody you've got to pay your 5%. And not everybody's paying their 5%. I mean, Poland might be the only one that's forking over any money. Heck, a lot of these folks aren't even paying their 2.5% for goodness sakes. And to be clear, as the president has made abundantly clear, we're getting nothing out of this relationship, right? Absolutely nothing. I mean, they're giving us the middle finger every chance they possibly can. So, with that in mind, we want to force them to pay up or we want to leave it all together. We don't need to continue contributing to this. You saw Pete Hegseth over in Brussels about a week ago. I think, in fact, it was just nearly a week ago. He said, hey, guess what?

if you guys aren't contributing, then we're going to reduce how much we're contributing. But I think that France might be worried about something else. I think France might be worried that we might take their goal. Could that be? I sat down moments ago with my friend and one of our terrific show sponsors here, Dr. Kirk Elliott, and we talked all about this. And it is a fascinating, fascinating interview. You've got to hear it.

Here we go. Join me right now with more on all of this. Dr. Kirk Elliott, you know, it's great to have you back on this show. The viewers have seen you a lot. I actually was teasing all week that you were going to come up on the program because we've been talking about how France is suddenly grabbing all its gold and it's taking it out of New York and even London and it's moving it. They've got all of it back in France right now.

And I was really struck by that. I thought, why now? We'll ask Dr. Kirk. So tell us what is going on. You know, this is a really interesting story, which is just kind of one cog in the wheel because it's broader than that. And there's a story behind the story. But why does anybody want control of their assets?

Because they don't trust that somebody else holding it is a safe option anymore. Right. And so when you look at what's been happening globally for quite some time, you know, you can go back to the announcement by Putin at the World Economic Forum, actually the BRICS meeting. It was the initiation of the bricks meeting, I think, three years ago. And he said, we're going to de-dollarize the world. It's irreversible and it's our objective.

Those are pretty big fight in words, right? It's like, but how do they do it by selling U.S. treasuries, by reallocating what used to be in treasuries into a different asset to kind of neuter the U.S. dollar and its use globally? See, and when France is doing this by repatriating their gold, are they actually saying? They're saying, we want something different than U.S. dollar assets backing our system. We don't trust that the West isn't going to weaponize our assets that they're holding and we're not going to get them back. So they're just bringing them home to Roost because

they believe that's safer. Well, the timing is really interesting to me because it's coming just as we get closer and closer to that NATO meeting in Turkey, which is happening next month, Dr. Kirk. And I would expect that we're going to continue to hold Europe responsible and say, listen, you guys got to show up with your 5% of GDP. So many of you aren't doing that. And so maybe, I'm hypothesizing here, but is one of the things going through their head that, hey, if they're not paying the bill, we're going to make sure that they do since we have their gold? That's that's the the weaponization of currency or the weaponization of assets that a big country like the United States, if we're holding their assets, I mean, that we could do.

Now, have we ever done that before? I don't think so. I mean, although we did confiscate everybody's gold here in the USA at one point. Yeah. Well, we've actually done it twice. So one, the first instance that I can remember is this goes way back. Like when I was early on in my career, Angela Merkel was a chancellor, Premier Germany, whatever, whatever the president or person, I don't know. No, you got it.

Chancellor, yeah. I think it was chancellor. She said, we want our gold back that the Fed was holding. Well, at the time, now this was like 20 years ago, 15, 20 years ago. What did the Fed say? They said, sorry, Germany. We'll give it back to you in seven years. Well, if I were Markell, I would say, what?

Those are my assets. I want them back now. We just put them in your vault for safekeeping. Well, what happened? Right. So the Fed probably re-hypothicated. It meant, yeah, they had it there on paper, but they were selling it over and over and over again. They were leasing it out.

It wasn't technically there. Oh, no. They had to go through a series of over seven years. We'll get it back. We'll get it back to you. Right. And so to me, I think that was the first signal of, is the gold actually there? Right.

Now we're seeing conversations of, well, we should audit Fort Knox and, you know, all those other kind of things. I think there's. We want to know, right? Is it there? Yeah. They want to know if their gold is there. It's supposed to be there for safekeeping.

You know, take it down to an individual level. Your money that you have in the bank, it's technically. not your money. When you deposit money in a bank, yeah, you're held, it's, it's, you're a beneficiary of your own money. Because when you deposit money in any bank, it basically becomes a security, meaning you give the bank the right to do whatever they want with it. They can buy real estate with it. They can lend it out to the next person. And they're just hoping and praying that not everybody wants their withdrawals at the same time. You know, that's the just of a bank run. Did you ever see the movie?

It's a Wonderful Life? Yes. That's exactly it. Right? When people think, oh boy, I don't know if my bank has enough money. What if they're under capitalized? And so they start to pull it out. We saw this a little bit with Silicon Valley Bank way, you know, a few years ago.

And then it was Credit Suisse and it was Signature Bank. And it was kind of caused this little mini bank run. Because people thought, I don't know if my money is. actually safe in the bank. They're lending it out because fractional reserve banking, they lend out 90% of what you put in. It's not like you've got put in a bunch of hundreds into your checking account and you open up the big bank vault door and all these hundreds start flying out. No, they're using it. This is how banks make money. Right. So, and how do banks make money? They lend. That's the gist of banking. That's what bankers do. They use your money. They lend it out

and they capitalize on that. So fast forward to today. And don't talk about $100 bills. Talk about gold is money, right? Because this is an interesting framework moving forward to where the global international monastery system is moving. And we could go back a few years to the Basel 3 accord. What did they do?

They made gold a tier one asset. And people said, well, what does that mean? It just means it's on the same playing field as currency when banks are lending back and forth. So let's build on that premise, okay? Because the international monetary system is not built on currencies. So people think that it is like Japan has the yen, the European Union has the euro, we have the dollar. And it's just this exchange of currencies back and forth. No, they're bankers.

Central banks are banks. the money or assets that they have held is collateral. You can't lend out money without the collateral to back up your loan. So what are central banks around the world now doing? They're saying as they de-dollarize the world, we don't want to use a system of currencies is our collateral anymore. This is why not just France, but Asian banks. You know, you look at the number of ounces of gold that are being held by central banks globally.

Trish, it has now surpassed the U.S. dollar. Gold is the number one held asset by central banks value-wise globally. It's surpassed the U.S. dollar. And the U.S. dollar has been the king of monetary reserves since Bretton Woods in 1940. Brett Woods. Hey, I'm coming to you live for a die, New Hampshire, very close to Bretton Woods. So close. I know well. Yeah, so why would central banks allocate into the U.S. dollar? Because it was safe, right? We were the world's reserve currency, which meant that all countries needed it for settlement. If push came to shove and, you know, it looked like the U.S. was running out, we had a printing press.

Right? So the risk of default on the U.S. dollar was very low. So since 1944, the U.S. dollar has been the number one held asset at central banks around the world. This changed just a couple months ago. Now, gold is the number one held asset and the U.S. dollar holdings are shrinking globally. So, and it's getting worse because not only are they no longer holding U.S. dollars as the number one asset, they're now retreating and saying not only are we holding gold, but we're going to hold it ourselves, like in our, our own vault. In many of these European countries, it's just, it's fascinating to see. And coming, I think, at this critical time when we look at what's going on with NATO. And so I think it really shows their geopolitical stress. And look, I mean, we talk about gold as being a safe haven. I know this is one of the things that, you know, you encourage people to look at. And everybody, just to clarify, has their own tolerance and ability to take on risk. any investment is always risky.

I want to stress that. But why is it that you think banks are looking to gold as that sort of safe haven play? And why is it that you think individuals also look to it as a safe haven? Well, it's because gold, silver, they have zero counterparty risk, meaning they are what they are. Right? So a currency has political risk, exchange rate risk, purchasing power risk, geopolitical risk. You know, currencies can go in and out of favor. If you have a currency that's either backed by gold or kind of de facto backed by gold, the central bank is holding it as a reserve, it is what it is. So why would you invest in a currency when you can invest in the asset that the currency wants to be backed by? Invest in that asset. There's zero counterparty risk. It doesn't matter if the Russian rubble is backed by gold. If the Russian rubble goals away, you still have the gold, right? So this is why banks are looking at gold more as collateral than currencies

because banks do what banks do and they lend money. They need an asset that's strong and stable and doesn't have any risk. Now, this started on steroids when the Russian-Ukraine conflict started. And why is that? Why did the world start? Because we took their money. I mean, look, I love, Dr. Kirk, full disclosure, I am all about using financial tools as a kind of arsenal and weapon. And so I think it's far better than using guns. Trust me, I mean, I'd much rather strangle someone economically than actually go in and start shooting at people and risk lives being lost, right? Which is ultimately, I'd rather lose dollars in lives.

I always say that, and I think the president is very attuned to that as well, and that's been his methodology, right? Like go in and sanction everyone, but the flip side of this is exactly what you're talking about, where all of a sudden, if your system is not trusted, if you've got France pulling their gold out of the Fed, I mean, then you're dealing with a future problem, a current and future problem, because let's not forget, I'll let you explain it. What goes along with being the world's reserve currency. Why would anybody want to be the world reserve currency? We have power, right? Because you have power and you can build a lifestyle for yourself that you didn't have before. Why? Because no matter how much money you print, the rest of the world still has demand for your

currency. I mean, because it's you. So it builds. But if you start saying, well, we're not going to give you the currency because we're sanctioning, then all of a sudden you start to lose that because what happens, people move away. It's natural, right? You know, if mom and dad say we're going to lock up your, you know, I, this is, it's such a good analogy, right? Because with NATO, I joke that they're like the mature adult kids that won't move out of the house. And so finally we're like, okay, sorry, kids, you're on your own. And we're taking the trust fund. Right? So they're like, no, no, I want to get my trust fund before mom and dad take it away from me. Because that's kind of like the point we're at. We've, we've subsidized them. And I think we've kind of had it. And they

probably since there's a risk, you know, I don't think we'd do it, but they worry, right, that there's some kind of risk that Donald Trump and Scott Bessent will say, yeah, you know, you haven't been paying your tap. We're going to deduct it from whatever we got. Well, holding people's assets back is, you're right, is a better weapon than an actual gun. Because it doesn't kill people. Now, it impacts an entire society, right? So when the rush Ukraine conflict started, I'm going to, I'm going to, kind of not dumb this down, but simplify it. Putin and Biden were at each other's throats, right? And Biden said, look, Putin, I don't like you.

I don't like what you're doing in Ukraine. We are going to kick you out of the SWIF system, which was, it's how bank wires are sent from banks to banks internationally, right? So they thought, all right, we're going to starve out the Russian people by getting them out of the banking system. So Putin goes to China and says, hey, gee, we just got kicked out of the SWIF system. And they said, oh, no worries. We have the similar thing called SIPs, CIPS. So now they were out of the SWIF system. Biden thought this was the nuclear option to really get at Putin.

And it didn't work at all. So then what did he do next? He froze their assets. He took their gold. He took Russia's gold. Well, that really ticked them off. But that signaled to the rest of the world. eke. We don't want our gold held in the West because it can be weaponized against us if we don't

agree with them. So now you've got country after country after country. France isn't the only one that's repatriating their gold and they want it back home because it's safer if they store it than having it stored elsewhere where they believe it can be weaponized against them. Yeah, no, I get it. It's a natural thing to do. I mean, look, Angela Merkel, probably, you know, when she was trying to get her gold back years ago, was on to something, it would have been nice if she had also figured out maybe we shouldn't be completely reliant on Russia for cheap natural gas, right? Because, again, just diversification being part of what one should want, both with assets and in terms of energy supply, which brings me to diversification, okay, one of the reasons people like gold, and one of the reasons I personally like gold and the reason I hold it,

and anytime it goes down, I buy more. Like, you know, everybody has a different tolerance again. Like, you know, I'm holding for long term, so I'm not looking at, okay, well, it's going down and maybe it's going to go down more. I actually really fundamentally just say I'm building an asset over time. This is me personally, again, everybody, you do your own thing, you talk to your investment advisor, et cetera. But that's what I'm thinking about.

In terms of, you know, what people like about it as a safe haven, I think you really outlined it pretty well. But let's face it, it's volatile. It's an investment like anything else. And recently, we've seen it going down. Now, I have one reaction. Other people have other reactions. What is your sense in terms of the value right now? When we look at it, it had been, I mean, everybody thought it was going to be $5,000, you know, maybe $6,000 an ounce. We saw Golden Sacks recently come out with a lower expectation. What is your sense of where we are in the here and now where it goes. I know it's hard to, you know, give price levels, et cetera. And I, but, but in terms of generalization, right, where do we head here? Is this a good time

to be looking at diversifying your portfolio into something like gold or silver, which I know you like too? Yeah. So the answer is, yes, it's, it's a phenomenal time. And then here's the reason why. It's so you look at last year, you know, in, in 2025, silver was up over, 140% gold was up like 65%. Why is that? Because of supply and demand. There's a lot of demand. There's little supply in silver.

So therefore, fundamentals to me always rule everything. So if there's low supply, high demand prices will go up. What changed the Iran conflict? It put a pause on that growth. It put a pause on that trend because now you've got this conflict in Iran. Oil prices are shooting through the roof. The whole story of interest rates, well, we can't lower interest rates when we've got this inflation because of oil. So when the conflict ends, oil prices will come down.

Did they? Yes. They came down a lot. Yeah. I mean, we're like back to the starting point now. Oil is cheaper than it was before the conflict started. So gold and silver should have resumed the trend because that conflict is over the inflationary pressures are subsiding not so fast. There's more coming out of the Strait of Hormuz than just oil, right?

You look at the backlog of what's been done over the last few months fertilizer. It's one of the main sources of fertilizer to the world. There's probably a nine month backlog from the research that I've read for the stuff to get out of the straight to get to where it actually needs to go. When you're talking about fertilizer, what did you miss an entire growing season? season globally, right? So the yields on the crops are going to be less. You're going to have food inflation. So the inflationary pressures haven't necessarily subsided completely. So then enter Kevin Warsh, comes in at the Fed. You know, prior to this, he was, oh, yeah, we've got a lower

interest rates. We're going to stimulate the domestic economy. He had to get the gig, right? Three days after he went and he said, we're going to have rates higher for longer. Inflation hasn't subdued yet. So now there's all this noise, right? And to me, by the way, I think you predicted that in fairness. I think the last time you were on, you were very skeptical of whether he would really be able to keep rates low. I think, like, long term, my personal belief is to throw this one out there and the viewers heard me say this before, but I actually think that you're going to in this, you know, post-AI or in, you know, world, right? You're going to have to generate some growth, given all the productivity.

gains we're going to have. So ultimately, I actually see an environment for lower rates. But you were making the case, as I recall, that, you know, at least in the near term, he's going to actually have to look at holding them steady or even hiking. Agreed, because inflation hasn't subsided yet. And it won't for a while. There's a lag effect on policy. Right. So he's going to have to do what he's going to do. He's not going to lower rates anytime real soon. Ultimately, he will. Right. They're not going to stay high forever. But some things have to change, right? So, So here's where this is just noise, because when you watch financial media, whether it's CNBC or Spock Box or whatever, right?

And you get these stories, it's like, ooh, here's our tip for the day. You got to buy this one. You got to sell this one. That's a trader mentality. Right? That's a traitor. And people listen to that. I worked in all those places.

And full disclosure, like, if it bleeds, it leads, right? And so when there's, you know, when we get our best ratings, Dr. Kirk. when the market was tanking. Because then all of a sudden, everybody's tuning in. So you can't, we learn this quickly, you can't put a bull on during a market sell-off. And when the market's rallying, you can't put a bear on. So I always say, like, people need to understand the financial media.

It's exactly what you just said. It's almost a day trader's mentality. They don't have the outlook of even so much as a week, right? They're in the present. They're in the moment. It is news. Yeah. See, crisis, it can be devastating for traders.

But it can be huge opportunity for investors. And that's where I see this right now because fundamentally nothing changed in the golden silver markets when the Iran conflict started. It was just a pause. It was noise. And so if you were, and I'm not a technical guy. I'm a fundamental guy. I look at the fundamental.

Well, you're not day trading. Yeah, that causes a chart to look like a chart. If none of that changed, then ultimately the trend will resume. Right. So if you look at it as an investor rather than a trader, how much money did people invested in gold and silver lose when we had this, you know, retracement and correction? If you didn't sell, you didn't lose anything. Right. It's just on paper. It's just going to continue to go up, in my opinion, because the fundamentals haven't changed. Now, they should have gone up when the conflict ended, but they didn't because Warsh came in and said, we're going to.

to keep rates higher for longer. To me, that's just noise. You look at where the world is headed, Trish, and it's an AI world, whether you like it or not, right? We're moving into AI, that's going to start displacing jobs. But this irrational exuberance, like what Greenspan used to call it, God rest of soul. Yeah, everybody's investing into AI. You look at two weeks ago, the S&P 500 hit an all-time high, right? But was a broad-based all-time high? Was 400 of the 500 shares hitting all-time highs? Well, you know, the S&P 500 is like Mag 7. So. Yeah. No, it was 20. It's very concentrated. 20 shares hit all-time highs. To me, that's a very thin bull market. That's a bubble, right? We have the same exact scenario. Yeah, for sure. The AI bubble, I think it's a bubble. Because

it's irrational exuberance, when 20 shares cause an entire index to actually hit an all-time high, it doesn't take too much for that to be deflated. Right. So what are people doing right now? They're pulling out of crypto. They're pulling out of gold and silver. And they're going into AI because of fear of missing out. So ultimately, reality is going to kick in.

I don't think you're going to see these massive numbers for long. No, it's just my opinion. Listen, that's just another argument, I think, for diversification, right? Because if you're going to be invested in tech, then you're going to want to seek some alternatives. Gold for many people is one of them, right? Because if you want to be able to, like, God forbid, the whole tech market comes crashing down, maybe that gold is going to be supportive of your portfolio in that environment.

It should. It should. And this is why diversification is key. You know, it's not bad to invest in AI. It can be great, right? Right, right. Don't do everything that you have. No, I think that, you know, look, you're pushing to the choir.

Diversify, diversify, diversify. It's one of the things that really helped you out over the long run. Yeah. So here's where, technically speaking, where was silver December of 2025, right? Sky hot. Oh, 25. Yeah, it was sky hot. Well, that was when this trend.

started that we right before that you know we we had a hundred and forty seven percent increase where was the price in December of 2025 where it is today oh it started creeping down okay because I mean 25 was a fantastic year oh my word I was looking at silver and gold in my portfolio I'm like oh my gosh they're outpacing everything what is going on so it went from from about $59 an ounce to 120 by the end of January, I mean, in a month and a half later, I mean, astronomical growth. So it became very overbought. So the correction and retracement that we've seen have now hit the 200-day moving average, a 50-day moving average. We are back. We got rid of the overbought status, but the fundamentals of the trend didn't change. So to me,

this is a massive buying opportunity. Now, if the trend had changed, if the world has moved into a world where we don't want AI, we don't want electronics, we don't want solar power, we don't want nuclear power, then the demand for silver would go away, right? And it would be a shift, but that's all still there. So that means this is just a buying opportunity. Same with gold, right? Gold, when you see central banks allocating into it like nobody's business and now they're starting to re-hypothecate it and bring it back home what do they see moving forward they see a world where we're not going to be basically ruled by different currencies but by something that's tangible something that's real there's a paradigm shifting moment happening right underneath our nose so you look at at the future

as an investor right not as a day trader look at as a in an investor, it's like, where are we headed moving forward? And these are really strong trends. I would like to use the example of like your kids, right? We're both parents. And if you treated your kids like a day trader, they have a bad day, are you going to get rid of them? No. You're not. Sometimes. Sometimes, Dr. Kirk. Sometimes I'm there. But we don't. Why? Because we're investing in them. We're investing in their growth, hoping that someday they're going to be. an amazing adult and we're teaching them in the way that they should go. And down the road, we're going to see a lot of fruit from that investment. So to me, investing for retirement is a lot

like investing in your kids. You might have good and bad days. Or months or even years. Or even years like when you're in junior high. Right. So look at the trend. Look at the fundamentals. Look at where the world is headed and forget about the noise. Those are temporary issues, right? When the fundamentals haven't changed, it's just getting stronger. That's where safety ultimately comes into play. Very true, very true. A very good analogy. Hey, just quickly, first of all, we appreciate all your wonderful patronage on the show. I tell everybody, go check out Trish loves gold and silver, gold and silver, to be fair, because I do like them for personally in my own personal portfolio for different reasons.

But one of the things that you guys do is very different than other folks that sell this. And you're very transparent. You're very upfront on the pricing. Just explain that quickly before you go. Yeah, it's real simple. To me, simplicity is key. When you purchase, it's 8% when you sell it zero. They don't charge anything when you liquidate.

That way you know that what your break-even is. There's not these magic. numbers and floating numbers, you know, and you never know what you're going to get. It's simply 8% when you buy, 0% when you liquidate, and you can do it with your IRAs. You can do it with an old 401k that you roll over into an IRA. You can do it with your brokerage account money and take delivery of it yourself or stored at a depository. It is really easy, but everything is completely transparent.

You know, in today's world where everything is falling apart, that's why I, I, I, I love what you do so much. It's like, Trish, you need to own gold and silver. I need to own gold and silver. Everybody watching needs to have a portion of their assets in gold and silver as a hedge against the geopolitical, political, economic instability that we're seeing globally. It's something for everybody to check out, and you can do that at Trish LovesGold andSilver.com. That'll take you right through to Dr. Kirk's KEPM, and you can learn much more.

I know you get a great team over there, and they're very helpful for folks. So I encourage people, go check it out in your free time. Trish loves golden silver.com. And I love having you on the program because this is just fascinating. And I honestly could talk to you for two hours straight. I mean, I'm such a dork on this stuff. Full disclosure. Some of the viewers know this.

I can walk out like nobody's business. And I love the history of all of this. And going back to, as you mentioned, Bretton Woods and post-World War II and the IMF and all of it. It's so cool. It's so interesting. But, you know, that aside, again, gold and silver being diversification tools that people could look at. Go check it out. Trish loves gold and silver.com. And Dr. Kirk, great to have you. It's great to be with you. We'll talk to you again soon. Thank you. My thanks to him. We don't need his lower third on there anymore. but my thanks to Dr. Kirk, of course, for all that insight and all he does to get this show out

there for all you guys. We thank him for his sponsorship. Don Baca just joined the chat, and I'm happy to see that because Don, I've been worried about you. Yesterday, afternoon, as we were closing out the show, Don said, gosh, there's been a horrible, horrible earthquake in Venezuela. And I immediately went onto my phone. I had seen a lot of stories about Venezuela. that day, they were all actually related to debt restructuring. And there was a big article in the FT. And I was like, I was quoting that. And I didn't quite know what had happened. And you know me. I'm very careful. Like I don't want to ever show you something that I haven't personally vetted, et cetera, right? So yes, Don said there were earthquakes, but I didn't know how bad they were, what they

were. And so that was all happening in real time here yesterday. So for any of you who think I don't look at the chat. Newsflash, I do. And I actually often rely on it because you guys have good, good stuff and good information. And Don, of course, yesterday had very good information, sad information. But we learned that it was a pretty tragic event there. And if you haven't been following the story, Venezuela, of course, hit by two massive earthquakes above seven on the Richter scale. And it is absolutely horrific. The damage is extraordinary. Now, there are death tolls that they're coming forward with right now, and none of these are seen as entirely accurate. I mean, they're talking about roughly 200 people. Of course, this is moving in real time. Thousands missing. Some estimates last

night are predicting as many as 100,000 deaths. So I want to be cautious and careful with those numbers, but suffice it to say there has been enormous damage. If you think about, Venezuela and the standards that they have had they don't have much in the way of standards for a lot of that construction and they don't have the same kind of building code that you would say see in a place like California right where California is very strict on how you build and what you can build and so so many of these places as we look at this aerial footage coming in have seen their their apartment buildings just absolutely toppled like absolutely coming down and right now there's a big search and rescue operation they're trying and the americans we are being very very

helpful on this front. I would say, and this is a little bit callous to say this right now, and you guys know me, so you know that my intention is only a good one, but it's a good thing. It's a good thing that they're friends with us right now, and they're not tight with China and Russia, right? Or the Iran, because that was sort of their access before, right? It was Russia, Iran, and China that they had in their back pocket, and now we got all those guys out. We came in, And believe me, in a moment like this, I mean, look at that. That's just horrific, horrific, horrific stuff. And you think about who was in there?

Have they gotten out? I mean, these are all questions that we're going to be trying to answer over the next few days and weeks. But it's a good thing that they have us and that they have Marco Rubio now on their side trying to help them. Marco Rubio speaking, you know, don't forget he's overseas meeting with all of those big players in the Middle East. He's over there talking to the Saudis, UAE, he's. the Kuwaitis, and he's gotten more help lined up from Venezuela from all of these Middle Eastern countries, which is really interesting and significant and important. Gosh, do you see that? You know, if you're listening to me on audio, thank you for that. You can listen to the audio

version of the show on Apple Podcasts. Spotify has it as well. But if you're looking at this stuff, you can see this is just horrific and obviously really devastating, very, very devastating for the people who were already struggling, let's face it. You know, they finally had this window of opportunity because the U.S. was coming in and the expectation was we were going to invest a lot there. I do believe that we're still going to invest there. And in some ways, this may offer an opportunity

for even additional investment, if you would. I want to go to Marco who's saying the first thing, the first matter at hand right now is getting as many people to safety as we possibly can. Listen to our Secretary of State who has very much made Latin America and Venezuela part of his policy. We're already deploying search and rescue teams from Fairfax County, Virginia, and Los Angeles. There'll be some others. That's their most immediate need right now is search and rescue efforts.

They have much of collapsed buildings, and so they'll need a lot of help in terms of digging through that. The airport there is badly damaged, so we'll have to rely on the Department of War to deploy assets there. And then we're also helping them with some overhead imagery, especially in coastal. areas where they don't have full visibility over what the damage has been and what the impact has been. Those are the acute, like, short-term needs over the next 48 to 72 hours because in search and rescue, you're trying to get to people while you can still save their lives. They're buried under rubble. And other countries are responding as well. The Qataris have already offered assistance as we spoke to them earlier today as well. El Salvador has stepped up and multiple

countries around the region, including Chile and others have reached out to us to communicate and get that happening. As we move forward with that response, with the sort of the short-term phase of response recovery, the second phase, of course, will be identifying their more longer-term and acute needs. What are the things over the long-term they're going to need help with? We'll have a better assessment of that after the next 48 hours

when we're on the ground and as the Venezuelan authorities get more visibility as to the level of damage in terms of housing. Where do you put all these people that don't have anywhere to go live? What we can do to help restore or help them restore their communications, their internet, their telecom, and so forth. We'll also have to manage what we expect is going to be a surge of private donation. I can imagine that there's going to be a lot of people

from the United States and entities in the United States. We've already been in touch with some of the leading charities, but I know at the local level, particularly in places like where I call home in South Florida, there'll be a lot of people that are going to want to step forward and help and provide assistance. And we just need to find the way that we can step in and provide logistical support from that.

In addition, of course, we've already stood up our disaster response teams at the Department of State and our humanitarian efforts. It's something we did very well in Jamaica after that storm, and it's something we're really prepared to do now. Wow. So I see some of the commentary coming in. Some of you worried we're going to be stuck with the bill. I mean, perhaps it's good that he's over there talking to the deep pockets in the Middle East that they might be able to assist as well. We do know that none of the oil infrastructure has been affected by this. So that's good news. Chevron says it's continuing to pump oil. This might be an opportunity as we talk about really seeing a new start for Venezuela that's more relevant,

not just for Venezuela, but let's be honest, right, put America first. For us, there may be some opportunity there for investment in a bigger way in that we can help them get that oil out of the ground, refined, and onto the market. Because as I've told you before, Venezuela is home to the largest source of oil reserves in the world, dwarfing Saudi Arabia. I'm talking about the Orinoka region. So it's thick, it's heavy, it's tar-like, it's not the kind of sweet, light crude that you can easily turn into energy. So there's a lot of technology that goes into this. Now there's going to be quite a need, a desperate need for investment. One source I spoke with earlier today told me that one of the silver linings in all of this, and again, it's hard to talk about this right now.

I get it, like people are grieving, people are lost, people have died, but it will allow for a better system to manage the money. In other words, one of the concerns in any of these countries, right, any of these, Godforsaken places, like Venezuela or, dare as in Minneapolis, is that there may be a lot of grift, and you want to get rid of the grift. And so when you now have the U.S. and Marco Rubio coming in and saying, we're going to take a big role in this, what they're going to do is they're going to make sure they get all that grifty stuff out of the way. That is the hope so there's more transparency for investors as they go in there to invest. So our hope and prayer is with Venezuela right now.

It's just such a tragic, tragic thing to have happened. And don't forget, there were like a whole bunch of these yesterday. This is the ring of fire, right, that they talk about. Now, they're not like directly related exactly on the same plate, but there was one in Japan. there were the two in Venezuela and there was one in California. So you got to say, what is going on? Like the world is getting really shaken up. Again, our hearts go out to them. We are wishing them the very, very best. I want to go back to what we were talking about initially as this show began, guys. And that is the enormous, the enormous response from the left over what the Supreme Court just

decided. Now, don't forget, the Supreme Court is the land, is the law of the land, right? So unless you want total bedlam, you got to stick by what the Supreme Court wants. And you get all kinds of people coming out right about now and flipping out, including the mayor of Boston, Massachusetts, Michelle Woohoo, woo. Okay, you know, I have fun with names. We have to have a little fun over here on the show, right? Here, listen to her. She's freaking out. This is just unacceptable stuff to her. Michelle Wu, ladies and gentlemen, mayor of Boston. Same breaths as we've been preparing for the worst. And so, So we stand here today grieving, still feeling that sense of shock, but having done everything

that we could possibly do to date to be as ready as possible to face what we are about to face. This is no moment to sugarcoat anything. We have a community of neighbors, of family members, of a workforce that holds up our entire city and country's economy. And today, Donald Trump's enablers on the Supreme Court handed down a decision that disregards established law, basic human dignity, and fundamental American values. Excuse me. They weren't disregarding the law. By the way, they are the law. Okay, just to be perfectly clear, Michelle, all right? They are the law. And what the law actually says now, that it's been clarified is, hey, guess what? When you show up at someone's house for dinner,

it does not mean you are in someone's house for dinner. So when you show up at the border, it does not mean you're in the United States of America. Therefore, you're not applying for asylum from inside the United States of America. They also made it very clear that they were sticking up for the law because they said, hey, guess what? Since 1990, we have made this the president's prerogative. The president has the executive power to say, hey, I'm going to offer protected status, temporary, protected status, and allow people to come here, live here, work here, until things get situated back at home. Well, the president's like, you know, things have been situated back at home. They no longer have Bashar al-Assad, you know, with the chemical warfare, et cetera, in Syria.

So, hey, those guys can go home. And, you know, it may not be pleasant in Haiti, but it's not like it once was. They can all go home, too. So you're talking about hundreds of thousands of migrants that are here, Haitian migrants, you've got Syrians that are here, all in because this affected like 15 more countries. They're talking about it potentially mattering for somewhere over a million people. And what the court decided, again, the court being the law of the land, so the law now stands, this is how it's been interpreted, that's that. If you are on that list and DHS decides you cannot be here, well, then you're going to have to go home. So now they're freaking out. You saw Michelle Wu in Massachusetts there in the city of Boston.

I want to go to Ed Markey, who's also losing it. This is the senator from Massachusetts saying, we've got to do something to expedite and create a fast path of citizenship for the Haitians in his community. This decision will place in grave risks, the lives of people. And Trump wants to send TPS holders back to unsafe conditions. and it's the far-right extremists sitting on the Supreme Court who has just let him sever this critical lifeline for Haitians and for TPS holders from all around the world.

We have a moral duty to protect TPS holders and provide this vulnerable group with protections and a permanent pathway to citizenship in our country. Excuse me, we have we have a moral duty We Okay the court just made that very very clear We're not open for business for everyone You know, go anywhere else in the world

Go to Haiti for example If I showed up in Haiti tomorrow I think I suddenly would get a A twice daily maid service apartment In the equivalent of New York City No, I would not I don't know if it's twice daily The Roosevelt Hotel, it's a nice place

They get at least once daily plus a card for food plus a mobile phone. I mean, come on. You can go any of these places. You're not going to get the red carpet treatment, and don't sit there and tell me, well, we're the U.S., we need to do this. We are the U.S.

We don't need to do anything. We need to take care of our own country and our own people, and then we need to be really thoughtful and articulate with who we are bringing in. Okay, we need nurses. Do we have nurses in the Philippines? Apply for asylum as a nurse. we need you in our hospitals, we will then therefore extend that opportunity for you to come,

live, and work here. But not just come one, come all, and you can stay forever, for goodness sakes. I mean, if your country is now doing all right, we're not going to offer the temporary protected status anymore. That's just the way it is. And, you know, what is this with these people? It's an extremism that has got to stop, absolutely got to stop. But I don't know as it will. I don't know as it will because of what I'm seeing from the left right now and the direction they're heading it. You know, mom dummy, comrade mom dummy won big time with those candidates, those awful candidates in New York. And Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is out with a warning today. She's trying to tell us, oh, this is the future.

Okay, AOC, if it's the future, I'm not entirely sure how you lady are totally going to fit into that. you might actually be running a little bit scared yourself, you're going to seem kind of quaint, kind of old-fashioned, compared to the new team, the new kids on the block. I mean, if these people were smart, they would actually read the handwriting on the wall and try and save themselves and their country. But nope, no one ever accused AOC of being smart.

Now, did they? No, no, no, no, no. Voters in general are looking for a change, and they're seeing that progress is not happening in the ways that meets the challenge. that they're facing. And so you're going to see, I think, people voting for new leadership. There was so much fear around that when I was elected, and none of it bore out to be true. Well, I would say this. In here and now, it's probably a good thing for Donald Trump that the

crazies are taking over and that the crazies are winning because it just makes him look all the more sane, which I've always thought he looked sane. You know, but of course he had me at taxes. back when in 2016. I'm like, this is the, I read every single tax plan. I was like, this one is the best. Anyway, you know the drill. Supreme Court expanding Trump's power over immigration, not really, I would say just reinforcing it because the left was trying to do all kinds of crazy stuff. Wall Street Journal apparently doesn't like it. They say it's stripping humanitarian rights, and we know Bloomberg doesn't like it. They put this one up on the site. The Supreme Court just betrayed asylum seekers. But again, I go back to, what about the people of the United

States of America? Do they not matter? I think they do. I think, by the way, they're going to continue to matter, and they're going to continue to make their voices heard. Hey, quick shout out to my portfolios there at 76research.com. Go check them out when you can. 76research.com. We have about 10 to 15 stocks in each one of those puppies.

We had some stocks trading off today. You saw the Apple News. Did you not trading off about 6%? And that was on concerned about the higher prices and whether or not they're really going to be able to continue selling to the same degree, given these higher prices. We did have core inflation hitting 3.4% in the month of May, highest since October 23. Now, I like core inflation. The Fed actually likes it, too. And the reason why it's an important indicator is it shows you whether or not inflation is creeping into the rest of the

economy. So yes, you have higher energy costs, you have higher food costs. Those are important metrics. But is it creeping into everything else that we buy and we consume? And the latest answer is increasingly yes. Now, this could shake out soon. This could change very soon. You know, the president is furious because he doesn't see gas prices coming down as fast as he'd like them too. So, you know, guys, you might want to get working on that. Chevron. So on the big energy companies here in the country might want to get working on that. But he's calling them out for that. I would say this. You have a little bit of a backlog. And once prices go up, it's always harder to get them down. They will go down. They will go down, but perhaps not as quickly as he,

would like it. I promised you a story. Did I not? David Lorenzo, peace of my mind. Some of you guys were asking all about my love of peas. You know, like ham and peas. I hate peas. I've always hated peace. It's partly why I like my balance of nature, which is one of the sponsors on our show. You can get 10% off in addition to the 30% off that they have on the website right now. So great thing to do because and you're getting all these nutrients. I think it's like 47 different fruits and vegetables that they pack the phytonutrients into. So very, very good, especially if you're like me and you don't necessarily love every vegetable. I definitely don't like peas.

And the funny story I wanted to tell you about is where I'm broadcasting from right now, this is actually my childhood home. When I was a little big, like the day I came home from the hospital, I came home to this house. How cool is that, right? Like not everybody can say that. So this is where I grew up. And the room that I happen to be in right now broadcasting from is exactly the room where I used to spit out those peas. So over time, and let's just say this house has been there a while because

I came home from the hospital to it, and I am a fully grown woman with three children, and I'm celebrating my silver wedding anniversary 25 years this year. So let's just say this has gone through some different changes. My mom loves changing the house around, and my childhood bedroom looks nothing like it once did, which is somewhat disappointing from it. me, but I try not to go on and on about it. Anyway, she like redecorates and reddoes things. And this particular room, this used to be where I watched TV. And when I was a kid and I'd watch TV, you know, you had to get up and change the channel, right? And you had the rabbit ears on, remember that? Like the old-fashioned TV? My kids don't understand this at all. I'm like, yep,

we had three channels. And I was the remote control. So anyway, I used to watch TV in here. It was our little study. And this was, this was the site of the TV where I'd just spit out. out all my peas. So I'd be around the corner in the kitchen and I'd be eating my dinner and she'd say, you have to eat your peas. You have to eat your peas. And I'd say, okay, okay. And come right over here and I'd spin them out, spin them out right behind the television set. So this is the scene of the crime, which is why I was laughing. You guys were asking about the piece. And I'm like, oh, I got a story for you. I am sitting right here in the scene of the crime. It is now transformed into my parents' dining room, which has been temporarily transformed into Trish Regan's studio for the week.

again, it all comes full circle. Great to have you guys here. Thank you for all you do to make this show a success. I really, really, really appreciate it. We're growing and growing and growing and it's thanks to your intensity and keeping, you know, make sure that you are subscribed. Don just told me that he didn't get an alert for today's show. So sometimes that happens. Make sure you are subscribed still. Because sometimes people get mysteriously unsubscribed. YouTube thinks, oh, maybe she doesn't like Trish. maybe he doesn't like Trish right now and then they unsubscribe you. So check your subscription and make sure you hit all the alerts so you know exactly what I'm here when I'm live. We've got much more content coming your way throughout the day and into tomorrow. And I will be

back live on the show with you tomorrow. Don, I'm glad to hear that so far so good in Venezuela with your family and friends. Hang in there, my friend. Okay, we'll see you tomorrow.