The Trish Regan Show - Trump’s Xi Summit Leaves CNN CRYING Outside—Their Power SLIPPING AWAY! S6 E1

Episode Date: September 26, 2026

S6 E1 The media is really coming apart right about now. We are 40 days from the election, and CNN is so worried that it is now suggesting Trump may invoke Martial Law. Seriously. That’s their report. It’s getting crazier and crazier. I’ve got a look at what’s really going on as the center of power shifts. Plus, why is socialism gaining so much ground? AFP's Kent Strang from https://FightingSocialism.com joins me with a look at what is fueling its growth and how we stop it. That's all on today's Trish Regan Show.Get my investing newsletter today at https://76research.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Oh gosh, they hate him. They hate him. They want him to lose this round so badly. They want to make sure that he doesn't get the house. Let's, I mean, they want everything. They want the House and the Senate. They want to impeach him. It's going to be bad, guys. I can tell how much they want him to lose by judging with everything that's happened, just within the last 48 hours. I mean, you've got what's going on, right, with the big dinner that they were banned from last night. And now you have this really, crazy story. This really crazy story out there today. Like, I can't even believe I'm reporting this, but it's CNN. CNN is out there broadcasting that the president is going to invoke martial law. Yeah, you heard that correctly. I told you it was getting wild. They're saying he's going to invoke martial law if he doesn't take the House and Senate. I mean, this is getting out there, but it really smacks of desperation. You wonder why he calls him the fake news, right? You wonder. We're going to get into that. But first, you know, think about what you're witnessing right now.

In this standoff, if you would, between the president and Donald Trump, it is all part of the same story. In other words, they thought that their team, and they themselves ran this show. But now you get the biggest media merger in history, right, with Paramount, Skydance, buying Warner Brothers Discovery. And with that, they get CNN. Oh, and they already have CBS. And then you get Elon over at X, and you get all the tech giants, the bigwigs and the tech industry, sitting by the president's side last night. And I'll tell you, this media is desperate, desperate.

So that's why they're coming up with crazy stuff like martial law. I mean, they're desperate and they're humiliated, okay? Let's face it, they're really humiliated because they got stuck out there last night, right? big summit, big dinner. And they weren't able to report on it at all. I mean, all they could do was shout questions like this one did from CBS, I believe. Mr. President, did you call on President Xi to stop buying oil from Iran? Mr. President, why are you banning?

Why should U.S. taxpayers pay for ads about you, Mr. President? Time and place. Time and place. Time and place. Anyway, like I said, desperate. desperate, desperate, desperate, desperate. And now the mainstream media wants you to believe that the Trump-Shee visit was nothing but a bunch of empty pageantry, that there was no there there. And they published a whole series of these pretty bad headlines. I mean, pretty nasty headlines like this.

Oh, the Xi meeting was heavy on pumped, light on substance. China is just fine with that. That is the CNN analysis of everything. and then you get this one. Oh, lots of pomp and even more punting on tensions in U.S.-China relations. That's from Associated Press. New York Times flyovers, pandas, and pomp masks divide in U.S.-China summit. A few more here.

Pomp over progress from the Guardian as Trump rolls out red carpet for Xi. Pomp prevails over substance as, I mean, it's like, did they get the talking point or did they get the talking point? I mean, right down to the adjective that they're trying to use. Pomp prevails, and the noun prevails of her substance as Donald Trump hosts Xi Jinping. I mean, enough is enough, guys. I mean, the bias is extraordinary. Oh, and then the Daily Beast for the win here. She humiliates Trump to his face in the White House.

Wow. I'll tell you. This was his first trip to D.C. in quite a while. I want to say more than a decade. I mean, he didn't go to the U.N. He came to see Donald Trump in Washington, D.S. He see he landed at Andrew's Air Force base, and somehow we still got video of that, even though they're all on strike, right? Amazing, amazing how that happens.

The world goes on, I see. There's the President of the United States greeting President Xi and his wife, you see Melania Trump, at the tarmac. That was not just optics. That was actually a very big cultural signal, because in Chinese political culture, how you were received is actually the message, the rank, the ceremony, the flowers, the state. or the flags, the B-2 and F-55s that were going over, the Rose Garden, and believe me, they had them. That is Beijing's language for respect. And guess who understands that? Better than the media, for sure. That would be one Donald Trump. And so that's why he made such a big deal of this. That's why this was actually really important. And if you wanted to have a good relationship with

China, you needed to show that kind of respect. Don't forget, China certainly did that for him when he went to visit. I mean, so you had the bombers going overhead, he had the band in the background. I mean, it really was an impressive welcome. And do not underestimate that. Again, I'm not an expert on Chinese culture, but I've covered China enough in the past and have enough friends that are experts on this, that this is a big deal, this is important, and that is a sign of respect. And, you know, you're trying to work on a relationship here, right? And so Trump understands this, Trump gets this, and instead of saying, you know, if this were Biden, I guarantee you, if it were Biden, they would say, wow, wasn't this brilliant, wasn't this wonderful, like we put on such a show and this is fantastic. And instead, because it is one Donald Trump, you're getting all of those would be the bombers, okay, going overhead.

And because it's Donald Trump, we're getting all of the sneering and all the laughing at the pageantry and it's just a show and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. You know, they just can't stand it because actually this is good for our relationship with China. It actually is good for our relationship with China. In fact, she said it himself today. Here they are at tea. President and I are like two people that's charting the course for the great ship of China-U.S. relations. When the president visited China in May, we agreed on the vision of building a constructive China-U.S. relationship of strategic stability. Wow, okay? So we're getting somewhere, all right? We're getting somewhere. And that's despite what you read in the media with all the headlines. By the way, I'll also point out that Donald Trump was very happy with this and said that this is going to actually be good for the farmers.

He extended the truth that we have right now for another couple of months in terms of trade. but in terms of where it goes from here, we'll get to that in a second. Just hear what he had to say on how this is actually good for farmers. And we'll be speaking a lot. I think our farmers are going to be very happy. A lot of very positive things happen.

But America is very happy about this visit, and I'm sure China is very happy also. Great things for both countries, and it's been just very, very productive, and thank you very much. So, as far as substance, look, you need to start somewhere, right? You need to start somewhere. And before I get into that, I just want you to remember, I want you to remember that China wanted the trade truce stretched out for years, preferably through the rest of Donald Trump's presidency. And Donald Trump actually wouldn't give them that today. He kept the clock short. He gave him two months. I think it's through January 10th. That's not weakness. that is leverage because you're not going to lock in some got a long term deal right when the other side hasn't fully delivered on all the farm purchases they promised and all the rare earth so what is he doing

he's extending the relationship just enough to keep the relationship from blow it up he's making everybody happy with the pomp and circumstance and the pageantry it was a warm welcome and that was very deliberate and by design and what you do now is you put the next hard round on the calendar right when you still have the cards. Treasury already said the truth holds, and the president has said the farmers are going to be very, very happy. So, you know, that's where we are. I'll take that. So we say over a press corp that doesn't know a win if it hit him over the head. I mean, you know, we get two more meetings, right? APEC in Shenzhen in November, then you get you 20 in Miami. that's not a one-off photo op there, that's a cadence. And I would also add that, you know,

great power relationships do not get rebuilt in a single afternoon in the Oval Office. They have to be warmed up. They have to be ritualized, especially with China, and they have to get into a rhythm. You have to develop some trust because we're talking about some important issues here, whether it be chips or AI or Taiwan, Iran, Ukraine, a lot. And so you got to work on this, and you got to start from a place of conversation. that is not filled with hostility. You know, it's kind of like dating, right? You know, if you want to build a long-term relationship with someone

and you want a future, then you're going to need to start slowly and you're going to need to go gradually and you're going to need to warm up because you want that trust. And that is what Trump and she are doing. So she even floated bringing 100,000 American students to China and he sent some pandas to Atlanta. And you can laugh at that as the media has. But you know what?

That's actually a big signal from China. China doesn't send pandas as a joke. They send them when they want the relationship framed as durable. So, you know, I just have to say, look, yes, there are a lot of things out there, whether it be Taiwan, whether it be semiconductors, whether it be AI. But I'm just telling you, you've got to start somewhere. And at least we're having the conversation. And then I look at the media and how they laugh at it and they mock it.

And I'm like, guys, you had two of the most powerful people on earth sitting at dinner. last night, surrounded by the people that actually build the chips and make the models, right? And that spectacle in and of itself mattered. Donald Trump gets something, something really important in foreign policy. If you want to deal with China, you don't open up by humiliating the other side on the camera, right? You show strength. You show honor. You got the flyover and you get the dinner and the archives and the tea and that wasn't filler okay that was actually well coordinated well planned and this is because we want a better long-term relationship with china knowing that they are oh how shall i phrase this are frenemy okay keep your enemies close what do they say keep your friends

close and your enemies closer i mean china's a big deal and china could be very threatening so we want to balance this relationship very, very carefully. I don't know what the media wants. I mean, the media just, what, they expect to some kind of massive trade deal and like some 40-page, you know, here's what we're doing. Now, I don't know what they wanted, but I will tell you, they didn't appreciate getting kicked out on the street and kicked out on the street they were. The media, they want him to fail. They want him to lose. They want to make sure that they're not getting locked out of the big dinner like they were last night. I mean, wow. So you know that there's this ban on CNN going on.

And because of the ban on CNN, all the other camera crews got together that are part of this so-called pool. And they said, well, we are not going to go and video this dinner or anything for that matter because you're not letting CNN in. And by the way, CNN was the pool camera last night. And the president didn't have to let CNN in because the judge's order that came back that was sort of a temporary thing saying, hey, you got to give me. a badge just to get in the building because you didn't give them due process. They gave them the badges, but they didn't invite them to the dinner. And so there was quite a fuss about this. Let's go to the MSNBC reporter. There she is, standing in solidarity with her CNN friends. ...cast on television, and right now there is no American network that is carrying this state

dinner that is carrying the events that have played out over the course of the day, including the rolling out of a red carpet for the Chinese president. Actually, I saw the rolling out of the red carpet. That's not on Twitter, on X. So I think we still made it, okay? We still made it, even though they're saying, oh, well, we didn't have anybody there. One of the things I did notice was that the video that came in,

it was actually more muted in terms of its lighting because I don't think he had the big broadcast lights in there. And so the dinner actually felt more intimate in a way. you actually kind of felt like you were there because it's like this candlelight dinner, right? And you kind of got that sense. And so no, it didn't have the broadcast, you know, whiz bang, but it actually felt really authentic and kind of cool. And so it was still getting out there. And I think Trump TV had some of it. But it wasn't the broadcast network. So understand this, right, guys? Their monopoly is crumbling in real time and they can't take it. They don't know what to do. I mean,

their entire livelihoods, their entire existence, their entire center of power is deteriorating in real time. CNN not being allowed in. Oh my goodness. So CNN was not allowed. So they also attempted to gain access to this greeting ceremony, just like I did, one of their correspondence and a producer, and they were told that they were not going to be allowed in as well. And I'm not sure if they have received any explanation, but we certainly have not from the White House Communications Director. And so again, will they, like us, be allowed to be credentialed into these future events? Well, it's going to be up to the judge now, right?

I mean, that's what it's coming down to. It's going to come down to whether the judge is going to say, okay, you are allowed to be credentialed for this event, you have this as a First Amendment right. I don't think you have a First Amendment right on that. I think you have a First Amendment right to report on things. I don't necessarily think you have a First Amendment right to be at every event that you want to be at. And that's going to be part of the distinction. They were in court for that today, and I have to show you some of that because I want to show you where the president's lawyer is arguing.

But back to what's really going down here. I think they're freaking out in part. I think they're freaking out because the new boss. The new boss was there. And they weren't. This would be David Ellison. Okay? So this is the guy who owns Skydance.

His father's Larry, you know, Oracle. He owns Skydance. We've talked about this before, and he went in and he bought Paramount. And everybody at Paramount's freaking out, including all of the 60 Minutes people, because you see CBS is owned by Paramount. And so the whole news division there is freaking out. Oh, my gosh, we've got this Trump supporter guy that is coming in and buying our prestigious Tiffany Network that hasn't rated in a gazillion years.

So David Ellison comes in, and he's at the dinner, right? He's the new boss. He is going to own. not to CBS, but also CNN, because that's his deal. In fact, we're just days away from it closing. It's supposed to close on September 30th, and they needed to close on September 30th because there's like a $7 million fee for every day it doesn't close,

and the expectation is going to close very close to the 30th, maybe the first week in October. But it just got approved last week, and they're coming apart at the seams at CNN, because now they've got this guy that's like a Trump guy that's going to be their new boss. I mean, what is he going to do? Look at this.

Here's another one. Hollywood Reporter. Whoa. David Ellison, Tech Titans, and Fox News hosts attend White House State Dinner honoring China's president. You had Elon Musk. This is like a who's who. Sam Altman, Tim Cook, Jensen Wang, Jesse. Well, I guess they had some Fox News contributors there as well.

Jesse and Laura made it. Look, it was a big deal in that you had everyone from the entertainment industry. Well, the new entertainment industry, dare I say, given it was David Ellis. as well as Elon Musk. You had everyone in finance there. You had bigwigs from Larry Fink, was a lot of really important people in finance. And then you had a lot of people that were very important in tech. And so this is terrifying, okay, terrifying for CNN. They're looking at it and going, our entire world just blew up. According to the guest list, released by the White House, attendees included Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison, just days after his company, inked a settlement

to clear its takeover of Warner Brothers Discovery, including CNN, which saw its reporters denied access to the state dinner, even as a federal judge reinstated their press pass to the White House complex. Okay. So the new boss was there, and he's got to be looking at his reporters out on the street, and he's got to be thinking, gosh, darn it, guys, there's got to be a better way. Just wait until I get in. A few more days, few more days. We'll get this fixed. Or not, right?

I mean, they're so nervous that before they even found out about this guy, you see who I got on my screen? We've been talking about this for the last couple of days because my sources tell me he's very interested in having this minority stake. They've got a syndicate that they're putting together of equity investors because they need to come up with some of the money. It's a $110 billion deal. So in order to come up with some of that, they're tapping some important folks. And one of them might be Elon Musk, apparently the L.E. Ellison's have gone to Elon and said, hey, can you help out? And I think he probably wants to return the favor because don't forget, when he bought X, guess who helped him out?

It was Larry Ellison, David's dad. So, like, I'm going to show you this because Christian Amunpur and Brian Stelter, who's like their media guy, they are so nervous. They are so freaking out. And this is before they found out about Elon, okay? Oh, it's, it, I mean, you have to understand the context, right, around where we're going with this, because what I'm eventually going to report is that they think that they think that they're there's martial law coming. And for them to get on that kind of limb and talk all this crazy stuff, it's because of this. It's because their livelihoods are threatened. Their entire establishment is threatened. And now they're like the wild cat in the corner. And they're just going to kick and

scream and lash out and do whatever they can to try and make this noise in kind of a last hurrah. So here's Christian. Here you get a sense of how nervous she is because she's got a new boss. We have also seen this movie. We have seen the Paramount Skydance Ellison takeover of CBS News First, and we've seen what their view of editorial independence has meant, essentially a wholesale reorientation of the personnel, and as far as we can gather, the editor-in-chief's views on what editorial independence looks like.

And there's been a huge amount of criticism about what it has transpired to be, I was actually surprised to see that this deal also adds the editorial board function for CBS. I mean, I thought the CBS thing was kind of done and dusted. That's a very interesting point. This is partly as a result of the state attorneys general negotiating over the weekend. For example, in Connecticut, the Attorney General William Tong, he says in a statement, he was fighting to protect both CBS News and CNN. He says he wanted them both to be sold off by Paramount,

but he couldn't get that done. Yeah, he couldn't. Poor guy. Well, you know, they go on to lament that this is going to be really tough. And she says, I've been here 43 years and I've lived through all these management teams. And I'm sitting there going, honey, you haven't lived through this one because the world is about to change. And that 1980 business model, 1980s, mid-80s business model, which was so revolutionary right back then, that is gone. That is out the window. And you've got the new kids in town that are going to come.

in and completely reinvent it. So yeah, Elon may be in there. David doesn't even, I'm telling you, I hear very, very good things about David from all my sources. He's thinking in ways that you can't even imagine because entertainment is changing in real time. And it's not going to be these big, big, big movie productions anymore. You know, hey, we wonder if the actors are even going to have jobs in a few years, right? It's all changing. And yes, you will still need people, but there's going to be all kinds of new technology coming to this, and that freaks them out. And so what do they come back to? Crazy town, okay? Crazy town. They're like, oh, you know, this must be the beginning of a dictatorship. He's not allowing CNN access to the dinner. This is clearly a dictatorship as Chris Murphy,

the senator from the state of Connecticut, a Democrat, a very liberal one, kind of like getting out there in weird ways, I just got to say. And talking to this reporter from Lindell TV. Hi, Senator. Your thoughts on Trump's media ban? The latest developments there. What do you think about him taking the access away from CNN in Politico?

I mean, this is the roadmap for would-be authoritarians that they try to destroy the free press and they try to use the power of the White House in order to punish anybody who tells, the truth. I think it's also the mark of a pretty desperate president. He knows that he and his party are about to get their clock cleaned in this election. And he thinks maybe that if he keeps objective news journalists out of the White House, people won't learn what's happening. They won't learn about the disastrous war. They won't learn about his campaign to raise costs on people. I just don't think

he'll be successful in that effort. There were journalists that were removed, though, under Biden for similar reasons. They didn't like the lines of questioning coming from those. Simon Atiba with an African news outlet. Yeah, do you think that that's similar to CNN? He was just asking questions. I think there he was a little less egregious than CNN to be honest with you. But what about when Trump was banned from all social media? So what's your, so what's your point? You believe that the president should be able to ban CNN from the White House? I don't think there's anything in the Constitution that says that CNN has to be allowed in the White House. I think it's a good decision for democracy and for the free press.

I'm all for free speech. I don't think anybody in this country right or left thinks that news outlets like CNN should be banned from the White House. What about when Trump was banned from all social media? Any comment on that? Democrats celebrated. Thank you, Senator. I love her. I really do.

I think she's terrific. And she goes right back at these guys. And they're like, it's kind of a, what, dare I say, once again, again, like this new medium, this new medium. So they're all out there. He's a dictator. You know, this is, this is what you see in dictatorships. And I just got to say, I don't think you have a constitutional right. Now, you know, I'd be curious to see what the court comes out and says on this whole thing. But I'm with JD on this. JD making the point that like, what's the difference between Politico and Breitbart? Like, why does Politico? But Breitbart doesn't.

So CNN, MSN, MS now and Politico are now suing over the ban. Do you think it's appropriate for the president to be banning media outlets just because he doesn't like what they report? Well, I take some issue with the premise. So he's not banning media outlets. What he's doing is saying, we're not going to give you special access to the White House if you engage in what is effectively propaganda. We have to remember those three outlets account about 92% of the stories that they have on the President of the United States, on the administration are negative. That's not representative of the American people. It's not representative of a public opinion. So if you're going to engage in what is effectively far-left propaganda, why would a Republican

White House give you special access. Sir, you talked a lot about free speech over the years. How is this not an attack on free speech? Well, they can still report on the Trump White House. They can still get the public reports. They can still, of course, talk to people in the administration and outside the administration. What the president has said is we're not going to give you special access inside the White House. The way that I think about it is if you go back to the Biden administration or the Obama administration,

compare, let's say, Politico to Breitbart. If you actually look at the objective analysis, Politico and Breitbart are, Politico is as anti-Trump as Breitbart was anti-Obama or anti-Biden. Now, why on God's Green Earth would Donald Trump be expected to give Politico special access when nobody in the immediate expected the Biden administration or the Obama administration to give Breitbart special access? It's about basic fairness. They can still report. They still have the access to free speech. They're just not going to get an office in the White House anymore. And I think it's totally appropriate. Okay. Another words, one.

are you being treated any differently? Because you see, you were part of the in crowd with all your like, in friends and all the Democrats love political. They loved it so much. I hear the Biden administration was given an $8 billion a year to pay for all those fancy subscriptions. Everybody had to have a political subscription, right? So where did they go when they wanted to plan a story that the Hunter Biden laptop on the eve of the election was in fact, um, allegedly not real? I mean, they said it was Russian misinformation when in fact it was real and all the people that were signing that letter would have known it was real. So when they wanted to put their misinformation out there, they went to, oh, the guys that were on the payroll that they helped become part of the pool

and part of the whole, well, it's not technically pool because they're not in the TV business per se. But they had those press passes. Well, now they don't, okay? So, so what? Let's go to the courtroom today because the president's lawyer was arguing that there is just no freaking way that these guys at CNN have any constitutional right. This is not within the First Amendment. This is not about freedom of the press. In fact, they're arguing that there's a security challenge here. This lawyer is saying, hey, you know what? You guys reported on that plane. Remember the plane. Remember the plane from Carter? And you reported it out all this business about it not having the same security apparatus that Air Force One originally did, et cetera. And for that reason, they consider them to

have threatened the security of the president of the United States. And for that reason, they're taking away the passes. Listen to the lawyer. Yes, please the court. Access to the White House, is a privilege, not a right. The court just heard the amendment. an absurd interpretation of the First Amendment that they could knowingly publish classified information and the President would be required to still give them privileged access to the White House complex. They're a law for HIPFEs C-798. Maybe that's why the cases that the Court has identified were decided not on First Amendment

grounds, but on due process grounds. So he's like, you guys are honestly crazy. to think that you have any leg to stand on with this, because there's this thing called 18 U.S.C. 798, disclosure of classified information. It's actually really illegal. It can land you 10 years in prison. Now, you might think that this is at odds

with the First Amendment, but this law actually prohibits knowingly and willfully publishing or disclosing to any unauthorized person, certain classified information involving, secret code, ciphers, and cryptographic systems, equipment used for cryptography and communications intelligence, U.S. or foreign government communications intelligence activities, and information obtained by intercepting foreign government communications knowing that was its source.

The statute explicitly includes publication, okay? So its wording is not limited here to government employees. They could actually arrest, if we're really to see this whole thing through, people that were reporting things that they considered a violation of these security rules, thereby putting the president of the United States and perhaps the entire team. Remember, he had a whole bunch of people on that plane. So that's a big deal. that's a really, really, really big deal.

And this is what they're going in with. I mean, I thought that they were just going to go in on, you know, whether or not you really had a right to be in the room, because this was kind of what was discussed with AP, when AP said, hey, we don't want to call it the Gulf of Mexico. We want to call it, or rather they wanted to call the Gulf of Mexico. They want to call it Gulf of America. And Trump said, all right, you want to keep calling it Gulf of Mexico?

I'm going to revoke your pass. And at first the court said, no, no, you've got to give the pass back. And then at the appellate level, you had two judges that actually said, well, the president does have some discretion over special access to restricted places, whether that's like Air Force One, or say like a little dinner like they had last night. And so he has the ability to say yay or nay to certain people. And so given that, they are saying that therefore he can continue using that same kind of discretion when inviting any of these people. to pool events. And so that's why the AP gets left out in that case. So the left will say, well, Trump is infringing on our First Amendment because he's cutting off access. And he's cutting off access to this very, very important outlet that is CNN. And you've got the rest of the pool,

the so-called pool standing with them, of course, in solidarity. But the reason they're standing with them, think about it, is because this pool is in jeopardy of seeing their own. Monopoly, get broken. Five networks, okay, and they are just refusing to film. So even though the president was like, okay, you guys can come back in, you can go to the White House briefing room, you can go sit in your desk, they said, no, we're still not going to film because you're not allowing CNN in. And this five network pool is ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox, and MSNBC, NBC, NBC.

So they all take turns. And it was CNN's turn. And CNN wasn't allowed in, so nobody picked up the slack. Everybody refused. So it meant you had, you know, reporters screaming out questions like this yesterday. Mr. President, did you call on President Xi to stop buying oil from Iran? Any new barbed world is online? Mr. President, why are you banning?

Why should U.S. taxpayers pay for ads about you, Mr. President. Oh, boy, right? Oh, boy. She's probably like, gosh, you know, you guys got to control the press a little better. I'm joking. I mean, that's what makes us who we are. We love having the ability to ask the president anything. And you know what's great about this president? This president actually lets us. I mean, look at the openness and the transparency that this administration has compared to what we saw last time around. It's really kind of remarkable. But the whole problem here, really, the whole problem is that you've had a select group, a very, very select group of these five networks that have run the pool camera forever.

And now they're realizing that they're not the only game in town. They have to hold their nose as they think about who else is out there. And believe me, there are others out there, including Lindell TV, including Breitbart, including Real America's News. I mean, all of these places that they're like, oh, my gosh, we can't believe that they're getting credentialed. But here, let me ask you this question. Do you think for two seconds that MSNBC wasn't like crazy, bizarrely liberal or that Politico wasn't or that, oh, I don't know, CNN wasn't? I mean, CNN sat there with a straight face and told us that the president was in great health all the time. It's the same stuff we got on MSNBC.

I mean, they just lied to us. For what? And for why? Like, why do that to protect your team? Like, what is in it for them? I want to know. Were they really getting that much from USAID? Like, you know, the whole Smith month, the month, Smith, yeah, the act, forgive me,

the Smith Month Act, you know, was it that important to them? Maybe for CNN with all the worldwide global operations they were collecting or skimming a little off the top there? I don't know. I'm just like, why are you guys so beholden to one team? Like, why do you hate him this much? I don't get it. And now it's so crazy that they're telling us, oh, he's going to invoke martial law. I mean, give me a break. They love it when the market goes down, but today the market went up and I love it when the market goes up. This is my company, 76research.com. I have a lot of reasons for thinking the market's going to continue going up. We actually published a note. And you can get that actually for a dollar.

a month. If you don't like it, you get your dollar a month back. So go check it out at 76 research.com today, a dollar a month for the first two months. And at least you can find the name of the company that we picked, a very important company that is now up, I think it's up 24% actually, it's probably up more today because of, and we, I mean, look, it's just, it's on a tear and we think it's going higher. But anyway, we've had a lot of wonderful success. My colleague and my co-founder is a long time, long time mutual fund manager. So he's been picking stocks his entire life. And I got a pretty good macro sense of things. So go check it out when you can. The media doesn't want the market to succeed. The media wants

higher oil prices. It's like the media wants this war with Iran to go on as much as it can just because they hate him and they don't want him to win. But this is, I'm sorry, this one takes the cake. I mean, I've heard it all, right? And then I hear this one out of CNN today. And I'm like, man, oh man, you guys must really, really be desperate. Here we go. Are you ready? CNN wants you to know that if you don't vote for Democrats in a massive force, it's going to be bad because the president of the United States is going to invoke martial law. With just 40 days left until election day, there is growing concern among experts about what

President Trump might do as he continues to push baseless election fraud claims. and as the Republican Party appears headed toward losses in the midterm elections, Democrats right now are enjoying an eight-point lead over the GOP and the latest generic in the battle for the control of the House. A new report from the Atlantic magazine details how a slew of outside advisors to President Trump are urging him to take control of federal elections this November. A key player in the scheme, according to the Atlantic, is an attorney named Peter Tickton. He's a longtime friend of Trump.

They went to military school together as teenagers. Tickton told the Atlantic magazine that Trump could decide to declare martial law on or around election day. Tickton is also the attorney for convicted election denier Tina Peters out of Colorado. Her sentence was commuted by Colorado Governor Jared Polis. Soon after her sentence was,

her time in prison was commuted, she met with President Trump at the White House. This is what Peter said about that meeting. There is a plan yesterday when I was with the president he talked to and I can't get into the plan. Understood. Please don't. But we talked, you know, he basically said to his lead counsel to do what I was asking. There is a plan, says Tina Peters.

And it's not just the figure circling the president saying this out loud. President Trump himself is publicly called for greater federal control of elections. This is what he told his former deputy FBI director, Dan Bongino, on his podcast in February. The Republicans should say, we want to take over. We should take over the voting in at least many, 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting. And then there's Trump's response back in August to radio host Wayne Allen Root's suggestion

that he should declare a national security emergency to mandate his preferred changes to the elections. You have the right to declare a national security emergency for elections. Let me just say that stranger things have happened. Okay, I'll leave it at that. He said, let me just say that stranger things have happened. Okay, I'll leave it at that. During the Republican convention this month, Trump sarcastically asked his supporters to make this pledge.

I don't care if I'm registered or not. I'm going to try and cheat like hell like they do. When asked for comment by the Atlantic, the White House said that figures such as Ticked and Peters and Wayne Allen Root play no role in election policy at the White House. That's good to know. But then again, neither did discredited MAGA attorney Sidney Powell and General Michael Flynn, both being boosters of the 2020 election lie. They were not official election advisors.

And yet you will recall in December 2020, in the midst of various Trump and Trump allies plots to overturn the free and fair election of 2020, Powell and Flynn told the president he should seize voting. machines in key states. A move then Attorney General Bill Barr told the president he could not do. So that happened in 2020. The only reason I bring it up is because in 2026, January of this year, President Trump told the New York Times that he regrets not having seized the machines. I should have, he said. Now, the president continues to make public comments and take active steps to push more election fraud claims, not just about 2020, but 2022 and 2024 and 2024 and 26,

claims that could theoretically be used by the president to take extraordinary actions. In February, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence under then-Durrecter Tulsie Gabbard said it obtained electronic voting machines seized from Puerto Rico to look for, quote, security vulnerabilities. In July, the FBI assigned analysts to examine ballots and election material seized from Fulton County, Georgia, right near Atlanta. Of course, today, no evidence of large-scale vote rigging or foreign interference has been found as a result of any of these measures. So the big question we continue to ask,

what is the president planning? We do not know, but we will keep watching and keep you up to date, whether from inside the White House or outside. Whoa. Okay, so you want to talk about irresponsible reporting, okay, blatantly irresponsible reporting from a very irresponsible person who's always looking to make a buck, right? Is it? book? I mean, that was the best. This guy comes out with a book after the election said and done, right? And he's like, oh, you know, we absolutely, you know, people that didn't call out Biden for not being in good health. It's their fault. It's like, oh my goodness, you were one of them day after day after day after day. And you thought we were all, quote, cheap fakes when we said,

gee, he doesn't look well. Unbelievable. So that was very irresponsible, very desperate reporting. on behalf of a very desperate news organization where all of the talent, including that guy right there, probably knows that they are about to be fired because that deal is going through in like five days. And their new boss is going to be one David Ellison and maybe even Elon Musk. So it's very stressful over there at CNN right now. Let me just tell you that when you're talking about supporters urging Donald Trump, to do that? It's a very different story than Donald Trump plans to do that. When he jokes around, you know, he jokes around, it's very different than him actually putting together a plan to do that.

So the Atlantic's headline was the supporters urging Trump to declare martial law for the midterms. That was their article. All right. And they are, they're quoting this guy, Peter Tickton, and, you know, these people around Trump who are maybe some of the more extremists, and they are possibly looking at these kinds of things. That's often conspiracy land theory. But they took this, oh, there are these reports that some people, I mean, look, I know some people who said something crazy, right? Like, it's like, okay, so you know somebody who's got a crazy idea.

Does that mean that you have the crazy idea? No. And yet they are presenting that because they're desperate. And they think that they have just completely lost their business model and all their jobs. That is why they're putting that out there. I mean, for starters, the president actually can't cancel the midterms by proclamation. I should just say that because federal law establishes a congressional election date and the Constitution assigns congressional election regulation to the state in Congress. It's a unilateral presidential decision. So that's not going to happen. And the Insurrection Act is not an election takeover power. It actually permits domestic military assistance under very specific circumstances. It doesn't

authorize replacing civilian government with military rule or overriding any constitutional rights. So there's that. I mean, this is crazy. Okay. This is crazy talk. But you understand, and this is why he's like, they're fake news. I mean, this is totally why he's banning them from here to Sunday, for goodness sakes. They're desperate. okay they are desperate because they know that when david ellison comes to take over in five days time it's going to be a very different reality for them the other thing that they're worried about let's not forget there's a chance that donald trump pulls a rabbit out of a hat and donald trump wins this thing big time because remember once before when the polls got it wrong i remember

I remember. I remember. I was there. In fact, my husband was waiting for me to come home because everybody thought it was going to be like an early night. And I was there on the election desk, you know, until the bitter end at Fox Business at the time, with Maria Bartaromo and Lou Dobbs, rest in peace, and Neil Cavuto. He's gone too. Like, I guess that makes all four of us. One, two, three. No, there was one more. It was Stu, I think, Stu Barney. He's still there. Okay, so we had like four of us there. Anyway, we were there on election night, and I remember Maria was looking at me, and I was looking at her, and we were like, can you believe this? Can you believe this? Can you believe this? Because everyone thought Donald Trump had no shot in HEWL of winning, okay? And now look at this, what I'm showing you, these were the polls back at that time. This is why my husband, who was waiting for me to come home, and he fell asleep watching the returns come in. And at some point, it's like, I don't know, two in the morning. and he wakes up somewhat disoriented, thinking, oh, gosh, she's not home yet, and he looks up, and there I am, still on television, because this was amazing, right?

So the polls got it wrong. They thought that Clinton was going to win so much so that the Princeton Election Consortium actually had it at a 98 to 99% chance that Hillary Clinton was going to win the election. the New York Times said it was an 85% chance. I mean, Princeton gave Donald Trump a 1% chance of winning in 2016. And he won. And the New York Times gave him a 15% chance of winning in 2016. And he won.

And then, oh, 538, they were looking like the hero, right? They were the only ones who at least had him at a 29% chance. And he won. So you see, CNN doesn't want to take any chances. They want to make sure that the left gets in and that they take the House and they're really hoping they can get the Senate too. And they know that the polls are not always accurate. And they know that maybe some people aren't going to be that motivated to get up off the couch and go and vote. I hope you are.

believe me, I hope you are, because it's so important, it's a very important election, but I would just remind everybody that, yeah, you know, the polls can show you one thing. And they show right now an 8 to 15 percent chance of, it's like an 8 to 15 point spread. And the expectation is not chance, but 18 to 15 point spread of the Democrats taking the House. And there's some analysis that suggests they could get them both. And I just keep reverting you back to this, because I don't believe this. that everybody's fully truthful in those polls. I don't believe they're capturing the MAGA population the way they should.

And, you know, they're trying. They keep trying to say, oh, well, MAGA doesn't like him anymore. And MAGA broke up and MAGA's over and this, that, and the other. And then you've got all these, oh, I don't know, these anti-Maga, X MAGA people out there, right, that are podcasters and they seem to claim that, oh, you know, it's all over. It's all over for Donald Trump because all these podcasters suddenly don't like him anymore. There was a story that they were quoting about the Wall Street Journal. The Wall Street Journal actually did an analysis they claimed of 70,000 hours of podcasting from quote-unquote MAGA podcasters.

And they found that MAGA podcasters were not talking about Trump like at all compared to how they used to. It was like this massive decline in how much they were talking about Trump. And so they were using that as a reason to say, like, the base is not there. The base is not there. I'm going to tell you, because I'm a very pro-Trump podcaster, we talk about them a lot. Maybe we don't talk about them every single day because guess what? The news cycle is such that there's other stuff sometimes we go to. Sometimes we talk about Ilhan Omar.

Sometimes we talk about Letitia James. And I guess in that case, he wouldn't be the main subject. Sometimes we talk about Elon Musk. sometimes we talk about Mam Dami. I mean, and Kathy Hokel, who looks like she may not win her race in New York. So here's the reality of it. We are not in the middle of an election season. Like we're going to be talking about this a lot over the next couple of weeks

as we get closer and closer to midterms. But for them to say and point to the podcast and say, oh, because they're not talking about Trump as much, must mean that Trump is not as popular. No. And the other thing I'd tell you is, okay, so maybe you got some kind of natso folks out. there and I say not so. And I mean it. Like, I mean it. Some people with some very big egos that are

kind of maybe a little bit jealous of Donald Trump, dare I say. They don't want him to win for variety of reasons. I sometimes think that they may have some foreign money coming into the picture as well. I hate to say that, but I really do question that. I think that there is a lot of foreign money that kind of finds its way into these situations and that may be in part what's going on. So, be wary of those ex-Maga podcasters that think they know it all and think that they have all the answers and want to trash Trump because apparently some of them are just suddenly becoming socialist. Socialists all of a sudden. I mean, they're going to be the next thing you know out with Susan Sarandon on the street protesting Beebe.

Yeah, that was take a good look at her or don't. Susan Sarandon, ladies and gentlemen, out protesting Netanyahu there in New York. Palestine, no more killing on our dyes. Okay, so this is TMZ. They went and got the footage. Lucky them. Oh, I see her. I see her.

I see her. There she is. And then she was really quite proud because, you know, she got handcuffed and the whole thing. You know, she's relive in the, she's relive in her hippie days, right? You know, apparently she was working together back when she was a young hippie. So she gets to get out there and do that.

Listen, I'll tell you, Bibi took, he took Mamdami down brilliantly at the UN. If you haven't seen this, you got to see it because it's quite extraordinary. And I'll tell you, Mamdami is a little, he's a little turd, okay? He's a little turd that needs to go back to Uganda. I'm not as eloquent when I say that as Netanyahu, but watch him. We've taken innumerable steps. to protect the civilian population. Is this genocide?

Of course not. It's the opposite of genocide. So to all those that are spreading these lies about my country and about our brave soldiers, whether they sit in this hall or in the office of the anti-Semitic mayor of New York, I say this, shame on you. Shame on you for distorting the facts. Shame on you for inverting victim and aggressor. Shame on you for spitting in the face of truth.

Mr. Mamdani, since you were elected mayor of this city, many Jews no longer feel safe in New York. They talk to me. They tell me. This isn't the city we remember. It changed so quickly. Now, it's no wonder. You praise criminals convicted of supporting Hamas.

You count as friends people like Hassan Piker, who said America deserved 9-11. America deserved 9-11. Some friends you have. You invite into your home a Palestinian journalist who filled Hamas terrorists beating and torturing Israeli hostages and later admitted that he refused to publish the videos in order to protect, you guessed it, the terrorists. I mean, we got a problem. when you got a guy like Mamdami running New York City, I don't know what to tell you. And what did he do right after this?

He ran to CNN, right? He ran to CNN to go do his big interview with Christian Amampur, who despises this president as much as perhaps Zahran Mamdami does. He met with him anyway. I guess he was, you know, a glutton for the camera. But bad news, bad news guy. Let's watch. Mr. Mayor, welcome to our program.

Thank you so much for coming. It's such a pleasure to have you here. Thank you. Shortly before we sat down, you were meeting with the president and you had a press availability, and so we were able to see you and monitor closely. It looks like the president is on his best behavior when he's around you.

He is dignified, polite, speaks gently and of substance. it seems like he quite likes you. It's quite a rare thing for a leader to have that kind of encounter with this president. So I just want to know whether you have a trick, whether you have a sort of a way of dealing with him. Okay, so what do you talk about? He's like, we both love New York.

He's got these vacant eyes, by the way. Have you ever noticed that? Totally vacant eyes. Anyway, I just, I can't take it because she's just, you're so great. You're so great. You're so great. You're so great. We love you. We love you. We love you. We love you. Because you're going to bring socialism to the financial capital of the world and destroy it. These socialists are getting out of control. And I mean, it's getting kind of scary. I'm not doing crazy stuff like CNN is, but I'm warning you. Like, this is an important election because these guys are getting kind of frightening. I sat down with my friend, Kent Strang just yesterday afternoon. And Ken, Ken,

just got back, just got back from the Chicago DSA event. They had like some big shindig out in Chicago. So he had a few things to say about that. I want you to watch. I got to tell you, the socialists are really getting out there. And when I say out there, I mean really and truly out there. You know how crazy this Hassan Piker is. I can't believe I even have to say his name.

I can't even believe I have to know who this person is. But you need to know too because you need to know what we're up against. Okay. take a look at the insanity of this dude. I will throw you in prison, okay? I want to put you physically behind a prison. I want Chinese-style communism to happen inside of the Democratic Party right now, okay? I want to do cultural revolution shit when I see that.

From ladies and gentlemen, the DSA. So he's a socialist who apparently didn't believe in prisons, but now wants to throw other members of his party who aren't socialist enough into jail. I mean, you can't make it up. Well, my friend, your friend, right? You know Kent Strang. He went to the recent big shindig that all the socialists were having in Chicago, and he caught up with some of these folks and got to witness their insanity firsthand.

Take a peek. Satan's School of Gay Communism. That's what this hat says. Reporting live from the Socialist Conference of Contradictions here in Chicago. They say they're pro-worker while union protesters are picketing outside. The Starbucks line is 30 people deep. Everybody's on an iPhone or a MacBook. And the Hyatt rooms here are going for more than $300 a night.

This isn't socialism. It's cosplay. Yeah. And here he is right now. Hey, Kent. Good stuff. Better you than me out there with these socialists in Chicago. But, you know, you're pointing out some of these contradictions.

I just showed a clip from Hassan Piker talking about putting all the Democrats he doesn't like in jail, right? I thought they didn't like jail. I thought there were supposed to be no prisons. You're pointing out that, you know, they're all staying at this $300 hotel, nice digs, right, for a bunch of socialists that don't believe in capitalism and they're spending big on their Starbucks lattes. I mean, what was that like? First of all, I just, I want your read of the room. You were hanging out.

I know they didn't let you in, right? No, they didn't let me in, but I thought, I've got to see it for myself, Trish. And what I saw was these folks might love the free market as much as you and I do. They're standing a hotel, the beautiful McCormick Place, the Hyatt, they're drinking $8 lottes. The line is 30 people deep. They're on their MacBooks.

They're on their iPhones. They probably have a better Jordan collection on their feet than I do. They're rolling up in Ubers. And I thought it was a pretty interesting dichotomy of they like and love the spoils of the free market while they're at a socialism conference telling us about the dangers of capitalism and free markets. And I think it's such an interesting point. We see Hassan Piker and all the Democratic socialists out there talking about the ills and the wrongs, the free markets, and how they're going to destroy it. but they seem to enjoy the results. But I think we should be incredibly careful

because the organizers, the folks like Hassan Piker, they're gaining market share, and we've got to go fight back. Okay, Ari, this is concerning to me, all right? So, you know, full-disco, look, I still think at the 11th hour we can pull through on midterms. I'm forever an optimist, and that's just me, right? Like, I'm always pretty optimistic.

I'm a realist, too, but, you know, I still think if we can get gas prices down and there are some indications that, hey, it could happen if this is, you know, in fact, they got 18 million barrels a day through last week through the Strait of Hermuz. So look, I'm still hopeful. But what troubles me tremendously is the idea that these nut jobs, and I'm sorry, I'm just going to call it, I know you're more polite than I am. They're total nut jobs like that Hassan Piker out there that have captivated a group of people.

and there is this movement. And I think that this is real in that if we're not careful, we are going to lose our country and we're going to lose the very thing that has made us the envy of the entire world. We are entrepreneurs. We are capitalists. This is what has made America great.

And these people are out there looking to take it away from us. I don't even think, to your point, they even know what they're taking away, but they want to take it away because they're jealous, they're angry, and they don't want you to have something that they think the government should have and then redistribute it. So tell me about your impression, like, are we right here? Like, this is real, right?

I think that we should fear it. It is dangerous. And it's probably here to stay, given the frustration of so many people when they look over and say, hey, well, the Joneses have more. It's real and it's dangerous. And they're organizing. And so as much as I make fun of it and call it cosplay, because, look, you got to have a little bit of fun with it. We need to treat it seriously. And I think what's

really important is like, why do people get here? It's because people are frustrated with the cost of living. They're frustrated with gas prices. They're frustrated with interest rates. They're frustrated with the lack of housing and the cost of housing. They're frustrated with their grocery prices. But why are those things expensive? They're expensive because the government got involved and the government made it expensive. The out of control red tape, the regulatory burden. That's why things are more expensive. And the socialists come around and they offer them liberation and freedom. But we know that the opposite is true.

Socialism is about control. And what we offer in a free market is true, freedom, the American dream. But they want to control how many hours a week you work. They want to control who your doctor is. They want to control where you get your groceries. They want to control who owns your housing. It's all about government control. and that's what we as Americans have to stop.

Tell me about the people that you saw coming in and out of that conference and just to back up because, you know, it's sort of funny. Kent, I'll just tell the viewers, he knew that the minute they saw his name, right? You know, he wasn't getting into the conference. So he didn't, but he stood outside and you were in the lobby, right? Correct me if I'm wrong. In the Hyatt Hotel in Chicago. And so you got to see the people, talk to the people,

who was kind of, you know, mulling around there. They looked like they could afford it decently, I guess, enough, the $300 bucks a night and the $8 lattes. But I suspect that there's some commonality in their misery. Are we looking at a lot of sort of overeducated, under-employed folks? Because I think that that's part of the problem. I think people have trained for a job that just doesn't exist. And, you know, they're looking around and they see that the plumber and the electrician, like, they got it going on, right? And they can afford the house and they can afford the two cars and the picket fence and a vacation. And they went to school forever and they've got a ton of student loan debt. And it's got to be frustrating.

Shockingly, it's a pretty big cross-section. They're younger people. There are older people. There are folks who come from seemingly all walks of life. And I think that that's again, the all lure of socialism is something. that promises you everything, something that promises you liberation and freedom from the system that you don't like, it's attracting more and more people. And that's why I think it's so important for us to educate Americans about what actually happens under socialist regimes. We've seen it in Venezuela. We've seen it through communism in the Soviet Union and through Cuba, that it leads to horrific outcomes. It leads to pain, suffering, the loss of human rights, the destruction.

economic systems. And so what we're trying to do at Americans for Prosperity, we've launched a brand new website called Fightsocialism.com. I put it on the screen for you. By the way, you guys should go there because anybody who wants to join Kent, these little excursions will call them or just be grassroots and get out in your community and help educate people. There are so many ideas and they've got so much you can do and they need your help.

So go to Fightsocialism.com. Keep going. You've got the new website. I love it. Yeah, what we want to show people is that these arguments have been tried and these arguments have failed. They have failed every single place they have been attempted. And so what we're doing through our new website is a booklet on how to fight socialism. And it walks through their primary arguments on health care, on housing, on government-run grocery stores.

And we show the flaws in those systems and the arguments you can make to defeat those failed policies so we can usher in free, to get the government out of the way so people can live their American dream. And so we can flourish so we can create more innovations in America because that will stop and stifle innovation if we live in a socialist state. And I often tell people that I meet with all across America that it's not enough anymore to yell at our television sitting on our couch. And it may not be enough to vote anymore. It has to be folks standing up for what we believe in. It has to be folks standing up for the principles of America and what we are founded on. And we have to push back and we have to push back hard and not allow the toehold of socialism to get any bigger.

If you love this country, you've got to fight for it. So get the ring and fight. I'm like, what are you guys doing? Right? Like, granted, my theory on this, Kent, and, you know, forgive me if you've heard this before. But I think that the Democrat Party, they just kind of, they got one. one track. And their only answer to everything was, we hate Trump. We hate Trump. We hate Trump. We hate Trump. So they had TDS on steroids. And instead of coming up with solutions for things, and they had four

years with Biden, all they did was say, we hate Trump. Everything is Trump's fault. And so they didn't offer any course of action. Donald Trump did. And he got voted into office. And you know who else did? The socialist, right? So if you wonder how like the Democrats party was just taken out from under, And, you know, yeah, it's not your dad's socialist or Democrat Party anymore. I think it's for that reason. I think people were searching for answers. And you went one of two directions. You're like, okay, this MAGA thing, they got it going on.

And I like how they're promoting capitalism or you went the other way. And I think it's so important as we get closer and closer to bid terms is we need to ask Democratic candidates, where do you stand? Do you believe that we should eliminate the United States Senate? do you believe that we should eliminate the Supreme Court? Do you believe, like Hassan Piker apparently doesn't, that we should eliminate prisons, that we should have complete open borders? Do you stand with the Democratic Socialist of America or do you stand with freedom? And let's find out. Let's find out in every Senate race. Let's find out in every congressional race all the way down to dogcatcher. Do you stand with the DSA or do you not?

Yeah. No, we need to know that. And so many of them are trying to to avoid that question or they, they, they, oh, you know, he's just a streamer. Who cares? Right. No, no, no. He's a streamer that has a big audience and you're courting that audience and you've invited him to come out, for example, with El Saeed and campaign with you or look at AOC. She's done events with him. Like he is actually, the fact that he's out there with some quote unquote mainstream Democrat politicians is very troubling to me, very troubling. And I know troubling to you. So fightsocialism.com, join the fight. Join Kent for America on Instagram. You can see all his clips there. Thank you so much. Good to see you, my friend. Thanks for having me on. I appreciate it,

Shresh. It's always good to see him. You know what? As he was talking with us right now, what just came out? Let me show you this story that just came out in the New York Post. Just within the last couple of hours, they have a headline here. Americans are embracing socialism at record levels, guys. What is going on? Why is this happening? I think, you know, I think it's a little bit keeping up with the Joneses. Everybody's like looking over and oh, you know, they get Instagram and social media and somebody has this and somebody has that and there's this like frustration. And I think it's happening like on a global scale. And they're like, oh, you know, why do they have that? And I don't have this. I mean, I don't know. I don't know why people would be looking to such a failed disastrous system that has. has brought only misery to every possible civilization, every country that has ever tried it.

I get some good news. We need a little good news, right? The citizenship is coming back. That check that they wanted to have before midterms? Yeah, this is a huge win for Donald Trump, guys, a huge, huge win. The Supreme Court voted on this, and they said, guess what? You know what? You can get checked for your citizenship. Look at this story right here. This is Reuters, okay? This is Reuters that I'm showing you, and it's a headline from just two days ago. Reuters is not a conservative website. This is not a campaign ad.

This is Reuters. And the headline is how U.S. states mistakenly added 30,000 non-citizens to voter rolls. Wow, okay? Red states and blue states, 30,000 people that didn't live in this country. suddenly showed up on the Vodoroal list. Apparently the DMV gets y'all set up and 30,000 as a result were in the system. Software glitches were told,

although the software companies are like, yeah, not really, they're clerical errors. Drivers license applications that should have stopped at no and didn't, okay? That's a problem. Reuters went all the way back to the year 2000, and they added up official records from a dozen states. So you had California, Illinois, Iowa, Nevada, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Utah, Virginia. Okay, I got a cheat sheet over here. I'll get the list.

That was a nationwide total. more than 30,000 self-declared non-citizens got registered by mistake. Now, they say that nobody had actually published his tally before. And they also say they cannot tell how many of these people actually voted, but I don't care if it was just one. Because what are we doing registering 30,000 people that don't even have citizenship in this country to vote for goodness? Remember what happened in New Jersey? I mean, New Jersey was a big deal because that happened

just a short time ago. We learned that 6,600 people walked into the Motor Vehicle Commission, and the next thing you know, they got registered. The system enabled them to register to vote in New Jersey. 400 of them actually voted. I mean, that's crazy. And so, you know, the White House is like, we got to do something. We got to do something. We got to do something. New Jersey is like, well, we had a software error. The software company says, no, no, no, no, no, you didn't have an error. No, honey, to the governor. No, no, no, no.

This was all on you. And so we don't really know what happened. But regardless of whose fault it is, I'm going to tell you what the upshot is, 6,600 non-citizens were registered to vote, and 400 of them did. New Jersey still does not use the federal citizenship database. New York doesn't use it. Texas. They ran 18 million names through it.

They came up with about 2,000 or so red flags. But what's going on here? I mean, we all live in the same country. We all want free and fair elections. But some of these states are saying, we don't want to have any part of that. And all I get to say is the news today could change this. Just this morning, the Supreme Court lifted the block on the federal registration database,

which is called save, and states that now want to check voter rolls against federal citizenship records, they can do it again, because for a while they weren't able to. The court did not order California to do it. They didn't order New York to do it. They didn't order New Jersey to do it.

But it said, hey, if you want to do this, you can. So what's going to happen? Red states are going to use it? Blue states are going to ignore it? Why are blue states ignoring it? Like, think about that. If you've got a database and you have the ability to say, well, gee, you know, we got a few in here

that are not actually citizens that have been registered to vote. Like maybe we should do something about it. CNN reporting on this. I actually know this guy. We used to work at Bloomberg together. Phil Mattingly, he's a good one. So let's listen to his report, even though it's CNN, and see what he has to say.

As we know more about that, the breaking news from the Supreme Court. The Trump administration will now be allowed to use a DHS citizenship database to review voter roles in their search for non-citizen voters. The ruling reverses a lower court decision, which had said the administration's effort likely broke the law. This is an unsigned opinion, meaning we don't know who exactly was in the majority here. We do know the three liberal justices dissented. Gabe Cohen has been covering every single step of this story and joins me now.

Gabe, talk about what the administration is actually planning to do now that they have this green light. Yeah, so Phil, the short answer is we don't know exactly what they're planning to do ahead of the midterms, and we are still going through this ruling, but I'll tell you off the bat, the question at play here that the Supreme Court needed to answer was whether or not the administration broke the law when it beefed up this save citizenship verification system over the past 18 months, bringing in various records,

federal records from other agencies, social security data, including data on U.S.-born citizens, whether or not they had broken the law to create this system that states could then run their voter registration list through in this hunt for non-citizens who might be registered. Remember, this has been a massive initiative of this administration as the president has continued

to claim without significant evidence that there is this widespread crisis of not just election fraud, but of non-citizens voting. And we know that about two dozen Republican-led states have actually run their voter list through this system until the courts paused it to figure out whether or not this was even legal. And we also know that the Department of Justice

has sued to require to order 30 other states. to hand over those lists so that the federal government could audit them. I do want to read you a bit of that unsigned majority opinion, which said that under the federal law, under federal law, I should say, the federal government has an obligation to respond to requests from state and local election officials seeking to verify the citizenship of voters. The lower court order, the Supreme Court said, had prevented the federal government from using the program that it believes it is,

that it is best suited for the task of being able to identify these non-citizens who may be registered to vote. The dissent that came from those three liberal justices, it said the harm caused by burdening or disenfranchising even a few lawful voters outweighs the non-existent harm that the government experiences when it is prevented. But how are they disenfranchised? If you're here legally and you're a lawful voter, like, how are you being disenfranchised if they just run a check on you. I mean, you know, when you go to the airport and you get on a plane,

they had that little ID check and they run you through a computer system? I mean, like, how is this disenfranchising to you? Oh, my gosh. I mean, we're not in a good place because these people are just so consumed with TDS that they are going to fight anything logical, anything logical at all. And this is logical. I mean, you should have some kind of way of making sure that somebody who's not a citizen in your country is not voting. And you get 20,000 of them. Forgive me. 30,000 non-citizens.

Thank you, Reuters, for assembling that data. I mean, wow. And I'll tell you, again, it goes back to you don't even want one. You need proof of citizenship. You need to have a system to triple check it. And there you go. I mean, end of story that does not need to be that hard because you can't just have mistakes. Like, you cannot have these kinds of mistakes.

I don't care. They say, oh, well, you know, 30,000 people, it doesn't really matter. It was since the year 2000, not a big deal. Only 400 people voted in New Jersey, not a big deal. Well, you know what, it is a big deal because it shows you, you got mistakes. You got a broken system. And with all the technology that we have at our disposal, believe me, we get a ton of it. You know that.

We ought to be able to fix this. We can fix this. It's just that these people do not want it fixed, and I leave you with this, why? Why do they not want it fixed? It is good to see so many of you. Please make sure that you subscribe. Do make a comment. Maybe answer that question for me. Why don't they want it fixed? I'd like to know. It's great to have you here. I may pop back over the weekend. We shall see, but we have a ton of content coming your way. Thank you for all you do to make this show a success, and I'll see you for sure, certain on Monday afternoon life.