>> And one last shout out, Donald Trump, President Trump. He told me I was gonna bring some energy today for you guys, you guys need it. And I told him if we did this, he gets all the credit. So thank you, President Trump.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
A news photograph of a man resembling Donald Trump, wearing a dark navy suit with a purple tie, walking outdoors and pointing with his left hand while gesturing off to the side. Beside him is a man resembling Chinese President Xi Jinping, wearing a dark navy suit with a maroon/red tie, looking in the direction Trump is pointing. Behind them, a line of other men in dark suits (a mix of Asian and Western officials, one carrying a gray tote bag) walk in a procession across a paved courtyard, with a small gazebo-like stone structure, hedges, and trees in the background. A Secret Service agent in a dark suit stands near the hedge on the left side.
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news photograph showing three men walking together on a tarmac or helipad, in front of the underside of a military helicopter marked "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" in white lettering on its dark green fuselage. On the left is an older Asian man (resembling Chinese President Xi Jinping) in a dark navy suit with a red tie. On the right is an older man with light/blond hair (resembling Donald Trump) in a dark navy suit with a magenta/pink tie, gesturing with his hand while looking down and speaking. Between and slightly behind them is a younger Asian man in a dark suit with a light blue tie and glasses, wearing a lanyard/badge, appearing to be an aide or interpreter. The ground is a gray tarmac painted with a white presidential-seal-style design including stars and circular elements, consistent with a U.S. military installation such as Andrews Air Force Base or a helipad near the White House/Mar-a-Lago.
Text in image: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news photograph showing a man resembling Donald Trump, in a dark suit with a pink/magenta tie, standing on a paved walkway gesturing with his raised index finger while speaking to a man resembling Chinese President Xi Jinping, who wears a dark suit and dark red tie. Between and around them are several aides and interpreters in suits, one holding papers and another carrying a black briefcase. In the background, a larger group of men in dark suits, several wearing red lapel pins/ribbons and name badges on lanyards, walk together across the same paved area near a stone building, with a lawn visible to the left.
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news photograph showing a man resembling Donald Trump standing beside a man resembling Chinese President Xi Jinping next to the open door of the olive-green Marine One presidential helicopter, which bears the seal reading "...OF AMERICA" on its fuselage and "Welcome Aboard / Marine One" on the boarding stairs. Both men are in dark suits with red ties, standing on a tarmac painted with a large presidential-seal design. Two younger men in suits (apparently aides or interpreters) stand nearby, one holding papers and a bag. On the far right, a U.S. Marine in dress uniform with a white cap salutes beside the helicopter's open door, where another uniformed crew member is visible inside.
Text in image: OF AMERICA Welcome Aboard Marine One
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news photograph showing a man resembling Donald Trump standing at the base of the steps of Marine One (the U.S. presidential helicopter, marked "...OF AMERICA" and bearing the presidential seal), gesturing with a raised index finger while speaking to a group of men below on a tarmac painted with a large presidential seal design (stars and eagle motif). A man resembling Chinese President Xi Jinping stands facing him, along with two other men in dark suits (one holding papers/a folder), and a U.S. Marine in dress uniform stands at attention saluting on the far right near the helicopter's open door and boarding stairs.
Text in image: OF AMERICA Velcome Aboard Marine One
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news photograph of two men in dark navy suits with red ties walking together outdoors on a paved area decorated with large white star and stripe/circle markings (resembling a stylized flag or seal pattern), with a patch of green grass in the lower left corner. The man on the left has gray hair and is walking with hands clasped; he resembles Chinese President Xi Jinping. The man in the center, who resembles Donald Trump, has light/blond hair and is gesturing with his right hand while speaking, pointing toward the other man. Behind them to the right, a younger Asian man in a navy suit, light blue shirt, and diamond-patterned tie is smiling and carrying papers/a notepad. Another partially visible man in a dark suit is in the background on the left. There is no text overlaid on the image.
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news photograph showing Donald Trump walking with Chinese President Xi Jinping across a tarmac, with an aide (a man with glasses carrying a folder/briefcase) walking between them. Behind them is a large green military helicopter (Marine One / VH-92) marked "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" with a U.S. flag painted near the front. Trump, in a navy suit with a pink tie, has his hands out gesturing while speaking and looking down/toward Xi. Xi is wearing a navy suit with a maroon/dark red tie and looking ahead. The aide between them wears a navy suit, light blue tie, and glasses, carrying a dark folder or small bag.
Text in image: UNI[TED STATES OF] AMERICA
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A digitally rendered/illustrated image showing four people standing on the steps of a white colonnaded building, beneath a gold cursive sign reading "The Oval Office." Behind them are four flags alternating American and Chinese national flags, flanking a set of white arched doors. The four figures, arranged left to right, resemble an Asian woman in a dark blue traditional dress, an older Asian man in a dark suit with a maroon/burgundy tie (resembling Xi Jinping), an older man with light hair in a dark suit and purple tie (resembling Donald Trump), and a woman with blonde hair in a black skirt suit (resembling Melania Trump). In the foreground, blurred and with their back to the camera, is a ceremonial guard wearing a red coat, a black bicorne hat with white trim, a white sash, and holding a long pole weapon (halberd/pike) with a large metal blade, along with a hand resting on top of a matching hat/headpiece next to them.
Text in image: The Oval Office
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news/official-style photograph taken in the White House Oval Office, in front of a gallery wall of gold-framed presidential portraits. Four people stand in a row behind a low wooden coffee table that holds a small model airplane (a "United States of America" livery jet resembling Air Force One) on a stand, positioned over a round rug bearing the presidential seal. From left to right: a woman in a dark navy long qipao-style dress with a brooch, a man in a dark navy suit with a red tie (resembling Chinese President Xi Jinping), a man in a dark navy suit with a magenta/pink tie giving a thumbs-up gesture with his right hand while smiling (resembling Donald Trump), and a woman in an all-black jacket and skirt with blonde hair (resembling Melania Trump). Two cream-colored damask sofas flank the table on either side. Gold table lamps with white shades, decorative gold urns/objects, and a small bronze bust sit on wooden side tables in the background beneath the portrait wall.
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news photograph of the presidential helicopter (Marine One, a green-and-white VH-92A helicopter marked "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" with a U.S. flag on the nose) parked on the South Lawn landing pad of the White House, which is painted with the Seal of the President of the United States. In the background, framed by trees, are the Washington Monument and the Jefferson Memorial under an overcast, cloudy sky.
Text in image: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news/press photograph of Marine One (the presidential helicopter), a dark green and white helicopter with "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" painted on its side and a small American flag decal near the nose, parked on the South Lawn of the White House. In the background is the National Mall with the Jefferson Memorial and part of the Washington Monument visible among trees. A group of men in dark suits stands near the helicopter's open door and stairway, including one who resembles Donald Trump and another who resembles Chinese leader Xi Jinping, along with two other men in suits (one appears to be holding papers/a folder). A U.S. Marine in dress blue uniform stands at attention near the helicopter's stairway, saluting. The presidential seal is visible painted on the ground/tarmac in white.
Text in image: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news/press photograph taken indoors at what appears to be a formal government ceremonial setting, decorated with alternating American and Chinese flags. A podium bearing the Presidential Seal of the United States stands in the foreground. A man resembling Donald Trump, seen from behind/side in a dark navy suit, is bent forward shaking hands with a man resembling Chinese President Xi Jinping, who is seated and applauding with both hands while leaning in to shake hands, wearing a dark suit with a maroon/burgundy tie. To the left, a woman resembling Melania Trump, wearing a black outfit, is seated and applauding. In the background through an open doorway, a military honor guard member holding a ceremonial item and a microphone stand are visible, along with additional flags and a blue curtain. An ornate red-upholstered chair with gold trim sits empty at the far right.
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news/press photograph of two men in dark suits with pink/magenta ties walking together along the White House Colonnade (the covered walkway next to the Rose Garden). The man on the left, an East Asian man in his 70s, is gesturing toward a wall of framed black-and-white presidential portraits with engraved plaques mounted beneath them, appearing to point something out to the other man. The man on the right, an older man with light-colored combed-back hair, is looking toward the portraits as they walk. The corridor has white columns on the right opening onto a garden with manicured hedges and trees, and gold sconce-style wall fixtures line the ceiling above the portrait wall on the left. There is no caption or overlaid text in the image itself.
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news-style photograph of four people standing in a row on stone steps in front of a colonnade, posing for an official photo. From left to right: an East Asian woman in a dark navy traditional-style buttoned dress with a floral brooch and black heels; an East Asian man with gray hair in a dark navy suit, white shirt, and pink/magenta tie; a man with light-colored hair in a dark navy suit, white shirt, and pink tie with a small flag pin on his lapel (resembling Donald Trump); and a woman with long blonde hair in a black tweed jacket and matching black skirt with black heels (resembling Melania Trump). Behind them are large American flags alternating with red flags, and a black backdrop/stage skirting is visible between the flags, consistent with a White House Rose Garden or colonnade setting. No visible text overlay is present in the image itself.
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A news photograph taken outside the White House, likely at a South Portico or Rose Garden entrance decorated with American flags and large red Chinese-style banners. In the foreground, out of focus, a row of U.S. Marine Corps ceremonial guards in dress blue uniforms with white gloves and peaked caps march in formation carrying rifles. In the background, standing on the steps and in focus, are four people: a man saluting (resembling Donald Trump) in a dark suit and red tie; to his left an older Asian man in a dark suit (resembling Chinese President Xi Jinping); further left a woman in a dark blazer (resembling Peng Liyuan); and to the right a blonde woman in a black buttoned coat (resembling Melania Trump). The scene appears to be a military honor guard ceremony during a state visit.
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A stylized map graphic in blue and white showing the Persian Gulf region, with countries labeled: Iraq, Kuwait, Iran, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Oman. A dark navy circle highlights the narrow waterway connecting the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman (the Strait of Hormuz), with a line pointing down to a dark blue banner overlaid on the map reading "TRUMP STRAIT" in bold white capital letters. The graphic appears to depict a proposal or joke about renaming the Strait of Hormuz after Donald Trump.
Text in image: Iraq Kuwait Iran Saudi Arabia United Arab Emirates Oman TRUMP STRAIT
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
A political meme/comparison graphic with two side-by-side photos under headings. The left photo, labeled "Fake News" / "Before," shows the White House press briefing room with rows of empty brown seats facing a blue-curtained podium area with the presidential seal and an American flag. The right photo, labeled "FDR Pool" / "After," shows an ornate, renovated indoor swimming pool room with white and gold-trimmed walls, arched windows and doorways, an eagle emblem on the wall, chandelier-style sconces, and a rectangular pool with light blue water reflecting the ceiling.
Text in image: Fake News Before FDR Pool After
Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.
NATO has shaped Europe's security since 1949. But now tension between the U.S. and the rest of the alliance has grown as the Trump administration pushes a NATO 3.0 idea that Europe should take the lead on its own conventional defense. And the Department of War has launched a six-month review that could lead to the biggest U.S. drawdown in Europe since the 1990s. Today we head to Spain, one of the countries that's been a big Trump critic, to take stock of Trump's impact on NATO. To understand the friction between the U.S. and NATO, we travel to the capital of Spain, Madrid... Lost steps because this is the place where... And walk the historic halls of the Senate with Senator Fernando Gutierrez from the Conservative Party. And this is Christopher Columbus who... Gutierrez is a retired general who leads the parliamentary assembly delegation that advises NATO. He agreed to address President Trump's beef with Spain and other NATO allies, which began with Trump demanding they pony up more for their own security. Do you believe that his actions and rhetoric are reasonable or irresponsible? Well, I think his behavior is too aggressive sometimes. And that's what he presents, an aggressive posture. But the principles behind that aggressive posture are understood for everyone. Everyone understands that we have to share our responsibilities. There was an additional rift expressed by President Trump when he felt like he didn't get the support that he wanted with the action involving Iran. How do you view that? Because you are part of NATO, you have to do what I believe you have to do. It's not how NATO work. Here in Spain, U.S. taxpayers have poured billions of dollars into two military bases. But when the U.S. and Israel wanted to use them for refueling and strikes against Iran, Spain said no. President Trump accused Spain of freeloading while the U.S. does the heavy lifting. When the U.S. struck Iran in February with Operation Epic Fury, Spain was one of the strongest opponents. The nation's socialist prime minister, Pedro Sanchez, called the war illegal and unjustified. Spain actually said that we can't use their bases, and that's all right, we could use their bases. We want we could just fly in and use it. Nobody's going to tell us not to use it, but we don't have to. But they were unfriendly. And so I told him that we don't want to -- Spain has absolutely nothing that we need other than great people. They have great people. Trump hasn't limited his criticism to Spain. He's threatened to withdraw the U.S. from NATO entirely. Look, we went to NATO. I didn't ask very strongly. I just said, hey, if you want to help, great. No, no, no, we will not help. I said, that's all right. You don't want to help? Because I've always said NATO is a paper tiger, because they haven't helped at all. Just the opposite. They've actually gone out of their way not to help. They didn't even want to give us landing strips. In Washington, the United States breaks a 170-year-old tradition as it joins -- The U.S. helped create NATO in 1949 to counter Soviet expansion after World War II. In 2024, full measure got the rare chance to embed in live-fire NATO exercises in northeast Poland. U.S. forces led troops from Britain, Croatia, and Romania. Special Integrat Russia is about 60 kilometers to our north. U.S. withdrawal from NATO would be earth-shattering. It could trigger the collapse of the 77-year-old alliance, weaken Europe's security, and embolden Russia and China. In Spain, we don't agree with a war that doesn't have any support from the United Nations. There are international rules to follow. Vivian Ogou is a left-leaning member of Spanish Parliament. For sure, we don't understand the positions of Trump. Trump is generating diplomatic tensions worldwide, creating -- putting the sanctions. That's not how international community should be working. It's -- the United States is stopping to be a reliable partner and is generating a lot of tensions, economic tensions, political tensions that have an impact on markets, that have an impact on prices, that have an impact in people. President Trump's threats have generated backlash beyond Spain. Member of Parliament Alex Ballinger is a Royal Marine veteran in the U.K. and a member of the Democratic Socialist Labor Party. When looking at NATO and defense when it comes to the United Kingdom, what are your thoughts on President Trump saying something needs to change? I think there has been a bit of concern about Donald Trump's comments about walking away from NATO. Some things he's got right. We do need to invest more in defense, both in this country and in Europe, and countries are now doing that. There is an element of burden-sharing to do, but it is so much in both of our interests that I think there would be an expectation that we're better working together on this stuff rather than dividing ourselves at this very dangerous time. But amid the criticism, NATO Secretary General Mark Ruda has emerged as President Trump's strongest defender, most famously after Trump used an expletive when comparing Israel and Iran to two kids in a schoolyard. Let him fight for about two or three minutes, then it's easier to stop him. And then daddy has to sometimes do strong language to do that stuff. Yeah, he is strong language. Every once in a while you have to use a certain word. After that remark, Ruda's approach with Trump quickly became known as "Daddy diplomacy." There's one point even Trump's critics concede. Only because of his pressure, NATO allies met the target of spending at least two percent of their economy on their own military for the first time last year, and they've committed to five percent by 2035. Because I want to show you what this president was able to achieve. And let's start with this chart. This chart is about the Trump children. The Trump children shows you the increase Europeans and Canadians are paying into defense since you took office in 2017. Most say a full U.S. withdrawal from NATO is unlikely, but War Secretary Pete Hexeth has initiated a review called NATO 3.0. People see it as a threat to reduce or reposition American troops in Europe after the disappointing response on Iran. It will be designed to ensure that NATO is moving fast and irreversibly toward Europe leading, stepping up to take primary responsibility for the defense of Europe, stepping up to ensure our forces are postured for America's global needs, and stepping up to make sure that our access, spacing and overflight are clearly delineated and assured. The impact of President Trump on NATO has been what? Has been demanding, has been just because it was unbalanced, and we have to do more. So you're not mad at him? No. I think most of the negative comments coming to say that NATO is going to be dismantled, that the U.S. is leaving Europe abandoned, are coming from outside the United States. Who do you mean? I think it's coming from the Eastern countries. I think it's coming from Russia. Russia is interested in making the European Union citizens to believe that they are endangered to be abandoned and it's better if they just take the first step. If they are abandoning you, just abandon them. Europe is bolstering its defense spending thanks to Trump. The question is how flashpoints over issues like Iran will impact the long-standing NATO alliance. The Pentagon is expected to recommend what to change about U.S. forces in Europe to President Trump by November 6th, that could include cutting 25,000 troops, roughly a third of the force, or as many as 40,000 with Germany, Italy, and Spain most impacted.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
The Supreme Court of the United States will just not let Missouri have an Election Victory. They continuously, three times now, overrule Judges who came to the correct decisions. Thank you to the Governor, and all of the Great People of Missouri, who are fighting so hard for Fairness and Election Security. Such tremendous Spirit and Love of our Country. I won Missouri BIG, all three times, and I couldn’t be more proud of doing so. A great place — I love you all! President DONALD J. TRUMP
More people working in the United States right now than at any point in the History of our Country! President DJT
Welcome back America, we're here with our friend Ben Shapiro who's in great demand. I have trouble getting Ben, he's in great demand and for good reason. The Ben Shapiro show, one of the biggest podcasts in the country, he's the Daily Wire editor Emeritus. He's got a great new film out of which he's producer, Run Hide, Fight, Infidels. It's a new movie exclusively on the Daily Wire and I cannot recommend it enough. I've seen it, it's fantastic. By the way, lots of action-oriented, I love it. No PC, I love that too. We can talk about it a little bit later. You know, Ben, we have this very odd woke-right isolationist element. I won't say within the Republican Party, they seem to hate the Republican Party, but they are of a similar mindset, I remember, of the George McGoverns of old, their similar mindset of the Papucans of old, and now of the Marxist Islamists on the hard left, pushing, pushing for isolationism and so forth. And yet, when we look at the Fox survey, Iran is a 4% issue with the American people. So whatever happens in the midterms, it doesn't appear that Iran is going to drive anything one way or another. What's your take on this? I think that's exactly right. Obviously, there is a contingent who would love to see President Trump too poorly in the midterms, who want Republicans to lose. Some of these people are openly saying they want Republicans to lose, by the way. Some of them are openly standing in favor of the pro-terrorism candidate in Michigan, Abdul Al Sayyed. So there are some people who are attempting to destroy the Republican Party from within in the hopes that they will then be able to sort of take over whatever remains of the Republican Party. I don't think that it's going to work. You know, when you look at the Iran issue, there's one thing that Americans hate more than anything else when it comes to foreign policy. And it is not foreign conflict. It is losing. It is losing. And the reality is that the president has done yeoman's work in reopening the Strait of Hormuz and putting the United States in a position to really finish off the Iranian regime without having to put boots on the ground in Iran. The president has to within his capacity to essentially finish the Iranian economy with a single bombing sortie over Karg Island or South Pars. The biggest thing, I think, that is the obstacle right now to just completing that victory is it's just a matter of decision making. Does the president actually believe that a deal is on the table or does he not? I'm very skeptical the Iranians are ever gonna put a worthwhile deal on the table. But as you say, the American people are significantly less interested in any foreign policy issue than they are with how things are going here in the United States. And if the economic numbers continue to boom in the stock market, if they can use well and the unemployment numbers, if the wages increase to keep up with the inflation and inflation drops, then Republicans will do fine in the midterms and the rest of the presidency will be a success. It really is almost that simple. But I'm hearing the the whispers. I think they're telling the president, they're certainly telling the media that if we go full bore and finish them off, and I believe that we can go full bore and finish them off, that if we do that, the price of fuel will even go higher to two hundred dollars a gallon. Isn't this what the isolationist said when this started? They didn't say that it would go to a hundred dollars a barrel. They said it would go to two hundred dollars a barrel, that we would lose thousands of troops. Everything they said is false. And I fear that they're repeating it and the Arab countries are all looking out for themselves. Turkey of course has greater, you know, desires about the region and so forth and so on. If we're going to do America first, and these other countries aren't aligning with us to quote the vice president, then why should we listen to them? Well, let's get it over with. Well, this is my view. I mean, I think that the president is on the verge of a world-shaking historic victory in Iran. And again, the oil prices, yes, they are higher obviously than they were before the conflict, but if you would like for the oil prices to be very high in perpetuity, please pull out as soon as possible and allow Iran free reign over the Strait of Hormuz and the Houthis free reign over the Babylon Mountains fray and the capacity to hit the east-west pipeline in Saudi Arabia. That is a great way to ensure that in a permanent basis Americans are paying a higher price for oil in the global markets. So again, the only way out is through here. Yeah, obviously the president's hit on this very successful economic strategy for strangling the Iranian economy. I do think it's going to take a final topple in order for the Iranian regime to actually change its behavior or fall. Yeah, I don't think that it's going to happen through them just giving up the ghost in a form of negotiations. But as you say, Mark, there is no substitute for victory, there never has been. I think you're quite right and I think we both agree that what the president has done up to now, as you said, is historic. What the president has done has actually created the circumstance, the environment, for finishing them off. And I think this is a very, very big deal what he's been able to accomplish so far and I think he will finish them off in the end because I don't think there's really much else that we can do that will work. We'll be right back. Welcome back, America. You know, Ben Shapiro, I'm noticing a few of the real rhinos, you know, they use that word very loosely, but real rhinos, which are liberal Republicans, basically. I noticed some of them are starting to peel off, you're starting to panic, they're starting to choke rather than stand strung. Let me ask you a question. If you're running for Congress, whether it's the House or the Senate, shouldn't you have the rudimentary capacity to express your principle, to make the case, to articulate it in plain English? Isn't there a lot of good that the Republicans can talk about in terms of both the administration's policies, as well as the bad that the Democrats are the worst as they've ever been? I think that's exactly right. I mean, the thing that I think Republicans, again, need to keep hammering home is, regardless of what you think of the president, obviously, I'm very pro, or the administration, obviously, I'm very pro. But regardless of what you think of that, the only thing that people should really be worried about is what's on the other side of that coin? Do they think that by staying home, the country gets better? What happens when you have a pro-terrorism candidate in Michigan, Abdullah Sayed, who actually is in the United States Senate? What happens when you have a supporter of every radical policy on transing the kids, like James Tallarico in Texas, sitting in the United States Senate? What happens when Democrats have majorities in the House and the Senate and then use every waking moment in order to target Republicans, Republican legislators, and members of the administration, and drag down the administration and restore woke in a far more radical form than it ever was under Joe Biden? You know, the great lie I think a lot of Republicans have told themselves is that woke is dead, that President Trump did such a thorough job of destroying the left, that they can never recover, they'll never come back. They are waiting. They are waiting, and they are watching, and they are ready to pounce. And in the meantime, while they've been out of power, they've gotten more radical, not less radical. They did not moderate in the wake of 2024. They decided that they were essentially going to negotiate the terms of their own surrender to the Democratic Socialists. They were going to turn themselves into the party of Zoran Mamdani, not turn themselves into the party of Scoop Jackson. And so this sort of bizarre story that a lot of Republicans have told themselves, which is that, you know, if we stay home, no big deal, it's a way to punish the president. It's a way of punishing yourself, because what you're gonna end up with is a radical Democratic Congress, and then you're gonna put them on the road to a radical Democratic regime in 2028. And it's not the Constitution and the ballot, too, given what the Democrats have said, even apart from the DSA. I mean, they've openly promised they're gonna stack the Supreme Court. They've openly promised to add a couple of new states. They've openly promised to change the voting procedures to essentially mandate ballot harvesting procedures across the country. And these are first priorities for them. And so again, the media are telling a story that Donald Trump is, quote unquote, a threat to the Republic. I don't know. I don't feel like the Republic is particularly threatened or was during his first term either. I think that what is significantly more threatening is a Democratic Party that is pledging systematic change to the way that the country itself works, breaking the machines that allow the country to work. Tell us about your movie. You worked very hard on it. Your whole team did run, hide, fight infidels. You're the producer. I saw it. It really is a tour de force. Tell us about it. Sure. Well, it's a lot of fun, and it also makes a really important point. It is the only movie that I think that's been made in the last 20 years, essentially, that tells the truth about what radical Islam actually does, but does it in a fun and entertaining way. First and foremost, a really entertaining action flick. A friend described it as sort of a mash up of red dawn, like a 1980s action flick with blazing saddles. But it's about essentially an Islamic invasion of an American college campus. A pro Hamas student protest is essentially hijacked by actual terrorists, and they take over this American university and set up a mini caliphate at the university and takes a group of red blooded students, plus a former military member in order to take them down. So it's a kind of a smash bang action flick. But again, the point of view of the movie is that radical Islam is indeed a real threat, and the radical Muslims in the film act like actual radical Muslims. One of the clips that's gone viral is them legitimately kicking a gay person off the top of a building, because that's what would happen if ISIS were to take over an American campus. You know, queers for Palestine would end up at the bottom of the building in reality, and so that's how it ends up in the movie as well. So where do people go to see it? So you can head on over to dailywire.com. Really appreciate it, Mark. And they can subscribe right now. It got much more coming. This is just the first in our sort of entertainment strategy iteration in the new form of Daily Wire. Well, I really do support independents and others who are using the entertainment genre to try and get a message out there and try and explain things, particularly the younger people. I think that's very, very important. Ben And Shapiro, God bless you my friend, be safe, take care of yourself. Thanks so much Mark.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Lots of talk about affordability, or is there? I don't even hear a lot of talk about it anymore, but still, there's a lot of grumbling about it on the internet, there's a lot of people talking about it. And one of the things they're saying is, if you understood the mindset of young people, you would understand what the problem is. They're leaving Trump by the zillions, and they expect us to do something to help them. And so you have some people proposing sort of socialism-like. These are from so-called conservatives who become pseudo-conservers. The populists, of course, are all over this, because in many ways, they're the socialists. And so more government and more spending, despite the $40 trillion debt going to $50 trillion, and despite, at some point, the need to do something about Social Security and Medicare, Social Security in six years, say the trustees, is going to lose money and go broke, and in seven years, followed by Medicare. So Washington proposes what Washington's best at, spending more debt, redistribution of wealth, stealing from you and the private sector. So let's get into this. I want the Democrats, specifically, to answer a few questions, and the media hosts, particularly on these Sunday network magazine shows or news shows, maybe they'll try asking some actual questions when they have Democrat Party guests. Please specifically spell out your affordability agenda. You raised gasoline prices when Biden was president. How will you lower them when you raised them last time? You raised food prices when Biden was president. How will you lower them when you raised them last time? You raised inflation when Biden was president. How will you lower it when you raised it last time? You raised the cost of living for average Americans. How will you lower it when you raised it last time? You raised healthcare costs when Obama was president by passing Obamacare, not a single Republican voted for that. How will you lower it when you raised it under Obama by expanding it and calling it Medicare for all? Well, they don't have any answers, you know, they'll just say tax billionaires or something like that. But I want to take a little bit of a deeper dive here and talk some turkey with you. People talk about in the 1950s and '60s, people could afford a home, they could afford a car, they had modest incomes, not anymore, not anymore. We need to get back to that. So I looked, in the 1950s and '60s, young adults in their early 20s and 30s, well, they had lower average incomes, more family-based households and less access to credit. This meant that while they might have spent a larger share of income on certain categories, like cars or housing, the absolute dollar amounts that they spent were generally lower than today's young adults in their 30s and 40s. Young adults in the 1950s and '60s by today's age had lower total spending than today's young adults in their 30s and 40s due to lower incomes in different economic conditions. Core spending takes up the greatest share of income for the youngest and oldest generations. Core spending, that trend can be explained in part due to changes in income. Peak earning occurs in middle age, obviously not when you're just starting out and obviously not when you're retired or retiring. Even in the dollar value of household spending, that goes up as someone approaches middle age. The increase in household income on average outpaces the increase in spending. So when you're really kicking into your career or your business or whatever it is you're doing. Medical expenses are the smallest percentage of budgets for the youngest adult generation. So they're paying lower than any other generation when it comes to medical expenses. Young adults today are much more likely than their counterparts 30 years ago to be college graduates. But that comes with a cost. College tuition is expensive. Most students wanna live away from home and go to schools away from home. So in addition to tuition, you have room and board on top of tuition. That said, those with college degrees over the course of their lifetime, they earn significantly more than those without. Although for many at the start of their career, they have college loan debt and perhaps other debt they've acquired, such as cars and credit cards for eating out or vacations that put great pressure on their incomes. Again, when they're starting out, their incomes are those of junior employees. Young women have made greater gains at attending college than young men. From 1993 to 2023, the share of young women, ages 25 to 34, with at least a four-year college degree rose from 23 to 47%. And among young men, the increase was smaller, 24 to 38%. Therefore, the debt spending income scenario can be even more widespread among young women and especially among single women. So in other words, much of this has nothing to do with government, nothing to even do with government policies. These are lifestyle decisions. In other words, the benefit for many young people in going to college doesn't actually come until several years or even a decade or more after they graduate. They pay down both student debt and other expenses they've incurred. So in the long run, the degree is typically beneficial. In the short run, depending on lifestyle decisions and spending habits, it can create more financial difficulty. The 1950s and '60s, fewer Americans went to college. Young people started work early. They didn't make big purchases requiring lots of debt, no student loans, not new cars. They lived more modestly in the types of homes and vehicles they might buy. They ate home at home more often than going out to restaurants. They didn't travel as much, so they didn't use airlines. They didn't go to hotels and that sort of thing. Maybe they drive for a three-day vacation or something like that. Family expectations were different. In limited consumer goods were available. Goods like sugar and meat were still rationed in the early 1950s, and refrigerators were a luxury for some households. Colored TV didn't even exist for most households until starting in the early '60s and beyond. Leisure was often local and low cost. Kids played outside, not a whole bunch of computers and video games. Clothing was practical and modest. While the 1950s and '60s saw economic growth, many young people's lives were marked by modest living. And so some young people had brought these circumstances onto themselves. It's not the system, it's not capitalism. It's not even government. We have gotten so good at producing so many consumer products, leisure products, and so forth and so on, that people wanna partake of them. They wanna acquire them. But sometimes they outpace their income, particularly when they're young people, particularly if they go to college, particularly if they take out student loans, and they live away from home with tuition and board. And all those expenses pile up. It's a bigger percentage of young people than 30, 40, 50 years ago. And I wanna talk about gas prices. We're told that a gallon of gasoline, if we can get the price of gasoline down, we Republicans will win the midterm elections. Gas prices may feel like a record in 2026, but adjusted for inflation, they are not, writes Dr. Randall Olson. We're told gas is the most expensive it has been in years. The war headlines are everywhere. And he says the record gas prices, it's back in everyone's feed. The pump number stings, but adjust for inflation and the record evaporates. US gas costs more in 1981 than it does today. More in 2008 than it does today. Again, inflation adjusted. More in 2022 under Biden than it does today. The number on the pump is near an all-time high. What a gallon actually costs you in real money is nowhere near an all-time high. 2008 is still the one to beat, he writes. The real all-time high was June 2008 at $6.20 a gallon in today's money. 1981 was worse too. 1981 held the record before 2008, took it. March 1981, regular gas hit, again, inflation adjusted. Regular gas, $5.32 a gallon in today's dollars. Oh yes. Even in 2022, a few years back, the most recent peak is the one people remember. When Russia invaded Ukraine, the national average set an all-time record just above $5 a gallon in June 2022. That was the highest price ever at the pump in plain dollars adjusted for inflation. It works out to about $5.50 for a gallon of regular gasoline still above spring 2026 and still short of 2008. And if you live in California, my son, our son took a picture of the prices at the pump. They are unbelievable. You got 72 cents a gallon sales tax in California, the highest in the nation by far. Other expenses that they add on to gasoline and oil out there, it is nuts. And they want you to blame Trump and they want you to blame the Iran war and on and on and on. No, I've said it before and let me underscore it again. The prices for gasoline, the prices for everything when it comes to energy is higher due to what we call Democrats. What about housing prices? As of June 2026, the last information that is comparative, the inflation adjusted US home price index is 170.2 up from 169 in May of this year. But that's 3.8% below the highest May 2022. That was the record 176.9. This is the number they use to compare income to housing prices. So the highest it's been was in May 2022, 3.8% higher than it is today. That means that when stripped of inflation housing prices, they're still near an all time high. And by the way, for investors, they like that. For first time buyers, they obviously don't, but it's not at the peak that it was under Biden in 2022. I just told you that gasoline at its peak was higher in the 1980s and highest under Joe Biden. I just told you that housing prices were highest, highest under Joe Biden. But you don't hear this. You don't hear it anywhere really. The two highest points were 2006, the housing bubble and 2022, the post pandemic surge. Now there's no accounting for what Democrats do in these blue states and these blue metropolitan areas. Take Mondami, the Marxist Islamist. Oh yes, socialism he supports. Well, let's take rent control. What does rent control do? Let's think for a second. They lock in rent prices back to a given year or time. Now people who are renting and are older, they love it. They love it because they're gonna have a fixed rental price whether the landlord likes it or not, whether his or her expenses go up or not, whether utility prices and taxes go up or not, they don't care. It's just wonderland. We love socialism, rent control. But what does that do? It limits the number of units. You have to be nuts to be a developer and go in and say, you know what, I'm gonna build a whole bunch of new rental properties just so I can have rent control at some point. No, because if a government can put in rent control today it can put it in tomorrow. That's not Trump's fault. That's not Israel's fault. That's Mondami's fault. That's the fault of the socialists who drive up the cost of everything. And not only is affordability an issue, but availability is an issue. Okay, I wanna address another topic before we go to our guests and that is Iran. I wanna be very blunt about this. This is not a war between the United States and Iran or the United States and Israel versus Iran. This is a civilizational war. You see, we don't quite understand the enemy. We can't seem to get our heads around it. I'm afraid some of our generals can't, some of our advisors can't. This is a civilizational war, certainly from the perspective of the enemy. Khomeini in 1979, he was not interested merely in taking over a nation state, a country. He is spreading an ideology. He is spreading Islam. He seeks to conquer the West. He seeks to conquer obviously an entire Middle East. He and his followers. Israel is a big problem to that agenda because the Jews don't intend to go easily. In fact, they don't intend to go at all. They have a serious military, one of the most powerful on the face of the earth and certainly one of the most experienced on the face of the earth because they're facing enemies, they're surrounded day in and day out. We are war hardened too, but not in the same way. Not in the same way. My concern is this. We've heard from generals talking about off-ramps. We've heard generals say that we have limited munitions, whether they've said it anonymously or however, same with advisors who said the same thing. They're leaking to the media. We had an MOU that was never going to work. The enemy, you know, they have an agreement and two minutes later they violate it. So we're constantly looking for ways to negotiate our way out of this. You wanna end this war? I will give you my best thought on this. I want us to win. I want the administration to succeed. I want my friend, President Trump, to be the greatest president, including wartime president in American history. And what he's done so far is unparalleled. Seven prior presidents, you know, chose to do next to nothing. Some of them even subsidized the enemy. Some of them subsidized their nuclear program. The fact is that this president had to act, did act. He couldn't wait. The enemy told his envoy that we could make 11 nuclear bombs in 10 days. Our intelligence said we needed to act and it was imminent. But it is a civilizational war. You can't contain the enemy no matter what's negotiated if it's ever negotiated. The enemy will not comply. The enemy will not agree to anything. The enemy views us as a bump in the road. Whether it's the first tier, the second tier, the third tier, or the 10th tier of this regime. If we want to defeat this enemy, we've got to use all that's available to us to destroy it. That includes arming the Iranian people, as I've said for half a year, as was the Reagan doctrine. Now there may be generals and advisors telling the commander in chief, "No, the risk averse and so forth and so on." There is no effective off-ramp. Arming those people with the help of the Israelis, who we've sidelined, with the help of Mossad, working with the CIA, will make a huge, huge difference as it has in the recent past in other countries, among other things. There is no reason Karg Island is off the table in some of these other infrastructure facilities. I don't care what the Arabs say, ignore them. I don't care what Erdogan says, ignore him. This is a civilizational war that we must win. It is a righteous war. We have a courageous president. I don't think we'll see another one like him. It's now or never.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
More people working in the United States right now than at any point in the History of our Country! President DJT
We have the BEST FINANCIAL NUMBERS EVER, and the FAKE NEWS MEDIA refuses to report them!!! President DJT