Popular Posts

You know, President Trump takes a lot of heat. They claim he's doing these horrendous things. Horrendous things to government, to the culture, horrendous things to the Constitution. All lies. I tell you this from a historical and legal perspective. In fact, it is they, his opposition, the abuse of power, the Department of Justice, the prosecutors, the indictments, the different jurisdictions, the abuse of the 14th Amendment to keep them off the ballot and over and over and on and on. Two unconstitutional impeachments, already plotting another impeachment, already plotting to destroy the independence of the Supreme Court and the judiciary, to stack the Senate, to stack the House of Representatives, and God knows what else they have in store for us. How dare they point a finger at him or any of us, what it is they who are tyrannical and have a totalitarian mindset. And look what they're doing in New York City, destroying it, absolutely destroying it. And in fact, the blue states are depopulating. People are trying to get out of there if they can get new jobs. Many people, they feel they can't leave. They have a generational attachment. But the only states that are actually growing, and I don't mean with illegal aliens, I mean with American citizens and naturalized citizens, are red states. Are red states. And there's a reason for that. There's a reason why the Democrats want to take over the whole country. So there's no escape. No matter what state you go to, the iron fist of centralized big government will be thrown at you. President Trump has a very small, small majority in the House and the Senate, and he's trying to get things done as fast as he can because he knows that there's a midterm election. We pray that we win, but we don't know. And he knows he has less than three years left in his presidency, and he's a doer, and he wants to get things done, and he's reaching into the culture, not just politics, to try and reform and protect and defend this nation. And people say, "Look at this. He knocked off a senator from Louisiana. He knocked off a senator from Texas. He knocked off this crazy congressman from Kentucky. Who does that?" A little bit of history. FDR tried to do that. The great FDR, according to the Democrats, greater than George Washington, greater than Abraham Lincoln combined. Nobody liked FDR. Why? Because he was a big socialist. That's why. But that for another day. Our friends at TeachingAmericanHistory.org, frustrated by the setbacks that his administration encountered in its second term, President Franklin Roosevelt took the bold step of intervening in the 1938 Democratic primaries. His targets were conservative Democrats, mostly Southerners, who had joined Republicans in opposing New Deal measures. In races across the country, he stumped from liberal candidates and denounced conservative incumbents as traitors to the cause of his reform. He explained his efforts in a speech, a fireside speech, that he gave on June 24, 1938. I'm not going to read the whole thing, but let me give you a taste of it. He said, "After the election of 1936, I was told, and Congress was told by an increasing number of politically and worldly-wise people, that I should coast along and join easy presidency for four years and not take the Democratic platform too seriously. They told me that the people were getting weary of reform through political effort and would no longer oppose that small minority which, in spite of its own disastrous leadership in 1929, is always eager to resume its control over the government of the United States. Never in our lifetime has such a concerted campaign of defeatism been thrown at the heads of the President and the Senators and Congressmen as in the case of this 75th Congress." He had gotten a lot of his new deal through, once he threatened the Supreme Court and many of the senior members started retiring, replaced with his appointees, but he was now being blocked by several of the more moderate Senators, Democrats in Congress, who said, "We understand why you're trying to address the Depression, but we're not all in for this socialist stuff." He says, "Never before have so many copperheads." That's a copperhead. During the Civil War, these were Northern Democrats who sided with, not the South, but with bringing the Civil War to a quick conclusion. They opposed war. They were anti-war. They opposed the warmongers who were trying to win the Civil War, and they turned on Lincoln, and they wanted to negotiate peace with the confederacy. See, we've been through a lot of these things before, whether it's World War II, the Civil War, and now the war with Iran. We've had the so-called anti-war types who don't want victory, and so you don't get victory. He complains about them. He says, "This Congress has ended on the side of the people. My faith in the American people and their faith in themselves have been justified, and I congratulate the Congress and the leadership thereof, and I congratulate the American people on their own staying power." So he slaps them around and then pats them on the head. He does this in a lot of his speeches. He goes on, "Following out this line of thought, I want to say a few words about the coming political primaries." Here we get to the gist of it. "Fifty years ago, party nominations were generally made in conventions, a system typified in the public imagination by a little group in smoke-filled room who made out the party states. The direct primary was invented to make the nominating process a more democratic one, to give the party voters themselves a chance to pick their party candidates." He goes on, "An election cannot give the country a firm sense of direction if it has two or more national parties which merely have different names but are as alike in their principles and names as peas in the same pod." In other words, the UNI party. The radicals always talk about the UNI party, whether they're the Woke Right, REICH, the Islamists or the Marxists, or Jess Kooks. "In the coming primaries, all parties, there will be many clashes between two schools of thought, generally classified as liberal and conservative. Roughly speaking, the liberal school of thought recognizes the new conditions throughout the world and they call for new remedies." And of course, the conservatives, Jess, the old school, you know, big business, big government, all the Bernie Sanders claptrap. But he says later, "With the head of the Democrat party charged with the responsibility of carrying out the definitely liberal declaration of principles set forth in the 1936 Democratic platform, I feel that I have every right to speak in those few instances where there may be a clear-cut issue between candidates for a democratic nomination involving these principles or involving a clear misuse of my own name." So he goes out and he campaigns to actually help pick candidates to take on these more conservative candidates. He's wildly popular, FDR won a landslide, but in every case where he tried to knock off a more conservative or moderate Democrat, his candidate lost except one in New York. Every other case, FDR's candidate lost. And it set back his administration. The party was angry. If he had won, they wouldn't be so angry, but he lost. Every one but won. He lost Walter George, a senator in Georgia, George won. Miller Tidings in Maryland won. FDR lost. Ellison Smith in South Carolina won. FDR lost. But he won this chairman of the House Rules Committee in New York, John O'Connor. He defeated him, but that's it. He didn't defeat anybody else. I want you to compare that to Donald Trump. Again, you got a couple vote majority in the House and you got guys like Massey who represent one small congressional district who are trying to undermine the president's landslide victory. One congressman, maybe two or three, because the majority is so tight. So they're trying to take his mandate and destroy it. And the president knows, President Trump, I got to get my agenda through. And I have a few of these senators who do the same thing. I got one senator who actually voted a removal from office in the second impeachment when I already was a private citizen. And he expects me to be supporting him in a Republican primary. What Donald Trump has done is what FDR tried to do, but failed. Not only that in Donald Trump's case, it's not only Louisiana, it's not only state senators in Indiana. It's not only Massey in Kentucky. It's not only the Senate race in Georgia with this Raffensperger. It's not only Cornyn in Texas, but before that, the president got involved in all these primaries in his first term. I don't think he's lost one. Maybe it's one or two, but whatever it is, it's inconsequential. So for those people who say, you know, Donald Trump's lost a step. You know, MAGA's divided. You know, MAGA's tiny, tiny thing that just represents Mark Levin. These are fools and buffoons. MAGA is as strong as ever. In fact, the Republican Party is MAGA. And MAGA is Donald Trump's movement. And we've got the general election. Everything will be put to the test come November. But those are the facts.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

I spoke in the fall about the iceberg I saw ahead. Something's fraud that's much larger than what's been visible to the public. When I said that it wasn't hyperbole or rhetoric, it was a warning. And today I wanna talk and I wanna show here a sense of what that iceberg looks like. 'Cause I think people deserve to know what that is and how big this problem is. Because we can't solve the problem until we grapple with the size of it. So the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services pulled the claims data for these 14 programs, dating back to 2018. And those 14 programs in Minnesota have cost $18 billion since 2018. And more than $3.5 billion in 2024 alone. So that's a sense of the magnitude of the problem. These are the 14 Medicaid programs, which is just a part of Medicaid. These wavered services that have been flagged as having issues with program integrity and fraud. Now I'm sure everyone is wondering how much of this $18 billion was fraud. That's not the million dollar question, that's the $18 billion question. The answer is far too much. And the task ahead of all of us is not only figuring out how much of that money was fraud, because we know a significant amount was, but figuring out how to put an end to the fraud in our state and get control of it. So let me end with this before I take questions. The magnitude of the fraud in Minnesota cannot be overstated. It's staggering amounts of money that have been lost. But it's not just about the money that's been stolen and wasted. This is a problem that's caused all of us to question what kind of state we live in. I think it's eroded our sense of collective statewide self-esteem and confidence. It's caused a state, as I've said before, that has long taken pride in having a strong economy, good schools, beautiful lakes, mini parks, and a sense of community spirit and civic mindedness. This fraud really calls into question all of that. And I think, I know that it's gone on, it's been allowed to go on far too long, and we need to do whatever we can to stop it in its tracks.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

-President Trump is not a racist. I've been with the president recently quite a bit, and when he signed the legislation making the historic site, Martin Luther King's site, in Atlanta, Georgia, a national park, it was introduced by Congressman John Lewis. And believe it or not, that's one thing the two of them did together. It took two to do it. And I'm so glad the president has done it. But what is so outrageous to call a man a racist who continues to acknowledge the significant work of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., my uncle in a positive way, and he puts his money where his mouth is. He puts his energy behind it.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Right now, at this very moment, Walmart is preparing to shut down more than 250 stores across California, not because of consumer demand, not because of competition, but because the math no longer works. And while Governor Gavin Newsom scrambles to control the narrative, families across the state are waking up to empty shelves, longer drives, and the slow collapse of the retail infrastructure they've depended on for decades. This is happening in real time. And what you're about to hear should concern every single American, regardless of where you live. My name is Megan Wright, and this is where we investigate the stories the mainstream media won't touch. If you value independent journalism that follows the money, exposes the decisions, and holds power accountable, then subscribe to this channel right now. Hit that like button. Share this video with everyone you know. And here's my question for you. Drop a comment below and tell me, how far do you have to drive to reach your nearest grocery store because for millions of Californians, that distance is about to get a whole lot longer. Let's talk. This isn't a story about corporate greed or free market failure. This is a story about incentives, mandates, and economic gravity. Over the past 18 months, California has implemented a cascade of regulatory policies, wage mandates, and enforcement actions that have fundamentally altered the cost structure of operating large-scale retail in the state. Walmart, the largest private employer in America, has done the math. And the math says leave. What you're witnessing is not a sudden decision. It's the inevitable result of policies that ignored basic economics, punished employers, and assumed that businesses would simply absorb infinite costs. They won't. They can't. And now the people who can least afford it are going to pay the price. I'm going to walk you through exactly how we got here, who made the decisions, what the consequences are, and why this matters far beyond California's borders. Let's go back to April of last year. That's when California's new minimum wage law for large retail and grocery workers took effect, pushing the hourly wage floor to $22. On paper, it sounded compassionate. In practice, it was a financial grenade. Walmart operates on razor-thin profit margins in grocery, typically between 1% and 3%. When labor costs, which already represent the largest operating expense for any big-box retailer, jump by 35% overnight, something has to give. Within days of the law's implementation, Walmart's corporate headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas began receiving store-level profitability reports from California. The numbers were brutal. Stores that had been marginally profitable were now bleeding cash. Stores in rural and low-income areas, where sales volumes are lower and theft rates higher, were posting losses that couldn't be offset by price increases alone. Translation, the very communities the wage law was supposed to help were the first ones marked for closure. Then came the compli-

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

- You talked about the weapon, the discombobulator. - Discombobulator, well, I'm not allowed to talk about it. - What does it do? - Let me just tell you, you know what it does? None of their equipment works, that's what it does. Everything was-- - How does it-- - It was my name, I'm very proud of the name. Everything was discombobulated. It was, you know, practically a shot wasn't, you know, they were ready. - Right. - And when we came, they couldn't do anything. - You saw this in the video, you could tell. - Tom, it discombobulated everything. Nothing worked, even including humans. It knocks the humans out. - Well, let's put it this way. We lost no equipment in a very strong, and they're good fighters, great fighters. In a very bad environment, it was a military base. The biggest in South America. In a very, 'cause the house was in a base in South, in a very, very tough environment, we lost no men and we lost no equipment. - The discombobulator just knocked everything out. - Well, it did something.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

I mean, I am one of many American conservatives who found him to be pretty repugnant when he first came on the scene in 2016, when the way that he talks, the way that he does negotiation, the way that he talks about war and peace, and life and death is sometimes overly strong. But what Donald Trump has done around the entire world is he has asked for people to advocate for themselves, actually stand up for themselves, and fight, fight, fight. That is his whole thing. And when you look at someone like Marco Rubio. Although to be clear, when it came to January the 6th, he didn't say fight, fight, fight. That's what we're going to be seeing in trouble, but carry on. But no, that's what he said when he got shot in the year. He got shot in the year, he stood up and yelled fight, fight, fight. Yeah, good point. But when you look at what he did with Marco Rubio, Marco Rubio was one of his foils in 2016. He was a good conservative, a good boy, but he was a squish, and he rolled right over him. According to Marco Rubio today, Donald Trump has taught him how to fight and how to stand up for himself and dismantle people in an argument. And he wants that from Europe. He wants that from the UK. He wants these people to be allies who will defend themselves and be pugnacious and willing to fight like Netanyahu does. Do you know what it is? I think he smells confidence. He smells confidence across the room. I was there today in that cabinet room. It was amazing. What an honor. What an privilege to be amongst those phenomenal human beings there. And you can see him look across the room and he gravitates towards people who he thinks are happy in their own skin. You don't see it at all, do you? Well, I think President Trump certainly has a lot of powerful political characteristics. He has had an ability to message and drive a message that I haven't seen really in any politician, for the exception of President Obama, if you look at the two seminal political figures of Stephen and I's lifetime, or like just the last 50 years, it would be President Obama and President Trump. I would say this though, I think sometimes the skills that get you where you are can also be the skills that lead to your downfall. And his ability to dig in and fight on things is certainly a skill that was able to get him back into the White House. But I also think they're missing a key point here, which is the Iran war is unpopular. There's a lot of talk about, well, what does the MAGA base think about it? Well, the MAGA base is 25, 30% of the entire US population. Look at the broader polling. The broader polling shows that this war is very unpopular. And the issue Trump has is that to accomplish the objectives he says he wants accomplished, taking out the regime and getting rid of the nuclear program, hold on, taking out the regime or getting rid of the nuclear program is going to require boots on the ground, something he campaigned against, and it would be a major escalation. And then even if we get rid of the regime, that is going to open up a huge box of issues. And every week that goes by where we don't have an end to this war, the economic pain is going to mount. And a recent Reuters poll showed that the Americans are more unhappy with this economy now under Trump than they were with Biden. So I think the Trump administration and President Trump needs to take a step back and see digging in their heels and fighting on every topic might not be the right strategy. Yeah, but that point about them wanting to change the regime, they have been crystal clear that that is not their aim. Hang on, hang on. Caroline Levitt said in the briefing room yesterday when she was asked about that, she said, "Of course, we want somebody in charge who is more favorable, who doesn't chance death to America." She said, "Of course we would want that." But she said their entire leadership has changed, but it is too soon to say if we will be happy with the new regime. Well, Bev, I would say I was on the show with you for the six hours, I don't know how you did it, when this war started. And GB News platformed a ton of guests who were in favor of this war, and they didn't have a fetish for destroying the Navy. What they wanted to do, and they repeatedly said, was regime change. GB News interviewed a ton of people who talked about how we need to get rid of this regime, and the Trump administration parroted that line, and they talked about getting rid of the nuclear program. Now, what's going to happen is the Trump administration might need to claim that getting rid of their Navy is the only thing they wanted to do, because that's the best way to back out. There's minor success, and then there's total success. Minor success with Chuck Schumer got himself into trouble when he couldn't articulate this on Morning Joe. The Senate Majority Leader of the Democrats was asked, "Would it be a good thing if Iran had no naval or military capacity at the end of this thing?" And he was like, "Well, we can't really say, because we don't know what's going to happen." No, it is actually just... Because he's a Democrat. It is just a good thing that Iran is feckless and weak compared to its neighbors. Not just Israel, but the Qataris, the Emiratis, the Saudis, none of these people actually like the Iranian regime, it's good that they are completely decimated militarily. But the total victory, of course, would be regime change, and regime change can either be a change of heart within the regime, that they're going to act differently, or the Iranian people install leaders that might bring them back to the days before the Iranian Revolution.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

[Music]

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.