In sexual assault cases, the absence of physical evidence does not mean the assault did not occur; courts consider testimony, circumstantial evidence, and credibility assessments. The E. Jean Carroll case demonstrates that a unanimous jury finding of civil liability for sexual assault, combined with the defendant's own admissions of similar behavior, can constitute sufficient evidence even without physical proof. Consent can be withdrawn at any point during an interaction, and victims may not exhibit stereotypical reactions like screaming or fighting back.
Install our extension to search inside any video instantly.
Political Discussions 06/01/2026Added:
Okay.
Let's get started.
that >> Good morning.
Let's start tapping and doing all the good things, please. I would appreciate it.
So we can get started today.
Hello, Sam.
Uh is it Priscilliana? I'm doing well. How are you?
>> Good morning, good afternoon to those of you on the East Coast. I appreciate you being here. Happy Monday, midterm Monday. We are back, another new start to the week. Um, so we are going to get started. Let's get our midterm Monday started. If you're over here on TikTok, if you could tap that screen and share the live out for me. If you share the live, you can repost it, you can add it to your story, you can share it to five of your friends.
Um, do your daily heart me if you have not done so. Guys, if you do your daily heart me, you get access to fun stickers. Um, if you're commenting, so if you have done your daily heart me and you look and you see the little heart when you hit for the comment button, you have access to stickers over there that I have created for you. Um, so you can have fun with those. And um, yeah, I think that's it for TikTok pretty much. And if you're over there on YouTube, make sure you hit that thumbs up button for me. I would appreciate it so very much. It does help push us onto the algorithm in case people do want to have conversations. I know a lot of you don't, but in case you find yourself brave enough to have actual conversations with factually based evidence and not your feelings, I would appreciate it. So, let's hit that thumbs up over there on YouTube. It does help.
Um, if you would like to subscribe, that would be awesome. Thank you so much, Audie.
And if you would like to become a member over there on YouTube, you can do that as well. Um, you can send super chats and I would appreciate that over there on um, YouTube. I do want to let you know that your super chats, while appreciated and I love them and it does help when the chat starts going too fast for me to be able to read the comments that you so desperately want to put out there, it does not affect my actual goal. Uh if you're watching over there on Twitch, hello. You can follow, you can subscribe over there, and you also have access to sticker emotes if you are a subscriber, and you can send bits and fun things over there. Guys, I have my 100 goal that I have every single day.
This is my job. This is what I do for a living. Let's start working on that. You guys were so generous yesterday when I was on Olive's panel, and I appreciate it getting me to 50. I am back to my 100 goal. I have uh Cash App, Venmo, and PayPal all in the link tree in my bio.
If you guys would like to help out with that, I would appreciate it. Tip your content creators. Make sure that you guys are doing the things that need to be done. So, thank you guys. I appreciate it, and we'll keep going. Um Oh, I didn't address I do have my gift gallery. We're back to C5. I know that that's a little bit harder to do, but let's try and get those things done. If you click on my profile picture and it says C5 gift gallery, and you click it, you can see what you guys need to get done to help boost. It does help.
Anything helps. Thank you so much. And we'll get started. Midterm Monday to start. Um let's start with elections are handy-dandy Ballotpedia calendar, okay? Try and increase it a little bit for you. There we go.
There's going to be a lot, okay? We've got a lot tomorrow.
It we are hitting primary season, guys.
So, it is just going to be one after the other after the other until we hit November of of [ __ ] primaries. So, June 2nd is going to be a lot. Now, that is tomorrow. So, if you are in these places, if you are in these counties, if you hear it and it you know, your ears raise up, pay attention. We're going to do June 2nd, and there's a few of them for June 6th um until we get to next week, which then we'll again we'll be back for Midterm Monday. So, Arkansas. Arkansas's House of Representatives District 44, you have a special primary for the Arkansas Arkansas House of Representatives District 44 special election tomorrow.
In California, you have two different ones. So, California and Alameda County.
If you are in Alameda County, you have general elections and you also have your Alameda County District Attorney special primary election. And then this is the big one, right? California statewide primary is tomorrow. If you are in California you have not voted yet, you have tomorrow is your big primary election day. Make sure that you get that done statewide. Um in there's going to be a lot of Californians because this is their day tomorrow. California District 1 Congressional District special primary. Uh California Compton Unified School District general election. California Riverside County primary election. California Riverside general election in Riverside, California. California Sacramento County Sacramento County general elections.
California, if you are in San Benito County, you have a supervisor recall. If you are in San Francisco in California, you have a special election as well.
And in California in the Twin Rivers Unified School District, you also have a general election there. So, there's a lot. Arkansas is crazy. That's not how we say that. Um all right. Iowa, you have your Iowa statewide primary election. So, just as we said with California, you also in Iowa, you have your statewide primary tomorrow. Same thing with Montana. If you live in Montana, you have your statewide primary election tomorrow. Make sure that you are voting.
New Jersey, New Jersey has their statewide primary election tomorrow. If you have not voted, that is your chance.
Tomorrow is your statewide primary. New Mexico, also statewide primary election tomorrow.
Also in New Mexico, if you are in the Second Judicial District Court seats 2, 11, 19, and 24 have special primary elections tomorrow. And New Mexico State Senate District 33 has a special primary election as well.
Um South Carolina has local elections tomorrow. Um P uh South Dakota, if you are in Pierre, Pierre general election is tomorrow. And then you have your South Dakota statewide primary as well tomorrow. So, all the things that you can vote on.
Uh it's cute King Skippy that you guys don't talk about men's mental health any other time of the year. So, you can suck my pansexual dick.
Um all right. And if you are in Texas, okay, this will be the the these are the six, excuse me. I In South Dakota, Nope, where did I go?
South Dakota you have the statewide primary tomorrow. In Indiana on the 6th, you have your Indiana Democratic Party State Convention, okay? Which if you have the ability to to attend, you should. South Dakota also has their Democratic Party State Convention on June 6th.
Um and then also on June 6th, if you are in Texas, a special general runoff election for Fort Worth City Council District 10 happens on the 6th. And then we get to the 9th, which we will do tomorrow. If you've already voted, thank you so much. I'm so proud of you. Just make sure you are paying attention.
Again, for anyone, I don't care what your political affiliation is, is going to be the best place for you to get that information in case you don't know it.
In case you're not inundated with mailers in the same way that some of us are. I already am.
Um Will we and we can talk about Colorado's elections at a later date if we want to.
But, that is going to be available for you. I will put it in my live outline on my Discord as I always do.
Um so, we are able to continue to talk about it because it is important, okay?
All right, let's move back over to our regular background as we get started today, okay?
Let's see. Where do we want to start?
Let's start with the Let's start with Iran. Let's start with Iran, why don't we? All right.
So, guys, make sure we are still doing all of the good things, please. I would appreciate it. Don't forget to tap that screen. We like to hit 50,000 likes before we hit the top of the hour. So, let's make sure you are supporting your content creators in that way, Please, I would appreciate it. Um yeah, do all of the good things. All right, Iran.
So, Trump Trump truthed this at 1:02 in the morning.
Iran really wants to make a deal, and it will be a good one for the USA and those that are with us. But, don't the Democrats and various seemingly unpatriotic Republicans understand that it is much tougher for me to properly do my job and negotiate when political hacks keep negatively chirping at levels never seen before over and over again.
That I should move faster or move slower or go to war or not go to war or whatever. What's interesting is he should be able to do that regardless of the noise, right? It shouldn't matter what is being said for him to be able to do his job. So, it's interesting that he can't focus. And we'll talk about his focusing in just a minute. But, this is the part we really need to read. Just sit back and relax, and it will all work work out well in the end. It always does. Well, that's an interesting statement because we also got this news.
I hate when it does that. All right.
Iran stops negotiations with US, vows to completely block Strait of Hormuz, state media, according to their state media, okay?
Iranian negotiators will stop exchanging Thank you so much, The Spark. I appreciate it. Will stop exchanging messages with the US through intermediaries, and Tehran will move to fully close the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for ongoing ceasefire violations, Iran's state-affiliated news outlet Tasnim said on Monday. Now, the thing is is we also bombed them again last night. So, this is not surprising.
The report in a translated post on the social media site Telegram homed in on Israel's military operations in Lebanon against the Iran-backed militia Hezbollah. Now again, Lebanon was supposed to be a part of the ceasefire, but not supposed to be, but was supposed to be. They can't decide which one.
"No dialogue will take place until Israel fully withdraws from occupied areas in Lebanon and stops all attacks in both Lebanon and Gaza per Tasnim.
Also, the resistance front in Iran have resolved to completely block the Strait of Hormuz and activate other fronts including the Bab al-Mandeb Strait in order to punish the Zionists and their supporters," the report said. "The Bab al-Mandeb Strait is a trade checkpoint that connects the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden.
Oil prices leapt more than 7% higher following Tasnim's report which signaled a breakdown in efforts to reach a diplomatic end to the war that is now in its fourth month.
President Donald Trump said just 3 days earlier he would decide at a meeting in the White House situation room whether to agree to deal with Iran that would at least pause the conflict, but that meeting ended without Trump making a final decision. And as we can see, I can show you my little one if you want. Then I can show you the big one, too, if you want that one as well.
Um Where are you over here? Where are you?
There you are.
>> [snorts] >> So, oil, do you see where it skyrocketed?
Here, I'm going to show you on the big screen. It's easier.
Look, we can search together. Ready?
Crude oil per barrel. Yes, I spelled barrel wrong because it's going to take me to what I already go to anyway. All right.
If you zoom in on this chart here, go away.
Not you.
Okay.
That it was coming down, right? Because of the tentative deal. The markets were rallying because of the tentative deal.
And then Iran said [ __ ] off because there's not an actual [ __ ] deal.
And um now we're sitting here. Let's see.
I haven't seen Seroski in a while.
Seroski, I hope you're not in there. If you are, avert your eyes.
Uh-oh.
Uh-oh.
Stocks holding near records amid oil surge, but they're wobbling. They're starting to wobble. That's not good, is it?
So, why are we there again? It's just a question.
Why are we there again?
Can anybody tell me?
No? You don't know? Okay. I don't know either.
Um so, let's continue.
Let me check this message real quick.
Remember, guys, if you would like to call in, you can absolutely call in and have a conversation based off of factually based evidence and not your feelings. We always appreciate that.
Um W's to Oh Me Oh My. W's to Oh Me Oh My for the 33 on PayPal. Thank you so much. I appreciate you.
Um that guy is that a going to help bring our goal down and start us off with Why?
She's not even here for her to hate it yet, but she she'll come in eventually, I'm sure.
Um W's to Oh Me Oh My for the 67.
Guys, brings our goal down to 67. So, let's keep working on that, please. I would appreciate it. Remember to tip your content creators as we continue.
All right.
To continue with Iran, uh here is Scott Bennett speaking about it and and what the goal is. What the goal of the administration is in regards to the strait. So, let's let's talk about that.
>> So, the the president was very clear in the cabinet meeting what he was looking for on the the straits, free free and open access that as we saw before February 27th, and that uh Iran that must give up their highly enriched uranium >> I'm sorry, what was that first part?
>> President was very clear in the cabinet meeting what he was looking for on the the straight free free and open access that as we saw before February 27th >> What happened on February 27th? What what what what major thing happened?
We want it free and fair use like it was before February 27th. What happened? Oh, we attacked them. Okay, so you just want to fix it back to the way it was. Yeah, it's also not the 27th it was the 28th but you just want to fix it back to where it was. Okay, what else did you want?
>> And that Iran >> Um NATO, that's where the problem lies right there. Is that comment that you just wrote? You said what's there to talk about Trump won see you in 2028.
Politics doesn't stop.
And if you think it does and you think that your only responsibility as a citizen of the United States to vote is to wait every four years, you should stop voting. Because you are not taking accountability for what you need to be doing. He won in 2024. That's accurate.
He was inaugurated in 2025. That's accurate. Your job now is to ensure that him and the Congress that is underneath him specifically he said he has a mandate and so they have the majority in Congress is to ensure that they are doing the things that they campaigned on and promised to do that would be beneficial for the American people. That is now your job. By the way, midterms are literally this year. I literally did an entire section on it.
Your job is not done.
Because they work for us so you have to keep them accountable. It is interesting to me that you think Trump winning means you won anything. If you're not keeping up on him to ensure he's doing the things that he promised you he would do that were going to be beneficial for America America first you're not doing your job and you probably shouldn't be voting anymore.
>> must give up their highly enriched uranium and >> Oh, they must give up their highly enriched uranium. Well, that is interesting in and of itself because Trump has waffled on that and Trump has said specifically to Hannity that he doesn't think we need it other than from a PR standpoint that we need to go get it.
He's talked about literally putting it would have to be boots on the ground to be able to go physically go get it, which I doubt is ever going to be allowed in any sort of kind of deal. Um even though Iran has offered multiple times to have that enriched uranium sent to a third country much like Oh, there was a deal.
There was a deal from almost 11 years ago. Oh, the JCPOA where they did just that, right?
>> cannot have a nuclear weapon. And to be clear >> And they never did.
To be clear.
Muse Muse.
>> I I think one of the things that has gone unappreciated and unnoticed here is this is the first time the >> What Democrats are blocking investigation Muse Muse? Can you Can you tell me?
>> Iranians have been willing to discuss the nuclear subject. So, the >> That's not true. They have absolutely been willing to discuss the nuclear subject because there is no nuclear subject.
Uh My life has been restricted. That's lovely. Can we keep tapping, please? Cuz I know I haven't got a rate. I know that all of us still on the phone and doing the things, but can you guys please keep supporting me while I am here? I would appreciate it. Tap that screen. Do all of the good things while we're sitting here.
Ilhan Omar Feed the Future Foundation fraud investigation. Can you show me where Ilhan Omar had any knowledge of that, please? I would like to see it, Muse Muse.
Let's talk about it.
No?
Come on, Muse Muse. Let's talk about it.
You said Ilhan Omar Feed the Future Foundation fraud, which was Feeding Our Future. You don't even know what it's called.
Show me where she knew about it and was covering it up, Muse Muse.
Come on. You can do it. I believe in you. You have a voice. Use it.
Give me factually based information.
One of her workers had to feed the children foundation found guilty and given 42 years. Show me where What's her name? Muse, come on. Come on. Come up here. She married a brother. Show me that, too. So, Muse, what's going to happen is you are going to get muted for a minute, okay?
And you can come up here and have a conversation or I'm just going to continue to mute you or have my mods mute you for a minute at a time. Guys, if you want to mute somebody for the entire stream, you need to pay me $2 a day, $7 a week, $25 a month to be able to do that, okay? Make sure you're supporting.
Yeah, he sure bought everything they sold him. All right, anyway.
Here's Donald Trump in regards to uh Iran and their military, okay? Remember, we have been told multiple times that their military has been decimated. They have no navy. They have no air force.
They have no nothing.
Um and this is an interview he did with uh with uh Laura, his daughter-in-law.
And in this same interview, he says that we pretty much left their military alone and then not even a few moments later says that um they they have no military at all.
>> Uh their navy is totally gone, 100%.
Their air force is totally gone, 100%.
Their military, we sort of left it alone because we think >> Which even that's an interesting statement.
>> think that their navy is totally gone, 100%. Their air force is totally gone, 100%. Their military, we sort of left it alone because >> Is the navy and the air force not a part of the military?
Is it not?
Did I miss something? Okay, but we've left their military alone. Interesting.
>> because we think that their military is somewhat uh somewhat moderate.
They have other people that aren't moderate. taken them out, we've taken different forms of leadership out. We've actually left their military alone.
People would be surprised to hear that.
Because uh mistakes have been made in wars where you wipe out everybody and then you have a country that's, you know, for 40 years can never rebuild.
You look at what happened with Iraq. We did so Iran >> Same interview.
>> Iran is in a very bad position. They have no military, they all they have >> What?
I thought that we mostly left their military alone.
What?
What?
>> I was good talking to them. They have a fake press. You know, the the fake news is probably their biggest asset. And I put something out on Truth the other day that I think was very profound. Uh it said that we wipe out their military, we wipe out their navy, their air force, their anti-aircraft, we wipe uh their navy is totally gone.
>> Uh-huh. Which one is it? Why do you guys listen to this man anymore? I really I don't I don't quite understand it. Um and then here he is saying that we shouldn't have been in Iraq and we also shouldn't have been in Iran, but here we are. So why are we there?
>> about everybody and then you have a country that's, you know, for 40 years can never rebuild.
You look at what happened with >> Muse, stop being a [ __ ] coward and come up and give me the factual information that you of course have because you would never never be a Republican MAGA simp that just believes things, right? There's no way. You're definitely smarter than that, Muse. So go ahead and come up and tell me, maybe you have information that I've never seen before. I would love to see it.
Please. That would be wonderful.
>> Iraq. We did so badly. That was such a foolish thing what we did. Shouldn't have been there in the first place, by the way.
Uh and shouldn't have been in Iran, but Iran has uh the capability if we didn't hit them with the B-2 bombers 9 months ago, they would have a nuclear weapon right now.
And >> Where's the source for that? Where's the proof of that? Because our own intel, our own intelligence, even him, former DNI director Tulsi Gabbard, didn't say that.
Former DNI, I didn't need to add director.
>> There would be a whole different >> It's like PIN number.
>> And so I probably would have used it.
You would You probably wouldn't have had a You wouldn't have had Israel, but you probably wouldn't have had a Middle East. And then where do they go from there?
>> Prove it. Again, waiting for the proof.
Hi Dano, you're the only one in here so far. From an olive branch, so.
Appreciate you being here. Can we guys make sure we're doing all of the good things still as we're sitting here, please? I would appreciate it. All right.
Let's move on to Trump's uh, you know, he writes profound truths. According to him, he writes profound truths. So, here we go. Here's his profound truth that he writes. Remember, he went to Walter Reed again for his fourth physical with in a year and a half being inaugurated. We love that. I'd love a president who goes to uh, you know, get physicals that often. Um, welcome in all Chief Deputy Chief Deputy over the IAEA says Iran wasn't seeking a nuke.
Exactly. No, but like they can't show me where they were or where they were close. So, Donald Trump is just lying out of his ass. All right. But, he went to Walter Reed. Let's talk about it. The results of my physical examination taken at Walter Reed Military Medical Center in were and just released were extremely good. I will tell read those to you in just a moment. Uh, unlike other US presidents, none of whom have ever taken an approved high difficulty cognitive test, I scored a perfect 30 out of 30 considered extreme intelligence. What you're telling me is he took another one.
He said before that he has taken three cognitive tests and he has aced them all.
This means he has taken a fourth.
I will again for the third time show you that test that he has taken. I will show it to you.
And I want you to tell me in what world a healthy, mentally healthy president is taking a cognitive test by their doctor's prescription of this test specifically four times within a year and a half.
Because this test is used just in case you might have Alzheimer's or dementia.
Why is he taking it four times? We'll talk about that. Are the Democrats really surprised? In fact, this is my fourth such test. He's bragging about taking it four times. Again, hold on.
Hold your horses. I will show you the test.
All perfect or 120 correct answers out of 120 questions asked. It is very rare that anyone gets a perfect score. Again, he said 30 out of 30. Especially when achieved four times in a row. All people running for president and vice president should be forced to take high difficulty cognitive test. Now, I don't have any issue with that actually. I'm totally fine with anybody uh serving in any kind of governmental office having to take this test. That's fine. Uh Congress and the Democrats should demand it President Donald J. Trump. That's fine. That's the only part of his truth that I actually agree with. Now, let's go into the test. I've shown it before and we're going to show it again.
Um all right. It's a little difficult to see. This is the best I can get it.
What he's taking is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment or MoCA test.
It's going to get more difficult as we go on, but remember he said high difficulty and he's bragging about taking it four times within a year and a half span. Okay?
You have to do visual spatial. So, you start with one and one goes to A. Then you go A to two. Where does two go?
Can anybody tell me? After two, where do you go? If one goes to A, two goes to Where does it go?
Ash, you got it.
B, you guys I think you guys could be president. Two goes to B. And then B goes to three, three goes to C, C goes to four, four goes to D, D goes to five, five goes to E.
Okay.
Glad we could get there.
Then you have to copy this bed. So you just have to draw it. You have to draw this bed and copy it. Okay?
So difficult. I'm so glad we have such an intelligent president that can ace this cognitive test four times.
Okay, six go six seven six does go to seven, that's true. Then you have to draw a clock and not only do you have to draw a clock but you have to draw the clock with the hands at 5:10.
Okay?
And for this total section, if you score you would get five points out of Then we will move on to naming. Thank you so much Hector. Appreciate it.
Welcome in. Um Hector he bragged about his fourth cognitive test. He's bragging about it Hector. Fourth cognitive test that he aced. So we're going to go over the test again. I've gone over it so many times but I just want to make sure that everybody else knows how difficult this test is. Um so then we move on to naming where you can get three points because there's three animals.
You have to name this animal. What's that one?
You have to name this animal. What's that one? And you have to name this animal. What is that one? So difficult.
I'm so glad that he was able to do that.
So proud of him.
Thank you for calling the stream. Can I get your age, state and who you voted for?
>> Yeah. 40, Pennsylvania, voted for Trump.
>> Uh can you get any closer to your mic?
I'm having a hard time hearing you.
>> Uh the 40 Pennsylvania, Trump.
>> Okay. Um it is your Wi-Fi. So I can hear you better now that you moved closer but it is your Wi-Fi. It's cutting in and out but we can try. Um why are you still supporting Trump?
>> I think >> good?
>> Okay, I'm going to have to you need to get out of Maga Wi-Fi town and then you can absolutely call me back.
Get I would love to have a conversation with you. I literally you are cutting in and out so that it does not work. Um welcome in late Raiders. I appreciate you guys being here. Please make sure we're doing all the good things since you guys weren't here at the beginning. Let's get started. Um they're doing wonderful on the tap so let's include yourselves in that conversation with the tapping and the sharing. Um if you are in the YouTube, if you could hit that thumbs up button for me, I'd appreciate it. All right, moving on to memory.
You have to read a list of words.
Subject must repeat them. You do two trials even if the first trial is successful, do a recall after 5 minutes, okay? So, you do leg, cotton, school, tomato, white. You have to repeat that.
Leg, cotton, school, tomato, white.
Let's see if your reception is better now.
>> Is this better?
>> It's just you're It's like very difficult like it's cutting in and out.
Like I can hear you but it's cutting in and out.
>> I'll try again.
>> Yeah, I got really fun Try again and try again if you can get that going. I don't know why it's doing that. But again, you can repeat this. Now, you can get the first trial right of leg, cotton, school, tomato, white. You wait 5 minutes.
And then you need to repeat it again.
Leg, cotton, school, tomato, white, okay? Memory.
But you get no points for that. That's just just a test. Then attention span, you read list of digits. Subject has to repeat them in forward order. 2 4 8 1 5.
Then the subject has to repeat them in the backward order. 4 2 7, you do 7 2 4, right? You read the list of letters.
Subject must tap with his hand at each letter A. No points if uh greater than two errors. So, you do F b a c m n a a j k l b a f a k d e a a a j a m o f a a b.
It's very difficult. It is so difficult to be president. It's so hard. I'm so proud that we have a president that aced four cognitive tests, guys. Four. He's so smart. He's so smart. Serial seven subtraction starting at 60 from 53 He has to You have to go down. Okay.
From 53 to 46 to 39 to 32 to 25.
Uh language, repeat. The child walked his dog in the park after midnight. The child walked his dog in the park after midnight. The artist finished his painting at the right moment for the exhibition. The artist finished his painting at the right moment for the exhibition.
Uh language fluency, name maximum number of words in 1 minute that begin with the letter b. So, you have to start saying words. Ball, balloon, ballroom.
>> [laughter] >> Bankruptcy. You can start listing words, right?
Thank you for calling the stream. Can I get your age, state, and who you voted for?
>> Yeah, well, I'm calling back from a different number.
>> Oh, okay. Perfect. I can hear you perfectly now. Um why are you still supporting Trump?
>> Well, I think he's good.
>> Good with what?
>> He's still trying to accomplish the promises he made with taxes, peace, economy, >> What about >> inflation.
>> He's trying to, sure. What What is he doing right now that you support?
>> Um What do you mean?
>> What is he currently doing as president of the United States that you support? A policy, a piece of legislation.
>> Um the tax trying to lower the taxes.
Support that. I support his foreign policies with Iran.
>> The tax so the tax policy did you sure.
Did you read the tax policy? Did you read the one big beautiful bill act?
>> I read a lot of it. It's pretty big.
>> Yeah, no. It was a it was a huge piece of legislation. Now, while it did give tax cuts to all people in all brackets, a majority of the tax cuts did go to the rich and to subsidize that they actually took away about 900 billion dollars over 10 years from Medicaid from Medicaid and they also were removing people off of snap so that they could take that same money that you're still paying that didn't stop you from paying it. You're still paying it so that they could pay for the cuts to the rich. Do you agree with that?
>> Mhm.
I mean that's what Obama did with Obamacare.
>> Obama did what with Obamacare?
>> He took from Medicaid and Medicare.
>> Where?
>> 794 795 billion dollars.
>> Can you give me a source for that?
>> Yeah, it's in the it's in the Obamacare bill.
>> That it pulled seven how much? 794 billion?
From Medicaid?
>> so.
>> Let's see.
>> That's somewhere around that. Might not be the exact number but it was quite a bit but Obama took from Medicaid to fund Obamacare.
>> No. What is what is Obamacare? What's the actual name of it? Do you know?
>> The actual name?
>> Yeah.
>> I just know it as Obamacare.
>> Well, you would be incorrect. It's called the Affordable excuse me Affordable Care Act.
>> Oh, the ACA that >> The ACA >> raised my insurance prices.
>> No, your insurance raised. Your insurance chose to raise their prices.
Why?
>> No, they had to because it because it's all coming from the same place.
>> No.
>> Uh to cover everybody that was just added to it including illegals which I know you guys say they don't but they do.
>> Prove that.
>> Cuz there's three different laws that >> No.
>> Yeah.
>> So oh so it's legal. So it's legal. It's legal for them to get health care then.
>> In a sense it is.
>> Okay. Um so again I'm still looking for this claim of of 709 Let's see. What I'm seeing and this is from overview and I don't like overview so I'm trying to find where they're citing this.
Um 716 billion >> even Mitt Romney was against it.
>> You know it was based off of his plan, right?
>> Yeah but Mitt Mitt Romney was against defunding Medicaid for it.
>> They didn't. Um so what we're we're going to read this real quick. Is the 716 billion Medicare cut. This was from the commonwealthfund.org in 2012. Um by the time this election is over even small children may know how much Obamacare cuts Medicare. The figure this is according to them but I don't know where they're getting their facts from yet. Um says that 716 billion dollars over 10 years is the subject of already intense debate over what the health care law will do to or for Medicare and it shows no sign of letting up until November.
Um let's see.
That how often 500 billion dollars have been cited as the Congressional Budget Office estimates of Medicare cuts in the health care law. Is it accurate? Let's see.
Little noticed initially what might have seemed like a mistake at first was not according to this person trying to find CBO actually citing this.
Plus covers like a covers nearly 10 billion. They have advertising by advertising by the Romney Ryan campaign suggests the 716 billion will badly weaken the services the beneficiaries get under Medicare, which is not Medicaid. But the Obama view is that the cuts are taken from sectors that either were previously overpaid by the government such as private health plans and big pharmaceutical manufacturers or that would recoup the money in the form of large numbers of insured patients.
Examples of such providers include hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, and home health agencies. Those health groups will get the money back because the reductions help cover the cost of subsidies for the uninsured to purchase insurance coverage so their medical costs would be covered. So you cannot in one hand support Donald Trump doing that. I Uh I am You cannot in one hand support what Donald Trump is doing, which is cutting Medicaid completely, um but also cutting COVID subsidies. That was the big shutdown argument with COVID subsidies over something that you obviously don't understand in way of immigrants receiving health care. But at the same time admonish Obama admonish Obama for supposedly cutting things from Medicare that they were going to make back because what they were doing is subsidies.
I said admonish. Admonish would be to critique.
>> No, I'm not critiquing. I'm just saying it It was acceptable for Obama to do it, but if >> It's not.
>> Trump can't do it.
>> Who said it was acceptable?
>> Uh everybody. Who that?
When they forced when they forced Obamacare and the ACA using the Supreme Court.
>> How did >> [laughter] >> How How did How did the ACA pass?
>> Uh they pushed it using the Supreme Court or >> What?
>> There was There was things they had to use the Supreme Court to push it through.
>> No.
>> the forcing people to pay a fine if they didn't get health insurance.
>> That And that was repealed under Trump, and I agreed with that being repealed.
But I don't know what you're talking about in way of the Supreme Court when the ACA was passed in Congress. They voted for it.
>> Yeah, after like a shutdown.
Uh it was forced. It's pretty much >> wasn't. No, it wasn't It can't be forced if they voted for it. It cannot be forced if the Congress if the Senate and the House of Representatives voted for it, it can't be forced.
>> I don't >> That's not forced. You just didn't You disagreed with it, maybe. Sure, but it wasn't forced.
>> Sure, that's fine. I have no problem with that. I have no problem with that.
What is Donald Trump's Sure, that's great. What is Donald Trump's plan for healthcare?
Cuz Obama's gone.
So, what's what's Donald Trump's plan for healthcare?
>> Exactly, I don't know. I know they were They were working on a bunch of stuff for it.
>> He He's He's talked about in 2 weeks for the last 10 years. What's his plan?
>> That it would actually be affordable, I hope. I think it's more going to be like private.
>> Why has it That's Yeah, that's a problem. That's a problem. That's where the expense comes in is when it's private because the insurance companies then gets to [ __ ] decide whatever cost.
>> Competition obvious No, no, no.
Competition doesn't bring the price down.
>> Competition yeah, like a single payer.
A single company could push out any price they wanted.
>> No, they all do. No, they all do. Show me Show me where competition has created lower cost in way of pharmaceuticals or any kind of healthcare in this country.
>> Uh what do you mean? Like uh generic drugs >> Mhm.
>> have lowered the cost cuz they're basically, you know, replacing these the centralized companies that control one one pill or whatever.
>> Did you um >> have the generic brand.
So, then you can buy the cheaper generic brand instead of instead of having to buy the name brand.
>> So, did you hear about Did you hear about the fact that Did you hear about the fact that insulin copays could not be higher than $35?
>> Yeah, Trump did that, and it was under Medicaid and Medicare.
>> Uh-huh.
And then, what did Biden do to that?
>> Biden took it away.
>> No, he didn't. He expanded it.
>> Oh.
No, they took it away and then re-added it.
>> No, no, no, no, no. They didn't take it >> My mom takes insulin. I know.
>> Sure. Okay, they took it away, they re-added it. Sure, sure, sure. They They took it away, they re-added it. They re-added it, and they expanded it, right? And then, what did the Sure.
Okay, sure. What did Sure. And that was for Medicare I know I know Trump did it.
I give credit for Trump for doing it for a specific part of Medicare.
>> over >> god, you're not listening. He repealed it. You're not listening, so stop [ __ ] talking, cuz then that would mean your ears are working. I give Trump that credit, well, I give Congress that credit for doing that for a specific section of Medicare. Biden and his Congress had to repeal it to be able to expand it, and that's what they did. So, they repealed it, they put it back, but they also expanded it to more areas, so it wasn't just a specific part of Medicare, it was also Medicaid. Now, the real question is, what did the private companies do on the actual generic market, not just Medicare and Medicaid, but all insurance markets, what did they do after that happened?
>> What did I don't know.
>> They brought it down to 35, even for price uh for private insurance. They brought it down to 35.
Now, that's not competition, that is called collective bargaining through the government that got it cheaper. So, again, we're not seeing where competition is causing prices to go down.
>> That's just simple economics.
>> Except it's not. We're not seeing it.
Why aren't we seeing that then?
>> That's why monopolies are illegal.
>> Um well, you should probably talk to your president about the fact that he doesn't give a [ __ ] about antitrust laws. He doesn't seem to care about that at all.
>> He doesn't seem to or he doesn't?
>> He doesn't. What what legislation has he put forth or what deals has he blocked to ensure that any kind of companies, not just healthcare, but any kind of companies are not issuing out a monopoly?
Cuz he seems to be totally fine with letting conglomerates eat each other.
>> Well, Trump wanted to >> I don't care what he wanted to do. What did he do?
>> He wanted to break up Meta, Facebook, cuz they were a monopoly.
>> Did he do that?
>> Uh, I don't know. He tried to.
>> No, he didn't. With what? He has He has the majority in Congress. What do you mean? No, I'm not talking about his first term. I am talking about right now. We are talking about his his term right now. What the [ __ ] is he doing?
Because what he's doing is making money hand over fist by in investing in stocks and then allowing these giant conglomerates do these deals. That's what he's doing.
>> He's investing in stocks?
>> Yes.
Yeah.
I went over it last week.
>> Pelosi?
>> Yeah, go get her, too.
Would you agree with me to put in federal regulations so that no person serving in the governmental office is allowed to trade stocks?
>> Yeah, the our Republicans just pushed a law to do that.
>> Yeah, but Mike Pence >> it for a very long time.
>> But why won't why won't they bring it up on the floor? You're talking about Josh Hawley's Act. It was called the Pelosi Act. He's also done another another iteration of that called the Honest Act.
Why isn't the majority held Congress, the Senate, nor the House of Representatives bringing that up on the floor for a vote when they're the ones in charge right now?
>> Well, a lot of the factors can influence the way they get brought up into the floor.
>> They have refused to bring it to the floor. They bring up a lot of >> They have refused to bring it to the floor. Why?
>> They refuse.
>> Yeah, because they could just because it's on the Republicans. It would have to be Speaker Mike Johnson or the Senate Majority Leader John Thune. Okay, it would have to be them bringing it up on the floor for a vote. Why haven't they done so?
>> I don't know.
>> Exactly.
I'm going to use that swan olive W's to olive for that swan. Guys, make sure we are still doing all of the good things.
Please make sure that you are still tapping the screen, sharing the live. If you are over there on YouTube, hit that thumbs up button for me. I would appreciate it. Hi Reuben.
Bye Reuben.
Hi Olive, I see you.
Okay, so let me get back to what I was doing. Now, back to this. We haven't finished our test, guys. We haven't finished our cognitive test that he aced four times.
We haven't finished it. We have to finish it. Guys, I have 67 left in my goal. If we could work on that, too, I would appreciate it. Cash app, Venmo, PayPal, all in the link trees in my bio.
Let's finish that up, okay?
So, we were down to abstraction, similarly between banana, orange, fruit.
So, hammer, screwdriver, matches, lamp.
So, you have to do that. Delayed recall memory. You have to recall words with no clue. Leg, cotton, school, tomato, white. Which is the same words from earlier. So, leg, cotton, school, tomato, white. You're still studying orientation, the date, the month, the year, the day, the place, the city. Your score would be 30 out of 30. Again, Trump is bragging about taking four of them within a year and a half's time. It seems like he is so, so, so smart.
You copied every single trade Nancy Pelosi did since 1997. Did you make money?
I don't think she should have been able to make those trades. I don't think anybody should be able to make trades because they can actually effectuate the trades. So, I have an issue with that. All right, but the White House released his >> [laughter] >> his last visit, okay?
On May 26th, 2026, President Donald J.
Trump underwent his annual medical examination at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. This comprehensive preventative evaluation included a thorough review of all diagnostic studies and laboratory testing conducted over the past year, as well as consultants with 22 specialty providers from multiple academic institutions, probably including the one for his cognitive deficiencies. All aspects of the assessment were were performed in accordance with the US Preventative Services Task Force recommendation. The president has authorized the public release of these findings. Vital statistics. He's 79.
That's true.
Thank you for calling the stream. Can I get your age, state, and who you voted for?
>> Oh, yes. This is Chachi Bolden. I am 42, and I'm from Florida.
>> Did you vote for Trump?
>> Oh, no, I didn't.
>> Who'd you vote for?
>> Uh I didn't vote, actually. I sat that one out.
>> Oh, why didn't you vote?
>> Well, you know, I mean, they only have like two Well, Biden had one debate with Trump. Kamala had another, and uh Trump, you know, he uh didn't want to have Kamala Harris have a third, you know, debate with them. And I I could tell why now.
She could have won.
>> Yeah.
She probably She probably should have if people paid more attention, but here we are.
>> Yeah, it's a it's a shame, you know.
Here we are. I mean, I am.
Um >> So, why'd you call in today?
>> Oh, why did I call? Uh I've I've scrolled on to the stream that you got you were doing, and um I want to have like a positive thought about all this, because a lot of people actually do see where they made mistakes, you know?
>> Sure.
>> And it could be fixed, you know?
>> It's going to take a lot of work to fix it, that's the problem. And my And that's the thing is my point in these conversations is to show people, specifically Trump supporters, that they need to critically think and pay attention and actually look up the things that their politicians that are running are saying and not just believe them, that you have to critique what they're saying.
>> Oh man, he has so much yes-men, too. And that's so so bad.
>> It's a massive problem.
>> mean, there there wasn't there wasn't really no problems with conservatives or Republicans until he came into the ship, you know? There wasn't no There wasn't really anything bad about liberals, either. I mean, it's just media telling you got to you got to hate me, you got to hate I got to hate you, you got to hate me.
>> Oh yeah, he took and he took that divide and he took a sledgehammer to it um to try to completely vilify the other side. And what he has done to the Republican Party is tear it completely the [ __ ] apart. So, I'm really hoping people go back to their Republican roots, even though there might be policies I disagree with in that way, I want them to come back to it and not surround themselves around Trump because he's not going to be here forever, so.
>> Yeah, I mean, that's that's a good thing, you know? And um what he did was also also the people that he did make into yes-men.
Um They They They really got some problems if they want to go forward.
>> No, they certainly do. Well, I appreciate you calling in and I I hope that you vote in your midterms at least in Florida. Um if you can find a candidate that you support, I think that your vote is your voice and I think that you need to use it, but I do appreciate you calling and having a conversation with me and I hope you have a wonderful day.
>> Yeah, you, too.
>> Okay.
>> Hello.
>> Hi. Um >> Sorry I'm a little late.
>> You were late.
>> I'm sorry.
>> [laughter] >> All right.
>> I'm sorry.
>> Vital statistics, 79 years old, true.
Height, he's supposedly 75 inches.
Again, we're getting the same stuff that we got for his [ __ ] mug shot for his intake. 238 lb supposedly. His resting heart rate beats 73 beats per minute.
Blood pressure 105 over 71. Pulse ox uh oximetry 98%. Temperature 98.7. Oh, he's just like perfect. His eyes, visual acuity, visual fields, and intraocular pressure were within normal limits.
Dilated. Here's the one I really want to hear, though.
Oh, let's do his ear first. Examination was normal except for scarring of the right ear consistent with prior gunshot injury. Where?
Where?
Ain't never seen it. Um >> Did he really say that on what?
>> Yeah, on his his physician his physician's note.
>> Get back to all the work.
>> Uh where is it? To to to to dermatologic, that's the one.
Examination of the dorsal hands revealed ecchymosis, which bruising, consistent with minor soft tissue irritation related to frequent handshaking in the setting of uh in the setting of aspirin use for cardiovascular prevention. This represents a common and benign effect of aspirin therapy. No suspicious lesions or concerning growths identified. It's just bruising from his handshaking.
That's all it is. It's just bruising from his handshaking. Um the extremities one was interesting as well.
Slight lower leg swelling was noted with improvement from last year, except that um his previous releases of his physician's record, his medical record from last year, did not note any leg swelling at all. So, it's interesting that we're seeing improvement on something that we weren't notified of before.
Hmm.
Interesting how that changes.
No, I [ __ ] hate it here. It's it's Now, let's see how well he was doing.
See, he had a we'll get into it.
Hopefully, we can get into it. He had a bad weekend in the judicial system, but this was um just a a little look at his his ranting over the weekend. Him at him on top of Mount Rushmore.
Uh I guess he's a pirate captain. I don't You're getting discombobulated.
We have an ad.
Time to physically audit Fort Knox.
We're back on that.
Billions were spent to convince you this is evil and we love a we love a 1950s white family. Um Nobody's saying this is evil. We're saying where are the the marginalized communities in this?
Um apparently equating himself to George Washington. This is definitely a man who is well um loved this one cuz it looks like he's using the American flag as a napkin. Yeah, physically audit. He's going to go in and count the bars himself, not fiscally. No, physically.
Chicky.
Uh again, Mount Rushmore, his head on that again. Trump energy 2026 with apparently Revolutionary War soldiers, but also stealth fighters and uh Air Force.
Uh advertisement. Oh, the Trump peace prize medal. This definitely is a man who is well He's not He's not trolling.
This is not trolling. This is a man who is unwell. He is not worried about actually doing anything beneficial for the American people. Something's physically wrong with him. Um I just want to stop the world from killing itself. Disloyal Rs are far more difficult than crooked Hillary. They come at you from all sides. They don't know how to win. I will teach them. Get in, loser. We're going losing except for the people in this car.
Marjorie Taylor Greene, uh Thomas Massie, I think you're supposed to be Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson, Lauren Boebert, and Rand Paul, all are people who told him that he needed to release the Epstein files. It's interesting that it's only those people.
Uh leave our crime alone, Newsom, Pritzker, Holcomb, except that you're not finding that because they found it first. Illegal immigrants, Biden imports, Trump deport, that's not accurate either. We can talk about the facts behind that. Stealing, Biden's solution, you have looting. Trump's solution, you have arresting, supposedly, but sure. Smashing car that he he did this all weekend.
All weekend, guys.
Yeah, Rand Paul isn't even Yeah, the drone port that he's going to put into the White House cuz apparently that's necessary and needed. But that that man's well, sure.
>> Wasn't the audit supposed to happen with Doge to Fort Knox? Wasn't that like a huge >> was asked about it. I don't know that he ever said it was like that it was going to be Doge specifically, but maybe.
>> it was supposed to be done I remember something about that. Drip drip.
>> Hello.
>> He has a point about the billions being spent to convince us that's evil because the only place it still has cars like that is Cuba.
>> [laughter] >> Okay, yeah, you're you're true. And they are spending billions to convince you that Cuba is communist evil, so I guess that is true. Good point.
>> wanted to Yeah.
All right. That's all.
>> Okay.
And then he repeated this line cuz you know when he finds one that he thinks plays well, he's going to repeat it. And we played it to critique him, but he's going to say it again.
>> As I take the word dumb, take the B off cuz most people don't know that, you know, dumb ends with a B, but most >> When he says most people, he means him.
I just want you to know that.
Listen to the lisp on her male panelist.
My husband doesn't have a lisp.
>> [laughter] >> But sure.
Um Most people don't know it has a B on it.
>> The word dumb, take the B off cuz most people don't know that, you know, dumb ends with a B, but most people don't know. And all I do is I switch the E with the U.
And you have a Democrat. And I came up with that by watching Hakeem Jeffries cuz he's a dumb >> By the way, he didn't come up with this.
Again, I don't know why you're not mad at him because you guys have been called saying this for decades. This is something you guys have been calling Democrats, liberals, whatever you want to name people for decades, and now he's stealing that from you.
>> person. And I said, "He's really dumb."
I said, "Wait a minute, he's a Democrat." So, I think it works. I don't know that it's going to be as good as Pocahontas or fake news or so many of the >> Oh, but he's got to get you with the ones that you like cuz you guys can't pay attention to policy. You guys cannot pay attention to policy, so he's got to do the greatest hits with you. I know that one. I don't like her, either.
>> others that we've come up with, but uh I mean, I'm going to just call them Democrats.
>> Sure.
>> Because I don't understand how they could be so stupid. Cuz >> Show us about policy.
Show us what you're doing for the American people with policy.
Uh >> Pocahontas was um >> Elizabeth Warren.
>> Yeah. She said she has indigenous heritage, so he started calling her Pocahontas.
Um Now, this is kind of backtracking a little bit from when I showed you about the bad news of the economy and how it looks today because Iran said [ __ ] off, but, you know, Donald Trump's going to keep talking about it.
>> Democrats wanted high taxes, I wanted low taxes. I'm right because that's why the economy is booming. Look, we have >> It's not. Show me an economic metric that where it's booming, Trump.
>> A war going on and the economy is boom.
We have a war going on, and you know, today we just hit another number number 69 is >> Oh, well, the stock market, unfortunately for him, the stock market is not a good economic indicator. It's why we don't use it because, yeah, people with money will continue to make money regardless of the fact that people can't afford to live. And we'll get into the economy right after this.
>> All-time high today. And we have a war going on.
>> Well, we're a few >> This is a Democrat >> Uh Mike, the Democrats don't have anybody because nobody has officially officially, excuse me, announced their run for 2028. They're not going to until after the midterms are completed. Will Newsom most likely run? Maybe. Um Harris has talked about it. Buttigieg has honestly been one of the only ones that I've seen when he talked to Al Sharpton saying like, "On the campaign trail, I'll be there." Buttigieg is the only one that I've really seen confirm. So, other than that, we don't know. We don't know anybody. They're all undecided technically until after the midterms.
That's just just a fact in how that works. All right. Um Well, first off, actually, before we get to economy, let's talk about how bad of a weekend he had judicially. Let's talk about that. So, lead federal prosecutor in James Comey seashells photo case steps aside.
A rookie federal prosecutor who brought a case accusing former FBI director James Comey of threatening President Donald Trump's life by posting a photo of seashells on Instagram has stepped off the case. Matthew Patraca, who had been recently hired as an assistant US attorney in the Eastern District of North Carolina, is no longer on the Comey case, according to a court filing.
And yes, we get the court filing. We love that. Thank you so much. We appreciate it. Now comes the United States of America buying through the United States attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina and hereby request that the undersigned attorney be substituted as counsel for the government and that Matthew Patraca be removed from the court's docket as counsel for the government. So, they're replacing him. Okay? That's your court document hyperlinked in the actual filing. Patraca also dropped off of other criminal cases in the Eastern District of North Carolina in recent days, according to court filings.
Patraca is a former Republican county committeeman in New Jersey, whom W.
Ellis Boyle, the US attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina, hired months ago, NBC News has reported.
Boyle oversaw the highly criticized case, which will go to trial in October if it manages to survive legal challenges. Now, remember, we just talked about the fact that the judge allowed um without any kind of uh uh appeal. The DOJ did not press back on James Comey's lawyer's decision to try to postpone his trial date to October in order to file legal challenges including dismissals and the DOJ did not fight back on that.
Petracka had contemplated leaving the Justice Department altogether according to two familiar people with the matter but instead remained a Justice Department employee after taking a week off.
Petracka had not responded to a previous request for comment on his status at the Justice Department and did not respond to an additional request for comment Friday. The US Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Assistant US Attorney Timothy Severo is now heading the Comey case.
Petracka did not handle a recent interaction with the Comey's defense team which instead communicated with First Assistant US US Attorney Phil Aubert.
And we've talked about the indictment.
You can read about the indictment. It's literally two pages. You can read it. It is going to be an interesting thing to watch.
Just keeping up on it. So, that's not good when your lead investigator on the case drops down. That's not good. Then we talked about the fact that it was being reported that E. Jean Carroll was being investigated. Well, come to find out I guess that's not true either.
Top federal prosecutor in Chicago denies investigation into E. Jean Carroll probably cuz it wasn't popular. The top federal prosecutor in Chicago on Thursday denied reports that his office had opened a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll, the writer who accused President Trump of sexual assault and later won millions of dollars in her lawsuits against him. CNN first reported Wednesday evening that the Justice Department was investigating whether Carroll committed perjury during testimony tied to her two civil lawsuits against Trump. Andrew Boutros, the US Attorney from Northern District of Illinois, issued a statement saying that was not true. In light of widespread reporting and intense media and public interest into the E. Jean Carroll matter in New York, the Chicago US Attorney's Office can confirm that it has not opened and has never opened a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll. But her said in a statement on the social platform X. Any claims to the contrary is categorically false.
Okay, so that's done.
Um W Tappers, you guys hit 100,000 likes and it we are only just a little bit after 11:00. You guys are [ __ ] doing amazing. Thank you so much. I am so glad you must have rested your fingers this weekend or you got really good use out of them and you came back ready to continue rolling. So thank you for tapping. I think that that means we can hit 200,000 likes before I end today. I know you can do it. You guys are rocking the [ __ ] out of it. Thank you so much.
Doing fantastic. Keep doing those things, guys. I do have the little finger hearts. If we can start getting those accomplished, that would be great.
And don't forget my gift gallery is refreshed. So let's start working on that. I would appreciate it so very, very much. Guys, I also have six, seven left in my goal. If we can start getting that down. Remember to tip your content creators, all right? So we need to continue to do that. Um do Cash App, Venmo, or PayPal all in the link tree in my bio if you would like to help out with that. Guys, if you are over there on YouTube, I know you might be hate watching, but if you are not brave enough to call in with factually based evidence yourself, please hit that thumbs up button so maybe you can find a comrade who is braver than you and we can we can talk about that.
All right, it just keeps going for Trump.
Judge blocks renaming and closure of Kennedy Center. President Donald Trump's effort to rebrand the Kennedy Center in his own name is illegal, a federal judge ruled on Friday. US District Judge Christopher Cooper said the rebranding of the institution that honors President John F. Kennedy as the Trump Kennedy Center violated the clear language of federal law that requires the building to honor President Kennedy and President Kennedy alone. The order to revert to the original long-standing name came as a part of a broader ruling and again, love this. We get a hyperlink for the actual 94 pages of the ruling so that you can read it yourself if you wish to.
Love that.
That also overturned a plan announced in March to close the center for 2 years for renovations. Cooper and Obama Obama appointees said repairs to the campus can proceed and an outright closure in the future might be lawful if the center's board is more thoroughly consulted. But he blasted the board for making its closure decision based on quote an insufficient one-sided presentation of information that quote neglected to consider the full range of its statutory obligations and potential adverse consequences of closure on programming and memorial functions.
Hours after the ruling Trump said in a social media post. Now remember hours after the ruling, Trump said in a social media post that he would abandon his pursuit of a Kennedy Center redesign and direct his administration to transfer oversight of the center to Congress.
Because he has to.
Because he has to.
The name-calling never stops with Democrats, does it? Donald Trump calls people names all the time. We just played a video where he called Democrats dumocrats. Are you okay?
He calls black women and black people low IQ. Are you okay?
He calls us leftist lunatics. Are you okay?
Mike, you're just scared. It's fine.
Mike, you just don't have facts. It's fine. We know why you won't call in, Mike.
Aw.
You're scared of a little woman. Hmm, interesting. And then on the last one as we keep going, it just doesn't get any better from here. Judge launches inquiry into Trump IRS settlement that led to anti-weaponization fund. A federal judge is demanding answers and again hyperlink to the actual order. This one is four pages, much easier for you to digest, but still legally, so maybe big words for you. A federal judge is demanding answers to allegations that President Donald Trump defrauded her court by filing a lawsuit against the IRS as a pretext to reach a settlement that resulted in $1.8 billion dollar fund to make payouts to his political allies.
US District Judge Kathleen Williams launched the inquiry Friday after closing the lawsuit on her docket last week. The Miami-based Obama appointee cited a request by 35 former federal judges who urged her to reopen the case to determine whether Trump's efforts amounted to serious misconduct and abuse of the court system. What they're alleging is that he used the court system filing this $10 billion IRS suit as a way to justify and use the court system to justify a settlement that the court never gave him of 1.776 billion dollars in anti-weaponization fund. It's the latest wrinkle in a developing scandal that has drawn bipartisan outrage on Capitol Hill, multiple lawsuits aimed at blocking the anti-weaponization fund, and demands for further investigation by government watchdogs and courts. Now, I am reading reporting this morning that supposedly Trump and Mike Johnson are supposed to be meeting about the anti-weaponization fund because it is looking like not only did Mike Johnson go on Memorial break early because they weren't going to have the votes for their DHS funding um that they wanted even though that's that was simple my simple majority reconciliation all with Republicans. They still don't have enough votes. They so they went on break early. They're coming back and it looks like they don't have enough votes again because of this anti-weaponization fund.
So, they're just shooting themselves in the foot further and further every time.
Earlier this year, Trump filed a $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of his tax returns by a private contractor in 2019 and 2020. The lawsuit immediately triggered questions about conflicts of interest. How could the Justice Department and IRS, now controlled by Trump appointees, defend against a lawsuit brought by their boss?
But before the lawsuit advanced, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche revealed that a settlement had been reached.
Instead of a payout to Trump, the settlement will result in the establishment of the nearly $1.8 billion fund to make payouts to people described in the settlement as victims of government weaponization.
Um so, the announcement generated particular excitement among hundreds of people Trump pardoned for their their in storming the Capitol on January 6th, 2021 with many announcing that their intention to pursue payouts.
Um police officers who defended the capital and former Justice Department prosecutors who pursued January 6th defendants sued to block the fund altogether with another judge, we talked about this last week, ordering a 2-week pause on its establishment. So, they cannot create it, they cannot give payments from it, they cannot do anything with it. Um I think that is until June 12th they have until to answer. In her four-page order on Friday, Williams indicated that she was considering reopening the case. She also noted the former judge's suggestion that Trump's attorneys knew from the start that their lawsuit had no merit and filed it solely to justify a purported settlement that the administration wanted to announce. The judge added that a federal court rule requires attorneys to ensure that court filings are not presented for any improper purpose. You do not get to use the courts to justify something else.
So, he had a really bad weekend, which I think is why he was losing his mind on Truth Social, by the way. I absolutely believe that that's why.
I mean, >> Hi.
>> How are you?
>> I'm pretty sure I made it on a list because I legitimately I legitimately came out of like start waking up from anesthesia and I was like, "We need to dismantle the white supremacy and the patriarchy."
And I was like, "Do you know why these procedures hurt women?"
Hi.
You don't know why.
So, and I was like, "It's because of the patriarchy."
And now I'm just like, "Let me go home.
Give me my crackers and my juice so I can go home so I can fight the patriarchy."
>> Um hi Matt and Mike, Mr. Scared Mike.
You said, "Actually, Democrats offer no evidence but demand evidence from the other side." I'm again, I'm not a Democrat, but what evidence would you like? Evidence for what? What What evidence would you like?
What can I help you with?
>> [snorts] >> Um so Philip, Philip, Philip. He said "Too bad the Biden FBI broke federal and state law in releasing Trump's tax returns." No, um not the FBI because they don't deal in taxes, right? It would be the IRS and even then actually what we know is that it was somebody that the IRS contracted.
Um it was a separate person that they contracted and that person leaked to them. Now, I have said this many times and I will continue to say it, Philip, is that that person that was contracted by the IRS broke the law. Donald Trump had said he would release his um taxes to us but that he couldn't because he was under audit. Whether that was true or not, we could have critiqued him for that. But it was not this person's business to choose to release that information um without his consent. And so he's in jail. Good.
I'm very glad about that. But that's not the FBI. So get your uh get your departments correct.
All right.
We're going to jump all over the place a little bit today because we're going to go to um economy now. And then we'll get back to anti-weaponization here in a little bit maybe depending on the time.
But >> Okay, I love you guys. I don't want to get yelled at by Blue.
Um so I just wanted to actually defy a man because he thought he could gaslight me [clears throat] and like do the reverse psychology and tell me to get on live after I finished my surgery. So love you guys. Bye.
>> Love you. Take care of yourself.
Blue will come yell at you. That's true.
Um he said "Where's your proof the IRS was controlled by Trump?" I didn't say it was.
When did I say that, Mike?
When did I say the IRS was controlled by Trump? What? I never said that.
The article said that Trump's appointees in the IRS made people critique it. I didn't say that it was controlled by Trump. Where did I say that?
Are you listening to the words I say or no? No. Okay.
>> Of course they don't listen. I don't not be surprised.
>> And then my favorite thing is when they say he wasn't talking to you.
This is my show. So maybe focus on me and not arguing in the comments because you're too [ __ ] scared to call in. So maybe focus on me, actually.
But hi.
>> Yeah, that's a thing. You hi.
Um I was going to add that Trump's personal attorney is not the ones that have so far been appointed to the Department of Justice and blah blah blah blah blah. They were present when um I want to say the guy's name was John Littlegood, funny name.
Um pled guilty and then was sentenced. They were present both times. They were present there for his his whole trial where he then pled out uh and then was sentenced. So they there was like this idea um that was posited by Todd Blanche, right?
Um that well Trump didn't realize that justice had already been served or rendered.
Uh and so that's why he was pursuing this lawsuit. And it's like no, cuz you're the personal attorneys were there.
>> Right.
>> have been Alina Habba at the time. I don't remember which one cuz he's got so many >> Yeah.
>> that have worked for him.
>> It might have been Alina Habba. That sounds right.
>> Yeah, they were there. They knew about it. He knew about it. Like they had no reason to be there. They weren't representing the defendant. They weren't representing the prosecution.
Um Donald Trump didn't go in there to make a a testimony of What is it called when you're the damaged party or a damaged party?
>> Oh god, I can't remember the term now.
>> Uh it's a victim Well, it's a victim statement, but I don't know the exact term.
>> Yeah. You're like the injured party, but >> Yeah, it's just basically like make their sentencing longer if you can, um, type of plea. So, like he didn't make any of those. He He could have. That That is an option when you go into court and you're there. That That's always an option even in those kind of cases. Like >> Um, Mike >> Impact statement. Thank you.
>> Impact statement. Mike, if you think Fetterman is a moderate, I have a bridge to sell you.
That's wild.
>> Technically all Democrats are moderates.
Fight me. I said it.
>> Mhm, cuz it's true.
>> [sighs] >> Um Fetterman hit his head and it made him more bi- No, he had a stroke and it actually made him more right-leaning.
But, we're going to The tapers are going crazy. You guys are doing fantastic and I appreciate you. Can we still keep working on that goal for the 45 minutes that I am here, please? I would appreciate it very much. I know that we're not getting It's not exciting when they're not calling in and getting dunked on, but they're scared. I don't know what to tell you about that.
Uh, they don't like facts and they don't have facts, so that's why they don't call me. Um, all right, so we're going to move on to economy.
Bessent is going to talk about the gas and the gas prices and how it's not hurting the American people that bad. It's only $200 extra.
>> the war will end and we'll get to the other side of this.
>> Andrew Wilson doesn't debate 2-1. That That's not what Andrew Wilson does. You said you would like him to debate me.
Andrew Wilson doesn't debate. What he does is cry about how words are used and he tries to find a word and its usage and stick on that so that he can come after people. That's what he likes to do. He doesn't actually debate. Um, one of the biggest dunks that I've ever seen on him actually was he debated, um, RTP Talks, if you don't know who that is. He debated RTP Talks and in way of the argument, he actually conceded the argument to RTP. He specifically said, "If I grant you all the statistics and facts that you have and that you are correct on that, can we go back to talking about my moral premise and my feelings?" So, unless Andrew Wilson is talking about his feelings, he doesn't actually debate. And I don't debate feelings, so we would have nothing to talk about.
>> And um I will say this and uh you would be his targeted demographic.
>> Oh, yeah.
See, cuz what Andrew Wilson likes to do is he just likes to rage bait women to try to get them to get up and walk away cuz they no longer want to hear his misogynistic [ __ ] about the fact that he rapes his wife while she's sleeping.
Um and they get up and walk away and he says, "I won."
That's it. So, no. No, thank you.
>> I'll message you the other part, but yeah, I do love the gosh, I wish I could remember the There was a bisexual woman that went up there and dunked on him.
Uh where he's like, "Just say you like doing this." Talking about eating a woman out. And she's like, "Oh, just say you don't pleasure your wife."
Just >> [laughter] >> He's like, "Well, no, no." She brought up the fact that um he preaches the traditional family values [ __ ] and she's like, "So, your wife has kids from previous marriages. No kids with you, but you're preaching family values." He crashed out so bad and all I wanted to do was like, "So, just say you don't like eating the the pussy." Like, that's just sad. Like, >> [laughter] >> Like, come on, bro.
>> licks snizz. That is what he said. He said licks snizz cuz, you know, obviously he's never done it if you call it licking snizz cuz nobody who actually does it calls it that.
Um yeah, and he crashed out once they brought up his his familial dynamic that he, you know, wants to portray as something, you know, nuclear family, but you've got you're with a woman who has kids from a previous marriage, but sure.
>> You can't support something that you don't follow yourself and then you wouldn't get yourself into these conundrums.
>> [laughter] >> Sure, I mean, two one, sure. Certain [ __ ] doesn't taste good, but that's his wife, so like, you know, whatever.
Anyway, Scott Horton says that the gas prices aren't hurting American families that much. It's only 200 extra dollars that I'm sure American families certainly have.
>> Overall and we'll get to the other side of this. The economy has been very resilient and grew >> [laughter] >> all all this.
Um Look, for for many families it's not nothing, but it's been less than $200 in extra the gasoline cost. And >> Is that something that families average middle American families have is extra $200?
When we know from studies that a $500 emergency can put people in poverty.
They They can go bankrupt from that. But yeah, less than $200 is not that bad.
>> Just a $500 car insurance deductible can bankrupt somebody. Like you can't prevent him from getting a whole new car cuz he can't put that up.
>> But $200 in gas, it's not that bad.
>> And you know, I I I don't have it with me, but all all the Democrats want to talk about now is beef and gasoline. I've got I've got a sheet that has the uh 12 supermarket items. You know, last year it was eggs, eggs, eggs.
>> Yeah, and not last year. It wasn't last year cuz last year was 2025. Um it was 2024. It was eggs, eggs, eggs because avian flu, avian flu, avian flu. And um Biden did what he could in way of subsidizing culling those birds, and Donald Trump didn't do much besides oh my god, the production came back underneath his administration. That's not It's not like a grand accomplishment, Besant. You can't sit here and tout eggs when that wasn't any president's faults.
Gas and beef, um the only thing I'll give with beef is there was screwworm going around, but other than that we are importing beef. We don't have a enough, and that's not very America first, which is what he had said. Now, I'm going to go to my favorite person when we talk about economy.
And this is Kevin Hassett, and he's going to be asked uh um on the Fox News about the fact that the Bureau of Labor Statistics says that inflation Hi, kitty.
Um i- inflation is now outpacing wage growth. Inflation is outpacing wage growth. And you know, he's totally going to be able to answer for that.
>> workers uh for manufacturing workers, for mining workers, some The numbers are really astonishing. For mining workers, their real incomes this year are up $7,000 per year.
>> Okay, so you talk >> What What have I argued from emotion to one? Where um do I have emotion in my voice when I speak? Yes, I'm passionate about the things I talk about. Where have I made an argument with anybody that I was talking to that was based off of my feelings and emotions, though? Where have I made that argument?
>> talk about growing wages, but the Bureau of Labor Statistics, according to their data, inflation is now outpacing wage growth. So, if people are making more money, but things are costing more, um how do you answer that question and that concern?
>> Th- That's a technical matter. The The it's the personal income report that came out last week that said that it was uh slight >> That's a technical matter. Meaning it's a fact. Okay, glad we could agree on that.
>> negative, but personal income includes lots of things like uh transfers and food stamps and things that we are have been reducing uh as part as part of our effort to uh make government leaner and meaner. And so, if you the >> So, you've been reducing people's incomes and inflation is outpacing the incomes that you're reducing, that you're admitting to reducing.
>> Making it harder for people to buy food, yeah.
>> And he's bragging about it.
Now, most of the time, MAGA is too stupid to understand the words he uses, which is why I'm stopping and explaining it to you.
He is bragging about the fact that the removal of food stamps is bringing down people's incomes. And that uh inflation is outpacing that.
And people can't afford food. And he's like, "Yep, that's fine.
Totally fine."
>> The best measure right now is to look at the wage data. That's by far the best measure, and the real wage data are showing big increases right now.
>> Okay, so we What What am I arguing from from emotion?
That I have emotion in my voice? I don't care about that. You can cry about that into your diary later. I really really don't care. Um and we're back to credit card debt. Again, remember the video that I played? It's one of my favorite videos about the economy right now with Kevin Hassett, which is that Kevin Hassett was said that credit card spending from consumers is through the roof, which we know is the recession indicator cuz it means people are buying necessities with credit cards, and he touted it as a good thing. Well, we're back to credit cards, and uh she is going to bring up the fact that there has been an increase of credit card delinquency, and she's even going to say that people are using credit cards to buy their necessities. And of course, he's going to be worried about the people in regards to that and not the companies, right?
>> Okay, let's start credit credit card debt though, cuz that's another issue.
Wall Street Journal says in the first quarter of this year, the percentage of credit card balances that were at least 90 days delinquent rose to 13.12% according to data released in May by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. That's the highest level in 15 years and the most since the period following the 2008 financial crisis. Um people say they're using those cards to get through necessities um because they can't afford what's going on.
So, your message to them?
>> Right. Well, we talk to the CEOs of the credit card companies all the time, and we do see some increased uh stress uh like the numbers that the Wall Street Journal uh quotes. But, for the most part, uh the delinquency is different from default.
>> Okay, delinquency is different from defaults. Both are bad.
>> [clears throat] >> Also, I want this video.
>> [laughter] >> And uh there's not any kind of threat the financial threat to the credit card companies. They they don't feel like they're heading towards default scenarios. It's just that people are taking a little bit longer.
>> There's no threat to the credit card companies. Of course not.
Because whether you as an American are delinquent or defaulting on your credit card loan, they are going to get that money from you.
So, being asked about the fact that consumers are using credit cards to buy necessities and becoming delinquent in that loan, he is talking about the fact that the credit card companies are fine.
>> Most credit card companies when they see somebody is in a 90-day delinquency status, they've already counted about um 75% of those is going to be defaulting on it um prior to it ever even hitting 180 days where they write it off and do it as a charge-off. So, no, he is just willfully ignorant. Once you hit 90 days, that's a sign that you're not paying back, period.
>> It's and it's just a wild way to frame this, but like the credit card companies aren't worried. Of course they're not.
What?
They get paid regardless. Cuz you know what else they can do, which a lot of them end up doing is they will then sell your debt to a third-party. And guess who buys it? That third-party buys it from them. They get their money regardless.
Like why is he touting this as a good thing? I don't know how you guys listen to this and think that he's talking about this as a good thing for you. He's talking about the credit card companies making millions and millions of dollars.
Matt, you said not if you file bankruptcy. I don't know if you know they've made it harder to do that.
>> Depends on which kind of bankruptcy that you're even able to file. Like there are strict qualifications for chapter 7. Uh you're more likely to be processed through a chapter 13. Please learn more before you just say words.
>> Um all right. So this was from a uh phone conference and Hassett's going to respond to this, but we're going to read this first.
This is the Exxon senior vice president Neil Chapman at a conference um is hosted by Bernstein in New York. Quote, "We're approaching and this is a in regards to gas and gas prices. They are warning this is unsustainable right now.
Quote, "We're approaching unheard of inventory levels." said Exxon senior vice president Neil Chapman at a conference hosted by Bernstein in New York. "I mean really, really low levels." Chapman warned. "You can debate whether that's going to hit those really low levels in 2 weeks or 3 weeks. Once you get to that point, then you'll see prices shoot up. The prices of physical Brent oil cargoes will spike. Brent oil to 150 to 160 dollars per barrel when inventories hit all-time lows in coming weeks." the executive said. "Quote, "When the price gets to a certain level, demand uh destruction brings it back into balance." he said.
Now, Hassett is going to get asked about this.
On uh ABC.
>> Actually, the International Energy Agency said it could take several months before uh the the the flow really gets going and prices come down, but the the the Exxon Mobil senior >> Um Alan, most uh people on food stamps, the majority of people on food stamps are already working full-time and part-time jobs. You didn't know that, did you?
>> vice president Neil Chapman, I'm sure you saw what he said uh to investors on a conference call this week. He said, "We're approaching unheard of inventory levels. I mean really, really low levels. You You debate whether it's going to hit those really low levels in two three two weeks or three weeks, but once you get to that point, you'll see the price shoot up. Um so, I mean the concern here is I'm sure you must share it that if this if a deal isn't struck, we could actually see those significantly higher levels of not just oil prices, but of course gas prices.
>> Right. Well, we we track inventories every day. We started out with billions billions of barrels of private and government inventories and we still are in the billions. And so, there's plenty of runway, but also, you know, there's a lot of pressure on Iran to finally agree.
>> Okay.
He said that we're still okay except that that's not what Exxon is saying. He's saying we're still okay, but that's not what the companies are saying. Now, what he's going to do is he's going to pivot to jingoism.
>> He's the president's terms. You know, one way >> No, Alan, I'm not going to moo. What you're going to do, Alan, is you're going to address the fact that I told you did you know that most people receiving snap benefits already work full-time or part-time jobs. I'm not unhappy. I'm unhappy with the administration and what they are doing to the American people and the fact that they are not helping the American people but hurting them. And what I'm going to do is actually be brave enough to not be a lazy little sheep [ __ ] and I'm actually going to critique him and make sure they do their [ __ ] job, Alan.
Like Eli said, wipe your [ __ ] chin.
>> The thing about it is that if you look at the real, you know, half a dozen years ago, then one would if 4,000 of them would buy a dollar right now.
>> 21, please call in. Please call in.
21, please call in.
Can anybody guess what he brought up in regards to Biden and gas prices? Can anybody guess?
I have a sticker for it.
Key lime pie line.
Key lime pie line. Key lime pie line. Go ahead and call in about that.
>> I I hate I hate.
>> Well, it's something like 1.4 million of them Biden >> You said 80% of people don't work for food stamps. Source, Alan. Give me a source. You can write the title of the source in the comments.
>> their currency. Well, their inflation is higher than ours. Um I I can't >> also puts a lot of pressure on them.
Like the people on fixed incomes and so on are really suffering.
>> Well, well, Kevin has >> So, what Kevin Hassett did is he pivoted to jingoism. Yeah, we're hurting, but they're hurting more. So, stop complaining about it because Iran is hurting more than we are. Um 21, you said oil is transported by gas. If a pipeline would have cut the gas transporting it, how did it not directly affect it? Probably because of the fact that it was a Canadian pipeline that would have been a shortcut for the Keystone, which is already still running, and it was containing tar sands oil, which is used for rubbers and plastics. So, also again, the fact that it is Canadian, it is not used for us. It was only 5% completed, so not completed at all. So, it wouldn't have affected the gas prices at all in that way from Biden doing that. What you also don't know is that in 2018, a US District Judge in Montana was the one that stopped the pipeline because it was running through indigenous lands um and also environmental factors, and they put a stop on it. They appealed it all the way up until the Supreme Court. And in 2020, under the Trump administration, the United States Supreme Court kicked that back down to the lower courts and said, "Your decision stands." And so, they were no longer able to build on the Keystone XL pipeline because of that previous decision. All that Joe Biden did was remove the permit so that the people that were contracted on this pipeline that no longer was going to be getting built because of the US Supreme Court in Montana and the US Supreme Court, it allowed them to be released from their contracts and get new jobs.
>> I think [laughter] that was $60 worth explanation of the Keystone XL pipeline.
>> All righty then.
>> Cuz you know, it's really irritating that this is an argument we are still having in 2016. We had these arguments in 2021, 2022, 2023, And then we stopped mid-election. And then here we are again in 2026 when we can see a clear indicator of the oil prices skyrocketing due to the Trump administration. Can we get that on a t-shirt?
>> [laughter] >> The front or the back?
>> My rant? Oh, no, you have to do like the Key Lime Pie line on the front and my rant on the back actually, I think would be right.
>> hold on. BRB. Let me think of something.
>> Thank you for calling The Stream. Can I get your age, state and who you voted for?
>> It's Matt.
>> Hi Matt. I'm doing well. How are you?
>> Good. Hey, is your co-host is that other is that Olive?
>> Yes.
>> Oh, it is. All right. I called her show earlier today.
>> Oh, did you? What did you talk about this morning?
>> We were talking about the redistricting stuff in her state.
>> Oh, okay.
Um >> Can Is she can't talk, right?
>> I don't I don't have that set up the way she does, no.
>> Oh, that sucks cuz I can't hear anything she'll say then.
>> No, I I don't I I'm worried about setting that up cuz everybody always has issues trying to fix it. And so I've just left it this way.
>> [laughter] >> It's better to get it like this >> No, I wanted I I've I feel I think it's funny that you brought up that oil guy, the Exxon guy because I feel I I kind of hope people understand that a lot of times when these guys go go on TV, a lot of times it's to push kind of like scare tactics as well. He's not wrong, obviously, like what he's saying isn't wrong, but it's also you got to be careful because these people are trying to sell their their their commodity in a way like it it creates scarcity in the public eye and then their their futures, you know, oil prices start going up.
>> what they're saying is that they we are at low levels. They're not This isn't like So then you would have to be implying that they're lying and and creating scarcity where there is none when we have seen worldwide that there is scarcity because of this war in Iran.
>> Not in America. What I'm talking about like I'm I'm basically mostly talking about the US, not necessarily the world at this point.
>> But we don't Right, but we don't use a majority of the oil that we drill because we can't. We can't refine it here, so we have to send it out and we import oil to get used.
That costs us money.
>> Yeah, and and I get I understand that.
I'm just saying like there's when when these big corporations and and these types of CEOs get on TV, usually it's the push some type of agenda, you know, make themselves sound like they're the good guy and all we're worried about the people. They don't give a [ __ ] about anybody. They just want money at the end of the day.
>> I know. I agree with you, but I think the problem is that the administration is is fine with that. That's why we I have been talking about the trades and stuff that has been going on. The DOJ says they're going to be investigating that people were investing in oil stocks 15 anywhere from 15 minutes to hours before Donald Trump announced either deals or strikes, so the prices would go up and drop. Like there is a huge amount of manipulation happening to allow these corporations to make money.
And I have an issue with that.
>> Yeah, I think I think most people can hopefully agree that when it comes to like insider trading, that's got to stop. And then most of it, you know, obviously has to do with Congress as well, but whoever's involved in the in the negotiations and that kind of like we've had these discussions about you know, Trump's family being involved and stuff like that. That stuff's got to stop.
It's not You can support You could have voted for somebody and still not support stuff like that.
>> Right, and that's the thing. I just want that I just want them to be honest about it.
>> Yeah, and I I wanted to also bring up I You vaguely talked about the E. Jean Carroll thing.
>> Sure.
>> Um so I don't I I'm not I don't want to get on your bad side today, but I did a little I did a little research in the case.
>> Okay.
>> And I think what's being talked about is isn't the minutia of the details of like what the what Judge Kaplan was like telling people how to how people telling people how to interpret the evidence, which there actually was no physical evidence in the case. At all, zero.
>> There was not in the case because during the evidentiary period, they she was not allowed to submit the dress because he did not submit his DNA. So, they did not put that into the record.
>> Yeah, but I guess so from what I what I gathered was when when that that was towards the end of the case and at the end of the case, the Trump side now you can obviously say like oh, you know, that's he's just picking and choosing and you're and you're giving them more credit whatever, but their side apparently didn't want them to mess with the with any of the DNA stuff because they didn't want to have a independent investigator do the actual sampling.
>> No, that's not why actually. His lawyers His lawyers specifically said the reason that they were not going to submit his DNA in the three years that he had to do it was because of a God, what's the word for it? Some sort of addendum that was supposedly missing. There were these like 13 pages that were supposedly missing from something that they wanted and the judge was saying that this is not relevant to this case and so you're not going to get these 13 pages and they said well, then we're not submitting the DNA. So, it wasn't actually about an independent testing agency according to his own lawyers.
>> Well, the addendum had to do with the way the testing was to be performed as well.
>> Can you show me that?
>> part of that. I I have to I I don't have it with me. I'm driving right now.
>> Okay.
Um >> I will try to get that, but there is That's why I'm saying like there's all these little little details that kind of like make or break things.
>> my thing.
Sure, but here's my thing. Let's exclude the Let's exclude the DNA. Let's say there never was. Let's say she never had a dress that supposedly had touch DNA on it or any of that.
What Like why are you so hell-bent on trying to defend him on something that nine jurors nine jurors found him liable on when most most SA and rape cases are he said, she said?
>> The The reason why is because I a even even according to what she was saying in interviews while this like right right before the case was brought was she was saying like she looked at at rape as like being sex like people looking at it as being sexy or whatever.
>> she said. She said She said she was talking to Anderson Cooper. This is why I know you guys don't pay attention to the actual things that happened.
She was talking to Anderson >> yesterday.
>> Sh- She was talking to Anderson Cooper.
Well, then you were repeating it wrong, right? Because she said most people think of rape as sexy. And what she means not her. She's saying most people.
Why? Because as a society we fantasize it. You have Law & Order SVU where although they are talking about these heinous crimes, they make it where it's a situation where it's kind of sexy. They do it in movies all the time.
Why in movies is that towards women?
It's always a sexual threat towards women, rape and sexual assault. Like we as a society absolutely take and sell and capitalize off of the rape and abuse of women. That is what she was saying.
And you're using it You're using it right now to defend him.
>> No, I'm not. I'm saying that these are things that are These are things that are brought up to sway cases and to sway the public opinion. The way things are framed in the in the media.
>> were no, there were two Trump supporters on that jury and even then, because it was civil, it did not need to be unanimous and yet it was. Even if those two decided that he was not liable, he still would have been found liable cuz it would have been a majority out of out of nine, seven, but those two also, it was unanimous decision including two Trump supporters that he was civilly liable for SA.
>> How do you find somebody guilty of anything without physical evidence?
>> Exactly, that's the problem with our system because there's not always physical evidence when you are raped.
There's not always DNA, there's not always scarring or bruising or red inflammation. There's not always that.
>> So, but that's again, like you said, that's what's wrong with the system and I don't disagree, but if I'm a juror, >> Mhm.
>> you know, and I put myself in a in a courtroom where somebody, not just Trump, but anybody, >> Mhm.
>> and there's no physical evidence that shows something's tied to an act, I can't in in my own conscience say >> Sure, but you weren't a juror. But what was the other evidence?
>> What, in the case?
>> Because cuz even if you have physical because even if you in Trump's case they didn't, but even if you have physical evidence, let's say um a woman says she's raped and she has DNA and it actually matches the person that she's accusing who said that they didn't rape her. What can that person say that negates all of that anyway?
>> If there's if there's evidence that that pits the DNA in the case.
>> Right. So, let's say she had let's say she had touch DNA or she had semen DNA and they matched it to the person she's accusing of raping her. What can that person say that then negates that argument?
>> I don't know, that's kind of >> say it was consensual.
Right? Now now where do we go? What evidence do we go to after that? After he says it's consensual, what evidence do we go to?
>> Well, if there's more if there's physical evidence, it leans more towards the um defendant.
>> Not if Not if he says No, it would lead more towards the prosecution.
>> No, no, if there's no I'm sorry, if there's no physical evidence, I misspoke.
>> Right. But if there is physical evidence, they then say it's consensual.
So, you can throw the evidence out the window because that doesn't prove anything in our court system. If that they just say, "Yeah, I had sex with her, but I didn't rape her." Right? That doesn't do anything. So, then what do we go off of?
>> Yeah, there's obviously other details that get put into a case that >> in the E. Jean Carroll case, what was that?
>> She said that she was that he followed her into her into the women's uh changing room or whatever in the dressing room.
>> What happened before that?
>> I don't know what happened I don't know reading the deposition.
>> Cool. She was in Bergdorf's, and she was shopping. And she said she was going to be shopping for lingerie, and he said, "Yeah, I told her I'd help her go shopping." And so they went to that department. She found something she was going to try on. She went into the changing room. He supposedly, allegedly, and apparently civilly liably found that he pushed her against the wall in the changing room, her front onto the wall, and he Or excuse me, no, he pushed her back to the wall, pushed her back to the wall, forced his tongue inside her throat, then uh turned her around where he then inserted Why it was sexual abuse was because she could not determine whether it was his fingers or his penis, and inserted them into her vagina.
That was what she alleged. Now, what Donald Trump said was that he had never met her, even though he had, and said she was not his type. This This was his defense. She was not his type, even though specifically he confused her with his wife Marla Maples at the time. He We also have the very infamous uh Hollywood whatever bus video where he specifically talked about an instance where he would a woman was furniture shopping, and he told her, "I will help you furniture shop." And then he said, I moved on her like a [ __ ] I started kissing her. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.
Grab them by the [ __ ] So, he has a culmination of evidence of him even admitting that this is what he does that matches exactly E. Jean Carroll's [ __ ] story.
So, where do you go from there?
>> evidence Is there any evidence that he that they both knew each other prior to this event happening?
>> Yes, there was a picture of them meeting.
>> Besides a picture Besides a picture?
>> That's a meeting. He said he never met her. That's a lie, cuz he did.
>> Do you Do you not agree that Trump probably meets hundreds of thousands of people every >> saying I'm not saying that he knew who she was when he saw her in Bergdorf's.
What I'm saying is he lied when he said he never met her, cuz he had.
>> Well, that's like you asking me, have I ever met X, Y, and Z from childhood? I don't remember all those things.
>> in his deposition In his deposition where they pointed that out to him, they said, this is uh this is a picture of you meeting E. Jean Carroll, and he said, oh, is that her right there? where he confused her for his wife at the time. He didn't say, I don't remember meeting her. He just said, oh.
Do you see how you have to twist yourself into pretzels when a court has already ruled that he is civilly liable for rape on top of 26 other allegations, on top of the things that come out of his own [ __ ] mouth? I do not understand why you guys continue to pretzel for him on on his harm of women.
I do not get it.
>> Because there's no physical evidence of this happening.
>> Even if there was, he could have claimed it's consensual, and it doesn't mean anything. What do you physically need to see? Video of her screaming no? Cuz also, women don't always do that when we're trying to save our own lives.
>> They Okay, so the the actual um the monetary stuff So, so the money The ruling wasn't convicted of specifically sexual assault, correct?
>> it was. Because she Cuz she was suing Cuz she was suing for defamation, and the court said, "You need to prove the sexual assault happened." Yes, Audie.
You need That's exactly why. You need to prove sexual assault happened in order to win the defamation case. So, she had to prove that. So, he was found civilly liable of SA. And then after that, he was ordered per defamation to pay, I think it was about 80-something million, which he did not pay. He continued to defame her. So, she took him to court again. I've got you, Audie.
Where she won again, a separate defamation case. So, she won an SA case and defamation at the same time and then she won a defamation case a second time because he wouldn't shut his mouth.
>> But again, I still I'm not trying to defend the guy.
>> You are doing everything in your power to do so, Matt. You are doing everything in your power to do so, Matt and Audie paid to get rid of you. You need to read more about the case and you need to stop defending this man. He wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire.
And he raped women.
He raped a woman.
>> I will never understand when we're having these discussions and we're specifically talking about something as serious as sexual assault and rape and stuff like that. There There is no perfect survivor. There's no perfect victim. In situations, unless you've been there yourself, there is no perfect scenario when it comes to these things.
Like you said, some people don't scream.
Some people just shut up. Some people don't know what to do. Some people freeze. I think that's the other thing that so many of these people when we're having these discussions don't understand.
>> Fight or flight, freeze or fawn. I think the problem is is what they imagine is a weak woman, a timid woman with black eyes, hands around her throat, bruising from that. She has to have swelling and cuts in her vagina cuz she struggled. She needs to have cuts in her nails and skin underneath the fingernails cuz she struggled. Their idea of a of a perfect victim doesn't exist. It's not [ __ ] real.
God forbid that a woman who was raped be strong enough to combat against the person who raped her. God forbid.
>> And that's why like >> I'm sorry. I don't uh I don't know if he's listening still, but um I I don't I don't deal well with rape apologetics because you would have to tell me what evidence do you need, right? Like that's the question.
Yeah, and I'm sure he wasn't able to provide an answer, or he wanted something like I a video of it occurring because apparently you need to watch a victim being victimized in order to satisfy your need to prove somebody is guilty even though they were adjudicated in a civil court of having committed sexual assault. Also, yay, team level 30.
>> Um so, what I will say is that >> distraction.
>> And I will say as a trigger warning, guys, please don't ever feel guilty if those kind of conversations come up in my space and you need to leave, or you can't handle it, or you need to pay to get rid of them, whatever you need to do, I will never fault you for that. I have been very lucky in my life and my experiences that I have the privilege to sit here and have those conversations, and I will have them. You want to make yourself be exactly who you are and dig your grave in rape apology, you can [ __ ] do it. Um and I will I will sit here and I will admonish you and I will talk you through all the [ __ ] facts you didn't read because you defending him all you're doing is continuing the perpetual harm of women and children in society. That is all you are doing. Um before we get too far out of there, I do want to give a uh W's to Omiomai for the $10 that brought us down to 50 um for that was fire. You were talking about my key lime pie line um ranch that I did that apparently we need to put on a t-shirt. So, thank you. And also, thank you's to Chris just now.
Thank you, Chris, for the 10 uh for cuz you're cute and smart. Well, we thank you.
>> That's aw, that's adorable. But the other thing like there will never be enough when when you are actually like I know Matthew says that he can criticize Trump. But there you can't. If you cannot accept the facts of the E. Jean Carroll case that are presented in front of you and the fact that consent can be withdrawn at any point in time by either party involved, then you are a rape apologetic. You are also I'm sorry. You are devoted to Donald Trump. If you cannot accept the facts of that case and you are trying to pretzel yourself saying get what what other evidence is there without while also I guess forgetting that the majority of rape cases are honestly he said she said because they don't have proof.
>> Right.
>> And a rape kit does not prove that rape occurred just that inner that intercourse occurred.
And not all rape cases are the exact same.
>> Nope.
>> Not all bodily evidence is the exact same.
>> Um real quick I want to address Brooklyn. Brooklyn you're bringing up Hillary Clinton and Hillary Clinton said those women who accused my husband are bimbos. Yeah.
Do you know that women can be anti-woman? Did you know that? Did you know that women can absolutely do that in service of the patriarchy and of misogyny and of men that women can be in that service?
>> Internalized misogyny is a thing.
And >> Yep.
>> there there should be no reason why on any platform we have a discussion about can consent be taken away at any point in time. There should be no conversation or discussion about whether or not no means no. There should be no reason why there are animated videos making not light of the situation but having a discussion around the idea of consent being taken away even before the process begins or even in the middle of the process beginning. There there should be no conversation about this.
This is not a discussion. This is life or death for some women and men.
It's just it's ridiculous.
>> Um I do want to give a shoutout to Hubba Bub real quick. Hubba Bub gave a 10 and he said Ari shouldn't pay to boot. Grape apologetics sis white men should. So W's to Hubba Bub for that cuz that's absolutely a fact. Women also shouldn't have to do the work of getting rid of misogynists. So >> Oh, well it already happened anyway.
Um >> [laughter] >> What was I thinking of?
>> Somebody give Ari her Galaxy back.
>> I didn't mean to interrupt your thought process Ari.
>> No Technically it was it was a mixed bag.
Uh crap.
Squeeze your fist. It might help.
>> Charlie Kirk. Mm Charlie Kirk.
>> Oh my god.
>> Charlie Kirk said that withdrawal of consent is a gray area.
>> Right. It's not.
I just want to remind you guys it it's a gray area. A what in his in his theory, right? Um consent should not be withdrawn in the middle of the act because you're doing something that is displeasuring to your partner.
>> That's wild. Um W's to Blue for the $2 train. Choo choo. Said also, why is it so hard to believe that a man who bragged about grabbing women by the [ __ ] could be found liable for doing just that?
Why is that so hard for you to believe?
He said it out of his mouth. And he's never apologized for saying it.
>> a I think it's the Hollywood Access tape is what it was called.
>> Yeah I I was like I knew it was Hollywood. I couldn't think of the other words. I was like the Hollywood bus.
Whatever that [ __ ] tape was.
>> He He's a Hollywood guy.
>> Yeah. He's conversations though. Like let's let's not It's not like he's hiding from these conversations. He loots it while he's like ranting on stage in front of millions and millions of people. I bet you from this day forward on June 1st of 2026 at 12:53 p.m. Central Time that his little performance he's going to do on the [ __ ] world stage is still going to loot the [ __ ] like this.
>> Mhm.
>> Like again.
The [ __ ] are we talking about?
>> Um okay, what's that?
>> And also just like randomly when somebody when that guy was spam calling me yesterday after I hung up on him and the number of people that like and I was like just tell me you don't you don't understand what consent is because you keep calling back and they're like, "You don't know what consent is, lady." Like no, me hanging up on you is me is like signaling I've withdrawn the implied consent that is offered by having my number published like openly on the internet. I can withdraw at any time.
Implied consent is not always there. You guys just don't understand it.
>> Uh-oh.
>> Yeah, that's what Yeah, that Uh-huh.
Yeah, that's Yep. Uh-huh.
>> Pentagon policy illegally banned transgender troops from military service, appeals court rules. It's according to the AP, a Trump administration policy illegally banned transgender troops from military service, a divided panel of federal appeal court judges ruled on Monday. The majority opinion by a three-judge panel from the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upholds a March 2025 ruling by US District Judge Anna Reyes in Washington, D.C. Reyes concluded that President Donald Trump's executive order to exclude transgender troops from military service likely violates their constitutional rights.
The administration appealed after Reyes issued a preliminary injunction requested by attorneys for six transgender people who are active duty service members and two others seeking to join the military. The appeals court's majority decided that the injunction should be narrowed to the plaintiffs currently serving in the military, but not those seeking to join.
In January 2025, Trump signed an executive order that claims the sexual identity of transgender service members conflicts with a soldier's commitment to an honorable truthful and disciplined lifestyle, even in one's personal life, and is harmful to military readiness. In response to the order, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a policy that presumptively disqualifies people with gender dysphoria from military service, but uh uh uh uh uh The policy The policy appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group, or persons who identify as transgender. Judge Robert Wilkins wrote for the majority.
Wilkins was nominated to the bench by Democratic President Barack Obama, and now you're going to cry cuz you heard Obama.
I'm now sitting here, and I'm looking at all the discords popping up [laughter] with this article.
We're fast. Tell you what.
>> are.
>> Damn.
>> Heck yeah.
>> That's a Oh.
>> Aw.
>> That is that the start of the rainbow?
>> W anonymous for the 10. I assume it's a reimbursement for her, and the pay-to-kick.
Um that all goes to my kitty cat, so thank you guys.
>> We love that.
Um I don't want to I never Okay, I'm going to say W, so put yourself in the chat, because I always forget, and I I forget the name sometimes. I think I have it right, but I don't want to be wrong. So, W's to you for the $28 completing my goal. Um he said for the goal because happy Monday.
So, thank you so much. If that was you, please put it in there, so I can get your name in correctly. Okay, Daryl, you're writing your name in there as correct, so I wanted to make sure. W's to Daryl for Monday.
For getting So, I want to see W's in there for Daryl for completing the goal.
Thank you guys so much for the support.
Um especially in hard conversations. But again, I know court is slow. I know the judicial system is slow, and I know we're not winning on every single front, but he is losing in court. He is having a tough time in court.
It's rough.
>> You guys, now that Money's goal is done, you guys can start touching uh Ari's pay links, and I still have 15 left on mine.
>> [laughter] >> Good job, C Spark, for sending Ari the drum pop.
So good.
>> So, make sure you guys are sending stuff to Ari, and you're still touching I still have 15 left on mine. Link's in bio.
>> I was going to ask you.
>> 15 >> Eep eep.
>> That's me.
>> Yes, it's you. Um >> Yes, it's me. I still have 15 left on >> There's a man.
>> Ah!
>> Oh.
>> Hey, it's Ari. CK learned about uh implied consent when that guy withdrew his implied consent.
>> Go away.
Lenny Lenny said that first.
>> [laughter] >> I uh I honestly didn't get that, so >> Oh. They took away his consent to life.
Um >> Okay. I didn't know cuz we I I cuz there was too many he's involved in that sentence.
And I'm going to be honest, like so there was I was very confused about Yeah, yeah, the he he. I'm like, okay, which he he are we talking about? He he.
Um that's what I was like [laughter] Hold on, that doesn't make sense cuz the way I heard it is that somehow we took away the pew pewers' implied consent, and I'm like, uh that's not right.
>> All right, we're going to finish this on the economy cuz Oh, no, God, no. Why are you apologizing? You are totally fine.
We're going to finish this on the economy cuz this was funny. Um >> [laughter] >> Uh-oh.
>> Uh so, I'm getting clips from this. I don't watch a Jubilee. I don't sit there and [ __ ] watch these videos, but I will watch clips from them sometimes.
Dave Rubin's dumb ass. He's a right-wing political commentator.
Dave Rubin decided to do a Jubilee with a bunch of liberal, democratic, content creators.
So, they're talking about economic metrics. Dave Rubin's saying, "The economy's doing good based off of metrics."
All that Parker does is ask him what metric.
And he can't give an answer.
And it's hilarious.
This is where Parker is doing exactly what Parker is very, very, very, very [ __ ] good at doing.
Santana, I think was in the crowd as well. I think you get a glimpse of him actually.
And there's another There's another guy I see all the time.
He was there as well, but I can't remember his name.
>> What is one main metric >> This is just Parker though. I don't have the other clips.
>> What >> Ah.
>> What is one main metric >> That's okay. I'm good with just this one.
>> off since he got in office. An example would be GDP, unemployment, inflation, etc. >> Right now, first off, the big beautiful bill was just passed last year and it's kicking in now, [clears throat] right?
It's kicking in now. So, we are see we're going to now see results of that.
Like even the tariffs. All right, so let's do tariffs. Are you for or against tariffs?
>> I'm against the universal tariff. So, what's the main metric that he made better off?
>> What?
>> What's the main metric >> Say that's Santana.
>> that he made better off. GDP, unemployment, inflation? Do you have any idea?
>> Listen.
>> [laughter] >> Listen, I don't think you do.
Hold on. So, you're >> What metric did he make better off?
>> Was this >> [laughter] >> Was Was this a Jubilee again or >> Yeah, it was a Jubilee.
>> Okay, was another Jubilee?
>> Yeah.
>> I would watch it, but uh I guarantee there are people I don't want to see, so >> No, I watch That's why I watch clips.
Yeah, I watch clips cuz I don't Mhm.
>> Do you have any idea?
>> Listen.
>> [laughter] >> Listen, I don't think you do.
Hold on. So, you're arguing that things economically were better under Joe Biden >> At the end of his administration, absolutely.
>> Yeah, can you give me an example of how?
>> Yeah, GDP growth is better off, real median wage growth is better off, inflation was better off at the end of his administration, unemployment was better off at the end of his administration. We had the worst year of job growth in the past 4 years just this last year under Trump's administration.
The inflation 3.8% year-over-year since Trump got in office. We're seeing all of those economic indicators become worse off. Can you tell me anything that he's done to make it better off? You say it's broken for Democrats. It sounds like it's broken right now under Trump.
>> Have you looked at the stock market?
>> It's worse off in terms of growth in 2025 as compared to 2024.
>> Which is true, by the way. Although we are saying the stock market always hits all-time highs unless we're obviously going through a crash or recession, but it hits all-time highs under every president every single year. The what we actually look at in way of the stock market is the rate at which it is increasing. And although we are hitting highs under the Trump administration, those highs are being hit at a lesser rate than they were under the Joe Biden administration. So, that's just a fact.
Sorry.
>> You look at Dow Jones and S&P 500.
>> Well, listen, you know Listen.
I was just mocking. I'm sorry.
>> Listen.
>> So, I'm just I'm going to This is more for people that I know that are in here.
So, if Hekaterak is still around, too, this is also for Moni. Yeah, it's still a good one.
Oldie but a goodie.
Olive, Moni, etc. Even Lanati.
Um Hey, if you guys have co-hosted with me or I have you in my co-host group or you're a call screener or we've done a deep dive already, just so you know, I am creating a brand new server because there are too many people now. So.
>> Woo! When you get a new >> When you get another invite from me, join it. Otherwise, you're being cut off from my list.
>> Well, I don't want to be cut I'm still trying to touch buttons correctly and not [ __ ] up your calendar.
>> [snorts] >> Uh I mean, yeah, I see where you Yeah, there there have been because there are too many people, Hector, because I am doing too many different things. Yeah, and my yeah, one group chat is already full.
Okay, uh, the next one is half full and it doesn't even have all of the same people in the other group chat. There's too much, so I'm consolidating because the server is just when you have a group chat that maxes out at 10 people in Discord, you got to consolidate.
>> That's how we made the overstimulated Senate cuz you can't add more people to >> Yeah.
>> server.
>> To group chats.
>> And your group chats, thank you.
>> I forgot how to change the picture in a Discord server, though.
>> I don't >> Anyways, ignore me.
>> Um, okay, I am going to No.
>> Also, hi Hector.
>> Also, hi Hector. Guys, can we get Olive's 1.5 knocked out before I get out of here today? I think that we can do it.
Um, I want to go over some more of that fraud, waste, and abuse real quick and then we will get out of here. So, Dana Bash was talking to Doug Burgum. He is the Secretary of the Interior, so he is the one who's in charge of these projects such as ballroom, arc Is it arc or arch? I don't know what he calls it.
Um, arch to Trump and um, the reflecting pool lake, whatever the [ __ ] he's calling it now. So, Dana Bash is going to ask him about the fact of this no-bid contract. You are supposed to legally supposed to do to bid out contracts and not no-bid. Um, but they assigned it to Originally, they assigned it to somebody that Donald Trump knew doing pools and stuff in Mar-a-Lago and then Donald Trump says he doesn't know much about him now. So, that's interesting. And uh, so Dana Bash is going to try and confront Doug Burgum about that.
>> Someone can say that, but you know, now they get in this project. They they these folks are awarded the bid cuz they have the material, they have the capability, they have thing, then you get in. You're doing that [ __ ] pool is 8 acres.
>> It sounded like he cussed there, but he's saying reflecting pool. I just I had to When I listened to it this morning, I was like, "Did he just say [ __ ] pool?" But he No.
>> You're doing That [ __ ] pool is 8 acres. It's the size of seven football fields. It's taller than than the Empire State Building. It's like the length of like five Washington Monuments. You get into that, there's 2 and 1/2 miles of expansion joints. The amount of things that they've uncovered that are that are extra cost. And then every time there's a rain, there's a rain delay. They had to bring labor >> Well, cost is one thing. Profit is another.
>> Well, yeah, but if their costs are going up because of trying to get this project done, that's a theoretical number that somebody said they might make that much money. Doesn't mean >> If that's their profit margin, but again, you chose the company instead of doing bidding on the contract. You just chose them outright.
>> they're going to make that much money.
And but what we are doing is we're getting the thing fixed because this is The New York Times also wrote uh 12 years ago that the Obama administration spent more money. It was Reflecting Pool was closed for 2 years. It never worked.
That thing Even right now when we took this project >> York Times didn't say that.
>> over was leaking 45,000 >> By the way, guys, I totally didn't notice, and I apologize. We must have been busy either having fun or yelling or doing whatever we needed to do. Um but you guys hit 200,000 likes. You hit 235,000 likes. Thank you guys so much. Holy crap. Your partners are going to be so [ __ ] pleased with you with what your fingers know how to do. So, thank you so much for that. I appreciate it, guys.
That's [ __ ] amazing.
>> gallons of water a day, uh 16 million gallons a year because the thing never worked. And they spent more money, and it was closed for 2 years. So, everybody should be celebrating President Trump getting a project done in 1/10 the time, so 10 times faster at a fraction the cost of a previous administration. There was no outreach >> No, no, no, no, no. See, that's not how That's not the metric that you use. You don't compare it to what a previous administration did. You you it to what you're doing now, where you originally told us it was about to be like 8 million, it increased to 13 million, and it's taking longer, and you also again, no bid, meaning they didn't put out how much it was going to cost, you just chose that company in and of itself, and now it's it's going to increase more.
>> page then, there should be >> So, that's interesting.
Then, she So, remember he's going to have his big which we we'll talk about, but his big Freedom 250 that he's we will talk about how it's pivoted to a state fair instead of a big event, but he was going to have donors contribute to that. So, Dana Bash is saying, is there going to be transparency about who is donating to this Freedom 250?
>> somehow has become a partisan >> to get to I want to get to that, and I just have one more question on this, and I just want to kind of open the aperture a little bit here, because I think part of the reason why people are thinking that these events have become partisan is because there is also a non-partisan America 250 that Congress created 10 years ago. But, when President Trump came in, he created Freedom 250, which is really what is governing a lot of these events. There's not a lot of transparency about where >> And the issue with that is that when Congress did it and set it up that is bipartisan, so a bipartisan celebration.
The issue with what Trump is doing, which is why a lot of the musicians pulled out, is because this is partisan.
This is specifically in regards to him, his people, MAGA, not for the entirety of the country to celebrate 250.
>> uh the funding is coming from.
>> Mad Rush, you should probably get some help. You just said Trump is king and best president in decades. No, we don't have a king, cuz that's specifically unconstitutional. I'm so sorry that you hate the Constitution and this country, Mad Rush. You should get help for that.
>> Well, yes, Congress created a lot of things uh over the years, and they created this USA uh 250 those years ago and there are USA 250s going on, but it's absolutely appropriate uh to celebrate freedom in this country uh and again, private sector donations coming in uh to support that. Uh but these are these events again across the country celebrating America and it's just it's almost confusing to me why uh there you know, the it's somehow that people want to turn this into to outrage as opposed to turn it into celebration.
>> Yeah, because it's hard to celebrate our country being 250 years old when you're using our taxpayer funding supposedly donors that again where she's going to ask if he's being transparent about the donors, but you're using taxpayer money for all of these things to make Trump look good and arch to Trump, a ballroom dedicated to him that also sounds like it's going to be a military complex complex in case he decides not to [ __ ] leave or reflecting pool that all he's doing is not maintenance but completely redoing it so that he can have his [ __ ] name on it. The Kennedy Center which he's trying to put his [ __ ] name on. It is hard to celebrate that when you have a man spending our money to inflate his own tiny mushroomed ego and the rest of us are struggling to get food and gasoline and make our bills every week. That gets tough. Thank you so much for the jewels made or tater tot. I like your name.
>> The real about that we're fixing up monuments or making America this capital uh beautiful again. This this scandal should be how in the world did we let our capital fall into such a disrepair? How did we fall into such a spot where where sell >> They didn't. They've been doing maintenance on it for years. It's cuz buildings require maintenance all the time. I say as somebody who lives in [ __ ] Colorado and our roads because of our weather constantly going from cold to heat in such a matter of a short matter of time, we're always working on our roads. It just doesn't end.
It's not cuz it's disrepair, disarray or being ignored. It's cuz it's constant.
Maintenance is constant cuz the earth moves. So.
>> Celebrating America patriotism patriotism became partisanship.
>> Yeah.
And and I'm I want to talk about that because for example the fountain just up the street at Union Station has been redone. There's water there for the first time in two decades, which is very nice to see as a resident here. But just I hear what you're saying. It shouldn't be partisan, which is why there are lots of questions about why this Freedom 250 organization was created. And maybe it's not partisan, but there are questions from Democrats about where this private funding is coming from and it's not transparent. Do you think that that should be opened up to the public so that people see where it's coming from?
>> I I think transparency is always a good thing. And of course I I work for the president that I think is the most transparent ever. I mean There's not a CEO in the country that invites the entire press pool into their board meetings. And we haven't we haven't had a cabinet meeting in the first six >> Yeah, but that's CEOs.
Donald Trump is not a CEO. He is the president, which means he works for us.
And the fact that he has these cabinet meetings that are in front of the cameras doesn't necessarily show transparency cuz all he does is repeat the same talking points that he has for the last 10 years. And all he does is have other people glaze his taint.
That's it. It's all they do. So those cabinet meetings aren't revealing anything to us.
>> So you're going to make the donors to Freedom 250 public?
>> Well, that's up to the Freedom 250 organization and their rules and regulations.
>> leader there, right?
>> I The Freedom 250 organization is run out of the White House, but it is >> Okay, so if it's going to be the most transparent White House that we've ever had, are they going to be transparent about the donors for the Freedom 250?
>> Not a It's not about the transparency of the donors. It's just It is a again >> It is because I want to see which CEOs and which donors are donating money to the Freedom 250, which is a partisan event, so I that I can then later see what kind of great deals Um, is going to give them because it's bribery. That's what's actually happening. Or what Donald Trump is going to invest in in those companies.
The rant about the pen was new.
>> [laughter] >> I guess true. Sure.
>> Uh, I'm >> Which by the way, in case nobody knows, the DOJ tried to quietly drop the investigation into the auto pen. Just so in case you haven't found that headline, we haven't covered it, but uh, the DOJ dropped the investigation into Biden's use of the auto pen. So, don't want to hear about that ever again. And doing it now.
>> This is about Americans celebrating the 250th anniversary and it's and it's all it's again, the fact that we have we are right now have so much to celebrate in our country and we're talk >> Um, that's not true. But you said Biden never displayed his cabinet ratings. Um, you mean meetings. That's not true. They did.
>> I can about >> He just didn't do it every Wednesday.
>> A single event on a single night in DC is >> Well, no, this is this is about Freedom 250 is as you know better than I is is governing a lot.
>> I hate when they cut off at the weird end of a clip. You guys don't need to do that. Just finish off. Clip it. It's fine.
So, here is that reporting on how Donald Trump's having a hard time because um, people have pulled out of that event.
Cuz absolutely not.
>> Announcing the first round of stars that will be taking over the National Mall in DC for the Great American State Fair.
The 16-day event held in celebration of America's [music] 250th birthday will kick off with Martina McBride on June 25th. It will also feature musicians like Vanilla Ice, Flo Rida, and [music] Bret Michaels on July 3rd leading right up to Independence Day. You see the lineup there. Those your headlines, guys. Back over to you.
>> As he faces a whole lot of legal setbacks over his so-called weaponization fund in DC makeover plans, it's safe to say it's been a pretty bad week for President Trump. After most of the musicians slated to perform at the White House's Great American State Fair for the nation's 250th anniversary dropped out, >> [laughter] >> They said, "No.
No, thank you."
>> The president announced in a series of Truth Social posts, "Don't worry, he got it." that the concert would be changed to a rally headlined by who else but the man himself?
>> it was very confusing when you posted this on Truth Social yesterday because he kept referencing Wednesday, and none of the concert dates actually fall on a >> [laughter] >> What?
>> You're like, [clears throat] "Do we have another concert to cover?" Yeah.
>> And so, we didn't get a whole lot of clarity from the White House, but then Freedom 250 put out a statement that they are going to now kick off this series of concerts with a speech from the president, but it just goes to show that a lot of the concerns that the artists had were valid. It's not actually a non-partisan event, and it's important to to understate that there's a distinction between America 250, which was this commission created by Congress, and Freedom 250, which is created by the Trump administration as a public-private partnership. So, it's hard not to say that there's not a partisan lean there.
>> It's impossible to say it. There is a partisan >> Yeah, uh Monster, you bring up a good point, which was his uh his birthday military parade. Does anybody remember his birthday military parade last year and the squeaky tank wheels? Cuz there was no squeak squeak squeak cuz there was no crowd. So, um it was very quiet.
If you guys don't know, this year um June 14th is his birthday. It is a Sunday. Um he's going to be turning 80 [ __ ] years old, but the No Kings is setting up their What would this be? Their fourth or fifth now? Um >> Uh fourth. I think it's number four.
>> Fourth protest. They were There will be a No Kings rally on June 14th on Sunday that Sunday for his birthday. So, >> city near you.
>> In a city near you. So, make sure you are looking that up. Um this is he hasn't responded back in the YouTube chat, but this is just so you know Biden cabinet meeting you can look up. This is 3 years ago, 1 year ago, 2 years ago, 4 years ago.
Um This one's 5 years ago. Look cuz they were wearing masks cuz it was still COVID in 2021.
Hm, interesting.
>> remind me if Can someone tell me what kind of celebrations or made to be a national event for Obama's birthday?
>> Hm.
>> Did we do a military parade for Obama's birthday out of 8 years? Can someone remind me?
Or even Clinton, Bush, both Bushes, even Reagan actually.
Did we have a big birthday bash for Ronald Reagan? Did we Did we throw a military parade for Ronald Reagan?
>> You know, I don't think so.
Didn't happen.
Thank you, Leona, for the jewels. I appreciate you. Um guys, let's get that 15 for all of down, okay? Let's get that down. The link tree is in her bio. Make sure that you guys get that 15 out of here before we end. I have two more videos. Um this is about the anti-weaponization fund, and this is just This is Mike Pence speaking on it, and I think that's somebody you should listen to in way of speaking on it because the people that are filing for this fund were the people who wanted to kill it.
So, you know.
>> I you know, I I'll be honest with you that I'll never minimize what happened on January 6th, and I'll always believe by God's grace we did our duty that day to the seat of the peaceful transfer of power under the Constitution. It's It's one of the reasons why I this talk of a weaponization fund, Margaret, the idea of creating a fund that could compensate people who who assaulted police officers and vandalized the Capitol that day is totally unacceptable.
My hope is the administration will drop it, drop the idea entirely and >> Senate Republicans will make them drop it because it's hard to stand up to the president many Republicans find?
>> Well, it >> Because of what you just said.
>> It is primaries and those midterms.
>> It it it is, but uh I've been heartened by the number of Republicans in the Senate who have spoken out against it.
People that assaulted police officers on January 6th and vandalized our capital should not get one dime of taxpayer money from that fund or anywhere else.
>> But I mean even just the the precedent of setting it up um should they exclude January 6th attackers? That the idea of a weaponization fund is its own you know, thing that it bears examining, but I want to explicitly ask you about something also that happened >> we don't need slush funds to settle cases.
>> it as a slush fund?
>> There was a pro-life family that was literally run over by the Biden Department of Justice that there was just a seven-figure settlement for them.
The The DOJ can settle these issues.
>> Now, while I may disagree with whatever this case is that he's talking about, what he's talking about is the fact that you can sue them.
You can sue them. So, what the January 6ers could do is they could choose to sue the government themselves and try to get it that way and go through a court system. But instead, Donald Trump is trying to circumvent that court system by creating a fund that Todd Blanche would appoint the five people on that board to decide whether they are allowed to get money or not. That is circumventing the court system and that is not okay. And Mike Pence is saying, "That's not okay.
You can sue. That's that's what that's for."
>> There was in the chat Peter for the 15 on the blue hat saying #paypig.
>> Not the pay pig! Peter!
>> And also, the more I look at um Mike Pence's hair, the more I'm like he kind of it reminds me of Ken doll hair. You know what I mean? Where >> Yeah, it's slicked down and it doesn't move. Ken doll hair, yeah.
>> because it's bald, balding? Is it old man hair? Is that what that is?
>> I just think he has really thin hair.
Like I don't >> I don't like >> I'm going to I I don't like what you're making me do. Mike Pence young. What did he look like younger?
What the [ __ ] That's crazy. Hold on.
I got to look.
Hold on.
>> Wait. Okay.
>> Huh?
Huh?
She's getting Where's the photo? It's crazy, Michael.
>> This proves to you Republicans that if you are full of hatred and you don't like people who want to love one another regardless of who they are, your hair, too, will eventually fall off your head and you will have to cement your hair down to your head.
>> [laughter] >> Well, in fairness, I think he has had that same hairstyle since when he was running for VP with him, so >> I mean, to be I honestly >> thinner than it did in 2020, though.
>> The last time I heard anything about Mike Pence is when my is when my sibling was telling me that Mike Pence was holding a government class at GMU.
Wait, why did my hair fall out? Well, that's a different Never mind, Midwest.
>> [laughter] >> Mike Pence gets a lot of [ __ ] right?
Like he has policies, but I will give him like a [ __ ] ton of credit for standing by like his wife and what he grew up believing and how he continues to be that person even when he was in the political hemisphere and being the vice president. Like I don't think it was great that he was like, "I can't talk to a woman unless my wife is there." But >> Yeah. That's a different level of respect to your spouse. And like I can respect it even though I feel like you can't really get much done when you're when you are that way, but he stood true to himself and to what he believed in the entire time.
>> So, what I would say is um this is something we don't recognize enough. It doesn't mean you have to agree with it or like it, but him, I would say him and uh Kinzinger, Cheney, Thomas Massie, they have principles. Now, >> Oh, yeah.
>> we can disagree with what those principles are, but they have principles and they stand by them. They do not They did not sway on what their principles are because of money or an idea of a power grab. They didn't do that. And so, although we can disagree with what those principles are, they are principled people and that is just a fact.
>> I mean, consistency is better than not knowing what the [ __ ] you stand for.
>> Exactly.
>> Even if it's really shitty.
Sorry.
>> where people have had their rights trampled on and and ought to do that. I welcome that settlement greatly.
>> Uh >> Right. So, he's saying he's fine with suits, with lawsuits, going through the system in the way that you are supposed to judicially, but don't don't sue. Now, of course, yeah, of course Mike Pence is going to say that he was in the middle of it. Now, I don't know if anybody has seen her. We saw her at the State of the Union and we couldn't figure out who she was. Well, this this is her and we have seen her.
Her name is Kat Cammack and she is a Republican representative from Florida.
And she is a taint glazer. She's a Trump taint glazer. Except >> Uh Florida.
>> You're starting to lose her.
>> Well, as someone who served on the weaponization uh committee last Congress, I can tell you that the issue is very real and it is rampant, but I'm not sure that a billion-dollar plus slush fund is the answer. I think if you really want to eliminate the weaponization that takes place within the federal government against American citizens and those that serve, you need >> I'm sorry, Midwest. If you stand for nothing, Burr, what will you fall for?
>> [laughter] >> I have the honor to be your obedient servant.
A. N.
>> This still won't help her win her re-election if she's in a even remotely uh leaning Republican area.
>> No.
>> So, I'm about ready to look her up later when I get to a stopping point.
>> need to actually address the root cause.
This is the problem that we have in Washington. It's the idea of throwing money at a problem and hoping it goes away. I think that money could be better spent in bringing down the cost of everything and making life more affordable for Americans while simultaneously >> You know what? I agree with that, Kat.
So, why um as you as one of the Republican members of a majority Republican held Congress, why have you guys not put forth any pieces of legislation to stop price gouging or make it easier on the American people?
Why haven't you done that?
But, I agree with you. This fund could be better used somewhere else.
>> addressing the the system that allowed for the weaponization against individuals here in this country. And certainly, I will say as the wife of a first responder, absolutely under no circumstances would I ever support any payouts for anyone who ever assaulted law enforcement.
>> Well, so this anti-weaponization fund is not going well. That's just even with uh Republicans. So, it's going to be an interesting interesting thing.
By the way, I'm reading headlines that uh Donald Trump is like, "The talks are still happening."
even though Iran said >> [laughter] >> So, it's going to be an interesting day tomorrow to go through all of that. I'm so excited to go through that with you guys um tomorrow.
>> [gasps] >> Oh, [sighs] my gosh. On that note though, I don't see a lot of people to raid today.
Um which is fine. We don't have to.
>> I've been I've been here the whole time like a good a good manager or whatever.
>> I'm sorry I was late. We had a good conversation rolling. I saw the time and I said, "Fuck."
>> I think but I think you forgot cuz I was like, "I'll see you in a bit." and you were like, "Oh." I was like, You forgot about me.
>> No, I didn't forget. I think because I was switching from my backup account to my main account and I was moving around a lot. Oh, Debbie's in the chat to Oh me oh my for the 15 on the Pal Pay Mike Pence had a radio show. What?
>> That yeah.
>> Okay, Jessica Simone is on and as a random side note apparently Jasmine Crockett is live.
>> Ooh.
>> Huh. I looked um so Jessica's doing what relationship lesson took you the longest to unlearn. So, if you guys want to, you can. Um it's not political.
Is a content creator copy Yeah, there's a thing in DC.
>> I mean >> Must be nice to be a man. Anyway, um >> Yeah.
>> I have a lovely screenshot I can send to you too later.
I'm not saying they're bad creators.
It's not about them being bad creators.
I'm just saying when you don't even have 10,000 followers but you have like 500 people in your [ __ ] live I have an issue.
>> I mean, yeah.
>> Yeah, send it.
Um so, >> I want to see. I'm curious.
>> Let's add it to the group chat. I'll put it in our group chat.
>> There So, I don't I know we prefer not to raid men but um 1993 Twin is live and he does good lives.
>> I also see The Fear Report's live too.
The Fear Report's good. He's a >> rather raid a smaller creator. So, I'd rather raid Fear.
>> Fear?
Yeah.
>> But he's he's smaller. Um Are you kidding? Twin has as many followers as I do.
>> Okay. Yeah.
>> Oh, I think I now know who you're talking about. I'm like, I don't think I know who that is.
Sorry, my brain's all over >> So yeah, go we can do that. They probably don't know who I am, but [ __ ] it. We have 130 people in here, why not send them over there? So we can definitely do that.
>> He's a fantastic creator. If you guys have not seen Fear, Manny and I were on his panel.
Actually, Manny and I Well, Manny will sit in the comments majority of the time for the Fear Report. Um but he he holds really good lives. Um he I think he just started a few months back. So um it would be great to meet him. Let me put his user right here. Um >> I'm working on recruiting him, okay?
>> Are you?
>> We got to Yeah, yeah, yeah, of course.
>> Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Um >> Yeah, yeah, yeah.
>> YouTube and Twitch, thank you guys so much for your support or your hate comments, whichever one. Thank you for the jewels over there on YouTube, I appreciate you. I will be back tomorrow, 10:00 a.m. Mountain time, whatever time that is for you, and I will see you
Related Videos
BREAKING: Judge Kathleen Issues Emergency Arrest Warrant After Trump Defies Order
Frontora
2K views•2026-05-29
8 Hidden Things About Mackenzie Shirilla Netflix's 'The Crash' Didn't Show You
MarvelousVideos
2K views•2026-05-28
MP Garnett Genuis warns Canada’s MAiD system has ‘gone too far’
WesternStandard
187 views•2026-05-28
THE STREISAND EFFECT AT BARBARA STREISAND’S HOUSE! - First Amendment Audit
KULTNEWS
1K views•2026-05-30
Trump Impeachment STORM IGNITES as 29 Judges Vote for Conviction!!
DanielBriefDaily
2K views•2026-06-02
EBK Jaaybo Won’t Be Going To Trial?! | Criminal Lawyer Reacts
floridadefenseteam
404 views•2026-05-29
OFFICE HOURS: The Theft of Black Brilliance... AI and Intellectual Property (w/ Lisa E. Davis)
marclamonthillnetwork
2K views•2026-05-29
सुप्रीम कोर्ट में 5 जजों का शपथग्रहण समारोह #supremecourt #judges #oathceremony #shorts #ytshorts
Bharat24Liv
4K views•2026-06-02
