Posted originally on Mar 24, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
A new NBC News pollshows that the Democratic Party’s popularity has dropped to a record low. Only 27% of registered voters said they held positive views of the party — the lowest figure in the network’s polling dating to 1990. Former President Joe Biden continue to delude himself that he could have beat Trump. He recently told the Democratic leaders he’d raise funds, campaign, and campaign for Democrats to recover lost ground as the Trump administration is gutting the waste in government everyone said needs to be done but then file countless lawsuits to prevent the cuts.
It’s always a Constitutional Crisis to object to whatever the Democrats support. Our computer has forecast that the Democratic Party will split and collapse just as the Federalists did for pretty much the same reason – dictatorial power from a centralized government. Schummer is admitting that they have not only engaged in the lawsuits against Trump to influence the election, but they have been stuffing the courts to re-interpret the Constitution to be PROGRESSIVE, which was a movement that lost back in 1913
It was the “Progressive” Movement that passed the 16th Amendment to tax the rich, which ended up taxing everyone. Then they hand you a refund check and never pay interest,t borrowing from the poor and middle class for free. Their rhetoric to target the rich only fills their own pockets. How do they leave the office with millions of dollars on a public salary?
Roosevelt also sought to stuff the Supreme Court with his cronies to redefine the Constitution with the Marxist slant of Progressiveness. He was stopped. But he also devalued the dollar, confiscated gold, all to fund his Socialist New Deal, and officially recognized Joseph Stalin as the new head of a Communist State.
The real Constitutional Crisis has been the Democrats. They have sought to impose dictatorial rule even on Abortion, knowing that this offends many and their religion. The Supreme Court UPHELD the intent of the Constitution. Remember the state’s rights? The Democrats do not believe in state rights. They want dictatorial control, and the Supreme Court has failed in its obligation to preserve the state’s rights. What it did with Abortion was to hand it back to the states where, under the Constitution, what should have taken place.
Like the Department of Education imposing centralized commands stripping states of the Due Process of Law. Parents have no rights in local education when they are dictated from Washington. What is the purpose of having state governments if Washington can overrule various local policies? Under the law, someone robs a WaWa, which is not a federal crime but a local one. To be FEDERAL, it has to be Mafia, Secuties, or involving murder involving drugs.
Kamala’s comment that you are at the wrong rally demonstrated this centralized dictatorial policy. That was saying to the Bible Belt – screw you. Your religion means nothing. Bernie Sanders’s show with the singer rejecting Gold is so out of touch with the central core of Americans; they embrace every fringe idea and, as Maher said, they are ridiculous, and he is a Democrat. That is why the Democratic Party will become extinct. The Democrats peaked with our model in 2021 with that election, and we have been in a bearish decline for 5 years into 2026. They do not appear viable any longer by the time we reach 2030. We may see a split for any election in 2028, fragmenting the political process.
Many people have written in and are shocked that even the forecast I delivered at the 2024 WEC in Orlando was that the Democrats were collapsing and the party would no longer exist. They are amazed how the computer put that forecast out long before anyone even thought about the issue. The Democrats are so entrenched in their fringe nonsense that they will NEVER admit a mistake, and the problem they see is that the American people are confused – not them.
Even the Hill, a left-wing biased news organization, commented:
“Continuing Democratic divisions from Washington’s recent funding fight show their party is disintegrating. Its fissures run between the House and Senate, between their base and their elected leaders, between establishmentarians and ideologues, and between generations.”
Posted originally on Mar 24, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is finally becoming an honest politician. First, he openly told Americans that he believed they were greedyfor questioning taxation. Then, he admitted on live TV that the Democrats intentionally weighted the courts with judges in a direct attempt to beat Donald Trump. Will he admit that they played a role in Trump’s assassination attempts next?
“There are those who believe that we are, in real-time, living through an assault on the constitutional order. Do you believe that we are in a constitutional crisis right now?” the host asked.
“Yes,” Schumer responded, adding, “Our democracy is at risk because Donald Trump shows that he wishes to violate the laws in many, many different ways. Then Schumer said what we all suspected out loud: “The good news here is, we did put 235 judges—progressive judges, judges not under the control of Trump—last year on the bench, and they are ruling against Trump time after time after time.”
It is beyond hypocritical for these corrupt lawmakers to claim Trump is the one putting our democracy at risk. The new democrats of today cannot stand US democracy because they have no authoritative power when the people have a voice. Schumer said he hopes these judges will overturn Trump’s rulings again and again. Progressive judges have already forced funds to continue flowing to the National Institute of Health, they pushed back against defunding USAID, and attempted to prevent migrants from being deported. At every turn, Democrat-installed political activists posing as judges are overruling the president.
These people have no respect for US democracy or law and order. These partisan, dishonorable judges are incapable of ruling impartially. They gained their position by playing dirty for the Dems, and now there are over 100 cases open against the people, and not directly aginst Trump, as the people of the United States voted for Trump and the policies he represents. All 235 judges are attempting to block Trump at every turn because they’d rather see the nation burn to the ground than a successful Trump presidency, especially since many of these rulings are undoing the damage caused by the former autopen president’s administration.
All 235 judges are not abiding by the Constitution that they have sworn to uphold and should be impeached as they are unable and unwilling to rule unbiasedly. The left is openly manipulating public policy and committing crimes in plain sight. So far, according to Schumer who cannot keep his foot out of his mouth, the Democrats have “won” 87% of cases against Trump. He admitted that the Democrats have paid off thousands of activists to work on “defeating the president.” They certainly do not want to reduce government or give power to the states because progressive policies are not popular with the American people. The Democrats are especially offended by DOGE because they did not want the people to see how recklessly they have spent our tax dollars on useless programs and NGOs that funnel back into their personal wallets.
The media says Trump is a dictator for demanding that these judges vacate their positions immediately. The Supreme Court needs to get involved here. Not only should the judges be impeached, but the swamp character like Schumer who have discarded the rule of law do not belong in office. When judges are immune and above the law, impossible to impeach, and they cannot be fired for life like a monarch, there can be no actual rule of law. Judges will interpret the law how they like to support their political agenda. Our American legal system has to be just scrapped. These are jobs that could and should be lost to AI.
Posted originally on Mar 24, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
Numerous nations are warning their citizens not to travel to the United States ahead of the busiest months for tourism. These are not true travel warnings but fabricated suggestions to deter people from visiting the United States for political reasons. These “advisories” are making worldwide headlines as the world turns its back on America.
Globalist leaders disagree with America’s policy of securing the border. “A criminal conviction in the United States, false information regarding the purpose of stay, or even a slight overstay of the visa upon entry or exit can lead to arrest, detention, and deportation upon entry or exit,” Germany’s foreign ministry stated. Yet, anyone visiting a foreign nation must meet these same requirements and could be denied entry for an array of reasons.
Three German citizens were separately denied entry in recent weeks, and their stories made worldwide headlines. This is standard operating procedure, as these travelers had incorrect papers. The same instance happened with a woman from the United Kingdom who was denied entry for having an incorrect visa. Again, none of this is new or a cause for concern.
Still, the United Kingdom issued a warning to potential travelers. “You should comply with all entry, visa and other conditions of entry. The authorities in the U.S. set and enforce entry rules strictly. You may be liable to arrest or detention if you break the rules,” the guidance reads. Precisely—you must abide by the rules to gain access to a foreign nation.
Denmark’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has also issued a travel advisory for the United States but for a different reason. The United States now requires passport holders to state their assigned sex at birth—male or female—on their record. There are only two options, and yes, this is a safety concern. Someone could easily create a fake identity to enter on illegal grounds. Customs officers must see identification that matches the person in front of them. Denmark is now warning citizens that they could face discrimination.
Other nations like Canada have unofficially advised citizens to take precautions when visiting the United States.
The World Travel & Tourism Council’s (WTTC) 2024 Economic Impact Research found that the tourism sector added $2.36 trillion to US GDP in 2023, a 7% increase from the year before. Over 18 million Americans are employed in this crucial sector.
These advisories are not intended to protect the people. There is no danger in visiting the United States. In fact, Europe has increased its entry requirements more so than the United States, but Trump derangement syndrome has spread like a pandemic.
Posted originally on Mar 24, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
Good news for the people of Mississippi—lawmakers have finally removed the state income tax. Mississippi is now joins Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington, Texas, and Wyoming in eliminating this excessive and predatory taxation practice.
The first income tax was created in 1861 during the Civil War as a mechanism to finance the war effort. In addition, Congress passed the Internal Revenue Act in 1862, which created the Bureau of Internal Revenue, an eventual predecessor to the IRS. The Bureau of Internal Revenue placed excise taxes on everything from tobacco to jewelry. However, the income tax did not last and was not renewed in 1872. In the Springer v. United States 102 US 586 (1881), the Supreme Court upheld the income tax.
The origin of the current income tax on individuals is generally cited as the passage of the 16th Amendment, passed by Congress on July 2, 1909, and ratified February 3, 1913. It was on June 16, 1909, President William Howard Taft, in an address to the Sixty-first Congress, proposed a two percent federal income tax on corporations by way of an excise tax and a constitutional amendment to allow the previously enacted income tax.
Once this Marxist concept of direct taxation was created, then the government must know everything we do, track us for it assumes we all cheat and lie, and in the process, it is hunting money globally to the point that world economic growth has been declining.
Those against Mississippi eliminating the income tax are proponents of big government. They are concerned that the lost revenue will hurt the public sector and low-income residents will be disproportionately burdened as other taxes are likely to rise. Yet, eliminating the income tax will directly lead to Mississippians receiving a larger take-home pay. Businesses, especially small businesses, end up taking on this tax as is passed through from entities to the individual owner who is unable reinvest those funds into his or her company. Businesses will now have the ability to become more competitive and attract a more desirable workforce.
The state has until 2037 to determine how to manage its budget without robbing its citizens and punishing workers. Income tax will fall from 4% to 3% in 2027 and then will see a 0.3% reduction until it is eliminated entirely.
Income tax is a relic of failed economic policies that governments refuse to abandon because it gives them direct control over the wealth of the people. When you tax income, you reduce incentives to work, invest, and innovate. Governments use the tax as a reason to continue perpetual spending that always leads to deficits. States do not need this tax to function. States need to operate within their means to function without punishing the people for fiscal mismanagement.
Posted originally on Mar 24, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
COMMENT: Marty, Cheer up. They are coming for you!
Gene
REPLY: Well, I can’t outrun that many. Hopefully, one is interested in financial markets. Then maybe. When I went to a new doctor, she asked if I was vaccinated, and I said, “NO!” She replied, “Good!“ She worked last at the VA and quit over government policy.
Posted originally on Mar 23, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
QUESTION: I think you commented that Jessica Aber was involved in a Biden prosecution scam. She was found dead after resigning when Trump won. Is there any connection?
LM
ANSWER: Yes. She was the pawn in the White House’s novel attempt to prosecute Russians for alleged war crimes in Ukraine when there was no jurisdiction whatsoever. This was a political prosecution by the Neocons for more hatred of Russians. Assuming that there was a crime, then that was something that should have been prosecuted at the Hague. Why did Jessica D. Aber of the Eastern Direct of Virginia bring this prosecution announced by the White House and Garland?
So now, does Virginia have the jurisdiction to prosecute crimes worldwide? That violates the Sixth Amendment, which prohibited the practice of the king charging you with a crime in America but transporting you to London to stand trial, where you could never call any witnesses. This is what they were doing. It was AN OUTRIGHT violation of our Constitution and International Law.
Is this a neocon-staged suicide? She was only 43. Who knows. Will we ever know the truth? Probably not.
Posted originally on CTH on March 24, 2025 | Sundance
FBI Director Kash Patel makes his first television appearance on Fox News to discuss his mission priority within the FBI. Defending the honorable rank and file FBI agents, Kash Patel notes his intention is to focus on the massive increase in violent crime that has come as an outcome of open borders and illegal alien inflows.
Kash Patel has a long relationship with both Trey Gowdy and current CIA Director John Ratcliffe going back to the days when Patel was the lead staffer for Devin Nunes on the House Intelligence Committee, and Gowdy with Ratcliffe were selected to review the FISA application at the center of ‘Russiagate.’
Mr. Gowdy puts the number of honorable FBI officials at 95% and Director Patel agrees, saying he wants to return to the time when he and his family would invite FBI agents for a cup of coffee. Patel then emphasizes he has already addressed the bad actors within the FBI and will continue to hold the internal investigative officers accountable with a zero-tolerance approach.
During the interview Trey Gowdy wants to emphasize how qualified Kash Patel is for this role in the FBI, delivering effusive praise for his mentee and friend, Director Patel. Gowdy calls Kash Patel the ’employee of the month’ for his excellence and brilliance in his first 30-days. WATCH:
Posted originally on CTH on March 24, 2025 | Sundance
Appearing with professional narrative engineer Margaret Brennan, Senator Rand Paul discusses his DC perspective on the need to protect criminal aliens from excessive deportation action.
Senator Paul agrees with Mrs Brennan that all persons, including illegal alien entrants into the United States, deserve constitutional protection. As an outcome of that viewpoint the Alien Enemies Act is in a state of contradiction and conflict. WATCH:
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: And we turn now to Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul. He is the chair of the Homeland Security Committee, and he joins us this morning from Bowling Green, Kentucky. Good morning to you, Senator.
SEN. RAND PAUL: Good morning. Thanks for having me.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Sure, because of your role in Homeland Security, I want to follow up where we left off with National Security Adviser Waltz. There are legal questions around using these authorities to send out detainees without giving them a day in court. But there’s also just questions of how it’s being handled in regard to these individuals who were rejected by El Salvador, one for gender, one because they weren’t Venezuelan at all. Do these concern- does any of this concern you? Along with claims from their family members that many of these people weren’t gang members?
SEN. PAUL: There are some big legal questions here. On the one hand, the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, to persons. The Bill of Rights doesn’t specifically designate citizens. It’s really anyone in the United States the Bill of Rights applies to. On the other hand, the Alien and Enemies Act simply says, you really don’t get much process. The president can simply declare that you are somehow a problem for foreign policy and opposed to our foreign policy, and you can be deported. So really, ultimately, this goes to the court, and then the court is going to have to decide, are they going to declare unconstitutional a law that’s been around for a couple hundred years, or are they going to defer to Congress? If you look at the TikTok decision recently, which I don’t agree with, but in the TikTok decision, the court basically said we’re going to defer to Congress. Congress says this is about national security, and who are we to question Congress–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Right and then the president issued executive order that defied the- what Congress did–
SEN. PAUL: Right, right. But my- my point is- is I think the court should have ruled on the First Amendment with regard to TikTok and not said, oh, well, whatever Congress wants. But if you look at the TikTok decision, and you had to guess what the Supreme Court is going to do, my guess is they’ll uphold the Alien and Enemies Act. It’s not necessarily my position, but I think the court will uphold it. So it’s at least debatable on both sides, who’s right or who’s wrong here. And I think it’s not correct for Democrats to simply say, oh, it’s constitutional chaos. There’s no leg to stand on. There actually is legal authority. On the one hand, it’s been around for over 200 years.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But, but just- we’re not talking about partisan politics. We’re talking about the courts right now. And what the judge said he had questions about and talks about this being done, you know, essentially in the cover of night, this seems to be an argument the administration wants to have go to the Supreme Court. Are you comfortable with bypassing what you described as, you know, what’s guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, a day in court, or at least some verification that some of these people actually are guilty in some way of what they’re accused of, which is membership in a gang?
SEN. PAUL: So we have a contradiction. We basically have the Constitution that says everyone, persons in the United States have due process rights, have the Bill of Rights on their side, but we also have law that has been in power for 200 years saying, oh, well, except for when the president wants to deport people. So these are in conflict. There will have to be some decision making. On the question of whether or not a district judge can make a ruling for the whole country, that’s also a very big question, and I suspect, as this works its way up to the Supreme Court, when you get to the Supreme Court, I do believe the Supreme Court is going to limit district judges from having nationwide rulings. So I think that’s also in the offing. But these are huge legal questions, and the only way they begin is by a challenge.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah
SEN. PAUL: If the president doesn’t challenge these, they never have standing and never get to court. So on the one hand, the president is generating this, but it’s the only way to generate a final conclusion from the court.
MARGARET BRENNAN: It just sound- I mean- these are debates for law professors, certainly, but in the meantime, there are individuals who may have been sent wrongly to these facilities that are outside the U.S. jurisdiction. Are you comfortable as the man with oversight, as chair of the committee, with what’s being done?
SEN. PAUL: I think the courts will rule that there has to be some process. I don’t think you are going to be able to deport people–
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, yes, you are comfortable with it?
SEN. PAUL: So no, I- well, I think you’re answering for me. I think there is going to be some process afforded by the courts for representation before you’re deported in most cases. I don’t know about the ones under the Alien and Enemies Act, and I’m not sure anybody knows that. And while I love constitutional law, I’m not a constitutional lawyer.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah.
SEN. PAUL: I do think it goes to the Supreme Court. And there are arguments to be made on both sides of this question.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Got it. I want to ask you about some congressional business. I’ve seen it reported that you have pitched to Elon Musk a plan to claw back $500 billion in federal funding that Congress has already approved. There was an effort back in 2018 to do something like this, and it failed. Do you think you can actually get this done in a rescission package, and how much money do you think you can get back?
SEN. PAUL: Well, this goes to another huge legal question. Can the president impound money, or does he have to send it back and we approve the cuts through rescission, and this is going all the way to the Supreme Court also, because I think the Trump administration believes they can just not spend it. There’s another question within the question, can the president and his people, can Secretary Rubio pause the spending. On that issue I think they will win. You will be able to pause spending as long as you don’t go through the end of an appropriations year. If you get through that, I believe it’s impoundment, and I think the court so far has said it has to come back, and less as the Trump administration argues that the empowerment Act is unconstitutional. So this was headed to the Supreme Court also. It is my personal belief we should adhere to the law as it is now, and that is, send it back and have Congress confirm it. It’s a simple majority vote. It’s called rescission. I did mention this to Elon Musk. He seemed enthusiastic. It can be done. No Democrats- you have to realize, no Democrats will cut one penny from any spending anywhere. But can we get all the Republicans, is the real question.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You can get 51 Republicans, you think, to get on board with this?
SEN. PAUL: Well, I think the president’s gonna- the president is going to have to use effectively his bully pulpit and his popularity to convince all Republicans to do it. It’s not a given that Republicans will stand, will will vote for this. We tried it once in the first administration it was only–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Right, I remember–
SEN. PAUL: –15 billion, and we we lost. We lost two Republicans. But my suggestion to the Trump-, my suggestion to the Trump administration is come to the Republicans who you suspect might have misgivings and convince them, in advance, don’t put it in their lap. Bring them 500 billion. If they say this, 10 billion, I can’t deal with, I can deal with the 490, you’re gonna have to pre negotiate the rescissions package. But I think you could get there.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you about the Department of Education. States, as everyone I think knows, provide the majority of the funding and oversight for your local schools. But Kentucky, when we looked at the numbers, gets the fourth most federal education funding per student of any state in this country. You have over 900 schools that have these Title One programs, which are low income schools who need that federal subsidy to continue to operate. How are schools going to get that money if the president closes the Education Department?
SEN. PAUL: I think the bigger question, if we’re sending all this money to Kentucky and all the other states, why are our scores abysmal? Why do two thirds of the kids not read at proficiency? Why do two thirds of the kids or more not have math proficiency? So it’s an utter failure–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Isn’t that up to the state?
SEN. PAUL: What I’d like to- let me finish, I’d leave it back to the States. It has always been a position, a very mainstream Republican position, to have control of the schools by the states, send the money back to the states, or better yet never take it from the States. About half of our budget in Kentucky goes to education, and that’s the same in a lot of states. I think we can handle it much better. When I talk to teachers, they chafe at the national mandates on testing they think are not appropriate for their kids. They think they waste too much time teaching-
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Right–
SEN. PAUL: –teaching to national testing. The teachers would like more autonomy, and I think the teachers deserve more autonomy.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But when we look at the budget in Kentucky, the state receives 2 billion in federal education funding. Do you have a guarantee that the federal government, federal taxpayers will still provide 2 billion in education funding? That seems important to your state.
SEN. PAUL: I’d rather well, no, what I’d rather is a guarantee that my kids can read and write and do math. The amount of dollars, look, the number of dollars has gone up exponentially, and our scores have gone the other way. So dollars are not proportional to educational success. What I want is success, and I’ve talked a lot about this, I think there are innovations we can do where there’s more learning via some of the best teachers, and we pay them more. I would like to have an NBA or NFL of teachers, the most extraordinary teachers teach the entire country if not the entire world–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Who would run that? The education department?–
SEN. PAUL: –And some of them- no what you’d find is they’d be selected out state by state across the nation. Look, people say, oh, without the department education, we’d have no testing. I was- I was in school before then, we did achievement tests in the sixth grade, the fifth grade, the eighth grade, and we compared ourselves across state lines. There were international testing.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Yeah–
SEN. PAUL: –You don’t need the Department of Education for any of that. But what I can tell you is–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Okay–
SEN. PAUL: –the best teacher in the world is not teaching the kids. What we need to do is have the best teachers and pay them more, but they wouldn’t teach 30 kids. They might teach 10 million kids at a time, because it would be presented to the internet with local teachers reinforcing the lessons.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, I’m sure we’ll be talking more about this. Senator Paul, thank you for your time today. We’ll be right back.
Posted originally on CTH on March 23, 2025 | Sundance
Obviously, Margaret Brennan is a leftist operative within the media space and desperate to direct any conversation toward the narrative issues that are organized by the professional Democrats in DC. Within this interview her priorities are protecting Iran, protecting Hamas and protecting illegal criminal aliens.
Regarding Tren de Aragua criminal gang illegal alien removals, Ms. Brennan says their removal is not a “deportation” they are being sent to prison, and furthermore they are not being afforded “their day in court.”
NSA Waltz misses the opportunity to tell Brennan immigration and DHS are deporting them, removing them; however, we are under no obligation to repatriate them. Perhaps Ms Brennan could look up the term ‘deportation’ in a dictionary. Obviously, illegal aliens do not have U.S constitutional protection, so “their day in court” is a little silly. [Video and Transcript Below]
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Good morning and welcome to “Face the Nation.” There is a lot to cover on the home front, but we begin first on national security. In just a few hours, U.S. officials will be holding talks with Ukraine, and tomorrow a separate round with Russia, in pursuit of a 30 day cease fire. In the meantime, the Trump administration is ramping up the U.S. military presence in the Middle East, sending a second aircraft carrier to the region. We begin this morning with White House National Security Advisor Mike Waltz. Good to have you here.
WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER MIKE WALTZ: Thanks Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So the Iran-backed Houthis, they continue to fire at Israel. What has the last week of bombing achieved? And if you’re holding Iran responsible, what’s next?
MIKE WALTZ: Well, we’ve taken out key Houthi leadership, including their head missileer. We’ve hit their headquarters. We’ve hit communications nodes, weapons factories, and even some of their over the water drone production facilities. Just in the last couple of days, President Trump has decided to hit the Houthis and hit them hard, as opposed to, in the last administration, where literally weeks or months would go by with these kind of one-off, pinprick attacks. And as a result, we’ve had one of the world’s most critical sea lanes get shut down. I mean, these guys are like al Qaeda or ISIS with advanced cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and some of the most sophisticated air defenses, all provided by Iran, Margaret. Just to- so everybody understands the impact here, the last time one of our destroyers went through the straits there, it was attacked 23 times. 75% of our U.S. flag shipping now has to go around the southern coast of Africa rather than going through the Suez Canal. And keeping the sea lanes open, keeping trade and commerce open, is a fundamental aspect of our national security. The last administration was not effective. The Trump administration and President Trump have decided to do something much harder, much tougher and much- and what- you know, we’ll see, but I think will be much more effective.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So the president said he’s going to hold Iran responsible as well. Envoy Steve Witkoff said in an interview that Iran had responded to this U.S. outreach via multiple channels. In regard to a letter sent by the president, Witkoff described it as an offer to Iran to “create a verification program so [that] nobody worries about weaponization of [your] nuclear material.” Can you clarify? Is the U.S. seeking the dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program, or verification, like what President Obama put in place back in 2015 and President Trump pulled out of?
MIKE WALTZ: Full dismantlement. Iran has to give up its program in a way that the entire world can see. And this is- look–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Have they said they’re interested?
MIKE WALTZ: –as President- as President Trump has said, this is coming to a head. All options are on the table, and it is time for Iran to walk away completely from its desire to have a nuclear- nuclear weapon. That- and they will not, and cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapons program.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Have they responded —
MIKE WALTZ: That’s enrichment–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –to the president’s call for peace talks?
(END CROSSTALK)
MIKE WALTZ: That is weaponization, and that its- its strategic missile program. Can you only imagine? We’ve seen the death and destruction that they’re doing through its proxies, between Hezbollah, the Assad regime, the Houthis, and what have you. If they had nuclear weapons, the entire Middle East would explode in an arms race. That is completely unacceptable to our national security. I won’t get into what the back and forth has been, but Iran is in the worst place it has been, from its own national security, since 1979, thanks to Hezbollah, Hamas, the Assad regime, and its own air defenses being taken out by the Israelis.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So there’s still a chance for diplomacy? I know you won’t get into- okay.
MIKE WALTZ: Well, of course, I mean, the President has all options on the table. But we want to be clear, this isn’t some kind of, you know, kind of tit for tat that we had under the Obama administration, or Biden. This is the full program. Give it up, or there will be consequences.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you closer to home, what has been happening here with Tren de Aragua, TdA, we’re going to call them, which have been designated by the Trump administration as terrorists. Last Saturday, 238 Venezuelan men were handed over to the government of El Salvador. 137 of them were deported using this rarely used, 1789 Alien Enemies Act. This is important because it gives the power to detain and deport without a court hearing first, if they come from countries at war with the U.S. In the hearing on Friday, it was revealed that El Salvador, where they’re being held, rejected two of the people: one on the basis of gender, because it was a woman and they can’t be held at a maximum security prison. The other because the person wasn’t even Venezuelan at all. How does that kind of high consequence mistake happen?
MIKE WALTZ: Well, these kind of one-offs we’ll deal with on an individual basis, but Margaret, the underlying issue here is twofold–
MARGARET BRENNAN: So there was a mistake that you acknowledge, here?
MIKE WALTZ: I can’t speak to those individual cases and the details of the individual cases, but what I can speak to is, President Trump has determined that this- this group is acting as a terrorist organization. It is terrorizing our communities through attacks, torture, rape, and the most awful of situations for those communities, number one, and number two, the Alien and Sedition Act fully applies, because we have also determined that this group is acting as a proxy of the Maduro regime. So–
MARGARET BRENNAN: You have- I’m sorry, just to clarify on that. This is supposed to apply if the U.S. is at war with a country. You are saying you have evidence–
MIKE WALTZ: We are saying–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –that the government of Venezuela is directing these gangs?
MIKE WALTZ: –we are saying- we are saying that TdA is acting as a proxy of the Maduro regime. This is how the Alien and Sedition Act applies, and we cannot have district judges interfering with the Commander in Chief’s actions to take care of, in the way he deems necessary, a terrorist organization.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So the U.S. is at war with Venezuela?
MIKE WALTZ: And I gotta tell you, we can- we can debate on Article Two, Article Three. That’s a fair debate. However, in this case, the Commander in Chief, President Trump, is taking decisive action to rid our communities of these gangs that are operating in a paramilitary fash- fashion, and that we know Maduro is deliberately emptying his prisons in a proxy manner to- to influence and attack the United States.
MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s different. That’s so different.
MIKE WALTZ: But that’s how–
MARGARET BRENNAN: That- the U.S. is not at war with the country of Venezuela. I know the Attorney General said on another network–
MIKE WALTZ: Look, this is not–
MARGARET BRENNAN: She- she thinks this is going to go to the Supreme Court.
MIKE WALTZ: Sure, that’s fine, but–
MARGARET BRENNAN: You want to have this fight.
MIKE WALTZ: No, but Margaret, we have instances where the IRGC from Iran have operated to- by with and through Mexican cartels, to then bomb facilities here in the United States. We’ve taken decisive action in that regard. We’re going to take decisive action in this regard, and we’re making a Washington D.C. distinction. When the American people are tired of being terrorized by these gangs. So–
(BEGIN CROSSTALK)
MARGARET BRENNAN: No one is defending gangs, but the concern–
MIKE WALTZ: Well, but it sounds like it. It certainly sounds like it from the Democrats–
MARGARET BRENNAN: There is concern–
MIKE WALTZ: –on the other side. It sounds like–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –that this is being carried out in a sloppy way.
MIKE WALTZ: –in the case of this judge that wanted to turn a flight around, full of gang members, that had intelligence packets that had determined what they’re doing–
MARGARET BRENNAN: There was a woman sent to a men’s- man’s prison, and El Salvador said, no.
MIKE WALTZ: I mean, okay, look–
MARGARET BRENNAN: So it’s the question of, if you are suspending the ability to have a day in court–
MIKE WALTZ: –I can’t speak to those individual details, If you want to–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –that you get the list right.
MIKE WALTZ: But, under- right, but under–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right? That you can verify that these people are gang members.
(END CROSSTALK)
MIKE WALTZ: Look, every one of them were here illegally. So first of all, we had every right and every- and should, deport every one of these individuals. If you want–
MARGARET BRENNAN: But they weren’t deported, they were sent to prison.
MIKE WALTZ: –to make a special case for one, that’s fine. But underlying that- underlying that, is the Alien Act that has determined that Commander in Chief has the absolute authority to do this.
(END CROSSTALK)
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’ll talk about this more with the Homeland Security Committee Chair, Rand Paul, ahead, I’m sure. I need to get to Ukraine with you, because this is active diplomacy, as we mentioned. The- the Ukrainians accepted this U.S. cease fire without preconditions, according to the announcement. The Russians said, only holding back on energy infrastructure. What’s the goal out of these talks that are about to begin in Saudi Arabia?
MIKE WALTZ: Yeah, well, first we’re- we’re moving closer, and we’re closer to peace than we ever have been. This started with President Trump talking to both leaders back to back. We then- Secretary of State Rubio and I engaged the Russians, engaged the Ukrainians at our level, and now we have technical teams actually with Ukrainians and Russians in the same facility, conducting proximity talks. And the progression will be, we have this cease fire on- on aerial infrastructure. That went in place immediately after President Trump’s call with President Putin this week. We are now going to talk about a Black Sea maritime cease fire so that both sides can move grain, fuel, and start conducting trade again in the Black Sea. And then we’ll talk the line of control, which is the actual front lines, and that gets into the details of verification mechanisms, peace keeping, you know, freezing the lines where they are. And then, of course, the broader and permanent peace, which will be some type of discussion of territory for permanent peace, and- and a lasting peace, you know, what the Ukrainians tend to talk about, or- or have talked about, as security guarantees.
MARGARET BRENNAN: One of the things the president has said he wants to see is the return of these Ukrainian children who were abducted as part of a state program by Russia to russify them, take them from their families and move them into Russia. Why did the State Department cut off funding to one of the programs that helps find these kids? It’s a Yale University Program, and they said the- the money was cut off. There are senators, including Grassley and Tillis, who- who want to know, why? Do you know why?
MIKE WALTZ: Well, Secretary Rubio is conducting a review of all of those programs. I can’t speak to that specific one, but I can say–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Because it seems at odds with–
MIKE WALTZ: –that President Trump has spoken to both leaders about prisoner exchanges. Both the Russians and Ukrainians exchanged prisoners, nearly 200, immediately following their call. And he’s also talked about the future of these children. So that’s certainly, first and foremost, and, kind of, confidence building measures. But again, Margaret, we have to take a step back. We have to take a step back. Just a few months ago, no one was talking about how this war would end. And we have to ask ourselves, what would it look like a year from now, two years from now, three years from now? We were in an endless stalemate here, and now we have both sides in the same facility with the United States really living out, I think, in real time, President Trump’s vision to end this war, which he campaigned on.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Just to be clear, are you asking for the release of these children as a confidence building measure? Is that what you meant?
MIKE WALTZ: We’re talking through a number of confidence building measures. That’s one of them.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
