jhughes4031: What is up, ladies and gentlemen? Welcome back to another episode of the Jesse Hughes Show. It is good to be here. It is good to have you all here. Thank you so much for tuning in. As always, our sip of churwan. to start things off. We've got a lot to talk about tonight, and I want to start with some events that happened last night. So last night in Arkansas, in North Carolina, and in most observed Texas, we had several primary elections, most of which affect the midterms, many of which are statewide offices or congressional offices. that will be at play in the upcoming midterm elections. And there were a lot of great and crazy results that happened last night. And I want to focus mainly on what was happening in Texas because that was the state which I think had the most eyes on it and the state which I think a lot of people were looking for specific results, were looking for specific things to happen. And that was the one that had some of the craziest outcomes out of all of the elections. In Texas, first off, you had a governor's race, which a lot of people online were pretty upset about because you had now four term, I believe governor, about to be fourth term, Greg Abbott, who has embraced the nickname for himself, Governor Hot Wheels, that I think began as a term of derision. He's embraced it. Greg Abbott won his primary handily. A large, large percent of the vote, I want to say around 89 to 90 % of the vote, he won by a landslide in his primary election. And a lot of people were upset about that. A lot of people were upset when President Trump endorsed Abbott. Some people see him as weak. A lot of people see him as a rhino, someone who you can't rely on. And there is some validity to that. However, when it comes to endorsements and endorsing in races, you can't exactly endorse against the incumbent if there's not a strong challenger. To Greg Abbott, there were not that many strong challengers. There wasn't that many people with the name recognition or the resources or the ability to actually upset him in this race. And I think that played a large role in Trump's decision. You don't want to endorse somebody and then look like an idiot if they can't pull out a good campaign. You just don't. And so I understand why people are upset, but Trump made the endorsement. Abbott, even if he didn't make the endorsement, Abbott was probably going to win by a similar margin. Maybe he would have knocked a few dents, a few percentage points down, but for the most part. This was a predictable outcome. Another statewide race that was widely watched was that of the senatorial race for US Senate. You have incumbent John Cornyn, very unpopular, not popular with the base specifically. He is a little bit of a rhino. He's pushed for amnesty. He's pushed for gun control bills. He's pushed against President Trump's agenda time and time again. He is refusing to push for the save act to be actually voted upon in the Senate. It's still just sitting there. It's still just sitting there. And he's not applying pressure on John Thune at all to get it across the finish line. And he had a primary challenger in Ken Paxton, the attorney general for the state of Texas. Now, Ken Paxton is a well-beloved but also well-hated figure in the state. A lot of the base, a lot of the MAGA base loves Ken Paxton. A lot of them see him as a hero to the movement, a hero to the cause. They see him as tough, ⁓ actually conservative, someone who will actually represent their interests. And he positions himself often as an ally of President Trump. problem with Ken Paxton is that he also has a lot of baggage that a lot of people are afraid how that's going to affect the race if he were to win the primary. We saw that the Democrats nominated James Tallarico, son of Satan, to the Democratic candidacy for Senate. Rest in peace, our ghetto queen, Jasmine Crockett. Tallerico is insane. He is another just classic progressive, but he is somebody that a lot of people think has at least the appeal, the appearance of being moderate. And so there are fears that if you put up the wrong candidate against him, it's not going to go well. Now, what would happen in a Tallerico versus Paxton race? I don't know genuinely. Can Paxton has some baggage, has some scandals, has some things that make people weary of him. I'm not here to litigate the validity of any of those. All I am saying is that they do exist. At least the appearance of scandal does exist and that does turn off some voters and it could be a problem. So that's why I believe you haven't seen Trump jump into this race yet because there's a balance of interest here. Some of Trump's campaign team, some of Trump's White House staff also work for John Cornyn. They are working to get him elected. Whereas a lot of the base, a lot of the people that Trump listens to, a lot of the people that Trump, that support Trump, who are the ones that are commenting on his social posts and the ones who are with him no matter what, they like Paxton. They want Paxton. Trump has announced that now that the race has gone into a runoff, It was very close. Neither candidate got 50 % of the vote. And in Texas, if you don't get 50%, runoff. Top two candidates go to a runoff. And you're seeing that now with Paxton and Cornyn. And Trump has announced he's going to endorse. And he has asked whoever he does not endorse to immediately back out of the race as not to waste more resources. Will that happen? Yet to be seen. There's a lot of indication that people think he's going to endorse Cornyn. and it's purely political. It's about resources. It's about keeping a safe seat safe. There's a lot of fear that Paxton just won't be the guy that can go up against Alarico. Whether or not that's true, I will let you decide. ⁓ I am very fond of Paxton. I think Paxton would be a person to be in that Senate seat. However, I do understand some of the concerns and so you are the ones. I will let litigate to that decision and decide who you think is a better candidate In fact, if you're watching this right live right now drop a comment in the chat. Tell me who do you think? Realistically not who do you like? Not who do you support but realistically who do you think is actually going to win and who do you think stands the best chance? to retain the seat in November Again, not who do you like? Not who do you personally endorse? But who do you think looking at the all of the circumstances is going to be the best? Drop that in chat right now. I want to see your guys' thoughts. I want to see y'all what y'all have to say. But it was a very crazy race. But it wasn't the craziest race in the whole state. That belonged to the congressional race in District 23, where we saw incumbent Tony Gonzalez going up yet again against Brandon Herrera, YouTuber, firearms expert, somebody who I've been watching his videos for several years now. And this isn't the first time that we've seen this happen. If you remember in 2024, Brandon Herrera challenged Tony Gonzalez and challenged him for his seat because of Tony Gonzalez's policies when it came to firearms in the second amendment, something that Herrera is very, very fond of, something that he he is very, very passionate about. In 2024, there were several other candidates in that primary. It ended up going to a runoff and in the runoff, it was Gonzalez versus Herrera. Brandon was outspent by millions of dollars and lo and behold, he only lost the runoff. Brandon Herrera only lost the runoff by four 400 votes 400 After the race, concedes, he meets with Gonzalez, he has a meeting, he thinks that things are gonna be smooth and, you know, Gonzalez got the message, you you gotta be better on this issue. But it turns out he didn't. And so this time around in 2026, the big two-six, Brandon Herrera once again announced he was running for Congress again, challenging Tony Gonzalez again, and this time he had a better idea of what he was doing. Last time, Completely new to politics. He had worked on the Trump campaign in 2016, but I think that was really mainly his only real foray into campaigning. And so he's new to this. He doesn't know what he's doing. Only ends up losing by 400 votes. This time he knows what he's doing. He has a way better idea of what's going on. And you saw a pretty harsh campaign. And part of the reason it became so harsh was because this story came out about Tony Gonzalez. As it turns out, Gonzalez had been having a serious affair with one of his staff members, who later ended up setting herself on fire as a means to commit suicide. It's an incredibly insane story. Not, you know, we see scandal in politics all the time, but this is a different level. This is something new. This is something totally different. Something that we are not used to for sure. And I don't, I don't mean to make light of this, but it is incredibly serious and it has cost Gonzalez a lot of support. You have members of Congress calling for him to resign right now. He refuses to do so, but it is something that is happening. And so Brandon Herrera obviously has called for him to resign, has used this as a central focus in his attacks against Gonzalez. And what ended up happening last night is once again, neither candidate broke 50%. But the night ended with Brandon Herrera in the lead. Brandon Herrera, if it wasn't a you need 50 % to get past the finish line kind of primary, Herrera would have won. The primary would have been over. But instead, we are once again headed to a runoff. Brandon Herrera is still being outspent, but he has a lot more money than he did last time. He has a lot more experience than he did last time. He actually knows what it takes this time around. He knows the game. He knows how to play the game. He knows the system he's entering into. And I think that when May rolls around and we see this runoff election happen, Brandon Herrera is going to achieve victory because he knows what he's doing this time around. And also this scandal with Gonzalez, it's not going away. It's not going away anytime soon. And so I think we will see a Brandon Herrera victory. And if you want to know my thoughts on that, all I have to say is let's go Brandon. Let's go, Brandon. I want to see it happen. There were some other important races that ended up in runoffs last night. Texas Attorney General, you had several candidates, Chip Roy, this Mays Middleton dude who I did not even know who this guy was until I was looking at the results last night. Aaron Reitz, who is former Paxton staff. I think he was his chief of staff and there was a fourth candidate who was pretty much irrelevant. Once again, runoff is going to be between Middleton and Roy. I don't want to speak out of turn. I have heard some suggestion and I've heard some rumor that Middleton, while he presents himself as a MAGA guy and while he presents himself as a true conservative, is pretty friendly with the Bush wing of the Republican party. I don't know if that's true. It's just conjecture. But if it is true, I would encourage all of my friends in Texas to vote for Chip Roy. Now I get it. Chip Roy has some problems. All right. He has kind of not been the friendliest face towards Trump. At one point advocated for impeachment. I don't know if he actually voted for it or not, but advocated for it on the House floor. Endorsed Ron DeSantis in 2024. Chip Roy and Trump in the MAGA base. not exactly on the friendliest of terms. That being said, Chip Roy is still probably one of the best people that we have in Congress right now. He has introduced a bill that would put in place a immigration moratorium, something that I vigorously support. His version would only have the moratorium in place until the H1B issue is solved, meaning gotten rid of, scrapped. I would opt for a moratorium that lasts a lot longer than that. However, you know, it wins a win at the end of the day. A moratorium, even if it's not as long as you want it to be, is better than no moratorium. Chipp Roy has introduced a bill, the Paws Act, to basically institute a moratorium until they scrap H1B visas. Chip Roy has been on the winning side of lot of issues in Congress, on the patriot side of lot of issues in Congress since he's been there. Again, he has some problems, but from what I've heard, from what I've read, he's a lot better than this Milton guy. So if you're in Texas, use your judgment, use your God-given reason, but I would encourage you to at least consider voting for Chip Roy. Other races, Texas Railroad Commissioner, something that's not exactly you know a Hot button type of seat or type of position However, there's a guy named Beau French who was running in that once again going to a runoff Beau French is a total patriot he is Definitely our guy. He supports a moratorium. He supports scrapping h1b's he supports all sorts of issues that people who watch this show are in favor of. Total patriot is somebody who I think should win that race and I would encourage you to vote for him in the upcoming runoff. So if you live in Texas, depending on where you live, vote for Ken Paxton, vote for Brandon Herrera, vote for Bob French, and at least consider voting for Chip Roy. I understand a lot of people don't like him for various reasons, but at least consider it. Probably the best news out of Texas last night though was something that didn't go to a runoff, but something that was a total patriot victory. And that is that state legislature, Steve Toth, defeated Dan Ipatch McCain Crenshaw. Something that so many of us have been wishing for for such a long time. It has finally happened. Dan Crenshaw has been defeated. Dan Crenshaw was a rising star in the Republican party early in his congressional career and has since taken every bit of political capital that he gained and set it on fire. Through stock tips and insider trading, through supporting red flag laws, through insulting the Republican party base and president Trump standing against him, through several, several avenues, through being a total war hawk. Crenshaw's done. He is done for, finally. He is out of here. And this is something that I am very, very happy to see, and I'm sure you are as well. Goodbye, Dan Crenshaw. We will not miss you. We are glad to see you go. We are very glad to see you go. Take a sip of Cheryline here. Moving, there was nothing really crazy out of Arkansas that I saw happen last night. The other big race that I was really watching was the North Carolina Republican Senate primary. Michael Watley versus Don Brown a Lot of people in North Carolina don't like Watley a lot of people especially in the grassroots and the base are not the biggest fans of Watley He still won by about what was it 20 30 points? So it's gonna be Michael Watley the former chairman of the North Carolina GOP and the former chairman of the Republican National Convention versus former governor Roy Cooper and I will be honest with you I am a little bit worried about this race. This is one that I have a lot of concern about because despite the fact that he is a total radical wearing moderates clothing, Roy Cooper is unfortunately incredibly popular in the state of North Carolina. He won re-election during COVID. He endorsed Josh Stein against Mark Robinson and Stein won. Mark Robinson kind of contributed to his own downfall in that one, but that's still what happened. He was the attorney general for the state for over a decade. He is somebody who has a lot of name recognition and a lot of popularity. Whereas Watley's name ID, despite being the state GOP chairman, despite being the RNC chairman, Watley doesn't really have as much name recognition within the state. And so there's a lot of concern about this seat, especially as North Carolina kind of shifts to a more moderate political landscape. Thank you to the Grove of Charlotte and Asheville and Verrali Durham area for that. It is unfortunate to see my home state shifting in this direction, but that is just how things are going, unfortunately. I hate it as much as anybody, but that's just the way things are. But, you know, hopefully I am wrong. Hopefully my concern is wrong. Hopefully Watley does win and we at least retain the Senate seat, which has been held by the infamous Tom Tillis. Not a fan. Tom Tillis, not a patriot. Not someone patriot through support. I'm hoping Watley Vough holds onto the seat. We will have to see. Thank you guys for tuning in. Let's see. Good evening, patriots from Romans8Shaman. Thank you for being here tonight. This dude, great, great guy. Somebody I've been following for a while. Recently had a Twitter rebrand. ⁓ Hey buddy, if you want to drop your ex in the chat just so people can follow you, go follow this guy. He's great. I want to move on to a situation that has gotten me in trouble on ex a little bit. How do I go about starting this off? I wanna say first off. I did post a little bit of RageBait over the last couple of days and it got exactly the reaction that I wanted it to get. It got exactly the reaction that I thought that it would get. so it's... RageBait... RageBait is a... It's not a tactic I emphasize using constantly, but it is something that you... sometimes can sparingly use. right, shout out. Go follow him on X at mythoshaman until he gets his handle back. Long story on that one. But yes, I've posted some rage bait over the weekend and it had to do with the fact that the Trump administration in cooperation with Israel launched a series of strikes against Iran. And there has been a lot of talk on the internet about this. A lot of people are accusing Trump of selling out the base on this issue. A lot of people are accusing Trump of being controlled by Israel because of this issue. There's a lot here. And so I want to briefly just kind of walk through some of this and to tell you what I believe to be the truth about this situation. You can choose to believe me or not believe me, that's up to you. But this, just want to explain. my views out in the open tell you what I think about this so that there are no questions and so that if you see me posting RageBait to kind of get under some people's skin, you know what I'm doing. You know what I'm doing. And so let's just start from the beginning. First claim is that Trump promised no new wars and has now started another war and has sold out the MAGA base. Well, for the first off, The definition of, depending on how you define the term war, whether or not that this conflict is a war. I'm not going to get into the semantics of that. But as for Trump selling out the base because, you know, we're supposed to be America first. We're not supposed to be getting involved and mailing in conflicts on the other side of the world. We're not supposed to be engaging in regime change and be engaging in all of these things. That can certainly be true. However, to say that Trump betrayed the base over this is a little bit of a stretch, and the reason for that is because at least since the 1980s, Trump has been calling for Iran to get bombed. He's had his eye on this country as a target for the military for basically 50 years now. This isn't exactly something that came out of nowhere. In 2011, Trump was calling for the bombing of Iran. During the Obama administration, Trump was criticizing the Iran nuclear deal and calling for a tougher stance on Iran, including potentially bombings. In 2015, 2016, when he was running for president, he talked about Iran. And what did he say? I'm going to bomb the sugar honey iced tea out of You can put the first letters of that sentence together and figure out what he actually said. This is a family-friendly show. In 2019, Trump bombed al-Baghdadi and threw up the set. He threw up an American flag. Trump's been, Trump has been moving in this direction for a while. This isn't exactly new. This isn't exactly something that came out of nowhere. Now, does that mean that this is justified? That is a different question. As for me personally, when it comes to the question of whether or not we should have bombed Iran, Eileen, no. but I am willing to concede several points. If I were in Trump's position, only having the limited knowledge that I have right now, by the way, we do not have the intelligence that this man has. He has the whole freaking CIA at his fingers. But if I were in that position, I probably would have opted not to do this. I probably would not have given that order. That being said, that doesn't mean there's not good arguments in favor of this. One argument, one potential argument is that... when it comes to the power structure and the power dynamics in the Middle East, Iran has been very aggressive towards us. They have been sponsoring terrorism towards us. They have been threatening us for decades. One of the first acts when the Iranian revolution happened was that they kidnapped members of our embassy in Iran. That was a whole scandal if you remember that. They have been very hostile towards us. And I would prefer to have countries that are not hostile towards us being a regional power in different regions. I would also prefer countries that are hostile to us to not have nuclear weapons, which has been a concern about Iran for a long time. Now, the counterpoint to that is, of course, that people have been saying Iran is weeks away from a nuclear weapon for I don't know, 30 years now? Whether or not they were actually about to make a nuke, we don't know. I don't think we will ever know. And unfortunately it's drawn a lot of parallels to weapons of mass destruction in the Iraq war and the whole thing that happened there. Regardless, there is an argument still to be made that maybe it was actually within America's best interest to carry out this operation. I don't know. I lean towards it's not something that I'm a fan of, but I am willing to be convinced. The other argument, so that's one argument, part of that argument is that Iran is really probably one of the last things keeping us bogged down in the Middle East and wish I know I'm going to get the objection of, but Israel, Israel's the reason we're over there. We'll talk about Israel in a second, okay? Iran is, in terms of hostile powers, really one of the only countries keeping us involved over there, and there's an argument to be made that you remove this problem, we can actually pull out for good. I hope that is true. If the regime does collapse and a new government is set up that's friendly towards us, and we are able to completely pull out, then I will think that this will have been worth it. If we can do that without putting boots on the ground, for sure, I think it would have been worth it. That is one thing that I'm going to keep a constant about this whole topic, this whole situation. I do not want American soldiers in Iran, on Iranian soil. I do not want it to happen. I do not want it to happen. I do not want that to happen. And many of you don't either. And I think that's a, no matter where you stand on this issue, I think that is a ⁓ common common feeling, common belief, a source of common ground for most of us, we do not want boots on the ground at all. Another argument kind of in favor of this that I find a little bit compelling is that Iran does give 80 % of its oil to China. Removing Iran from the equation, similarly to how we removed Venezuela from the equation with an operation that took out Maduro, It weakens China and it does lessen the possibility that there is an armed conflict with China in the future. It doesn't completely eliminate it, but it lessens it pretty significantly. Whether or not that's valid, I'm not sure, but I'm willing to concede that that is a possibility and something that could be in the win column, something that could be in the column that makes this idea of this operation a little bit more favorable. Whether or not that comes to pass, we have yet to see. Some people are saying that this is not in America's best interest. There are arguments that it is, but are decent arguments and I will give credit to them. Some people think that this is something that we shouldn't have gotten involved in. Some people think this is something that Israel dragged us into. Now, I do want to address the Israel question. It's something I've been trying to avoid on this show for forever, but I'm just going to lay it all out what I think about Israel right now. Israel is just another country in the world. That's basically the extent of my thought. I think there's a lot of foreign influence from Israel on the American government through sources like APAC. But also at the same time, there's a lot of foreign influence on the American government from Japan and from South Korea and from India and from Dubai and from Qatar and from a whole host of countries. If you look at a list of countries that have spent the most money in American lobbying, Israel's not really even in the top 10. You've got Japan up there, you've got Qatar up there, you've got Saudi Arabia, you've got South Korea, you've got a host of other countries before you get to Israel. Now, I don't think that we should allow any foreign government to put money into our politics, to give money to our politicians. I don't want any of them doing it. I don't want Israel doing it. I don't want Great Britain doing it. I don't want Iraq doing it. I don't want Saudi Arabia doing it. I don't want Japan doing it. I don't want any of these guys doing it. So that's one thing. there's an idea that's kind of popped up out there that Israel is running the show that they've controlled the United States for a long time. And I do think that there are circumstances, if you look at the history of what's going on in the region and the history of the nation of Israel and the history of kind of what the Christian eschatological thought and view for towards Israel was for the last 60 years there is a good argument, but they have been very influential on our government. and on our policies. That being said, once again, I don't think they've been the most influential. I think the United States really kind of runs Israel more than Israel runs us to a certain extent. And part of that is Benjamin Netanyahu just a few months ago said, yeah, we want to stop relying on the United States for money, for weapons, for this and that. We're going to be moving towards decoupling. Trump said no. Trump said no, that's not happening. Whether or not that was wise, I, you know, once again, I don't think we should be sending money to a lot of other foreign countries and I don't think we should be allowing a lot of foreign countries to put money into our political system. That is my blanket view. But I don't think Israel is this like big bad that is doing all of this stuff behind the scenes as much as we think it is, as much as some of us think it is. That's just my opinion. You know, I'm willing to be convinced otherwise if you present the evidence. That doesn't mean I'm like a big supporter of Israel. I'm not like a Zionist. I'm not out here saying Israel can do no wrong. I just am ambivalent towards, I don't care. I don't have any feelings toward it. And the reason I've tried to avoid this topic so much in the past is partially because, and you've seen a grand display of this over the last few weeks, especially this weekend, is that when you bring up Israel, when anything to do with Israel gets brought up, you get some bad actors. who start commenting on the issue. If you disagree with them even slightly about it, they call you Jewish. And the vast majority of them aren't even Americans, they're from the third world. Why are these people commenting on my political positions is what I want to know. But yeah, you get called Jewish and you get a lot of people from the third world coming into your comments and saying, ⁓ you're just a Zio shill. ⁓ you're just a Zio cuck. ⁓ you're this. ⁓ you're that. And, you know, people will say, ⁓ well, you know, they are just saying that because they disagree with you on this issue, blah, blah, blah. They just have strong feelings towards it. They just have strong feelings. That's just how they express themselves. Okay, then please explain to me. Let's take an example here. Operation Midnight Hammer happened last June. We bombed Iran's nuclear facilities. And you had Charlie Kirk go out on the world stage, go out on this podcast and say, I didn't necessarily support doing this but I trust President Trump. Fair opinion. One I agree with. And what happened? You had a ton of people calling him Jewish, calling him a fake Christian, calling him a zio cuck, calling him this, calling him that, disparaging his name, slandering his name, all over the place. And then a few months later, Charlie tragically gets martyred. on a college campus by deranged leftists. And there's evidence to suggest that Charlie's views on Israel were evolving. Mine have certainly evolved over the last few years. I used to be a dispensationalist, I'm not anymore. But because of that, you now have the same people that were in his comments even the day before he died who were calling him Jewish, who were calling him a Zionist cuck, who were calling him a fake Christian, a fake Christian, one of the most Christian men in all of politics in the 21st century that I've ever seen, and people are calling him a fake Christian because of his views on Israel, Nick Fuentes. Now these same people are claiming his mantle and trying to say, ⁓ he would say this about this issue. ⁓ he would have had this opinion about his issue. Listen, I don't claim to know exactly what Charlie Kirk would have said or would have done or would have thought about this moment, but I do know one thing. While the rest of you were in his comments, slandering his name, almost every day I was listening to his show. because I held Charlie in great respect. I liked him a lot and I respected his opinion and thought he had a very wise and prudent way of looking at the political situations around the country. I had a great respect for the man. I listened to his show almost every day. And I can tell you that the majority of people who are trying to claim that they know what he was going to say about an issue, that they know what he was going to say or do, are the same people that were not listening to him when he was alive, that did not care about him when he was alive, and that were calling him a fake Christian and slandering his name when he was alive. I don't care what any of those people have to say. Not one bit. I don't know what Charlie Kirk would have said about this situation, but you sure as heck don't either. You don't either. And you don't get to claim his mantle and pretend that you do. Unfortunately, a lot of people, they will not listen to this, they will not care. But that is the truth of the matter. Now, where do I ultimately land on this? Once again, I was not necessarily in support of the president bombing Iran. That being said, I think there are good arguments on both sides. As long as there's not boots on the ground, as long as we don't get too deeply entrenched in this. And if we achieve the objectives we set out to achieve, okay, you know what? I'm fine with it. And while I didn't necessarily think this was the wisest move, I'm not panicking. I'm not somebody that's going to abandon Trump over this. I think that Trump has the best interest of America at heart in what he does. That doesn't always mean he makes the right decision. That doesn't always mean that he's perfect, but I think he's coming from a posture of wanting the best for America. And for one reason or another, he thought that this was an America's best interest. And if this would have happened under Joe Biden, if this would have happened under Barack Obama, if this would have happened under George Bush, I probably would have been a lot more hesitant to say what I am about to say. But when you have Donald Trump, JD Vance, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth leading this operation, I trust them. And I think that they will make wise and prudent decisions based off the best available information they have. And they won't intentionally do something that is going to harm our country. That is my opinion. I might get proven wrong soon. I might be made to look like a fool soon. But based off of Trump's track record, when it comes to foreign policy, when it comes to handling ISIS, when it comes to handling North Korea, when it comes to the Venezuela operation, when it comes to every single thing that he has done from 2016 to 2020 and from 2024 to now. When it comes to foreign policy, I have a lot of trust and a lot of confidence in the Trump administration because they have built up a lot of good will. And my friend here has made a pretty good point. Let's see, show this. Trusting the plan equals supporting Trump and other politicians pushing us the right direction, making constructive, not destructive, criticism and supporting when you don't get what you want. Exactly. Constructive criticism to the administration is good. Endlessly yelling into the void about Trump being a Zionist shill. a slave to Israel, this or that or the other, that is not going to get you anywhere. If you want to have influence on people, you give them constructive criticism and you don't go crazy. That's a golden rule of politics, just saying. But ultimately, I trust the President. I stand with the President, and I will support the United States of America no matter what. I might think a decision is wrong. I might think a decision is not in our best interest. But I still support my country. I am still a patriot. I am a nationalist. And that means I love America. You might disagree, but I sure go ahead, that's your right. But that is where I stand. I will always stand with the United States of America and her people, no matter what. Thank you guys for watching. Thank you so much for watching. Remember, times like this, they seem stressful, they seem scary. Remember where our hope and our trust comes from. It does not come from presidents. I support Trump, but my hope and my trust and my confidence don't come from him. I trust him to make good decisions, but my hope and my confidence don't come from him. They don't come from the nation. They don't come from political victories. My hope and my trust and my confidence. comes from one source and one source only, and that is the gospel of Jesus Christ and the saving grace that he has bestowed upon me and that he is offering to you as well. If you don't know Christ, crack open your Bible and start reading about Him. Thank you guys for watching. God loves you and so do I. I hope you guys have a fantastic night and a fantastic week to come. Thank you guys.