The 100 Page Trump Report That Should Terrify You
PDS Published 07/20/2026
-
We're talking about all of that and even more on today's brand new Philip DeFranco Show, your daily dive into the news, starting with this.
We need to talk about Trump's war on what he calls far-left terrorism, instigated by... right.
Because the State Department just put out a 100-page report titled "Cuba: The Capital of 21st Century Communism."
It's genuinely kind of... first, it claims that Cuba's singular goal is to conquer the United States.
Then it claims that Cuba's fundamental objective is actually to erase the United States from the Earth.
And then it's like, actually, Cuba wants a revolution against Western civilization itself.
How, you might ask, does this poor, isolated, resource-starved island intend to pull off a feat like that?
Well, by, quote, "the novel and insidious method of persuading the children of the West to turn against their own inheritance."
According to this report, for nearly seven decades, Cuba has infiltrated the highest reaches of the U.S. government and carried out one of the most durable and damaging foreign intelligence penetrations in American history.
It is a conspiracy that encompasses universities, nonprofits, activists, media outlets, politicians, and even the internet's Hasan Piker.
Apparently what ties them all together is a new and distinct kind of Marxism, focused not on class struggle, but on racial and civilizational conflict.
In fact, according to this report, you have everything from the BLM protests to the rise of Antifa to pro-Palestinian student activism being linked in some way, shape, or form to Cuban influence.
You've got this report naming dozens of examples of what it calls front groups and fellow travelers—basically, the people it claims are somehow a part of this Cuban network.
And yes, it includes people like New York Mayor Eric Adams, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, Congresswomen Maxine Waters and Ayanna Pressley, but also former British Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, Ilhan Omar's daughter, and even the co-founder of Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream.
Then also media outlets like Mother Jones and Democracy Now!, as well as activist groups like CodePink, The People's Forum, and The National Lawyers Guild.
Just to round things out, you've got the Amazon Labor Union and its founder Chris Smalls, plus Antifa, Black Lives Matter, the NAACP, and just a whole host of others.
Now, as far as how these various people and groups are linked to the Cuban regime, the ties, we'll say, are a bit flimsy.
Some of them have simply made comments supportive of Assata Shakur, a Black Power activist who was convicted of murder after a shootout with police in the '70s and then escaped and took refuge in Cuba.
Meanwhile, you have others being called out for their work with the Venceremos Brigade, which is a group that organizes trips to Cuba and advocates against the U.S. embargo.
You then have even more being targeted because they participated in the recent Nuestra América Convoy to Cuba, which is how you have creators, including Hasan Piker, being among those.
But one of the more interesting names in the report is the Democratic Socialists of America, which, quote, "represents a significant advance for the Cuban influence operation."
Because while you have this report admitting that, quote, "DSA was not shaped by the direct or tangible influence of the Cuban government," it still insists that the group is part of this so-called network because it freely adopted the ideology.
Which, if to you that sounds like, "Hey, isn't that kind of like the criminalization of free speech?" you wouldn't be alone in having that thought.
"This is a gross violation of the First Amendment. This is a not-so-subtle way of bringing McCarthyism back to the United States of America. And the targets are, ironically enough, also identical."
History doesn't often repeat, but it rhymes, is what they say, right? It's a cliché.
Well, right now history isn't even rhyming. It's just repeating.
And he's by no means the only one drawing comparisons to the Red Scare.
In fact, even the report itself credits blacklists, McCarthy-era investigations and prosecutions, and a slate of anti-communist laws for weakening the American Communist Party in the 1950s.
And you also have our Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, ringing all the old bells last week during a summit on political terrorism.
"The paranoia, the guilt by association, the fearmongering about an organized transnational conspiracy. These are not distinct and isolated cells. They are interconnected networks. They do not recognize our borders. They do not believe, in fact, in the nation-state itself. They coordinate, they communicate, they travel, they train, and they act together, sharing the same infrastructure, sharing the same enemies, sharing the same mission."
If you're wondering, with all that, who "they" is, Rubio wasn't exactly very clear.
Most of the examples both he and his department's report gave came from the 1960s and '70s—groups like the Symbionese Liberation Army, the Weather Underground, or the Black Panthers.
And then you have them just seemingly transitioning from "there was left-wing terrorism" to "there is left-wing terrorism," and, sleight of hand, it's kind of easy to miss if you're not listening for it.
"Between 1970 and 1980, 93% of terrorist attacks in the West came from the far extremist left. These are numbers that would shock most Americans today because we've been taught to believe that this kind of political violence simply doesn't exist, or it's being exaggerated. But it does exist, and we're actually underestimating it."
And you had him just citing isolated cases today, like the assassination of Charlie Kirk or the attempts on Donald Trump's life, and then asserting that they're all somehow connected.
And Cuba—it's the key.
But then also, a very key thing with this is that the report and the summit, they're not just empty propaganda because you have this Trump White House making very clear that its paranoid delusions are going to be translated into real policy.
Saying that far-left extremism will be treated with the same seriousness and ferocity the world has long reserved for jihadist terrorism.
To that end, you had Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent explaining that includes literally using the same tools meant to disrupt funding to foreign terrorist groups for what it deems domestic left-wing extremism.
"Violence requires money. Now we are mobilizing some of the same tools that we have deployed against terrorists abroad to confront this emerging threat here at home. At President Trump's direction, Treasury is expanding its efforts to identify organizations that abuse charitable and nonprofit structures as vehicles for illicit finance. We are examining where tax-exempt status has been exploited."
And you see the Trump administration's critics right now putting all this together and going, "Oh, shit."
There is a clear plan.
First, you have Trump in the White House establishing some kind of link, however flimsy, between its political enemies and the island of Cuba.
Then it claims those enemies are, in Bessent's words, financial conduits for foreign influence.
And then finally, it takes legal action against them, whether that means revoking their legal status, freezing their funds, or arresting their leaders.
You would see Stephen Miller seemingly preempting the criticisms.
And he gave this kind of what felt like an evil movie villain speech at the summit.
"When the leftist, who does not believe in freedom, who does not believe in civil rights, who does not believe in any ordered notion of justice, protests that we are violating his rights, understand that he is lying to try to persuade people who are not closely following the political scene that some injustice has been perpetrated against him. We must stay the course and be completely unflinching in the pursuit of justice against these enemies of civilization."
Right.
And it's as his supposed "enemies of civilization" often seem to just be people calling out the administration for their abuses of power.
And we're going to have to wait to see how all this develops on just a number of fronts.
We then also need to talk about these protests in India.
-
Because you've got this fake political party that started as a joke just a couple of months ago that's now behind one of the largest anti-government movements in years.
It's actually all thanks to this controversial exam that's been linked to dozens of suicides. You've got the people who are a part of this movement now being tear-gassed and beaten in the streets.
This all goes back to May, when you had the country's Chief Justice comparing the country's unemployed youth to parasites and cockroaches during a Supreme Court hearing.
And you then had 30-year-old Abhijeet, who recently graduated from college in the U.S., jokingly putting out a call on social media, writing:
"What if all the cockroaches came together?"
And he then launched the Cockroach Junta Party, or the CJP.
It was meant to satirize Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ruling BJP.
You actually had this new website showing a manifesto targeting Modi's government, describing itself as "a political party for the people the system forgot."
Within just two weeks, you had the Instagram page reaching over 22 million followers.
That's more than double the BJP, which markets itself as the world's largest political party.
So you had Modi's government actually try to block the CJP's social media accounts on the basis of national security, which is kind of this common excuse for Modi to crack down on speech in the country.
You've had him ruling the country for 12 years.
And over that time, he and his party have steadily consolidated their grip on power at the national and state levels.
You've had them often use that power to suppress dissent, including by routinely prosecuting and jailing critics and political opponents.
The CJP, its focus—at least on the surface—is on one very specific issue.
Something called the NEET, which is the mandatory entrance examination for undergraduate medical programs in India.
And this thing—it is just... it's very difficult and it's incredibly competitive.
With more than 2 million students vying for only around 130,000 seats.
And that means that many families spend their life savings and incur massive debt to pay for their children to privately be tutored for the exam.
In fact, more money is now spent in India on private tuition than the government's entire higher education budget.
A huge key thing with all this is that back in May, more than 2 million students who took the test found out that they'd have to retake it because the results had been leaked and sold online.
That's actually something that's happened several times in the past now.
And it's reportedly contributed to dozens of young people taking their own lives.
But also this time, as I mentioned, the test cancellation was followed by those comments by the Chief Justice and then the creation of the CJP, which quickly called for the Modi government to be held accountable and for the Education Minister to resign.
And also, of course, another big key thing that we have to mention here is, like we've seen with other youth-led—let's call it Gen Z protests—around the world, many of these in Nepal, Madagascar, Bangladesh...
These movements may start with a focus on a very specific issue, but they're really also about something much bigger.
In India's case, the exam controversy is just one reason that you've got people fed up with the education system.
And those concerns are also tied to frustrations within the job market.
Just last year, the unemployment rate for people between the ages of 15 and 29, who make up more than a quarter of the country's population, was roughly 10%, compared to around 3% overall.
And according to one recent study, you have that number going up to almost 40% for graduates under the age of 25.
So with all this in mind, you saw the CJP's first in-person protest taking place in Delhi in early August.
And then later that month, you would see supporters holding their second major demonstration less than a mile from Parliament, where some vowed not to move until the Education Minister resigned.
A big thing here was that you had a prominent education activist, who was arrested and detained under anti-terrorism laws last year, announcing that he would start a hunger strike in solidarity with the students.
And as far as the Modi government, they also labeled CJP protesters as terrorists and refused to speak with them.
Which then brought us to Sunday, 20 days into the activist's hunger strike.
And you had police move him to a government hospital against his will.
They said they did this to protect his health, but his wife slammed it as an illegal detention.
Right.
And then this marked one of the biggest anti-government protests the country's seen in years, with thousands flocking to the streets of Delhi early Monday morning.
And this time, as far as the government, they banned public gatherings and sealed off roads across the city.
They shut down the internet, and they funneled protesters into an area about a mile away from Parliament.
But then people just kept showing up.
And by early afternoon, more than 20,000 people were estimated to have gathered.
You had attempts by some to move toward the Parliament building.
They were met with tear gas and beaten with batons, with at least 60 arrested, according to lawyers representing them.
That's as you had Indian media reporting that at least 100 people had been brought to two hospitals in Delhi, with security forces claiming that over 100 of their members were injured as well.
And while the Modi government did also finally agree to meet with the CJP, the two sides reportedly chatted for only about ten minutes.
With the CJP saying that they presented their demands and that no commitments were made.
You then later had the group claiming that the protests would continue, at least until the Education Minister stepped down, with several hundred remaining camped out at the protest site into today.
And they also weren't alone.
You had an opposition lawmaker and several lawmakers from his party also staging a sit-in protest outside of Modi's home and calling on him to step down.
And, well, very notably, I will say it is not clear right now if this movement poses an existential threat to Modi's power.
But also with that, I'll say that's kind of the situation with any spark—or sparks.
If, and how, and when they catch fire, that can be a hard thing to predict.
The fact that this has gotten so much attention, you have people jumping on board, at least online, it just becomes a question of:
Will we see more of it flood into the streets?
And if so, what does that look like?
And then I've got more for you to dive into in just a minute.
-
But first, let me thank a sponsor and say, if whatever is closest has become your meal—you know, some Doritos are doing way too much of the work.
Today's sponsor is Factor.
Factor delivers fully prepared meals straight to your door so you can grab something delicious and substantial instead of asking Doritos to cover another meal.
The meals are designed by dietitians and crafted by chefs, which means they're convenient without tasting like the backup option.
You just heat one up for about two minutes.
No prep, no cleanup.
The Ginger Teriyaki Salmon—that's, I will say, been the go-to lately.
It's delicious. It's filling.
It doesn't leave me feeling like I need to immediately find a snack.
And Factor's meals arrive fresh, never frozen.
There are more than 100 rotating options each week, whether you're in the mood for something high-protein, calorie-conscious, or just something that sounds really good.
There's plenty to choose from.
The meals are made with lean proteins, colorful vegetables, whole-food ingredients, and healthy fats.
They're made without artificial colors or sweeteners, high-fructose corn syrup, or refined seed oils.
For me, Factor is less about replacing cooking and more about having a great meal ready when cooking is just not going to happen.
Head to Factor Meals and use code DEFRANCO50OFF to get 50% off, plus free Daily Greens for new subscriptions only, while supplies last through September 27, 2026.
See the website for details.
And then diving right back into the news, we've got to talk about this whole Air Force One confidential informant situation.
FABRIC
Go to: https://meetfabric.com/defranco and apply today, risk-free.
-
Because you have Trump's Department of Justice trying to find out who the sources were for the New York Times journalists and their coverage about the security concerns surrounding the new Air Force One jet.
Right, that Boeing 747-8, which was given to Trump by Qatar earlier this month.
You had The New York Times reporting that confidential sources confirmed federal officials had some serious concerns about the security of the new jet.
One of the big things being that it doesn't have some of the defensive features that the previous jet had, like advanced anti-missile capabilities.
Something that the report says was mostly thanks to Trump's insistence that the plane join the fleet as quickly as possible because it had to be so much more luxurious.
And with all this, you had Frank Kendall, the former Air Force Secretary, saying time didn't permit all the normal Air Force One modifications.
So some security, communications, and support systems are missing.
Adding that he was surprised a Qatari plane was taken overseas as quickly as it was, especially considering the escalating war in Iran.
And so, yeah, that coupled with the reporting also citing confidential sources that Trump switched from the Qatari plane back to the old Air Force One when he left Turkey on the 8th apparently really pissed Trump off.
Because you had him ordering FBI Director Kash Patel to oversee an investigation to find out who those confidential sources were, which then led to an avalanche of subpoenas.
Several Times journalists were served subpoenas.
It tried to order them to testify before a federal grand jury in Manhattan.
Some even had federal agents show up at their door.
The Times then pushed back against the administration, essentially telling the DOJ where they could shove it.
Specifically saying:
"The appearance of federal law enforcement agents on the doorstep of news reporters should shock the conscience of any American who believes in the Constitution and the press freedom it protects."
Adding:
"This brazen act should be seen as nothing more than an attempt to prevent the public from knowing what is happening in their country by intimidating journalists from doing their jobs."
The DOJ responded by saying it's not the reporters they're targeting, but rather their sources.
Rather, as they describe them, those leaking classified information.
A spokeswoman for the department added:
"We value and appreciate the important role that the press plays in this country. But DOJ also plays an important role to make sure that the people entrusted with our nation's secrets do what they're supposed to do with that information."
In fact, now as I'm recording this, we've just learned the DOJ took things to a whole new level by getting subpoenas seeking several journalists' phone and text message records.
And actually, not just from the journalists themselves, but also from their family members, including two of the journalists' spouses and even another one's mother.
And so with this, you have The Times filing to squash the new subpoenas over the weekend, with a motion getting unsealed yesterday.
And that is on top of their other motion filed last week to squash the grand jury subpoenas.
Also, I think we've seen in the most recent filings that The Times argued that the DOJ violated its own guidelines for media subpoenas because it waited a week to notify them about the phone records requests.
Saying that this whole thing is nothing more than:
"A bad-faith effort to intimidate the journalists and chill their ability to report on the administration."
Especially considering that two of the phone-record subpoenas date back to way before the incident the administration claims it's investigating.
At the time saying the DOJ is requesting phone records all the way back to January 1st.
That's months and months before the Air Force One reporting was even kind of a twinkle in anyone's eye.
The motion reading that the time frame strongly suggested the department is using this investigation not to focus on any purported concerns arising from the July 8 and 9 articles, but instead to forage for information about the journalists' source relationships more broadly.
Which I'll say doesn't feel baseless or like it's even coming out of nowhere.
The Trump administration has been waging war on the free press since, I mean, he got back in office.
Especially regarding confidential sources.
I mean, back in January, you had the FBI searching a Washington Post reporter's home and seizing all of their electronic devices as part of a leak investigation.
Then, of course, there's the whole Pentagon press corps dumpster fire.
And that's without mentioning Trump's own lawsuits against The Times and the public threats that he's made against the so-called fake news media—or anyone who doesn't report on him favorably.
The examples there, I mean, could just go on and on.
Trying to force journalists to reveal their sources using a subpoena is definitely rare, even in these days.
And so that's why you have so many people who live in this space saying it's an unprecedented escalation.
And you have media advocates sounding the alarm.
You've got people like Frank Sesno, a former CNN White House bureau chief and current public affairs professor at George Washington University, saying:
"They have used the levers of power to intimidate and demonize professional journalists who report stories that are unfavorable to the administration's desired narrative. Don't like a poll? Sue the Des Moines Register. Don't like the way an interview is edited? Sue 60 Minutes. Don't like the coverage of the gifted Air Force One? Order the FBI to investigate and subpoena the journalists for what is, by the way, a story that is in the public interest."
He added that it's even more concerning that this investigation and these subpoenas are coming out of the White House.
Specifically saying it:
"Graphically illustrates the pressure and influence the White House and president have on law enforcement."
Because many have forgotten about this in the day and age of a Trump presidency.
But the DOJ is supposed to stay independent of politics and driven only by the facts.
But also, while we wait to see what happens here, and you have Trump trying to bend traditional news outlets to his will, we should then also talk about how one of the biggest voices in alternative media is bending over for a different dictator.
-
Because you've got Tucker Carlson remembering who he is at his core.
And so he's spreading blatant Russian propaganda, and it's something that not enough people outside of his sphere of influence are noticing or talking about.
Right, and it's important because it gives you a little insight into where things might go.
Because yesterday, on an episode of his podcast, you had Tucker doing this lengthy interview with Steve Jermy.
If you're unfamiliar, he's a retired Royal Navy commodore who has become known for pushing pro-Russian narratives.
While you've had him pushing a wide range of ideas, his basic thesis is that Russia is fighting a justified defensive war for its own survival.
He claims that the West has actually provoked the war through NATO expansion and rhetoric from EU leaders about breaking up Russia, arguing that the country faces a clear existential threat to its existence.
All while he argues that Western countries have also failed to understand Russia's objectives, which has resulted in strategic failures that prevent them from ever winning the war.
And so the best path forward is to just negotiate with Russia.
And you have him claiming that failure to do so risks drawing Europe into a much bigger war that they won't be able to win because the EU lacks the capabilities to defend itself against Russia.
Though, a big key thing for you to understand is that basically all of that has been thoroughly and widely disputed by experts.
For one, the overwhelming consensus is that Russia's invasion of Ukraine was a clear violation of international law.
With most international scholars rejecting this idea that the war is defensive, noting that even if Russia did have some legitimate security concerns, they do not justify the full-scale invasion of Ukraine or Russia's sweeping territorial claims.
Of course, the reality on the ground didn't stop Tucker from blasting these pro-Russia talking points out to his millions of subscribers.
You would hear Tucker just openly embracing the argument that Russia is simply acting in self-defense.
"That has always made sense to me. If foreign leaders gave speeches calling for the breakup of the United States, I would, of course, do everything I could to support the defense of the United States. I would see that as existential. If someone said we're going to break up the UK, you'd probably take up arms in its defense."
"Of course."
"So I've understood that since the first day."
You also had Tucker painting Western leaders as intentionally hostile liars and arguing that they deliberately sought and actively provoked the conflict.
"What I don't understand is the motive of the liars. Like, why do European leaders seek a war with Russia? Why do American leaders seek a war with Russia? I mean, these are not stupid people, and yet they are hell-bent on destroying their own countries in the service of this war against a country that doesn't need to be our enemy. I mean, it doesn't make any sense."
You also had him praising and echoing Jermy's claim that NATO is the real reason Russia started this war.
"I've often thought that one of the biggest problems is NATO."
"NATO at the moment is a bit of a self-fulfilling... loop."
"What I once said is NATO exists to confront a threat which is created by its own existence, that doesn't have the power to confront the threat that its existence has created. So I think NATO, to my mind, is a key part of the problem here."
And Tucker responded:
"What a beautiful formulation that is. NATO exists to confront the opposition it's created, but doesn't have the power to successfully resist that. I mean, that's the thing I've heard today."
But what you saw, for many, being the craziest moment from the whole interview—and really what's gotten the most traction online—was this:
"I understand why the European populations are Russophobic, because the propaganda has played upon their best qualities. Russia is seen as the aggressor. Ukraine is the underdog. I think Europeans, in general, root for the underdog. That's a sign of their decency."
"It's also allowed. You're allowed to hate Russians because they're white, so you don't have to feel guilty about painting them as animals. You're not racist when you do that."
"I understand all of that."
"And they just don't know any better because Europe is a biosphere in its media. Like, no outside information comes in."
"Right."
"Of course."
"Same in the United States."
And then you had another notable moment when he took a very direct jab at Trump.
"My sense is that Trump's views are irrelevant. I don't think he was for this war with Iran. He did it anyway. He's utterly controlled. So there's that."
"JD Vance is the only person I'm aware of in American national politics with any power at all who would oppose this. But I don't see anyone other than JD Vance. I mean, I hope I'm wrong."
Unsurprisingly, that episode got a ton of backlash online, with many people accusing Tucker of parroting pro-Russian talking points or just actively spreading propaganda.
An allegation that wasn't exactly dissuaded by the fact that you had Russian state-controlled TV network RT reposting multiple clips from the podcast.
But also what was actually surprising is where some of that backlash came from.
Well, yes, you had a lot of people on the left slamming Tucker.
You also had Laura Loomer absolutely crashing out over it, posting tons of different tweets tearing into Tucker, accusing him of gaslighting, claiming he was spreading Russian propaganda, and arguing it's very important that MAGA opens their eyes to this.
That said, I'm not going to say, "You got it, Loomer," or give her too much credit.
This is, at most, broken-clock-being-right-twice-a-day territory.
And a lot of her criticism actually appears to rest on just overt Islamophobia.
With her claiming that Putin is evil because he has embraced—or at least supported—Islam.
And then at one point she also argued that many people believe Carlson has converted to Islam, claiming he recently bought a house in Qatar and repeatedly referring to him as "Tucker Carlson al-Qatari."
But also, Loomer's craziness aside, the criticisms of Tucker are valid.
Especially because this is by no means the only time he's been accused of spouting pro-Russian narratives.
Really, since the war broke out, he's repeatedly spread various Russian talking points.
And, of course, back in 2024, he traveled to Russia to do an interview with Putin that received sweeping backlash, with people on all sides accusing him of providing a platform for a murderous dictator to spread brazen Russian propaganda to American audiences.
But it is important to flag this latest episode for a few reasons.
First of all, I think it's just necessary to call out every instance of major thought leaders spreading propaganda when we see it.
Especially because despite all the backlash, you also had a ton of people on Twitter sharing and repeating the talking points that Carlson was pushing.
But also beyond that, Tucker's pivot away from Trump and his condemnation of the Iran war has made it seem like he is a more sensible authority.
So it feels very important to remember that he has consistently spread conspiracy theories and acted as a megaphone for dangerous propaganda.
Then there's even more that we've got to dive into in just a minute.
-
But first, let me thank a sponsor and say Brain.fm.
It helps me get past the hardest part of convincing my brain that we are, in fact, starting.
Somehow opening the document? That's easy.
Actually focusing on it? That's an entirely different negotiation.
But Brain.fm isn't just background music.
It's audio engineered by neuroscientists to help support focus, creativity, relaxation, sleep—whatever mode your brain needs.
It uses patented Neural Phase Locking® technology, which is just a very scientific way of saying the audio is designed to help your brain stay on task instead of suddenly remembering something embarrassing from ten years ago.
You can also adjust the neural effect level depending on how much help you need.
Sometimes I just need a little momentum.
Other times my brain just needs to be escorted back to the task.
And Brain.fm has modes for:
Deep Work
Creativity
Relaxation
Sleep
Power Naps
ADHD-specific focus
Unlike regular playlists that compete for your attention, Brain.fm fades into the background so you can actually focus.
It's the only music app backed by a National Science Foundation grant studying how sound affects your brain.
If your brain keeps turning one task into a 12-tab side quest, go to Brain.fm/DeFranco or scan the QR code on the screen to get 30 days free.
That's Brain.fm/DeFranco for a free month and a chance to see what happens when your brain finally stops filing appeals.
And then we arrive at the final block of today's Philip DeFranco Show.
BRAIN FM
Go to http://brain.fm/defranco to get 30 days of free access to science-backed music that really works.
-
We've got more news you need to know. We're going to cram it in, and it starts with Troy Jackson.
Because you've got Jackson now set to pick up where Graham Platner left off in the race for the Senate.
And if you're unfamiliar, Jackson is a Bernie-backed Democrat with a working-class background that has, so far, helped him a lot in his career.
He's been on the scene since the '90s.
But also, he's changed a lot since then.
He actually started as a pretty socially conservative guy at one point.
I mean, his voting record earned perfect scores from anti-abortion groups.
You also had him voting against gay marriage in the state back in 2009.
But since then, he has voted for pro-abortion bills, saying that abortion is health care and that he believes in health care for all.
And so, for Troy Jackson, his voting record now earns perfect scores from LGBTQ rights groups.
With him saying:
"People in LGBTQ circles know that I am one of their strongest advocates."
Then, when it comes to economics, as a fifth-generation logger, he's a populist.
He seems focused on the working class and wants to tax the wealthy.
And so, for all, he says this movement is about taking on a system rigged against working people.
Fighting for Medicare for All, strong unions, higher wages, reproductive freedom, and an economy where billionaires and corporations finally pay their fair share.
And so you're seeing, for a lot of people, he seems like the obvious choice as far as policy compared to his opponents.
But it turns out one of his biggest challenges is going to be making sure that people focus on his policies and not his alleged behavior.
Because there is a bit of a reputation there.
He's reportedly thrown a water bottle at one of his peers during a meeting.
Others have also said that he's gotten in people's faces, cursing at them.
Some even saying they think of him as a bully.
"It's one thing to be screaming when you're just mad about the world. But his screaming felt like intentional intimidation."
You're seeing more reports like that resurfacing as he's been getting closer to a potential Senate run.
But then with that, what you're seeing his team say is that he's always taken responsibility and apologized whenever, quote:
"His frustration got the better of him."
And that he regrets the moments when disagreements became too heated.
Adding that passion for the issues he advocates for should not be confused with physical intimidation or abuse.
But as far as whether any of this is actually going to derail him—who really knows?
For some, those instances in the past might represent something they don't want to see in a representative.
But for others, they might just see passion from a person they want to see as a fighter.
And honestly, something we've seen post-Platner allegations is a lot of people kind of just want Platner's policies without any of the Platner baggage.
Baggage that, to many Republicans, made Platner very beatable by Susan Collins.
Closer to the election.
Then also in the news, this white-only separatist group.
-
They're being threatened with a lawsuit that could expose every one of their secrets.
Because this is Eric Orwoll, the founder of Return to the Land.
Who, since 2023, has been operating two communities in Arkansas that are designed to be exclusive to straight, white, Christian people.
And they're actively trying to set up four more, with long-term goals of creating cities of thousands.
And so far, you've had them raising over $200,000.
One of their communities has over 40 residents living in makeshift cabins, including 12 kids that many people argue are being actively indoctrinated.
And at least among their goals is installing a "Hitler 2.0."
"And so it's natural that we get excited thinking about, 'Oh, well, maybe we'll get, like, Hitler 2.0, and he'll just fix everything. We'll have a dictator that will just fix the country from the top down and inspire us.'"
The guy even reportedly tried to hide his copy of Mein Kampf while giving a tour to reporters.
Now, publicly, we don't know exactly how its membership process is laid out.
It's laid out in the membership rules.
And depending on what's in there, it could violate state or federal laws.
But the group argues that it can discriminate through a loophole in the Fair Housing Act of 1968.
Legally screening members by organizing as a private membership association, and then tying that to a for-profit LLC.
Giving any member who buys a $6,600 stake in the LLC three acres of land that they can build a home on, rather than buying the land outright.
Now, what you're seeing is that could all come crashing down for them because a real estate broker saw an opportunity to snatch up land for cheap.
She said she thought she'd sneak under the radar since she's white and Christian.
Adding that she didn't care about clashing politics, saying:
"A good investment's a good investment."
With that, you had her claiming that the application included questions about her views on:
Gay marriage
COVID
Abortion
How often she thinks about the Roman Empire
But Return to the Land ended up barring her after they discovered three things:
Her husband's Black.
Their kids are biracial.
She has Jewish ancestry.
But the point there being that Return to the Land doesn't consider Jewish people white.
So now you've got her suing with the backing of the NAACP, with them seeking a court order that would ban the group from discriminating.
A huge key thing here is if this lawsuit reaches the pre-discovery phase—which is the pretrial phase where each side starts collecting evidence—it could expose Return to the Land's actual membership rules, their land agreements, and the active plans they have for other communities.
All details that this group has fought to keep private up to this point.
-
And then actually, for your last story today, let's talk about the Senate race in Texas.
Because you've got Democrats worried that James Talarico could lose the seat to Attorney General Ken Paxton.
Well, the Democrat running a statewide race in Texas has already been seen as kind of a long shot.
The polling has been very positive thus far, so with every vote mattering more than ever, you've got some people thinking that it's up to Jasmine Crockett to actually make or break his campaign.
But also with that, you're seeing people speculate that she's holding back because of how their primary race turned out.
"We've all seen the attack ads that have come on behalf of my primary opponent. The ads that are darkening my skin, and this continual kind of, 'If she wins, we lose.' It's not even undertones right now. It is straight-up racist."
Where you had racial issues coming up there, people wondering if those are the same issues that are keeping her away from his campaign.
And reportedly, she's not going to be at the Democratic Party convention later this week.
So you have some speculating even more.
But I should note that she actually already endorsed Talarico after conceding a few months back.
And she said that she'd spend time on the road through the midterms trying to support down-ballot candidates.
But still, right now you're seeing people worried that Black Texans aren't going to show up for Talarico at the polls if she isn't helping out his campaign to make sure of it.
Which is why you've seen some political experts saying that not having Jasmine Crockett involved may come back to bite Talarico and other Democrats.
You're seeing some voters agree, saying:
"He'll have an uphill battle turning out the Black vote. And if he narrowly loses this race due to decreased Black turnout, then Jasmine Crockett is going to go down as an all-time villain in modern Democratic politics."
But then that's also what you're seeing some other voters pushing back on.
Saying that Crockett doesn't decide what Black Texans do with their votes.
Arguing that any struggles Talarico has with Black voters are his responsibility.
And actually, you have a lot of people sounding off on one another at a recent town hall.
You would see Talarico speaking on all of this.
"If you claim to be my supporter, if you claim to be a part of this movement that we are building, please keep Congresswoman Crockett's name out of your mouth."
"It is not the congresswoman's job to win this Senate seat. That is my job. Treat the congresswoman with the respect that she has earned."
And in the meantime, as far as some voters out there, they do seem like they're going to be holding Talarico's feet to the fire between now and Election Day.
"You stay here. You answer our questions because we've suffered the consequences."
"And I appreciate you traveling in. And I appreciate you—for my people, not for you."
But for now, we're going to have to wait to see what happens.
And then, my friend, you beautiful bastard, that is the end of your Tuesday Philip DeFranco Show.
But I've actually got a bonus news story that we need to dive into together around the Meta AI layoffs and lawsuits.
It's, in my eyes, insane. Wild. Worth your time.
You can click on the screen here, or I've got a link for you in the description.
But whatever you do, my name's Philip DeFranco.
You've just been filled in.
I love your faces, and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.
