Bloomberg interviewer's attempts to needle Trump backfire — and the crowd loves it



Leftist publications and the Harris campaign have tried desperately to spin President Donald Trump's Tuesday interview with the editor in chief of Bloomberg News as a botch job on the part of the Republican — calling it "disastrously bad," "rambling," "angry and unfocused," and "a total mess."

The audience members present for the exchange at the Economic Club of Chicago were evidently of a different mind, both cheering on Trump's ripostes to Bloomberg's John Micklethwait, booing the interviewer's loaded questions, and giving the president a standing ovation.

Micklethwait, who reportedly ordered his staff not to investigate Michael Bloomberg or his Democratic rivals prior to the 2020 election, attempted on several occasions to kneecap the Republican candidate but proved unsuited to the task.

In one instance, the British Bloomberg EIC tried characterizing Trump's plan to impose significant tariffs on imports and on American companies that outsource manufacturing as potentially ruinous, suggesting that it might adversely impact the economy as well as foreign powers.

Trump indicated that his tariff strategy during his first term was ramping up to major success prior to the pandemic, not only incentivizing companies to build factories in the homeland but bringing in "hundreds of billions of dollars just from China alone, and I hadn't even started yet."

'They've been wrong about everything.'

Shortly after the Republican president reiterated that tariffs serve to protect American companies and those companies that will ultimately flood into the country, Micklethwait said:

A lot of places like this, they rely — there are a lot of jobs that rely on foreigners coming here. You're going to basically stop trade with China. You're talking about 60% tariffs on that. You're talking, as you said, 100%, 200% on things you don't really like. You're also talking about 10, 20% tariffs on the rest of the world. That is going to have a serious effect on the overall economy. And yes you're going to find some people who would gain from individual tariffs. The overall effect could be massive.

Trump rejected the Bloomberg editor's premise, saying, "I agree. It's going to have a massive effect. Positive effect. It's going to be a positive, not a negative."

"I know how committed you are to this," continued Trump. "It must be hard for you to spend 25 years talking about tariffs as being negative and then have somebody explain to you that you're totally wrong."

As the audience broke into laughter, Micklethwait tried in vain to reassert himself, insinuating that 40 million jobs dependent on trade might be lost on account of the tariffs.

"You ready? John Deere. Great company. They announced about a year ago they're going to build big plants outside of the United States," said Trump. "They're going to build them in Mexico."

"That's right. I said, 'If John Deere builds those plants, they're not selling anything into the United States,'" added Trump.

Following the Bloomberg interview, the Wall Street Journal indicated John Deere has not yet axed its Mexican ambitions; however, Trump's potential re-election might prompt a rethinking of the company's extra-national focus.

Micklethwait suggested further that Trump's proposed tariffs could undermine American foreign policy, in part by upsetting allies and "dividing" the West.

"How does it help you take on China turning all of your allies against you?" asked the editor.

"Tremendously because China thinks we're a stupid country, a very stupid country. They can't believe that somebody finally got wise to them," said Trump. "Not one president charged China anything. They said, 'Oh, they are a third-world nation. They are developing.' Well, we're a developing nation, too. Take a look at Detroit. Take a look at our cities. ... We have to develop more than they do."

"Our allies have taken advantage of us more so than our enemies," continued the president, citing the European Union nations, Japan, and South Korea as countries that have benefited from other presidents' reluctance to impose tariffs.

After several unsuccessful attempts to extract concessions from Trump on the topic of tariffs, Micklethwait suggested the Republicans' promises to drop taxes will cost trillions of dollars.

"You're flooding the thing with giveaways. I was actually quite kind to you. I used $7 trillion. The upper estimate [for the cost of the promises] is $15 trillion. People like the Wall Street Journal, who's hardly a communist organization, they have criticized you on this as well," said the editor.

"What does the Wall Street Journal know?" responded Trump. "They've been wrong about everything. So have you, by the way."

Once again, the audience — apparently out of touch with the thinking of liberal bloggers — broke into laughter.

"You're trying to turn this — you're trying to turn this into debate," said Micklethwait, growing visibly flustered.

"You're wrong," replied Trump. "You've been wrong all your life on this stuff."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

BlackRock: The puppet master behind Kamala Harris



Kamala Harris is not a comedian, but you could be forgiven for thinking otherwise.

During the recent presidential debate, the tireless TikToker somehow managed to maintain a straight face while pledging to create an "opportunity economy" for the middle class. Yet, this promise rings hollow when both she and President Biden are deeply entangled with BlackRock, a firm notorious for crushing the very group she claims to uplift.

BlackRock’s CEO, Larry Fink, openly praises the efficiency of totalitarian regimes; what does this say about where the firm’s loyalties lie?

In short, BlackRock has used its vast financial influence to sway political decisions, control market outcomes, and prioritize profits over the interests of everyday people.

Master of puppets

It's the puppet master behind the scenes, shaping policies that favor the elite while leaving the middle class to foot the bill. Harris' cozy relationship with BlackRock exposes her "opportunity economy" as nothing more than a smokescreen for serving the powerful.

The facts speak for themselves.

Harris' two top economic advisers, Michael Pyle and Brian Deese, were key players at BlackRock. Both weredrafted last month, likely to help her craft policies in anticipation of a potential presidency.

As for Joe Biden, since taking office, he has surrounded himself with former BlackRock executives, embedding the financial giant's influence at the highest levels of government.

Take Michael Pyle, once BlackRock’s global chief investment strategist, who recently served as U.S. deputy national security adviser for international economics. In this critical role, Pyle directed the administration's international economic policy and acted as Biden’s key representative, or “sherpa,” at the G7 and G20 summits. His sway over global economic strategy was significant.

Before this, Pyle helped shape domestic policy as Harris’ chief economic adviser during the administration's disastrous first year. His deep ties to BlackRock underscore the firm’s growing grip on the Biden administration's decision-making, further aligning government policy with Wall Street’s interests.

Last week BlackRock announced that it was rehiring Pyle as deputy head of it's $3.2 trillion portfolio management group.

And let’s not forget Adewale "Wally" Adeyemo, another key player in the Biden administration. Currently serving as deputy secretary of the treasury, the 43-year-old was once Larry Fink'sright-hand man at BlackRock. During his time at the investment giant, Adeyemo acted as a senior adviser and led the firm's public policy team, directly shaping BlackRock’s strategy in navigating government relations and regulatory frameworks. His current role places him in a powerful position to influence U.S. financial policy.

You break it, you bought it

Then there's Eric Van Nostrand, a former BlackRock executive now serving as a senior adviser under Biden on economic issues related to Russia and Ukraine,as reported by Bloomberg. Since Van Nostrand’s appointment, BlackRock’s interest and involvement in Ukraine have suspiciously intensified, with the firm advising on reconstruction efforts and channeling investment into critical sectors.

BlackRock's history suggests this support is far from altruistic. The firm has a notorious track record of capitalizing on geopolitical crises for financial gain, rather than genuinely aiding nations in need. Much like itsexploitative role during the 2008 financial crisis, when BlackRock profited from the collapse it helped precipitate, the firm now stands to benefit from Ukraine’s instability. Its influence over Kyiv’s policies, including the deregulation of urban planning, paves the way for corporate interests to exploit a rather dire situation.

Chinese democracy

It doesn’t stop at Ukraine. BlackRock isn’t just funding the destabilization of democracies abroad — it’s actively helping China, a regime that poses an existential threat to American interests.

The Coalition for a Prosperous America has revealed how BlackRock funnels billions into Chinese companies, many linked to the Chinese Communist Party and the People's Liberation Army. This raises alarming questions about national security and America’s economic sovereignty.

BlackRock’s CEO, Larry Fink, openly praises the efficiency of totalitarian regimes; what does this say about where the firm’s loyalties lie? Certainly not with the average American family struggling to make ends meet.

As if that weren't enough, BlackRock’s involvement in the U.S. military-industrial complex adds another layer to its nefarious influence. As highlighted by researchers at Corporate Accountability, an organization committed to exposing corporations that undermine democracy, BlackRock holds tens of billions in investments in major defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Boeing. By profiting directly from never-ending wars, BlackRock reaps enormous financial rewards while American taxpayers are left to foot the bill.

Which brings us back to Kamala Harris. For all her posturing, the flip-flopper-in-chief is not here to challenge this system. She’s here to safeguard it. If elected, Harris' economic policies will be molded by the same firm responsible for widening income inequality and eroding democracy. The Wall Street Journal has shed light on how BlackRock has amassed entire residential neighborhoods, turning these homes into rental properties. This aggressive acquisition strategy fuels bidding wars and drives up home prices, directly disadvantaging the middle class.

As Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, a Yale professor, has pointed out, Kamala Harris’ ties to Wall Street are even more intimate than Biden’s. And when Wall Street speaks, it’s really BlackRock’s voice you’re hearing. Harris’ campaign promises to support the middle class appear to be nothing more than a boldfaced lie. But this is what she excels at: bending the truth.

Make no mistake about it: BlackRock’s interests are diametrically opposed to those of the American people. A Harris presidency would mean more policies that enrich the few at the expense of the many. Kamala Harris isn’t the answer; on the contrary, she’s part of the problem.

'Pod Save' Bros Flaunt Wealth, Bust Unions, Sleep With Subordinates: Bombshell Report

Pod Save America? More like Pod Damn America. The former Obama bros who started a podcasting empire have finally been exposed by their employees for flaunting their wealth, sleeping with subordinates, and flouting their progressive ideals like total hypocrites.

The post 'Pod Save' Bros Flaunt Wealth, Bust Unions, Sleep With Subordinates: Bombshell Report appeared first on .

Zuckerberg's JAW-DROPPING statement on Trump — are we in the midst of a 'cultural shift'?



The assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump left many Americans outraged — but it also left many proud.

And one of those Americans is someone you wouldn’t quite expect: Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

In a recent interview with Emily Chang from “The Circuit,” Zuckerberg embodied what Dave Rubin of “The Rubin Report” calls a “cultural shift.”

“I’ve done some stuff personally in the past, I’m not planning on doing that this time,” Zuckerberg told Chang. “And that includes, you know, not endorsing either of the candidates.”

“I mean, there’s obviously a lot of crazy stuff going on in the world. I mean the historic events over the last, like over the weekend,” he continued, before he brought up the assassination attempt on the Republican nominee.

“On a personal note,” Zuckerberg began, “seeing Donald Trump get up after getting shot in the face and pump his fist in the air with the American flag is one of the most badass things I’ve ever seen in my life.”

“And I think at some level as an American, it’s hard to not get kind of emotional about that spirit and that fight. And I think that’s why a lot of people like the guy,” he added.

Rubin thinks this is a very interesting turn of events.

“The point is that he now feels that he can come out and say that, say anything remotely positive about Donald Trump or America. He would not have done that, say, five years ago. So, that’s the portion that we are winning here, and I don’t want people to lose sight of that,” he says.


Want more from Dave Rubin?

To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Mark Zuckerberg says Trump with fist in air after getting shot is 'one of the most bada** things I've ever seen in my life'



Mark Zuckerberg said seeing former President Donald Trump with his fist in the air after getting shot during last weekend's assassination attempt was "one of the most bada** things I've ever seen in my life."

Zuckerberg — CEO of Meta, the parent company of Facebook — revealed his reaction during an interview Thursday at his company’s headquarters in Menlo Park, California, Bloomberg reported.

'I think that that’s why a lot of people like the guy.'

“Now look, I mean there's obviously a lot of crazy stuff going on in the world," Zuckerberg told Emily Chang of "The Circuit," which is part of Bloomberg Originals, before shifting to the attempt on Trump's life in Butler, Pennsylvania, last Saturday.

"And I mean, on a personal note ... seeing Donald Trump get up after getting shot in the face and pump his fist in the air with the American flag [in the background] is one of the most bada** things I’ve ever seen in my life," Zuckerberg said with an incredulous laugh.

Photo by Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Zuckerberg added that "on some level, as an American, it’s ... hard to not get kind of emotional about that spirit and that fight, and I think that that’s why a lot of people like the guy.”

The social media mogul also said in the interview that he's not going to endorse Trump or Democrat President Joe Biden.

Check out a clip of the interview below:

— (@)

It would be a stretch to call Zuckerberg a Trump fan.

The day after the Jan. 6, 2021, rioting at the U.S. Capitol, Zuckerberg announced that Facebook and Facebook-owned Instagram "indefinitely" banned Trump from using their social media platforms.

Zuckerberg wrote in part on Jan. 7, "The shocking events of the last 24 hours clearly demonstrate that President Donald Trump intends to use his remaining time in office to undermine the peaceful and lawful transition of power to his elected successor, Joe Biden."

Meta, Facebook's parent company, lifted that ban against Trump last year, the Associated Press reported — but with “guardrails” such as “heightened suspension penalties” if Trump posts violate standards. The social media giant then did away with all social media restrictions against Trump a week ago, the AP reported. The announcement came the day before the assassination attempt against Trump.

Zuckerberg in 2022 said Facebook restricted the spread of the Hunter Biden laptop story in the run-up to the 2020 election over an FBI warning against the spread of election disinformation. Earlier in 2022, former Attorney General Bill Barr said suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story by legacy media and Big Tech "definitely" had an effect on the 2020 presidential election.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump Set To Become One Of 500 Most Wealthy People In The World: REPORT

The process will increase Trump's net worth to $6.4 billion

Bloomberg: '2024 is the year of elections and that's a threat to democracy'



Opinion writers at Bloomberg and other liberal publications appear to share at least one thing in common with President Joe Biden: a sense that democracy is safe only so long as the right candidates are winning. It turns out, the right candidates happen to be establishment liberals.

Return of the 'unthinkables'

On Sundays, Bloomberg Opinion senior editor Tobin Harshaw cobbles together the various opinions his publication spat out over the course of the previous week and attempts to pull at the threads common among them. This Sunday, in a roundup entitled "2024 Is the Year of Elections and That's a Threat to Democracy," Harshaw exposed his team's disdain for democratic processes that yield results unfavorable to the liberal status quo.

India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Russia, Mexico, Iran, the U.K., South Africa, Austria, Taiwan, the Czech Republic, and possibly Ukraine are among the 64 countries set to hold elections this year, along with the European Union.

"41% of the world's population is having major elections this year. Yay democracy! Right?" wrote Harshaw. "Not really, what with extremist populist parties — mostly right-wing — on the rise everywhere from the European Union to the Pacific rim."

Harshaw referenced a weekend piece by John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge, which cast the 2016 election of Donald Trump and the restoration of British sovereignty via its Brexit break with the European Union as "unthinkables," then suggested the world in 2024 "is almost a mirror image of 2016."

"In this year of elections, voters in countries representing 41% of the world's population will go to the polls — and in a terrifying number of cases, candidates who would have been seen as extremist wild cards in 2016 look the strongest," wrote the Bloomberg duo.

"The long-shot unthinkables from eight years ago are now the firm favorites, or even just the accepted status quo," wrote Micklethwait and Wooldridge. "Bookmakers give Trump a 40% chance of winning November's presidential election. His closest rival, Joe Biden, is an 81-year-old prone to gaffes and memory lapses, exactly the rival that Trump would want in the grueling marathon that is a modern presidential race."

Not only is a candidate loathed by establishment Washington and the liberal media poised to win the 2024 presidential election, but right-leaning populists farther afield — such as Dutch prime ministerial candidate Geert Wilders and France's Marine Le Pen — are also ascendant, to the chagrin of liberal onlookers in the media.

The Bloomberg duo suggested optimists might be satisfied to know there's a 10% chance of "more benign possibilities" seizing the day. In the case of the U.S. election, they floated the names of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) and Nikki Haley as so-called "benign" options.

After insinuating that the basic requirement that things turn out "alright" in 2024 is that "somebody other than Trump wins the US presidency," Harshaw noted that voters may also threaten democracy in the island nation of Taiwan, where "another victory by the ruling Democratic Progressive Party may bring the territory closer to a Chinese invasion."

The head of the DPP, current Vice President Lai Ching-te, has been called a "complete troublemaker" by the Chinese regime.

To deliver the Bloomberg opinion team a "surprisingly good year," voters will have to make sure that "America will be celebrating its first female president; Trump and Netanyahu will be spending more time with their lawyers; the US and China will be devoting more time to mending their economic relationship and less to shadowboxing over Taiwan; [British leftist Keir] Starmer will have begun [reunification] negotiations with the EU; the Israelis and Palestinians will be talking to each other seriously, for the first time in decades; and one or another of the world’s nastier dictatorships will have fallen."

Birds of a feather

The Atlantic is another liberal outfit that has fearmongered over the possibility that voters may not provide establishmentarians with what Harshaw called a "good year."

Brian Klaas, a contributing writer for the Atlantic, suggested Saturday that "even with all this voting, democracy is under severe threat, endangered by predatory politicians who rig elections and disgruntled voters willing to hand over power to autocratic leaders." Klaas even came up with a term to denote the tendency for democratic elections to produce results he doesn't like: "counterfeit democracy."

The decision to seek remedy for bad leadership at the ballot box is emblematic of democracy's erosion, according to Klaas.

Rather than lean into the kind of "stolen election" rhetoric failed Democratic candidates Stacey Abrams and Hillary Clinton have deployed in recent years, Klaas suggested that democracy is failing because of a "toxic cycle: Governance is dysfunctional, so politicians fail to deliver for voters—and voters respond to those failures by contemplating whether authoritarian rule might be better."

"Billions of ordinary people around the world will vote this year," wrote the Atlantic contributor. "If they make the wrong choice, 2024 may be remembered as the year the world embraced elections without democracy."

Campaigning on theme

The democracy rhetoric deployed in the Atlantic and Bloomberg pieces has been central to Biden's re-election campaign.

Within hours of a Democrat-aligned group getting his top rival removed from the primary ballot last month, Biden tweeted, "Trump poses many threats to our country: The right to choose, civil rights, voting rights, and America's standing in the world."

"But the greatest threat he poses is to our democracy," continued Biden. "If we lose that, we lose everything."

In his first major campaign event of 2024, Biden said, "America, as we begin this election year, we must be clear, democracy is on the ballot. Your freedom is on the ballot."

While he claimed that "democracy is about being able to bring about peaceful change," Biden also insinuated that voters' decision to change the man in the White House could mean democracy's end.

The Biden campaign has also capitalized on this suggestion in the decrepit candidate's new 2024 campaign ad.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!