“Don’t Tread on Trump” – The Unknown Podcast
NOTE: The Unknown Podcast is available on YouTube and Rumble.
By M. Thomas Nast with Michael Volpe and Richard Luthmann
In Episode 61 of The Unknown Podcast, journalists Richard Luthmann and Michael Volpe tore into America’s political circus with a blend of streetwise candor and unapologetic bombast.
From the global “No Kings” protests to President Donald Trump’s latest legal and foreign policy fireworks, the duo turned current events into live fire.
Trump’s War on Radicals: No Kings, Know-Nothings, and the Socialist Left
The rise of the “No Kings” movement has liberal activists parading in the streets – but President Trump’s allies smell a setup. They see these mass rallies not as organic uprisings but as astroturf theatrics bankrolled by left-wing billionaires.
“No Kings Day” protests drew paid protesters across the nation in a bid to “jumpstart an overthrow of President Donald John Trump.” The media hyped huge crowds (even using old footage to inflate turnout), while organizers claimed millions rallied worldwide.
Conservative critics aren’t buying it. Senator Ted Cruz scoffed that the anti-Trump protests were “organized by Soros operatives and funded by Soros money.”
Richard Luthmann has consistently called the protesters “paid agitators” and the whole spectacle “very synthetic” and “inauthentic.” “If you look, it’s an AARP convention,” Luthmann sniped, noting many demonstrators were “old liberals” holding identical signs.
Trump’s camp compares “No Kings” to past doomed movements. Luthmann likened these “woke, AOC, Mamdani types” to the Know Nothing Party of the 1850s – rabble-rousers who swept into office only to flame out due to “no ability to govern.” He predicts the same fate for today’s leftist insurgents.
“I think that’s what’s gonna happen with [Zohran] Mamdani and some of these other people,” Luthmann said of the movement’s darlings.
Zohran Kwame Mamdani, a 33-year-old Democratic Socialist, is running for New York City mayor as a proud face of this “No Kings” left. But even Democrats are cringing at his thin résumé. Mamdani “has barely ever held a job” – only about three years of work since college – and “has no experience in local government.”
Behind his flashy social media persona, “there is little substance and no proof of success,” critics say.
Longtime political strategist Hank Sheinkopf didn’t mince words: “What does this guy know? He’s a make-believe character who has no idea how the city works,” Sheinkopf said, noting Mamdani wouldn’t know how to run the jail, subway, or sanitation in America’s largest city.
Others slam Mamdani’s radical record – he’s been called a “polarizing figure” with “radical affiliations” and rhetoric that poses a “danger to the city’s diverse communities.”
Some pro-Israel groups even brand him a “rabid antisemite” who pals around with extremist, anti-police organizations.
Trump’s supporters argue the “No Kings” brigade is far from a genuine grassroots wave – and they doubt it will have the lasting impact of the 2010 Tea Party. Unlike the Tea Party, which united around concrete issues like taxes and backed real candidates, No Kings “was a big set of rallies” without a clear platform or leadership.
“If [they] are to be successful, they have to coalesce around a set of issues… and back candidates,” noted podcast host Michael Volpe.
So far, that hasn’t happened. Luthmann goes further, arguing that many “No Kings” protesters are essentially paid “Antifa” shock troops funneled in by George Soros.
“This is a very inauthentic showing,” he said, claiming big leftist donors and unions whipped up an anti-Trump street spectacle to create an illusion of mass resistance.
In a twist, Luthmann believes President Trump will turn the tables on the slogan itself. He predicts Trump will “hijack No Kings” – not to grab power, but to reject it with a flourish worthy of George Washington.
Trump, he says, might soon have “universal acclaim” akin to the founding generation’s regard for George Washington, to the point “we… might ask him to be the king.” But Trump will refuse because “he loves the Constitution that much.”
In Luthmann’s telling, Trump could be celebrated as the leader who “would not be King,” echoing the first U.S. president. It’s a bold prophecy – and one that underscores how Trump’s allies cast him as a principled patriot even as opponents scream that he’s a tyrant.
“Donald Trump [doesn’t] want anything other than peace. He’s the peace president,” Luthmann insisted.
In their eyes, Trump is no wannabe monarch – he’s a guardian and protector of the constitutional republic stepping up to save America from chaos.
Trump’s War on Radicals: Trump DOJ Drains the Prosecutorial Swamp
President Trump is not just talking tough – he’s using the Justice Department to clear out the rot and assert his authority. In recent weeks, Trump’s DOJ has unleashed a blitz of indictments against figures he blames for past “witch hunts.”
After crooked Letitia James, the highest-profile target so far is former FBI Director James Comey. The indignant former prosecutor is now facing federal charges for lying to Congress and obstructing justice in connection with his 2017 memos.
Comey pleaded not guilty and blasted the prosecution as “vindictive” and “selective.” Trump’s Justice Department makes no apologies for taking on the man who led the Russia probe.
And Comey isn’t the only one in the crosshairs. Trump’s legal guns have fired at a roster of his enemies – from ex-White House aide John Bolton, who was hit with a new indictment, to former CIA chief John Brennan, who officials hint could be next on the chopping block.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who unfurled unprecedented Lawfare against Trump, his businesses, and his family, now finds herself under federal indictment in a separate case.
One by one, Trump’s foes are being marched into court in what mainstream media hacks have dubbed a “revenge tour.” Critics call it an abuse of power. It has another name: Justice.
“He’s going through his enemies,” said journalist Michael Volpe, warning that America is “turning into a Banana Republic” where each administration jails the last.
“When the Democrats get in power, they’re gonna try to prosecute any and all of their political enemies,” Volpe argued, likening the cycle of retribution to third-world despotism.
Trump’s team shrugs off the hysteria. They insist it’s about restoring a fair justice system after years of one-sided impunity for the “deep state.” And they’re fighting tooth and nail in court to keep these cases on track.
In Comey’s trial, Trump’s prosecutors just opened a new front: they suggested Comey’s high-powered defense attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, has a conflict of interest and may be disqualified from the case.
In a filing, DOJ lawyers claimed Fitzgerald himself was involved in Comey’s leaking of classified memos back in 2017, effectively making him a witness to the events at issue.
It’s a bold move – one that would deprive Comey of his lead counsel. Comey’s camp fired back that the conflict claim is “provably false,” but the judge agreed to review the matter in due course.
Meanwhile, Comey’s lawyers are pulling every lever to throw out the charges. They’ve filed a barrage of motions – “like 5 million motions to dismiss,” Volpe quipped – and one in particular has Washington buzzing. The defense argues that the newly-instated prosecutor who signed Comey’s indictment, Interim U.S. Attorney Lindsay Halligan, was illegally appointed.
Halligan, just 33, is a Trump loyalist installed as the acting U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia. Trump elevated her after abruptly ousting her predecessor, bypassing the usual Senate confirmation.
Richard Luthmann practically gushes about Halligan – “she’s a MAGA icon already. She’s just great,” he said – precisely because she’s been aggressive in going after Trump’s antagonists.
Halligan led the team that indicted Comey, a fact that infuriates the former FBI chief’s defense. Comey’s motion claims Trump broke the Appointments Clause of the Constitution by installing Halligan without Senate approval. They argue that any indictment she signs is invalid.
Trump’s Justice Department calls that argument a desperate technicality. Halligan’s interim status is permitted under federal vacancy law, they counter, and she was well within the 120-day window allowed for acting U.S. attorneys.
“She’s not there 120 days yet. It’s totally fine,” Luthmann said of Halligan’s appointment, dismissing the issue as “not a ripe issue.”
He and other Trump allies are confident this gambit will fail – but if a judge ever bought it, the consequences could be explosive. By Comey’s logic, not only his case but other recent indictments (including one against John Bolton) could get tossed out as “illegitimate.”
That high-stakes question may ultimately land at the Supreme Court, as both sides seek clarity on where presidential appointment power ends and judicial authority begins.
The showdown is escalating into what Luthmann calls a “war on the judiciary.” If the courts try to block Trump’s justice agenda outright, he warns, Trump and his Republican allies in Congress will hit back hard.
“They’re gonna have to give Trump something here,” Luthmann said, “only because if they give Trump nothing… It’s gonna turn into a war on the judiciary.”
In his view, Trump can “win the war” against recalcitrant judges. How? By using the powers of Congress to starve the courts of resources.
“Congress can start taking away seats… defund judgeships” in liberal districts that obstruct the agenda, Luthmann explained, effectively choking off the courts’ ability to interfere. It’s a nuclear option no modern president has dared consider. But Trump’s camp wants the judiciary to know they mean business.
“American justice [could grind] to a halt” if activist judges overplay their hand, Luthmann argued – because Trump would not hesitate to use every tool at his disposal. The message to the courts is unmistakable: Don’t Tread on Trump.
Trump’s opponents paint these maneuvers as the acts of an autocrat. His supporters frame it as a long-overdue house-cleaning. To Trump’s base, indicting figures like Tish James, Comey, Bolton, and Brennan isn’t partisan payback – it’s fulfilling a campaign promise to “drain the swamp” and hold “bad hombres” accountable.
They point out that for years, Democrats prosecuted Trump associates (from Michael Flynn to Roger Stone to Paul Manafort) while Beltway insiders like Comey and Hunter Biden skated free. Now, with Trump back in power, the shoe is on the other foot.
The President is unapologetic about settling scores. He sees a corrupt establishment and intends to “prosecute any and all” who broke the law under its protection. And if that triggers a constitutional clash, so be it.
Trump is confident he has the people—and the Constitution—on his side.
“The system was two-tiered,” Luthmann said. “It’s favored elites for too long. Trump is simply evening the scales. Any liberal that wants to argue has to explain away Glenn Greenwald’s book on elite immunity from 2012.”
In this high-stakes fight between an emboldened executive and the entrenched legal bureaucracy, neither side shows any sign of backing down.
Trump’s War on Radicals: Troops for Chicago, Missiles for Cartels
Even as he battles protesters and prosecutors, President Trump is charging ahead with a hardline national agenda that has his critics aghast and his supporters cheering. Nowhere is Trump’s “law and order” zeal more evident than in crime-ridden Chicago. He has openly threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to quell violence in the Windy City – a move almost unheard of in modern America.
White House insiders say a “wider military deployment to Chicago with full arrest power” is on the table, and Trump himself has talked up the option of sending in federal troops. Essentially, the President would declare that Chicago is in a state of insurrection, allowing him to bypass local authorities.
“They are talking about him imposing the Insurrection Act… by decree. He says, there’s an insurrection in Chicago and I get to do whatever I want,” Volpe explained of Trump’s stance.
Such rhetoric sends shivers down the spines of civil libertarians. Chicago, after all, is not literally rebelling against the United States – it’s suffering from endemic gang crime.
“There’s no insurrection, folks,” Volpe remarked. “Chicago has some crime… but there’s no insurrection.”
Local leaders argue that flooding city streets with federal troops would be extreme and unnecessary. But Trump is visibly fed up with the unending bloodshed.
Luthmann grimly quipped that today “you have to walk down the streets of Chicago with a bulletproof vest” to feel safe.
The President seems to agree. He’s signaled that, absent drastic improvement, he’s willing to do whatever it takes – even if that means soldiers patrolling Chicago.
Federal courts are already grappling with the legal limits: one appellate panel (in the liberal Ninth Circuit) recently ruled Trump can deploy the National Guard in Portland, Oregon, but another court slapped an injunction on a similar move in Chicago. The fight may end up at the Supreme Court.
In the meantime, Trump keeps the pressure on, lambasting Chicago’s “soft” local leadership and insisting he will restore order where they failed.
Trump’s hard line doesn’t stop at the city limits. He has taken the gloves off in the war on drugs – even if it means using military force outside the country. In a brazen show of force, the U.S. Coast Guard (with the President’s blessing) recently opened fire on a vessel in the Caribbean Sea suspected of carrying narcotics. Trump later boasted that the boat was “full of drug dealers.”
But according to reports, no drugs were found, and the survivors were sent back to their home country without charges. To critics, it was a shocking act of vigilante brutality.
“He’s shooting up boats in the Caribbean based on nothing,” Volpe said. “I think he is engaged in extrajudicial killing… Not only scandalous, but dangerous.”
Trump’s opponents say this is a step too far, even in the name of stopping drugs. But Trump and his allies are unapologetic. Trump has described the flow of fentanyl and cocaine into American cities as an urgent “invasion” that must be met with lethal force. Luthmann passionately defended the decision to blow the boat out of the water.
“Michael, those missiles are saving American lives,” he told his co-host. “China is producing the fentanyl precursors, Colombian and Venezuelan cartels are shipping the poison to our shores.”
Americans are dying in the tens of thousands.
“It’s poison on the streets,” Luthmann said, his voice cracking with personal grief. “I don’t know if you had members of your family that died of fentanyl overdose. I have.”
By Trump’s logic, a drug boat isn’t just carrying contraband – it’s waging chemical warfare on the American people. So he’s decided to answer with military force.
“Get the poison off the streets. That’s what Trump is doing,” Luthmann argued, calling the strike a fulfillment of Trump’s promise to get tough on the cartels.
Far from regretting it, Trump is doubling down. He’s warned regimes like Venezuela that if they harbor drug traffickers, they’ll face “foreign aid consequences” or worse.
In short, the President’s message is unmistakable – if you send drugs into the U.S., prepare to be dealt with like an enemy combatant.
Trump’s War on Radicals: The CCP and Their AZ Governor Are On Notice
On another front, Trump is taking aim at Chinese Communist Party (CCP) land buyouts in America. For years, Chinese state-connected companies have been snapping up U.S. farmland, ranches, and even land near military bases.
Under Trump, that’s coming to an abrupt halt. His administration is backing state-level bans on Chinese nationals and firms purchasing property on U.S. soil.
“Think about it, Mike,” Luthmann said. “The CCP has police stations in the United States that they run.”
Indeed, federal agents recently busted clandestine Chinese “police station” operations in New York – outposts used to surveil and intimidate Chinese diaspora dissidents. To Trump and his advisers, that’s proof that Beijing will exploit any foothold it gains in America. Buying land could allow the CCP to plant intelligence assets or even strategic weapons.
“They’ve already infiltrated to a certain extent,” Luthmann noted, recalling how U.S. law enforcement had to shut down those illegal CCP offices masquerading as cultural hubs. “They just don’t want that to happen in Arizona and elsewhere. And I think they have every right to do so,” he said of efforts to bar Chinese land purchases.
Some civil rights advocates have balked, arguing it’s unconstitutional to single out buyers by nationality. But Trump’s camp is unfazed.
Equal protection laws “don’t apply to foreign” entities, Luthmann argued, noting that U.S. law already restricts property and visas for “enemy” nations and sanction targets. From his perspective, preventing Communist China from “buying up America” is just common sense – a necessary step to protect national security and economic independence.
And it plays politically as well: nothing fires up Trump’s base more than a tough stance against the CCP, whom are responsible for unfair trade, espionage, and the COVID pandemic.
By pushing these land bans, Trump guards the homeland from a sneaky adversary.
Trump Helps Americans Weather the Democrat Shutdown
Finally, the Trump agenda has run into a domestic hurdle: a grinding government shutdown that is now weeks old. Budget brinkmanship has brought Washington to a standstill, as the President and Congress feud over spending priorities. Both sides have dug in, leaving much of the federal government without funding.
As of today, the shutdown is in its 23rd day. National parks are closed, “non-essential” workers furloughed – and soon, millions of vulnerable Americans could feel the pain directly. On November 1, food stamp benefits (SNAP) for roughly 40 million people will be cut off if the impasse isn’t resolved. That prospect has state governors and charity groups sounding alarms.
“Tens of millions… will be left without food assistance,” including 16 million children and 8 million elderly. Democratic governors are blasting Trump for allowing hunger to be used as a political pawn.
“President Trump… [is] playing political games with health coverage for millions,” said Rhode Island’s Gov. Dan McKee, “now [his] inaction is threatening crucial food assistance for those who need it most.” He urged Trump to “put people over politics” and end the shutdown before families go hungry.
The White House, however, is not flinching. The President has secured pay for the military and ensured vulnerable women and children will have access to healthcare and nutrition programs.
Trump believes holding out gives him leverage to force budget cuts and policy concessions from Democrats. Republican allies argue that Democrats could reopen the government any time if they agreed to Trump’s terms. The Democrats own the negative effects of the shutdown.
Louisiana’s GOP Governor Jeff Landry pointed out that the House (led by Trump loyalists) has passed bills to fund the government – it’s the Senate Democrats under Chuck Schumer who refuse to “vote yes and reopen” things. In short, Trump’s team says: we’ve done our part; the ball is in the Democrats’ court.
On The Unknown Podcast, the stalemate was framed as a test of voter perception. Luthmann posed a blunt question: if food stamps are cut off, who will SNAP recipients blame? “Big bad Trump” or “the big bad Democrats that didn’t… look out for you”?
It’s a cynical calculation, but an honest one. Both parties are betting that the other side will shoulder the public’s anger if 41 million Americans lose their grocery money.
Trump has already authorized emergency funds to keep other programs running—for example, ensuring that women and children on WIC still receive formula and food—but SNAP is being used as a bargaining chip. By his calculus, inner-city Democratic constituencies will suffer the most from a prolonged cutoff, potentially sowing anger at local Democratic leaders.
Some Republicans think this strategy is risky. But Trump’s inner circle views it as the Democrats’ fault.
“I’ll be pissed at Trump initially… but am I not more than a little pissed at the Democrats too?” Luthmann imagined a typical, non-affiliated voter’s thinking if the stalemate drags on. In other words, spread the blame around.
Volpe grimly observed that in this showdown, “nobody wins, and Trump doesn’t… I don’t think [any of] those people are gonna vote for Trump” regardless.
Still, the President seems confident he can weather the storm. He knows feeding 40 million people is an urgent priority – and he’s already signaled he might use executive powers to mitigate the damage if absolutely necessary. But for now, he’s content to let the pressure build.
Trump believes he was elected to be a disruptor, not a caretaker. His supporters agree: sometimes you have to break a few eggs (or in this case, break a long-running government routine) to achieve real change.
Through it all, Donald Trump casts himself as a man doing what must be done. He’ll send troops into our own cities if that’s what it takes to stop anarchy. He’ll blow a narco-boat out of the water to keep fentanyl from killing one more American kid. He’ll stare down China on the economic battlefield, and he’ll stare down Congress over the budget.
His admirers see decisiveness and strength; his detractors see cruelty and authoritarianism. But Trump doesn’t mind the outrage – he thrives on it. He insists his motives are ultimately pure.
“Donald Trump doesn’t want anything other than peace,” Luthmann said, underscoring the president as a peacemaker with a big stick.
Trump would tell you that every bold stroke – from Chicago to Caracas, from Beijing to Capitol Hill – is aimed at securing peace and safety for the American people. And if he has to ruffle feathers, topple sacred cows, or even scare the daylights out of the establishment to get there, so be it.
In Trump’s America, there are no kings – only the people, and the fearless leader who refuses to bow.
About The Author
