Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin News and Analysis - No Spin News - Weekend Edition - March 28, 2026

There's nothing like your first Mac.

Here's what people online are sharing.

At Dr. Rain says,

everything is just so smooth and fast I still can't get over it.

Sinking stuff between my phone and this is just chef's kiss.

At Mr. Incredible488 says,

Apple Silicon basically cures low battery trauma.

That's how they felt with their first Mac.

How will you?

Introducing the all-new MacBook Neo,

an amazing Mac at a surprising price.

Find out more on Apple.com slash Mac.

Details the most.com slash terms subject to change.

Welcome to the No Spin News Weekend Edition.

Orion's is subject of the talking points memo once again.

You can't get away from it because it affects every American

and mostly every person around the world.

Today President Trump ordered a post-pone of draconian action

against the Iranian oil fields.

He's going to blow them all up.

He's not going to do that for five days.

He says because they had a call yesterday.

They being the United States with cough is the main negotiator.

And somebody in Iran.

We don't know who.

Okay. Nobody knows who's in charge.

The Mueller's kid who got elected. Nobody's seen him.

So somebody's talking but we don't know.

But Trump says it was very good call.

They're making a lot of progress.

So I'm going to back away for five days here we can get a deal

which is what Trump wanted from the very beginning as I have reported

and how do I know that because I was on the phone with the man.

For half an hour talking about the negotiation with this was before

there was military action.

Okay.

So again the conversation between Iran and with cough and you know by phone

and there are other people in a room with with cough of course

to place yesterday, Sunday, March 22nd.

That happened.

Iran says it didn't happen.

Okay. What do you expect them to say?

They're not going to admit weakness.

They're not going to say they came to the USA wanting a deal.

Ever.

All right.

Two weeks ago.

Here's what I predicted.

Go.

So the Iranians obviously are getting a hell kicked out of them

and this is a threat to them and they wouldn't be in power

if they didn't kill 30,000 of their own countrymen.

Okay.

And so they'll probably open talks and then Trump will impose what he wants.

Now whether Iran accepts that or not, I think they will.

Because they really don't know how much of a choice now.

You know talk, they cliche is bombing them back to the stone age.

That's what they're doing.

But one thing changed, the difficulty in a straight of hormones,

which is strangling some oil flow out to the rest of the world,

most importantly to China.

China, the big part of this.

Okay. But it gets no publicity.

But China gets an enormous amount of oil from Iran.

In fact, 80% of all the oil, the Iran cells, goes to China.

Just keep that in mind.

Now, a deal is going to look something like this.

The Mullahs are not going to be removed from power.

All right.

So regime change.

It's already changed because the Israelis killed all the first leadership.

So we're on the second and third tier now.

But they'll remain.

Okay. That's number one.

You, Western weapons inspectors, nuclear people,

probably from the UN, but there's got to be some EU people in there,

will be admitted to make sure that the Iranians are not enriching uranium.

The Iranians are going to back away from that.

They're going to say, all right, we will do it now.

We just want this whole thing all about.

All right.

They have to because Trump's not going to sign any deal.

It doesn't include that.

Ballistic missiles, they only have like eight of them left.

So Iran doesn't, that's not a big factor.

But they'll say we're not going to make any more.

We're going to destroy the ones we have or whatever they'll say.

And I'm not naive.

Iran will cheat on all this.

But you got to get the agreement first.

Okay.

And then in return, the Trump administration will lighten up some of the sanctions,

economic sanctions against Iran.

They'll be able to take their oil and sell it to China and that kind of a thing.

That's probably the way it's going to shake down.

Now, how long will that take?

I can't see it going more than two more weeks.

Because every day, there's another attack on Iran's infrastructure.

And if they are disrespectful or if they lie about this pause,

Trump will come back with more ferocity against them.

And, you know, every day, it's going to take Iran that much longer to rebuild

whatever infrastructure they're going to have left.

Okay.

So that's, these are my predictions of what's going to happen.

Now, the war is going to cost the American taxpayer about $200 billion.

A lot of money.

All right.

And you're, if it's not going to help, they won't even give us a dime.

All right.

Israel doesn't have any money.

They're totally dependent on the USA.

How is the Trump administration going to make that back?

I don't know.

But it will probably be through some kind of oil deals.

This is the only way I can see that we're going to get back

anything out of this whole campaign against Iran.

So that, you know, is significant.

Now, the Department of War, a head said, oh, we got a trillion dollar.

Look, let's not do that.

We are spending ourselves into oblivion in this country.

$39 trillion dollar debt.

You need to tighten this up.

And then individually, I do expect oil prices to come down

pretty significantly, pretty fast.

Why?

Because if they don't, the Trump administration, Department of Energy

is going to investigate the American oil companies.

And they don't want that.

They don't want to be investigated because they're gouging us.

So I expect that to come down.

Is it enough to keep the USA out of a recession?

I don't know.

I don't know.

Is it enough for the Republicans to keep the midterms?

Or did you say?

All right.

That's the memo.

You're listening to the No Spanews Weekend Edition.

Now, most Americans are getting their information from the media,

which is always now dangerous.

It didn't use to be, but now it is.

Because the media is not going to tell you the truth.

I'm talking generally.

They will.

New CBS poll.

3,335 US adults.

That doesn't mean these people know anything.

They're not registered voters.

They're not likely voters.

Just adults.

That means they just sweep them in.

You don't know anything, whatever.

First question.

What is your impression of the military conflict by the Iran?

Going well, 43%, somewhat or very badly, 57%.

That is media driven.

Second question.

Do you think Americans would be willing or not willing?

Pay more for gas during the US military conflict by the Iran.

Willing, 33, not willing, 67.

That's a frightening number.

So if you'd rather have Iran in possession of a nuclear weapon,

then pay a little bit more for your gasoline.

I don't know what to tell you.

Okay.

Now, the media itself is divided on this conservative media backs Trump.

Liberal media, some of the not progressives understand the big picture.

The progressives totally against it.

They hate Trump.

People.

Trump's worse than them all is in their eyes.

All right.

Now, here is the con.

So the network news and the cables, M.S. and CNN,

only book guests that hate Trump.

With a few exceptions.

They're trying to wise up a little.

They got to get maybe one or two.

But it's out there outnumbered like 20 to one.

And they know when they book a hate Trump guess,

what the guess is going to say.

Roll it tape.

President Trump thought he could get a better deal than the Obama administration did.

He failed to get that better deal.

And he went off and launched a war without planning.

Without being ready for even some of the most basic things.

This is the second time this century that the United States has made a drastically bad mistake

in terms of engaging and conflict in the Middle East.

The first one was in 2003 when we even baited Iraq.

And that ushered in then years and years of chaos and violence and tourism.

I just came from a two-hour closed door classified briefing on the war.

I just confirmed to me it's totally incoherent.

We are not going to be able to achieve any of our stated objectives.

Okay.

So all three of those men, they hate Trump.

They never say anything good about him.

Ever or would they?

In a million, why bother having them on?

Why bother?

Because the network news and two out of the three main cables are invested in ruining Trump.

That's what.

All right, joining us now from Florida is our media go-to guy, Bernie Goldberg,

who is the purveyor of Bernard Goldberg.com, which has a sensational special.

We'll tell you about it at the end of the interview.

So you go there and absorb Bernie's wisdom.

Okay.

Now Bernie has so much wisdom that you have to absorb it kind of gradually.

Or you'll be overwhelmed by the wisdom.

All right.

Where am I going wrong here, Goldberg?

And I want to make a comment about your rare, rarely happening wisdom.

That's a joke.

You nailed it.

How they portray negative news.

They bring people on who say all these negative things.

And then they say, well, it's not us.

Right.

Just the people will bring it on.

Yeah.

Anyway, I wrote a column on the website that you mentioned, Bernard Goldberg.com.

This is what I said.

If Democrats were ventriloquists, journalists would be the little dummy sitting on their laps.

So if Democrats are against the war and they are.

Liberal journalists will also be against the war.

Now you and I build come from a hard news background.

So I know you'll agree with this.

Journalists should not be cheerleaders for this or any other war.

They should ask hard questions.

They should be skeptical of what the government tells them.

But they've crossed a very bright line with their partisanship.

I won't give me just 30 seconds to read a very brief passage from an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal.

Not by a mega Republican wearing a red hat.

But by Mark Penn, who was an advisor to Bill and Hillary Clinton and Andrew Stein,

who was the former New York City Council president, obviously a Democrat.

Very short passage.

Journalists have a right and a duty to report bad news.

And to question Polly and it is reports from the US government.

Many seem to be going beyond that and rooting and rooting for America to fail.

Let that sink in very short ending.

What seems to be driving the coverage is repartorial partisanship.

And the Democrats determination to oppose this president.

No matter what he does bingo.

That's what it's all about.

Democrats want to oppose him no matter what he does.

So their media allies do the same thing.

And I think you got to give the New York Times credit for running that op-ed.

But it's outnumbered.

Wall Street Journal.

Wall Street Journal.

I read the op-ed.

I just didn't remember the source of it.

Okay, and all of that is true across the board.

The real frightening part.

Because I did use that word in introducing the CBS poll.

That a lot of Americans made me most of us.

Don't pay attention.

They don't know really what's happening.

They just hear things.

And when the media is overwhelmingly against a president.

They're going to just hear things that aren't true, that are slanted,

whatever it may be, and then make their opinion based on the things they are hearing.

I'm seeing more and more of that.

How about you?

No, I think you're right.

You're on a roll today, Bill.

I think you're right about that too.

Let's use this as an example.

Liberal Democrats and their allies in the media are crashing Donald Trump.

This is one of their big reasons that for their opposition to the war.

Because there was no imminent threat they say.

But for argument's sake, and only for argument's sake, let's say they're right.

There was no imminent threat.

Would it be better if he had waited until there was an imminent threat?

Because if he waited until there was a woman in threat.

Iran may have had a nuclear device, nuclear bomb.

And they could have hit London, Paris, Berlin, Tel Aviv,

even New York or Washington possibly.

So you know what would happen then, Bill?

The same media that is crashing Donald Trump for going to war when there was no imminent threat.

Would be crashing him because he waited too long before it was an imminent threat.

So heads they win, tails he loses, the system is rigged.

Now, interesting you brought that up because right after you I'm going to run a clip of Lindsey Graham

where I did an interview on our new long form which did discuss in very micro detail the imminent threat.

Okay.

So you have a basically dishonest media here.

I don't think there's any question fair minded people understand that.

Do you believe, did you know fast growing trees is America's largest and most trusted online nursery

with thousands of trees and plants and more than two million happy customers is like your local nursery.

But anywhere you live with more plants than you'll find anywhere else.

Right now they have great deals on spring planting essentials up to half off on select plants.

And listeners to our program get 20% off the first purchase when using the code bill at checkout.

That's an additional 20% off better plants and better growing at fastgrowingtrees.com using code bill at checkout fastgrowingtrees.com code bill.

Now he's the perfect time to plant. Let's grow it together.

Use bill to save today, offer valid with a limited time, terms and conditions may apply.

America leads the world in medicine development. It matters.

We get new medicines first nearly three years faster.

Five million Americans go to work because we make medicines here at home and not relying on other countries keeps us safe.

But China is racing to overtake us.

Will we let them or will we choose to stay ahead when America leads America cures.

Let's tell Washington to keep us in the lead.

Learn how at America cures.com paid for by pharma.

The actual people running these companies making the calls are dishonest.

I think they're acting like business people and not news people.

I think they know who their audience is and they say we're going to give them.

Isn't that dishonesty though because they're supposed to be presenting.

Absolutely objective news.

Yeah, that's right Bill and I'm going to break some bad news to you.

There's no tooth fairy and there's no Santa Claus and there's no Easter Bunny either.

Of course they're dishonest.

They're doing this for business.

They don't call it the news business for nothing.

It's a business and they should be doing that they should be reporting the truth without partisanship.

But they're trying to stay and desperately trying to stay in business in this new media landscape by telling the audience.

Precisely what they think the audience wants to hear.

That's corrupt.

Yeah, there's no doubt in my mind.

Do you believe that the corruption that began in 2016 when Trump came on the stage and started to succeed.

It has destroyed the television news industry in particular.

Or it was inevitable with social media and always inevitable.

They were going to decline.

It might have been it might have been inevitable but but they're getting worse and worse and worse.

I mean, if if Joe Biden or or Barack Obama had launched this war.

Do you think the coverage would be the same?

Of course not.

And the infantile questions.

How long is the war going to do you get as angry as I do?

I'm sitting there.

How long is it?

How would anybody know that?

It's that you're absolutely.

I don't know what you've been drinking but you're absolutely right about that too.

Here's the thing.

If this same journalistic.

We're covering D day on January 6, 1944 when 2,500 Americans and 4,400 ally troops were killed in one day.

They would be calling for the impeachment of Franklin Roosevelt and they would try to get white ice an hour thrown into prison.

I mean, you can't count any American death in uniform any American in uniform who dies.

It's a tragedy not just for their families but for all of us.

But they count every single one as if you see what's happening.

And this war is not going to go on.

It's not going to end tomorrow.

When is it going to end?

These are questions without answers and they know what they're doing and they're doing it to turn their audience to appeal to their audience already doesn't like it because of what their audience is hearing from other news people.

It's a vicious circle.

Yeah, but with one goal get from that that's the beginning the middle and the end.

Tell me about Bernard gover.com March madness special.

What do you got?

I want to say two things.

First of all, it's a half price sale off of already very low prices, but here's the thing Bill.

We're a small website and we're trying to stay relevant and your audience.

The people I'm talking to now and thanks and thank you for letting me do it.

Are important to our survival to be perfectly honest about it.

We need your audience.

We like your audience and we appreciate you for letting me say these things to your audience.

Now you have a half price going forward and it's it's a pittance.

I'm saying that not in a derogatory way, but if you want to add to your frame of reference,

which really is what this is all about.

I mean, when you have a colossus corporate media that's being blatantly dishonest across the board,

and you can't discount the right wing networks either because they're feeding the same kind of absolute

absolute quote-unquote information, but it's tailored to people who want to believe a certain thing.

So the only way is us.

That's what I was about to say.

If somebody wants their views given back to them 100% of the time.

Don't waste your time coming over to Bernard Goldberg.

I can't do that.

Well, and I have been hard news reporters for many years.

That's our foundation.

That's our basis.

We give opinions, but they're based on fairness.

At least I hope they are.

In my case, they are and in bills case, they are.

And you'll agree with us a lot of times.

You won't agree with us or admit it.

You want to agree with me all of the time.

That's the way I do it.

I try to give you my honest opinion, but it's only an opinion.

But that's healthy.

And that's what the founding fathers wanted.

That kind of vibrant robust debate with no personal animus or greedy money factor in it.

Let me say this to your audience.

You know how Bill knows that?

Thomas Jefferson.

Goldberg, look, you're older than me.

And base upon this shot that's going all over the world now.

People can see that with their own eyes.

All right, Bernard Goldberg dot com.

March madness.

Check it out.

Appreciate it, buddy.

Thank you, Bill.

I need your help.

This is the no spin news weekend edition.

So the president of Pakistan.

Shabaz Sharif is offered to hold peace talks

in Islamabad between the United States.

And I would assume Israel would be in on those talks to some extent.

All right, but not a major player and the government of Iran.

The guardian.

That's a newspaper that is not reliable.

Reports that vice president.

Vance would be the chief negotiator.

And not Steve Whitkoff or Jared Kushner who had been doing the negotiating before the military action.

Again, the guardian is not reliable.

So I can't give you anything other than that's what this newspaper says.

The government of Iran predictably says, oh no, no.

We don't want to talk.

Yeah, okay.

That's like.

They don't want to lose face in the Arab world and the Muslim world and with their own people.

But they'll show up if there are talks schedule.

Now, Reuters reports the talks may begin this weekend.

Reuters is so so.

Okay.

I'm just giving you what we have.

I can't say with certainty that any of this is going to happen.

I can just tell you that Trump administration would like it to happen.

Okay.

About 2200 Marines are either in or on their way to the Persian Gulf.

We don't know why.

And the Pentagon is not going to tell anybody why.

Why would you do that?

So we have ground forces available.

If certain missions, not occupation, but missions need to be done.

But the, you know, the defense department, department of war, whatever they are.

Then I'm going to say, is where the Marines are?

Is what we're going to do?

Come on.

But the reporters keep asking.

Okay.

A Pentagon official says that due to security situations, we can't answer any questions.

That's legitimate.

Usually the government dodges and it doesn't want to answer questions here.

In a battle front situation, that's legitimate.

In Ukraine, Zelensky says he has irrefutable proof that Russia is providing intelligence to Iran.

That is likely an accurate situation.

Putin is the master of evil.

It's ways on the cover.

Confronting evil right next to the Ayatollah Army.

All right.

So I'm sure that Russia is doing bad things, trying to make it more difficult for the United States.

So I believe that report.

The United Nations UNICEF, which is the children's arm of it, says that 324 children have been killed so far in a conflict.

206 in Iran, 118 in Lebanon, 4 in Israel, 1 in Kuwait.

Now, the Lebanese thing is interesting because Lebanon got involved at the behest of Iran, and it's Hezbollah.

It's not a government of Lebanon.

So terror group Hezbollah, it's the same thing with Hamas.

So they start firing rockets at Israel, civilians.

Well, what do you think Israel is going to do?

Though they fire rockets back.

Now, not just to find anything.

I'm just telling you that perspective is needed in covering the story.

So the kids are caught in the middle, just like Hamas.

Civilians were caught in Gaza because Hamas hid behind them.

We all understand.

I hope so.

So how did the UN get those numbers?

It's impossible to get them.

So they took them from the various governments, which then you say, okay.

You got to be skeptical.

But be that as it may.

Children, women, civilians, everybody's suffering.

We're going to be a lot better place if we didn't have any of this.

Right? It's so simple.

So summing up, I think that they're over the weekend.

This weekend coming.

Stuff is going to happen.

And I'm hoping a good stuff for the country's sake could be wrong.

And that's the memo.

You're listening to the No Spanews Weekend Edition.

Joining us now to watch you see is Mick Mulvaney.

You know him.

He was President Trump's Chief of Staff for 15 months at the end of Mr. Trump's first term.

He is now the co-chair at Actum.

And he's on CNBC and News Nation.

So my question is very simple.

I'm a simple man as you know, Mick.

Is President Trump the same leader?

We'll talk about him as a human being in a minute.

But is he the same leader now?

Then he was when you were Chief of Staff.

Yeah, it's a really interesting question.

I'm going to give you a try to give you a little nuanced answer.

And the answer is, yeah, some places and some places he's different.

Keep in mind I was Chief about seven years ago now.

And you know, I don't think any of us are exactly the same person or same leader

that we would have been seven years ago.

I see some similarities bill and I see some differences.

The big differences that I've seen is that in the first term,

I really think Trump valued having people around him

who aggressively disagreed with him.

Maybe not publicly, but certainly privately.

Look, he hired me.

I was one of the most fiscally conservative members of the Republican Budget Committee on the Hill.

And Donald Trump is not the world's most fiscally conservative person.

He hired Gary Cohn, the former President of Goldman Sachs,

to advise him on economic issues and carries a free trader.

Donald Trump is clearly not a free trader.

He welcomed those types of disagreements in the first term.

In fact, he sort of cultivated it.

He wanted to see people fight with each other.

I remember going to trade meetings and he used to put the free traders,

you know, me and Gary on one side of the room and the protectionist Peter Navarro

and Bob Lighthizer on the other side of the room and watch us argue.

He liked that.

That's how he chose to manage.

I see a little bit of that in this term.

I know for, oh, by the way,

and don't forget he hired John Bolton,

the most neo conservative person you can,

if you're a national security adviser,

and Donald Trump is not a neo conservative.

In this term,

I get the sense that he doesn't have as much interest in doing that.

He's still some rust vote who runs the OMB work for me,

probably more fiscally conservative than I am.

And he's still on the team and very highly regarded.

But generally speaking, I'm just not,

I don't get the sense that he wants that same sort of active

and aggressive disagreement that he wanted in the first term.

So yeah, there's some similarities.

Probably to be expected with the passage of time.

He's a different person.

The country's a different place.

So I don't think that's necessarily bad.

It's just different.

Is it true that he's more confident in his second term

because he learned some very hard lessons in his first term?

I'm not sure if it's the first lessons.

I think he's confident right now in the military.

I think the,

the actions in Venezuela,

the action six months ago in,

in Iran at the Nantons,

nuclear facility gave him a certain level of confidence.

We didn't see that.

We didn't do any of that in the first term by choice.

And I think maybe he,

that's a new data point for him that he thought he could use

the military in a way that what didn't really occur to us

in the first term.

I don't think Donald Trump has any interest.

As you mentioned in your,

in your introduction of putting,

you know, troops on the ground in Iran on a permanent or semi-permanent

invasion type of basis.

But I,

and he did want that in the first term either.

But this sort of what I call Tomahawk diplomacy,

the strategic sort of stuff,

the standoff weapons.

That was something we didn't even consider using the first term.

And clearly he's not shy about using it now.

It is true that a lot of people that he is hired have been sick of fence.

And just say,

yes, I'm the death and whatever he wants is fine.

But is that understandable?

Because he got burned by a lot of people in his first term.

Kelly.

Yeah.

People like that.

They turned on him.

They burned him.

There were a lot of leaks.

Remember the leaks all over the place.

And he then became very distrustful of the swamp.

Yes.

And no.

And again, that's the second time I'm trying to give you a nuance answer.

But these are,

these are complicated questions.

Yeah, he got burned in the first term.

There's no question.

I mean, James Mattis was actively working against Donald Trump.

John Kelly, my predecessor's chief of staff was actively working against him.

Many of the people saw themselves as the so-called,

adults in the room there to protect the country against the president.

That's a fundamentally wrong position for any member,

an unelected member of staff to take.

And if Trump sort of felt burnt by that, you can't blame him.

That being said,

there were people that he trusted and knew and worked well with in the first administration

who did disagree with him from time to time.

I was one of those.

I never turned on Trump.

But I did have the confidence to go and close the door and tell him something

that maybe I disagreed with.

So I don't think you need to go as far as just firing everybody or not putting people in there

who would disagree with you at all.

There are ways to get there.

But he's chosen people for loyalty as one of the top considerations.

I think a lot of this turned,

and I'm looking at it from a historical point of view now, on January 6th.

So he had a close relationship with Pence, his vice president.

And I think and correct me if I'm wrong.

But I think they launched a couple of times a week,

and Pence gave him fairly candid advice.

Correct?

Did.

Okay.

So that that that that relationship was pretty strong until January 6th.

All right.

So that's when Pence wouldn't go in and challenge the vote.

And so Pence was out the door,

and then a more loyal guy in Donald Trump's opinion,

Vance took his place.

And then you saw that in the Department of War with Hague Seth,

who is a patriot.

I mean, I would never argue that.

He's a certain, this country well.

But certainly very inexperienced and another loyalist.

He just looks down the line like that's what he did.

He wanted to get any chances with people.

And the January 6th thing hardened him.

Are you stuck staring at your W2?

Our tax refund worry is holding you back.

You probably have FOMO, the fear of messing up.

The fix?

Using turbo tax on into a credit karma.

They find every credit and deduction

to help you get every refund dollar you deserve.

Or your money back.

It's time to overcome your fear of messing up

and get your taxes done right.

Start filing today in the Credit Karma app.

Chat?

I think it's time to book that trip to Walt Disney World Resort.

You know, you work so hard.

I think it's time to give yourself a little TLC.

Like, when's the last time you had fun?

We could hop in a light cycle.

Eat food from all over the world at Epcot.

We could even build those lightsabers you always wanted.

Like, let's make plans for real this summer.

Find your moment at Walt Disney World Resort.

Would I be wrong there?

No, but I cringe when I hear people say,

oh my goodness, this president hired loyalists.

They all do.

And the older one is not disloyal to bring the homies.

Right, I'm sure.

That's true.

Confident.

The question is, is not loyalty.

I was loyal to the president.

In fact, I was so loyal to the president,

I decided to give him honest opinions when he asked me about questions.

You had a falling out with him over January 6th.

Yeah.

That's right.

I did.

Not to the same extent that Mike Pence did, but that sure.

If your question is this,

is he getting good advice.

I think that's really what we're talking about.

Is he getting good advice from people?

And I think the answer is, generally, yes.

I do hope that behind closed doors, there are people who are saying, Mr. President, this

might not be such a good idea.

My fear bill, my fear is this, is that instead of giving them those, those honest opinions,

there's people, especially more junior people in the White House, you know, we talked about

the cabinet here, but the junior people who are around the president all the time are,

are, are, are goading him on.

Oh, Mr. President, I think it'd be a great idea if we put your name on the Kennedy Center.

I don't think Donald Trump came up with that.

I think that was some of sequest junior staffer trying to get in good with the president.

And I don't think that serves him well, generally, in the long run.

That's maybe not the best example, but that's the guy most powerful guy in a White House

right now is Stephen Miller.

And Miller is more militant about everything than Donald Trump is.

But I think that Miller still has the presidency or would I be wrong on that?

No, he absolutely does.

You're not wrong at all.

The one thing about Stephen is that it's a constant.

Stephen was just as adamant and militant about this in the first term.

He just is.

I think one of the differences is that Trump really, really did latch on to immigration

as one of the key issues in the 2024 election.

That's not to say that it wasn't like that in 2026.

Excuse me, 2016, but clearly him not being Hillary Clinton was also a big part of this.

And it worked and Trump likes success and Miller can take success.

Now, I have been in a few cabinet and I'm starting to erupt,

but they have fixed a fundamental underlying issue of the security that's other way we talk about.

But it got him elected.

It got him elected.

I mean, you know, that pounding of this is insane and hurting a country.

And I'm going to fix it, which you did.

Now, as a civilian, I don't work for anybody but myself.

I've been in some cabinet meetings.

Serious stuff.

Invited by President Trump because I believe he like you.

He knows that I'm not going to toe any party line or ideological line or anything.

When he asked me a question, I give him an honest answer.

I never insert myself without being asked ever.

I don't call him.

I don't do any of that.

He's got come to me.

But when I was in those cabinet meetings,

those guys in the White House were not happy to see me.

They were not pleased because I would go out of the box.

And I would say, I'm writing about it in my book,

which will be out in September confronting America.

I spill it out pretty vividly.

But I'll give you one example, Panama.

And it was early on, and you remember the rattling the cage

and we're going to go down there and take over to Canal.

Well, I was in that meeting and I said, do any of this.

Here's what you can do.

You'll get everything you want.

And it absolutely happened.

The whole thing happened the way that I had drawn it out

because I covered the horse in Central America.

I know the turf.

All right.

I know how it goes.

Well, those guys didn't like that at all.

And I understand, I mean, here's this O'Reilly guy

coming in from God knows where sitting with us

and he's given, and the president is listening to him.

They didn't like it.

So I got a little taste of the office politics.

I don't remember you doing that when I was the chief of staff,

but other people did.

And here's how I would respond to it.

I get the concern because a lot of folks

who come into those meetings from the outside,

whether it's a cabinet meeting or just an oval office meeting

aren't familiar with all the work that has been done

up to that point of arriving at a certain conclusion

or at least getting to someplace along the line

of making a decision.

So I get that little level of frustration.

But to me, it was more important.

Number one, did the president like it?

And was it good information?

Number two, that's what we're looking at.

He made fun of me.

I don't know whether he liked it or not,

but it evolved the way that I laid it out.

I was at Harvard two weeks ago giving a little seminar

to the pinheads at the Kennedy School, my alma mater,

and they don't like Trump generally speaking in that school.

And they were asking me questions about my interactions

with the president.

And what I said to them was, look, what

you're hearing from the media isn't true generally speaking.

So there's shading it negative toward Trump.

I can tell you that in every single conversation I have had,

and I did the first interview with him in 216 when he announced,

in every single conversation.

Number one, he never lied to me.

And number two, he knew what the Ducey was talking about.

He knew.

All right, so if you think that this guy is some bomb-y bomb,

shouldn't be there because he doesn't know what he's doing.

You're crazy.

And he's straight up with me.

And that silenced them because they couldn't challenge me on it.

Because I've had more conversations with President Trump

than any journalist in the country.

A lot of them are private, and I always honor that.

Now, the man himself, I have seen a change

in the man.

I'm not ready to define it yet.

Have you seen a change in him?

I mean, look, he's what?

Almost 80 now, I guess he was 72 when I worked for him.

So that's a big difference for everybody.

Do I think he seems a little bit more tired sometimes?

Yes.

But I know that people offer examples of what he calls the weave

as sign of mental decline.

And I'm like, that's crazy.

Donald Trump is always no mental decline.

There's a great ESPN 30 for 30 from, I don't know,

40 years ago about the USFL.

I encourage people to go back and watch it

because the Donald Trump, when he was in his,

I don't know, late 30s, early 40s

is the exact same Donald Trump you see today.

So now, I've not seen any mental decline yet at all.

Does he look a little bit higher than the overseas?

Yeah, I mean, I would say that with certainty.

However, he's less restrained in his statements,

in my opinion.

So when Mueller dies, he says, I'm glad he's dead.

I don't know if you would have said that

in his first four years.

Yeah, he did.

He said the same thing about McCain.

I mean, not this example.

Yeah, I don't know if he criticized me.

I remember that.

But it wasn't that personal.

Yeah, it wasn't that, that was it.

That was a tough statement, which I understood

and I wrote a message today.

I'm Bill O'Reilly-Dach, I'm about it

because Mueller had attacked his family.

And if you attacked somebody's family,

I mean, that changes everything.

So you haven't seen a big change in Donald Trump, the man.

Not, not really.

Just done this stuff on the overseas trips.

Look, those trips are brutal.

And as you know, he doesn't sleep,

he only sleeps about four hours at night anyway.

The man's physical conditioning

is just, it's outrageous.

I've known a couple of people who are able to do that.

I couldn't do it.

But at some point, it has to wear on you.

You know, a 30-hour flight back from the Middle East

is going to take it all on everybody.

How about being moody?

No, I don't, I mean, I'm not with him day-to-day

like I used to be.

So my interaction with him is on television.

I just watched the interview that he gave today.

I've not seen any large swings in that.

He is a little bit more willing to push back on the press.

But that's a degree.

That was something he did in the first term anyway.

I do think, if this, let me see if I can make sense

out of it this way, Bill.

He's not restricted by having to run for office again.

And when you're, the first term president,

you're also automatically on day one,

a candidate for reelection.

Everybody is, right?

And so you're always in the back of your mind going,

how is this going to play in the next elections?

And I think that's different this time.

He doesn't have to do that.

We watch the equity markets very, very closely in the first term

because we knew it was a big deal for the voters.

I don't think they're, as restricted by that,

they pay more attention now, for example,

I think to the bond markets than they do the equity markets.

Equity markets are still done very well

and Trump don't get me wrong.

But I think that the flow of the day

might be a little bit different

because he's not running for reelection.

But he has to win the midterms

or two years going to be real rough.

And I think that's an uphill battle.

The, listen, if gas is $4 a gallon in August and September,

they've got a problem.

Yeah, it shouldn't be, though.

I think they're going to wrap this Iran thing

in the next, in the short term.

Let's put it that way.

And then gas prices will have to come down fairly rapidly.

But the damage done, you'd ever know.

You don't know if recession or other overseas

or what's going on.

Final question.

Donald Trump has got a big thing coming up with China.

And a lot of people don't understand

his interactions with Putin,

but they're different, my observation.

They're different than he interacts

with most other world leaders.

Would I be wrong there?

I don't think so.

You know, the way I try to describe it is

that just because you get elected president

doesn't mean you're not a human being.

And he reacts the way that ordinary people would

in the under similar circumstances.

Look, a lot of the European leaders,

when I was there in the first term,

were not shy about showing their disdain for Donald Trump.

And if I come on TV and I clearly don't like you

and I let it be known that I don't like you

and my body language is like that.

My verbal language is like that.

That's going to affect our relationship.

And I think that was part of the difficulty he had,

for example, with Justin Trudeau and Canada,

Angela Merkel in Germany, et cetera.

You can go down the list.

Donald Trump does not pick his friends

based upon their politics.

He doesn't like conservatives more than liberals.

He likes people that he likes.

And I think he just gets along with she.

To a certain extent, he gets along with Putin.

I still, I do worry a little bit about the relationships.

And at the end of the day, when Trump comes out

and has these meetings, like he's going to go to,

he's supposed to go to China at the end of this month,

it's now been delayed.

And says he's got a great person

or relationship with she.

That's wonderful.

But what I would tell him when we did this in the first

and was Mr. President, that's great.

But the American people don't care as much

about your relationship with that leader

as they do is what that means to them.

So we need to show them the benefits

of that good, good relationship.

But he feels he can leverage deals with these guys

if he has.

Let's see the deal.

Yeah, if yes or yes.

Hey, Mick, thanks very much for helping us out.

We really appreciate it

and hope we can talk again soon.

This is the No Span News Weekend edition.

So I was laying down late last night when the phone rang.

When the phone rang.

And it was President Trump.

To me, even though he's my friend,

and I've known him for 35 years,

it's the president of the United States.

And it doesn't really matter what time it is.

So anyway, we had our usual back and forth,

a lot of it off the record.

But I had to go on a record for a couple of things

that I want to tell you about.

Yesterday, we analyzed that a negotiation

between Iran and the USA might be led

by Vice President Advance.

But I cited the source for that,

the Guardian newspaper, and I told you

it is an unreliable publication.

And it's exactly what it is.

It's not going to be Vice President.

That's taking the lead in the negotiation.

It is going to be with cough and Kushner,

the two have been doing it all along.

Now, Iran has not agreed yet.

I don't know whether they will.

But U.S. authorities are ready to go to Pakistan

or Turkey or wherever a negotiation might take place.

The problem is that there's no one in charge

in Iran right now.

The President doesn't even know

he's going to show up for a negotiation.

Could be Omar the tent maker.

I mean, if you call over there,

it says, well, line one used to be so and so,

but he's dead and I'm making fun of it, but it's true.

So the upper echelons of the Iranian government,

the Theocracy, they're all dead.

And nobody really knows who's in charge.

There are rumors.

Hi, I'm Jim.

I'm not an actor, just a guy living with prostate cancer.

My wife and I face each day head on.

We asked my doctor about Extandi in Zalutamide.

Extandi 40 milligram tablets treats men with prostate cancer

that has spread to other parts of the body

and responds to a medical or surgical treatment

to lower testosterone.

Extandi may cause serious side effects.

Seizure, a brain condition called press,

allergic reactions, heart disease that can lead to death,

falls and bone fractures,

swallowing problems or choking that can lead to death.

Stop Extandi and get medical help at once

if you're face, tongue, lip, or throat start swelling.

Tell your doctor it once if you faint, have a seizure.

Quickly worsening headache, decreased alertness,

confusion, vision problems, chest pain or discomfort,

or shortness of breath.

Extandi can cause harm to an unborn baby or miscarriage.

Use birth control during and three months after Extandi.

Common side effects include muscle and joint pain,

feeling unusually tired,

hot flashes, constipation, less appetite, diarrhea,

high blood pressure, bleeding,

falls, fractures and headache.

Visit Extandi.com to watch my story.

Right now, new FANDUAL customers can get up to $300

back in bonus bets every day for 10 days.

Place a tournament bet using the token,

and if it doesn't win, you'll get up to $300

back in bonus bets every single day for 10 days straight.

You can even mix things up with same game parlays

for a shot at a bigger pale.

FANDUAL, it's time to dance.

21 plus in present and select states.

Bonus bets are nonwithdrawable and expire seven days

after receive.

Tokens are received in increments of one per day.

Restrictions apply.

See terms at sportsbook.fandal.com.

Gamling problem called 1-800-GAMBLER.

A, B, C, D, but it is so chaotic in Iran right now

that there's no certainty at all.

I'm going to get into it in a few moments.

You might want to get a pen and paper

because you're not getting honest information

from the American media about disarraining in action.

I will give you honest information.

But I want to start with the dissent to the war in Iran.

Okay.

Now I like dissent.

I'm a maverick.

I think dissent is really, really good,

but it's got to be responsible.

Can't be personal animus.

And that's what we're seeing here.

So on Saturday, there is a no kings,

the third no kings demonstration all around the country.

And this is an anti-Trump, we hate Trump demonstration.

Okay.

We've seen it.

We know what it is.

There's no real difference.

The grievances are sending mass agents

into the streets, terrorizing communities,

immigrant families terrorizing, no warrants,

threats to overtake elections,

getting health care environmental problems

and education solved, rigging maps to silence.

But you know, it's the usual litany

of progressive grievances.

A few are legit.

Most are just made up fabrications.

All right.

I mean, there aren't people being detained without warrants.

All right.

There are judicial warrants signed by judges.

And then there are homeland security warrants.

You sign by superiors in that organization.

You gotta have a warrant, take somebody in.

And it's just a simple lie, all right.

So no kings is based,

this demonstration on Saturday is based

in Ready, Minneapolis, hello.

And Bruce Springsteen's going to be there.

So it's Bernie Sanders and Attorney General Keith Ellison.

And Jane Fonda, the Trot now, Jane,

now mocking me is because it means nothing.

I mean, these people don't want to talk

about legitimate issues.

They want an open border.

Progress is want an open border.

Everybody comes in.

Everybody.

And then they stay.

That's Amnesty, they want Amnesty.

So millions and millions and millions

of people are absorbed into our country.

That's what they want.

Say it.

I respect you if you said it.

Now, the funding of this is fascinating.

So it comes from a group called Indivisible.

That's from the Pregival legions, all right.

Indivisible.

And nobody knows anything about that organization.

You can look it up, but it's shadowy in mind.

But the big money is coming from Soros, as usual.

Soros pumped about eight million

into the No King protests, the two priors in this one.

Soros behind it.

ACLU, which is no longer a civil rights organization,

it's a far left fanatical group.

And plan parenthood.

So they're in on it too.

These are the big organizations behind it.

And a lot of the money that comes in,

and you'll see it if you watch television coverage,

and it'll be plenty of it, but there's no King's thing.

You'll see the buses, you'll see the signs,

you'll see the people, organized.

All that takes money.

And it's dark money, because the commentators

and the news reporters, they don't know when the money comes

from, and they don't care.

As long as it's a big crowd, that's what they care about.

As long as Trump looks at that.

Okay, but the dark money component here is very,

very disturbing, because money can undermine

democracy.

It's not hard to do it.

So you will remember that on January 26th of this year,

we broke a story about Neville Roy Singham.

Okay, there he is.

He's a communist, lives in Shanghai, China,

very close ties to the Beijing government.

Now, he is behind a lot of the dark money stuff.

Okay, and we reported that.

That Singham has been in this arena for nine years.

Ever since he sold his technology company

called Thought Works for about $800 million.

Now, you would say, well, how can you live

in a communist country if you have $800 million,

wouldn't a government take that away from you?

No.

As long as you're serving the government,

there are a lot of billionaires in China.

They serve the government and so does Singham.

Singham is American citizen.

Can't come here since one foot on our soil,

a little rest of them.

Okay, but he is a real, real threat to every American.

And 99% of Americans have no idea who the man is.

This is what I said in January ago.

His name is Neville Roy Singham.

He's a billionaire tech guy, lives in Shanghai, China.

He works with the Chinese government.

And he has a 5013C in the United States

called Breakthrough News, where he funnels money

to places like the people's forum in New York City

and other and Minnesota radical left organizations.

He's deeply involved with the insurgency

and the sedition against the federal government, this guy.

We gave you all the information.

He's a communist guy.

Well, now Fox News Digital has launched

the five-part series on Singham and we congratulate them.

Not gonna see that on CBS or CNN or ABC or NBC.

They don't care.

But Fox News Digital has come up with some very interesting

information about $300 million.

Singham is pumped into the following nonprofits.

CodePink, Breakthrough Media,

Justice and Education Fund, people's forum,

people's support foundation,

France, Tri-Continental LTD.

He did pump the money in through Goldman Sachs.

Can you believe this?

And he got tax breaks from the IRS

to pump the money in 300 million.

Now we call Goldman Sachs because we're fair people.

You can come back to me here.

We're fair people and we got a guy named Tony Frato

on the phone, he's a spokesman for Goldman.

And he says that they have terminated Singham's fund.

But they did it only last month.

Okay, I'm sorry.

February, 2024, 13 months ago.

13 months ago.

But Singham used Goldman Sachs

and he got tax deductions to undermine

the American government and system.

All right.

His main outfit now is the people's forum

located 14th Street in Manhattan, New York City.

They are the ones that funnel the money out locally.

And CodePink answer.

He's married Singham is to the co-founder

of CodePink, Jody Evans.

And guess where they all showed up last week?

Havana, they all showed up to prop up

the Cuban government, which is along the ropes.

Now, the Justice Department, come on.

Come on, Cash Betel.

Hello.

Okay, he got investigated this.

This is subversion at the highest level using our system.

And maybe there's an investigation,

but nobody's telling us

that Justice Department is the only mechanism

on the planet that can stop this and expose it.

If you go out tonight and say,

hey, you notice guy Roy Singham,

nobody's gonna know it.

This is a suppression, very, very dangerous.

And all the progressives, all these idiots out, no king.

If you go up and go say,

how about Neville Roy Singham?

And you know, he bought that sign for you.

Who, who, no idea.

This is bad.

Now, we're proud that we broke the story

and independent news agency.

The nosepin news billorally.com, y'all know.

And we applaud Fox News digital, picked it up.

They picked it right up.

Listen, if you watch Fox News, okay,

and I don't have time to watch a lot of it,

and I don't really learn a lot there.

But what we do, they monitor it very, very closely.

And there's more to do that,

because what we say is true.

And that's the memo.

You're listening to the nosepin news, we can't edition.

Okay, final thought, as we said,

we'll do a live drops tomorrow.

Okay, earlier for premium and concierge, remember?

Got a new, and then late afternoon for everyone else.

So the program, the soprano is still

all over the world of phenomenon, unbelievable phenomenon.

It began on January 10th, 1999, not long ago,

on the air for eight years.

Okay, the center piece was James and Gandalfini.

Okay, he died at age 51, my heart attack,

while vacationing in Rome, Italy.

Now, all the castes are very, very close.

Steve Sharipa, you know him.

He was not only in the sopranos,

but in blue bloods.

He'd never wanted to be an actor at all.

But anyway, he was close to Gandalfini, Rollitable.

Jim was always a pro.

That, you know, people say, did you guys have fun on the set?

Yeah, we had fun, it was all business.

He was working 16 hours a day, five days a week.

And listen, a great guy, not without problems.

I mean, that's common knowledge, right?

But not on the set, never when he was working.

You saw none, there was none of that.

Was he the leader of the gang?

Absolutely.

Okay, so in a positive way, so you can't come in

and, you know, it was a good vibe.

Really was like a family.

We were close, very respectful.

Nobody could come in and be disrespectful to one another.

That wasn't flying me.

All right, so Gandalfini was kind of like the chief of police.

If you want to use a bad, I mean, you know,

but kind of by example, you know, I mean, he was the guy.

But it was such an intense program.

Do you guys have any laughs off?

No, no, absolutely.

We went out constantly.

I mean, we enjoyed every moment.

I mean, those guys with Michael, Jim were in the late 30s.

I was my early 40s.

We went out, we, we were like playing for the Yankees.

So, Shirovig is his all the inside stuff on the sprangles

and blue bloods.

And he's a little teed off.

Blue bloods got canceled by CBS.

He's a pretty good explanation.

I want that up.

So again, that is, we'll do it live tomorrow.

And we hope you check it out.

The other one is a podcast I appeared on.

Fly on the wall with David Spade and Dana Carvey.

Roll that.

It feel like I'm on your show.

Spade looks like he's in a bad cave.

You look like you're in Bali, Indonesia.

You got to have plants in podcasts.

Because most people, your interview are potted plants anyway.

Shots fired.

Thanks for having me on, you guys.

I really appreciate it.

Go nice of you.

You seem to have unlimited energy.

Are you going to take a nap after this podcast?

I may take a nap during the podcast.

That's what most of the customers do.

I wrote the book specifically for the church lady.

She demanded that I write confronting evil

to get all the evil out there with the church lady commands I do.

I talked to her before I came out.

I can only paraphrase it.

Well, well, well, Mr. Bill O'Reilly writes a book about naughty people

when he could have been writing about himself.

So it goes on like that.

You can catch, uh, fly on the wall on Spotify, Apple podcasts,

YouTube, that drops tomorrow.

As you can see, and we'll have all of this on Bill O'Reilly.com.

Hello, I've all the links and all of that stuff.

I'm overexposed, I understand.

But these stuff is entertaining and informative.

That's the key.

People learn stuff, but they have fun doing it.

That's why we're so successful.

Because they don't think ourselves that seriously.

Even, you know, sometimes we have to,

because there are terrible things happening.

But we like to bring in a value.

And we have it this weekend.

So we hope you check out Bill O'Reilly.com.

Thank you for watching those spin news tonight.

We will see you again on Monday.

President Barack Obama.

Virginia, we are counting on you.

Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress

to raid the next election and wield unchecked power

for two more years.

But you can stop them by voting yes by April 21st.

Help put our elections back on a level playing field

and let voters decide not politicians.

Vote yes by April 21st.

Paid for by Virginians for fair elections.