Transcript of Thursday Afternoon Breaking News Updates with Ben - 5/21/2026 New

Welcome to Ben on Breaking News. I'm Ben Myselis and this is your breaking news. A lot of developments happening fast and furious on Capitol Hill. We just learned that the United States Senate will be shutting down for the foreseeable future. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, after a very contentious meeting with Donald Trump's acting Attorney General Todd Blanch regarding the $1.8 billion slush fund that Donald Trump wants to give to January 6th insurrectionists, Thune announced, we're all going home. We're done here after this fight with the Trump regime, Republican on Republican, MAGA Republicans in the Senate versus MAGA in the White House. And the Senate and the House feels that they are being basically attacked by Donald Trump with his ballrooms and his arches and his reflecting pools and his slush funds and, and his attack on sitting Senators like John Cornyn, uh, the Texas Republican senator. Donald Trump endorsed Ken Paxton, the corrupt AG of Texas, over Cornyn, and now that's going to cost tens of millions of dollars, uh, potentially being lost by Republicans in the Senate. James Talarico now leads in the polls over Ken Paxton. Republicans are pissed about that. You know, you had Senator Cassidy, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, lost his primary over the weekend as Donald Trump endorsed his primary opponents.

So Bill Cassidy's now unleashed, calling out Donald Trump's ballroom and slush funds and all of this. And lots of Republican senators are just absolutely livid at this Trump regime right now. Acting Attorney General Todd Blunt— this guy's like a total maniac— was apparently screaming at the Republican senators during the lunch. They were screaming back. And then you had Majority Leader Thune just say, we're out, we're leaving. And they were supposed to pass a reconciliation bill. To fund Border Patrol and ICE even more than they've already been funded. They shouldn't be funded at all. They should be defunded, in my view, and they should be abolished, frankly, in my view. There needs to be something on the border, but that ain't it. You know, this has been used as a— it's been used for terroristic purposes, in my view, and it's not what it was ever supposed to be. That's my own opinion. You could have your own. You could disagree with the opinions. But we are now seeing probably the same thing in the House. We'll probably shut down shortly also. And kind of here we go again. It's the most dysfunctional House, the most dysfunctional Senate, the most dysfunctional White House.

It is a government that quite literally does not function, and the stakes cannot be higher, right? Because as Donald Trump shows this utter weakness abroad with that horrible trip to China with Xi Jinping, and then Xi Jinping meets with Putin. What did Putin do today? We've been covering this, and frankly, this should be, I think, a front page story everywhere. This should be This should be what's leading coverage. I mean, you had Putin do nuclear drills in Belarus with a clear message, uh, to the Trump regime, which is the nuclear triad of Russia, um, and is, is going— he says, look, we don't want to use nuclear weapons, but if we have to use nuclear weapons, you know, we reserve the right to do that. They've made it very clear that they've given Belarus nuclear weapons, which is right there on the border with Ukraine. As Ukraine is increasingly, uh, changing the course of this war, Ukraine is— I always viewed Ukraine as winning in the sense that, uh, the goals of Russia were to take Kyiv in 3 days, and they didn't do that. And, uh, the way the Ukrainian army has performed has been nothing short of miraculous and incredible.

And, uh, as courageous as you can be. But we've now— remember our reporting about Ukraine striking, striking deep within Moscow, hitting oil depots and infrastructure there. And so to me, it's not a coincidence that you had Putin meet with Xi Jinping in China. They issued a joint statement together. Notice there was no Donald Trump and Xi Jinping joint statement. There was a joint statement of Xi Jinping and Putin together about a multipolar world order. Before Donald Trump arrived in China, you had Foreign Minister Arakchi of Iran arrive, and Xi Jinping planned it this way. Iran, Russia, China all working together, planning it this way to just make Donald Trump look so utterly, utterly weak. And then you had Putin make this announcement today that there were military drills in Belarus involving tens of thousands of Russian soldiers, lots of equipment for these nuclear tests. For those on audio, I'm showing the video of what was put out by the Russian side of things, showing what these nuclear tests look like, showing Um, and clearly, I mean, this was supposed to be a warning sent to Donald Trump and to NATO, as sadly under, uh, Trump— I mean, Trump consistently is attacking NATO over and over and over again.

We've been covering here on the Midas Touch Network the NATO meeting that was just taking place in Brussels. There's going to be a broader conference in Ankara that's going to be coming up soon as well, um, at a foreign minister level. As I remember, I reported NATO's not doing, uh, presidential or prime minister levels because they don't want to be around Donald Trump. So they're doing it at a foreign minister level because they view Trump as a distraction. And, you know, I've been reporting how you have, you know, some of the top NATO commanders like, uh, Grinkowicz and Dragone and, uh, Vernier and some of these other people, you know, who are doing their best in NATO to try to hold the alliance together and project strength, as it seems that no matter what, all Trump wants to do is attack NATO and kind of elevate America's adversaries. I mean, what, just yesterday you had Donald Trump demanding that, uh, Zelensky encourage Europe to buy Belarus, uh, Belarus potash fertilizer from Belarus I mean, that's what you're going to Zelensky to help Belarus, which is allied with Russia, to encourage— you want Zelensky to encourage Europe, buy Belarusian potash?

Seriously, that's, that's where you're at. And then of course, we saw lots of market manipulation again this morning. I saw that there was a report that there was a deal in principle once again that was reached between the United States and Iran, and then the markets moved on that news. Oil prices dropped, futures, on that news. Then Iran came back and said, no, there isn't any final deal, uh, in principle. There's no letter of intent yet.

They say—

said the parties have moved slightly closer together, but on the main issues, Iranian control of the Strait of Hormuz, and that Iran's not going to give up its— any of its nuclear material to the United States. I think Iran was open to an Obama-style non-nuclear deal because Iran claims it's using its nuclear material for non-weapons-grade purposes, whether you believe that or not. But they say that they're open to an Obama-style deal, but with the nuclear material being kept in Iran, not being transferred to the US or even Russia or anywhere else. So they're real— the main issues: Strait of Hormuz, nuclear material. There's been, uh, there's been no changes there, uh, at all. And then of course, one of the things we've been focused on is, uh, as Donald Trump is weaker than ever We see him attacking allies, you know, see him attacking Canada. You saw the Undersecretary of State— and there's an Undersecretary of Defense who calls himself an Undersecretary of War— uh, Elbridge Colby threatened Canada. We're pulling out of the Joint Defense Pact, which has been around since 1940, since World War II. We don't like your rhetoric, Canada, is what this Trump regime, uh, Undersecretary of Defense is saying.

And notably, as you have that happening, it's related related to the fact that Canada's been more forceful in supporting Arctic defense and helping out Greenland, along with European countries helping out Greenland. You had Jeff Landry, Donald Trump's so-called envoy to Greenland, the governor of Louisiana, had this awful trip to Greenland. There were massive protests that broke out, uh, today. Landry left a day early. Um, he was— no one wanted to even meet with him. Uh, there was supposed to be a signature campaign of having the Greenlandic people agree and sign their names that they would accept $200,000 to give up their sovereignty. They were only able to get 2 signatures of the entire people who live in Greenland. They were able to get 2 signatures. You know, you saw lots of signs at this massive protest in Nuuk today saying, "We want NATO, not pedo." You know, and then there were photos of signs like that with photos of Donald Trump and Epstein together. But you saw a forceful protest out there in Nuuk, you know, asserting its sovereignty. Notably, you have Xi Jinping saying to that Elbridge Colby guy, the Undersecretary of, uh, War, Undersecretary of Defense, he's not allowed to show up in China until the United States clarifies its position regarding a $12 billion weapons package to Taiwan.

And so it's just interesting that you have Elbridge Colby threatening Canada, threatening our allies, threatening NATO. And then ultimately, this Elbridge Colby guy, who is all about decoupling from China and we're going to be strong against China, he's basically begging to go to China right now. And Xi Jinping is like, no, you're not invited until you clarify what the United States position is going to be on, uh, on, on Taiwan. And also, it should be noted that there were no documents signed when Donald Trump was in Beijing. Zero. Like, usually out of these meetings there's, there's deals that are signed in, in writing, right? There's joint statements, there's deals, so you know what they are. So Trump came back and said China agreed to buy 200 Boeing jets, uh, when in fact they were supposed to buy 500 Boeing jets. And I think, you know, Trump was also bragging, look, they're gonna buy, you know, what, 200— uh, 20 million metric tons of soybeans. When under Biden they were buying 28 million metric tons. And then last year, I think they bought a total of like 12 million metric tons of soybeans. So last year was half the amount to Biden, which Trump bragged was a big deal.

Now he's saying it'll still be between a half and three-fourths of what Biden was getting without all of the drama and tariffs against, uh, the world. But, but China didn't agree to any of this. And so China's basically holding this over the head of the United States. Clarify what you're going to be doing on Taiwan. And Donald Trump's been asked about, you know, Taiwan and weapons to Taiwan. And Donald Trump now refers to Taiwan as his, quote, Taiwan problem. That's how Donald Trump is referring to it— my Taiwan problem that I have to, um, that I have to deal with. And, you know, it's just notable how Donald Trump so easily and so quickly, uh, runs to try to be liked by authoritarians who are completely outmaneuvering him every step of the way. Which is a photo of Donald— this is a real photo taken by Reuters, uh, today, uh, at Donald Trump. And I'll talk to you and show you some of the things that he was saying today. But he held this Oval Office, uh, press conference. And during this Oval Office press conference, before, uh, going there, he was asked about losing control of Republicans, uh, in the Senate and even in the House.

You know, how many Americans— with so many Americans who are concerned about affordability ahead of the midterms, there's some backlash amongst Republicans. What's your response to that? Let me share with you what Donald Trump said here. Let's play this clip of Trump. Are you losing control of the Senate, Senator Paul?

I don't know. I really don't know. I can tell you I only do what's right. Uh, I don't need money for the ballroom. You're not making a gift of the ballroom. This is the biggest, uh, misreporting that I've ever seen. The ballroom is being built. It'll cost— we've done— it was going to be $200 million. I've doubled the size of it because we need it, and it's being done in conjunction with the military and with the, uh, very much in conjunction with the military and Secret Service.

I mean, again, it's just this ballroom over and over again, and reflecting pools over and over again, and triumphal arches over and over again, and golf courses, this and that. And the American people are like, really? Enough is enough. And then he raises the ante and says, actually, we're going to do $1.8 billion slush fund to January 6th insurrectionists. $1.8 billion. He goes, I'm going to sue my own Treasury Department. And I just want you to all understand the dynamics. I know you've heard about this case, but let's just break it down very slowly together. Okay. In January of 2026, this past year, a few months back, Donald Trump, in his personal capacity, sues the Treasury Department and the IRS for $10 billion, alleging that there was a data breach regarding his tax returns in 2019. Okay, who was in office in 2019? Donald Trump. Whose IRS was it in 2019? Donald Trump. Donald Trump alleges an IRS contractor who was employed by him took his tax returns in 2019. The presidents of the United States in the past have always just released their tax returns to begin with. But setting that aside, there was over 450,000 people who were part of this data breach, not just Donald Trump.

450,000 people. None of them, including Donald Trump, have any cause of action. The government has absolute immunity— remember the immunity doctrine— from these types of lawsuits for a variety of reasons. Also, it would be time barred under the statute of limitations. We learned that the IRS lawyers, uh, also prepared a memo to the DOJ lawyers explaining why this case was frivolous and why it should be dismissed. The federal judge who the case was assigned asked the parties to do briefing about why this was even a case that was filed. Why wasn't the Treasury Department filing a motion to dismiss, because that's what you would normally do in a case like this. Is there adversity? Is there standing, or is this some collusive thing? So the judge said, I would like some briefing on this. And then the Trump regime dismisses the case and just says, okay, we're dismissing this with prejudice. Doesn't even tell the judge that there's a settlement agreement. So then outside of the case then there becomes a settlement agreement of Donald Trump in his personal capacity with the Treasury Department, with the government, for $1.776 billion, meaning we the taxpayers are on the hook for $1.776 billion to go to January 6th insurrectionists, many of whom are terrorists.

Not all of them, but, but there were some who were attacking police officers and engaged in in my opinion, sedition. So that's why, in my opinion, their, their conduct was terroristic. People who were found guilty of crimes by jurors who Donald Trump then pardoned. So Donald Trump wanted to give them $1.8 billion. But there was another aspect to this, an addendum, where Donald Trump then entered into a deal with himself, with him and Todd Blanch, his former personal criminal defense attorney that says that Donald Trump can't be audited and that any of the past claims against him for not paying his taxes are waived and that he's basically immune from audits. And if he owed taxes, he doesn't owe taxes anymore, and that the IRS can't look into him anymore. And the way the waiver is written, it purports to basically be, uh, any and all known claims get waived against him, his family, and the Trump Organization. And while you may say, well, it's from the date of the agreement going back, one could also say that included in this are all of these shady deals he's done with foreign countries recently, all of these quid pro quo deals, all of the stuff that he's done with the crypto and the Bitcoin and all of that, because that conduct, this money grab if you will, all predates the signing of the settlement agreement.

So in the future situation, he would argue all of these business endeavors are immune from any audits and any repercussions, which could be— people are saying, well, that can mean $100 million or $200 million. In my view, that can mean a billion dollars. Like, you're— they're— you— the media is using the wrong number, in my opinion, because they're saying, based on what they believe Trump owed in taxes in the past, he could owe as much as $100 million in unpaid taxes from the Trump Org and all of his entities. And I think what they're missing though there is Trump has made billions of dollars since he's been in the Oval Office so far, which he owes taxes on, right? If those are investments, maybe they're going to claim it as capital gains. I, I don't know the treatment. So whether they're capital gains or ordinary income, you're talking on the low end 20-25% taxes. On the high end, you could be talking in the high 30% of it. And that, you know, and so you have all of those taxes that would be owed. So what's stopping him from saying, I'm not going to pay any of that?

So let's just say he made— we saw the stock trading he's done, right? Usually that would be treated as capital gains, although like in a state like California, They treat capital gains as ordinary income. So there's a lot of aspects of that, though, and I won't bore you with the nuances of the way these tax structures occur. But what would stop him from saying, hey, I made $4 billion, so let's just take 20— let's take a blended rate of 20-25%. Let's say he's made income of $4 billion, right? That's probably the income that he's made from this crypto thing and that thing. I'm just giving you my opinion. I don't know for— none of us know. So let's assume he owes $1 billion in taxes on the $4 billion, right? To me, as I read the agreement, he's made that money already. Why would he pay those taxes? So it's not just the $100 million. My analysis is that it's probably more like $1 billion that he settled with himself, because what's the taxable amount on all of these grifty quid pro quo improper deals, in my opinion, that he's already made? And not just him, the Trump Organization as well.

So he can try to shelter his own, you know, first off, you know, he has this complicated trust structure. He runs everything through the trust. The entities are part of the trust. He tries to hide his personal income in the entities themselves to claim that he personally loses money by moving, by moving the amounts around from this entity to that entity. That's what I've observed in my opinion, you know, before. So now the Trump Org also gets this immunity. So setting aside him, Think about what the Trump Org would owe and, and how that— and so if they don't pay their taxes because they're going to cite the settlement— anyway, I think that that aspect needs more attention. And I'm just giving you my opinion and my legal analysis, how I see it, because I don't think you're getting that legal analysis anywhere else. Anyway, back to what's going on on Capitol Hill. You have, uh, Congressmember Fitzpatrick. He told our Pablo Monríquez that this $1.7 billion fund is bad news and that he was going to try to kill it. And so here's a Republican Congress member from Pennsylvania in a vulnerable seat for the midterms, and here's what he had to say.

Let's play this clip of him.

Congressman, what do you make of this $1.7 billion fund for—

Bad news. We're going to try to kill it.

You're going to try and kill it?

Wow.

Okay.

And how? Well, we're considering legislative options. We're going to write a letter, uh, to the AG to start, but we're considering a legislative option. Okay. We're trying to unpack exactly, you know, what the legal machinations are, but can't do that.

Have you ever heard of any other Americans, like, other than Trump and associates?

I haven't.

I've not—

who are unauditable by the IRS?

I've never heard that. Okay.

So would that be part of the legislative?

Of course. Of course. Yeah, you can't do that.

Got it.

Think Thank you. So let me be very clear, because some people have said, look, Ben, that guy, he's in a vulnerable seat. He obviously is worried about losing it in Pennsylvania. Ben, you've interviewed the guy he's running against, you know, who are, who are good, good candidates. So why would you platform a Republican Congress member saying those things? When I— because I'm— I, I— what I care about is I want to get out the truth and I want to get out honesty. I want to get out the facts. That's what I see my role is, you know. As I've told you before on, on this network, and this is what I've said before, I care more about the values and the principles and people meeting at our values and principles as a community than any particular person running for this or that. That's just how I feel. Values and the way we've got into this mess as a country is we've exalted personalities. And so to me, if the values and principles of the Democratic Party align close to our values and principles, let them chase us. Let us stand for something, because if you don't stand for something, you fall for everything.

Right. Let them chase us and or let them, let them fight for what we care. And let's make it very clear and hold everybody accountable, frankly. And that's, and that's what we do. So where our views align, I'm going to say, look, there's great alignment here. That's great. The MAGA Party has become a right-wing fascist party. They objectively, they don't support democracy. You've got MAGA Mike who runs this thing like the Russian Duma. He's destroyed Article 1, and I believe they're pathetic, pathetic people. If they're going to speak rationally like that, I can say, well, as I did, this is an individual in a vulnerable seat. Take it with a grain of salt what he's saying. Like, you know, it's probably self-interested, but we need people, humans, to stand up to the grift and the quid pro quos and what Trump is doing. You're also hearing over here from Republican Congressmember Kylie, also in a vulnerable seat now with the redistricting that took place in California. It's not a coincidence that these are the people saying it, but here's what Kylie had to say. Let's play this clip. Concerns.

It's very strange, very unprecedented. It's very concerning.

Do you think that January 6th rioters who have been pardoned should be able to receive money from this fund?

I don't know why anyone is receiving money from this fund. That's not the way we typically adjudicate claims, if anyone has claims. So, and certainly I would think that, you know, those wouldn't be people that would be at the top of the list, even if there were a basis for, for such a payout. So I'm still learning about it. It's a very unusual arrangement. I think that there does need to be congressional oversight into exactly how this came about and what exactly is going to be the criteria for, for any distributions.

Now I want you to compare that to, let's say, Congressmember Troy Nells. I mean, and this is your typical MAGA guy. And look, on the Midas Touch Network, we've got our reporters out on the Hill. They're there every day. We're leading the news cycle with these interviews, and we're setting— this is what everybody wanted here, right? I mean, I'm watching you all in the chat. We are not reactive. In the House, we are proactive and we are asking Democrats, Republicans, whoever on the Hill, the questions that you want. And we're there. You saw we, we've got Pablo in the tunnel. We've got Scott McFarland in the rotunda. We're everywhere right now. And so we caught up in the rotunda with— or in the tunnel first with MAGA Republican Congress member Troy Nails about Trump stock trading, because we're not going to let this just fade into the news cycle that Donald Trump in Q1 of 2026 made about 3,700 stock trades for around $750 million. And remember, to me, this is intertwined also with the IRS stuff. Here, play this clip.

Carson, what do you make of Donald Trump doing 3,700 stock trades in the first quarter of this year?

Why don't you guys focus on something that's really, really important instead of worrying about Donald Trump and his stock trades? Why aren't you more concerned about what's happening with Iran and their willingness to, you know, have a nuclear weapon? Donald Trump was over there in China trying to cut some deals, trying to bring manufacturing here. He's trying to end wars across our entire globe, and all you're focused on is stock trades.

Go ahead.

Stock trading.

Corruption.

We have corruption. You want to talk about corruption?

Yeah.

Let's talk about the previous administration. Now that's corruption. And all these people complaining, specifically the far left nut job Democrats, about the billion dollars for the ballroom or the billion point seven for these individuals that may have been wronged by the previous administration. Let me tell you something. The previous administration administration weaponized those agencies. So you want to talk about J6ers? You want to talk? I mean, we violated the previous— they violated their rights.

The previous administration is like unhirable. Everybody knows that they went out in disgrace.

Like, well, Joe, Joe, Sleepy Joe was asleep at the wheel, obviously.

So let's hear what he said there. He said Donald Trump's out there trying to cut deals What do we give participation trophies? What was the deal that he cut? He's out there trying. Would you want me to give him a participation trophy? You want me to give the guy an E for effort? He gets an F for effort, actually, because he's sucking up to authoritarians. He's trying to end wars. He started the wars. And in fact, he is trying to start another war with Cuba right now. There's an aircraft carrier outside of Cuba. He's starving the people of Cuba to death, and he thinks that starving the people is a strategy that's going to get the people to rise up against the current regime in Cuba, like as if that worked in Iran. So you're going after the people to go after the regime, and now you're creating a pretext that, oh, in Cuba they've got 300 drones, and so now You know, as Donald Trump fails in Iran, they ain't giving up the Strait of Hormuz. Okay, let's be very clear, they ain't giving up the Strait of Hormuz. The Islamic Republic is still in power.

That was a major loss, a major loss in Iran. And Iran and Oman have talked about the, the area that's under their joint control for these tolls. They've just increased the, uh, solidifying and formalizing of, uh, of their toll system. And then they go, and all you're focused on is stock trades. That's not all we're focused on. It's a big deal. All you're focused on is the stock. We should be focused on the fact that from the Oval Office there's 3,700 stock trades going on in one quarter alone. That's not all we're focused on. All of these other things. But the thing is What the American people are focused on is, hey, I can't afford gas or groceries or my rent. I'm delinquent on my credit card. My house is in foreclosure if you were lucky enough to own a house. But I'm late on my rent. If you have student loans, maybe you're late there and that's harming your credit, which makes you— makes it very difficult to participate in the economy. Um, we're suffering. You've taken away our healthcare. You've taken, you've taken away, uh, critical resources from us to be able to afford things.

And you're out there stock trading Nvidia and Palantir and Dell while you're posting the stock ticker of these companies, and then they're moving up and you're all getting richer and I'm getting screwed. That, that's— it's all connected. All of these things that you're mentioning This catastrophic war is one of the reasons that inflation is surging. 3.8% CPI, 6% PPI, and inflation is expected, as I predicted at the beginning when everyone's like, oh, you're being hyperbolic, Midas hyperbolic. I said it's going to be 5%. It's going to be 5% year over year. That's what it looks like it's heading towards. And it didn't take me to give you a Nostradamus prediction. It just seemed like that's where it was going. You just look up, you look at the tariffs against the world. It was only a certain amount of time before the dam broke on that because companies were trying to, as much as they can, not to pass it on, but then they had to pass it on to consumers. We know that we knew that was going to happen. And now the floodgates open there combined with the fact that, you know, the Strait of Hormuz is closed and it's not just the LNG and it's not just the crude, which impacts the global markets as it's things like the fertilizers as well, which which requires, you know, all this material from the Middle East.

And now Donald Trump is telling Zelensky to convince Europe to buy potash. I mean, seriously, that's, that's where you're going with that. Anyway, so you have that. So then we caught up with Tommy Tuberville in the rotunda. Here's what Tuberville told our reporters. You could watch what Tuberville said. Let's play it.

So, Coach, what do you make— I gotta ask— Donald Trump, 3,700 stock trades in the first quarter of this year. Is What do you make of that?

Donald Trump, 3,700 stock trades. Yeah.

In the first quarter of this year, it's like 9— every 9 minutes and 45 seconds a trade. I know it's not him personally doing that, but—

Exactly. And I do the same thing. I never look at my stocks. He does the same thing. You give it to somebody who knows what they're doing. That's how this country runs. People have jobs. Give them your money. If you want to invest in the country and corporations, that's what we all do. I get sick and tired of hearing Republicans and Democrats say we need to stop all this trading. If you're— sure, if you're inside trading, you need to stop. But I guarantee President Trump's not inside trading. I'm not inside trading. And it's ridiculous even people bring that up. Most people that bring it up don't have a clue what they're talking about.

Got it.

Coach, who's gonna win the World Cup?

World Cup? You got me on that. I'm an American football fan.

Got it. Thanks, Coach.

Dude's such a phony also. Um, and speaking of dudes who are such a phony, you had Todd Blanch. I'll just share this one with you right here. I was asked by CNN, would the average taxpayer— wouldn't the average taxpayer respond, why do my tax dollars need to go to people who are upset about their involvement in J6? Like, don't you think the average taxpayer would be upset about that? Here's what he said. Let's play it. But wouldn't the average taxpayer respond and say, okay, but why is that now my problem? Why do my tax dollars now need to go to people who are upset about their involvement in investigations?

Well, if you're just upset, you're not getting it done. On the other hand, I think if you said to the American taxpayer that there was a horrible wrong committed by your government, and now you can apply and you can have your lawyer's fees back. You can, you can be compensated for what you lost financially. What American would say, oh my gosh, that's terrible? I mean, I don't know. I very much disagree with the idea that the American taxpayer is indignant about the fact that a, a victim of weaponization, okay, a victim who suffered, whether it was, um, legal fees, lost a job, had their life turned upside down in a way that was not appropriate. If it was appropriate, There should be no compensation. And that's why we have 5 commissioners who will take a look at it. But I do not think the American people have issues with that. To the contrary, I think they do want their tax dollars spent on things like that.

You will—

you think that right now, while the American people are suffering, you want our tax dollars to go to J6 insurrectionists? And here's the deal: these people were convicted of felonies, of crimes. In criminal courts. Thus, they are not victims. Every single one of them, if they filed a lawsuit in federal court, would have the lawsuit instantly dismissed. It would be Rule 11 sanctions against any lawyer who filed because they've been convicted of crimes or they pled guilty. Do you think I'd be able to represent someone on a civil rights case who was found guilty of a crime? No, I would lose my bar license for— as someone who was previously a civil rights lawyer, you would be laughed out of court and you would be sanctioned and you would lose your bar license. So if someone is an actual victim of something, you know what they do? They file a lawsuit. And you can file a lawsuit against the federal government. By the way, the way Donald Trump filed a lawsuit against the federal government. And then you put your claims before a judge, and then the judge decides if there is a case to go to a jury.

And if the case is legally viable and goes to a jury, then a jury decides the outcome. That's the way our system works. And ultimately, if somebody is wrong— like, I would represent people in excessive force cases. Or families that lost loved ones in excessive force cases. If the person was a victim, I had to prove that they were a victim, not to Donald Trump's commissioners. That's how you do things in Putin's Russia. That's how you do things in Kim Jong-un's North Korea. In our country, there is a system where people who are actual victims bring claims and cases in, in courts. And so it's so deeply damaging when you have the acting AG say things like that. And this has even pissed off Republicans. And as I mentioned, you have now the Senate and likely the House shutting down, shutting down until, until June, not doing any more work because the Senate says we're going home. The House goes, if the Senate's going home, we're going home. They're all flipping out at the Trump regime that Donald Trump is doing all this ballroom reflecting pool stuff. And, you know, I don't know if the dam is breaking there.

But I can tell you that the Senate Republicans are pissed, and they seem most pissed, frankly, that Donald Trump targeted John Cornyn in Texas and exalted Paxton, you know, and that now they're responding to Trump, potentially now costing Republicans the Senate in the midterms that are right around the corner, folks. Let's cover all of that when we come back from a break. I know that was 36 minutes long, this first segment, but I had a lot to discuss. Hit subscribe, help us get to 7 million subscribers. Thanks to all of you for those great birthday gifts. And your birthday gifts were getting memberships for people who couldn't afford memberships. And so if you're still able to do that, click join, gift memberships to as many people as possible. Long segment we had there. We'll take a quick break. When we come back, we've got a lot more to discuss. Oh, and help us get 7 million subscribers. We'll be right back.

Look, I don't mind a dad bod, but with summer coming up in just a couple of months, I've been thinking about getting into better shape this summer, just a little bit better shape. The problem is that my body doesn't just snap back into shape like it did in my 20s. As men get older, our bodies reprogram themselves. We naturally start, you know, storing more fat and losing muscle faster. And then the main reason for this is testosterone. Most men's testosterone levels start dropping as early as their 30s. When that happens, it becomes easier to gain fat, especially around your stomach. And here's the frustrating part: the more body fat you gain, the more your body actually converts testosterone into estrogen, which makes it even easier to gain more fat. So it can turn into a really tough cycle for a lot of guys. That's why I started taking Mars Men. Mars Men is a natural supplement designed to support healthy testosterone levels, which can help your body burn fat more efficiently and build lean muscle. When your hormones are working the way they're supposed to, a lot of things can get easier— workouts, energy, even staying lean.

It's basically helping your body get back to running like it did years ago. No weird stimulants or synthetic hormones. Just a real natural ingredients that support healthy T levels, weight management, and exercise performance. And the quality is legit. It's made in the USA and every batch is third-party tested. Since taking Mars Men, I've had way more consistent energy, stronger lifts, and better focus. Also, I love that it comes with a 90-day money-back guarantee, so there's no risk. Worst case, you don't absolutely love it, you'll get your money back. For a limited time, our listeners can get 50% off for life plus free shipping and 3 free gifts at mengotomars.com. For a limited time, our listeners can get 50% off for life, plus free shipping and 3 free gifts at mengotomars.com. That's mengotomars.com for 50% off and 3 free gifts when you check out. And it's also available on Amazon. After your purchase, they'll ask where you heard about them. Please support our show and let them know that Midas Touch sent you.

OneSkin has become one of my favorite skincare products because it actually works differently than anything else I've tried. I use their moisturizer with the OS-1 peptide And what I've noticed is that my skin feels smoother, firmer, and it just looks healthier overall. It's not one of those products that promises miracles overnight, but over time you really start to see and feel the difference. I'll tell you my personal favorites right now. The OS-1 Face, Lip, and Eye Cream are my go-tos. What makes OneSkin unique is that it was developed by longevity scientists to target what they call zombie cells. Those are older skin cells that stop functioning properly and contribute to wrinkles, dullness, and loss of firmness. Most skincare products only treat the surface, but OneSkin's OS-1 peptide is designed to address one of the root causes of skin aging. And this isn't just hype. OneSkin is backed by 4 peer-reviewed clinical studies, over 10,000 5-star reviews, and was recognized by Bloomberg as a leader in skin longevity. Born from over a decade of longevity research, OneSkin's OS-1 peptide is proven to target the visible signs of aging helping you unlock your healthiest skin now and as you age.

For a limited time, try OneSkin with 15% off using code MIDAS at oneskin.co/midas. That's 15% off. Oneskin.co with code MIDAS. M-E-I-D-A-S. After you purchase, they'll ask where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them we sent you. Again, that's oneskin.co/midas and use code MIDAS for 15% off. I'm so excited to tell you about our sponsor, Avocado Green Mattress. Their certified organic mattresses are specifically designed to relieve pressure points, support your body the way it needs, and help you actually get the deep restorative sleep that you've been missing. Every mattress is made with thoughtfully sourced materials and built with real care so you get incredible sleep night after night. When I invest in something for my home, I want it to last. That's what I love about Avocado. Their best-selling Green Mattress is supportive, incredibly comfortable, and feels intentionally made not mass-produced. It's the kind of purchase that not only helps you sleep better, but also feels like a smart, long-term investment. Avocado products are crafted with real certified organic materials that provide comfort, breathability, and durability. And because they're made to last, they're a better choice for both your home and the planet.

Avocado products are made, not manufactured, and thoughtfully crafted with real materials to deliver lasting comfort and support. Go to AvocadoGreenMattress.com/Midas to check out their mattress and furniture sale. That's AvocadoGreenMattress.com/Midas. AvocadoGreenMattress.com/Midas. That's M-E-I-D-A-S.

Welcome back to Ben on Breaking News. I'm Ben Myselis, and this is your breaking news during the break. We learned that all charges have just been dismissed against the so-called Broadview 6. That's the detention facility in Chicago, the concentration camp, uh, as the defense lawyers uncover— that's the Kat Abu Ghazala case. Remember Kat running for Congress over there? Uh, she came very close but didn't win, and she and 5 others were arrested right outside. Broadview is one of those Trump regime smash-and-grab arrests, and then they get indicted and it gets all of the headlines. I remember we were saying, seems like there's a lot of misconduct and impropriety there. Well, uh, that case was just dismissed, and the United States Attorney there in Illinois had to admit that after they were called out by Katz's lawyers and the other lawyers, the criminal defendants, that there was massive, massive grand jury misconduct that took place. And there was something taking place called vouching, where you as a prosecutor are not allowed to do this. You can say, hey, I've looked at this, I promise you, I have a lot of experience, this is a bad case, and you've got— you, you should side with me because I've seen a lot of cases like this, and just trust me on this one, we've got a lot of evidence that we can show you right now.

We just need you to do this for us because this— like, that's vouching. You can't vouch, you know, yourself. You have to let the evidence speak for itself. That's automatic no-no. I mean, complete prosecutorial misconduct. And here's the thing, if you're like, well, why didn't that get called out earlier? It's what I've always been saying about these grand jury proceedings. They were always based on good faith by prosecutors because in grand juries Historically, this isn't a new thing. There's no federal judge in the room with the grand jurors, and there's no defense lawyers in the room with grand jurors. The grand jurors— if you've ever been on a grand jury, different than a jury, but you get a jury notice, but you show up and you are in a grand jury, then you hear about— I lost service there— you get a bunch of— you get a— you hear these cases. and then you're asked to sign a true bill. You're asked to sign, you're asked to sign an indictment, um, that is presented to you. And the only people who presented to you are the prosecutors. They, they give it to you, and then the foreperson signs it, and then a true bill is delivered and handed down, and then an indictment is issued from the grand jury.

But the only people in the room with the grand jurors are the prosecutors. and they're supposed to follow a prosecutorial manual and they don't. I mean, remember the first James Comey case where you had Lindsey Halligan? That case ultimately got dismissed because she was an unlawful United States attorney and she was the only one in the room with the grand jury and she was not properly appointed. So the whole case got dismissed on that basis since she wasn't even allowed to be in the room with them representing she was something that she was not. But in that room, what we learned happened was all of this misconduct. She handed the foreperson a different indictment than was originally presented to the grand jury. She went back and gave the foreperson something to sign that wasn't the actual document that the full grand jury was signed, which is just completely crazy. And then they called in an FBI agent, and the FBI agent was talking about like attorney-client privileged information. and the FBI agent was doing all of these things that, again, you were not allowed to actually talk about in front of a grand jury. And so there has been a lot of these indictments that we know are tainted by impropriety.

I mean, we've been raising this issue as it relates to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which, you know, the Trump regime is like, well, a grand jury indicted him. Wasn't like we did it. But what are you telling the grand jury? These are under Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Almost in all cases, the grand jury proceedings are supposed to be secret, secret grand jury. And it relies— and you could, you could pierce the secrecy if you can show— and it's a high standard, it's a very high showing of piercing the secrecy of grand jury before indictment happens. If you can show that there were improprieties that were brought. But the issue with the Southern Poverty Law Center, same thing. There hasn't been a ruling on the grand jury grand jury misconduct yet. But the issue was the Southern Poverty Law Center's like, we've been working with this prosecutorial office with our informant program. We've given you the leads to go after the bad guys. So did you tell the grand jury that we work with you? Like, we're partners with you. We're partners with the FBI. We've always— so it's not like we hide this So you're charging us for wire fraud for concealing this when we work with you and it's clearly known that this is what we do because this is how we get the bad guys with you and we infiltrate these organizations.

Oh yes, you may infiltrate them, but we now have a weaponization fund for the bad guys, says Todd Blanch. And so anyway, that to me was big news that I wanted to share with you. About those cases being dismissed. And it's like, have you all heard a peep about what's going on in the Don Lemon case? Right. I mean, just think about all of these DOJ cases now follow the Trump vexatious litigation track.

Right.

The headline, Don Lemon arrested. He was arrested. He was arrested during Grammy week. And he and all these journalists were arrested. Okay. And then the Trump regime's like, could we delay the trial? Could we delay discovery? Can we delay this? Can we delay that? Trump got his headline. Now he wants to try to bleed these people with the lawyers' fees and attorneys' fees, but then drag this out, hang criminal cases over people's heads to try to destroy their lives, basically, is what, is what they're doing. And it's like, if you have a good case, bring it to the jury. So you show your evidence. And the question there is also, what are they telling these grand jurors to procure these indictments? I did a video with Harry Litman that I think will drop tonight.

10—

and Politico deserves the credit because they, they tracked this. Kyle Cheney over there does a very good job. 10 thousand cases involving immigrants thrown out by federal judges, over 430 different federal judges from all different political parties throwing out these unlawful detentions with it, with no evidence, because there's no evidence to support unlawful detentions. People rotting in prisons for what, for 6 months, a year or longer. So it was when Cheney, Kyle Cheney, did this analysis. 90% of the— 90% of these immigration cases, 90%, 9-0, get dismissed or the person gets released and the detention is deemed unlawful. So they have a 10% success rate and a 90% loss rate at the DOJ. At the DOJ, which used to have a 97% win rate. They're a bunch of losers. And I go back to what I talked about in the last episode also, Tim, and you know why I show the clip of Fitzpatrick or why I show the, the clip of Kylie, although I believe— let me be clear, I'm not letting them off the hook. They've been very complicit in MAGA. They've exalted these, you know, these horrible They've allowed— they've been complacent and now they're staring down elections and losing their jobs.

So obviously that's a motivating factor for them. But for me, I never approached any of this as like a political guy. I never did that. And or, or, or never liked, you know, I never liked that aspect of it at all. When I was a litigator, I represented Republicans. And I represented Democrats and I represented independents. I never asked what your political affiliation is. I represented people who were wronged by usually large institutions or police departments. That's what I did. I represented a lot of people in Bakersfield and Kern County and Fresno and Fresno County, which, if you know that area, it's a lot of Republicans. I didn't ask people what their political affiliation was ever. And so to me, it's just about like behaving like a grown-up and an adult and ethically and morally and sticking with the truth and the facts. And it's bad that Trump is trading 3,700 times. It'd be bad if he's trading once, let alone to trade companies that you talk about all the time in the Oval Office. That's horrible conduct. You know, I, I want there to be honesty. I want there to be transparency. That's all.

It's very, very basic asks, very basic asks. Going back to Todd Blanch, though, now, who's the acting attorney general. Let's go to this one right here. He's asked by CNN, would you be okay with people who were convicted of hurting police getting taxpayer money? Let's listen to what his response is. Let's play this clip. Look, you're the nation's top law enforcement official right now. Would you be okay with people who were convicted of hurting police getting taxpayer money?

Just to be clear, people that hurt police get money all the time. Okay. There's a process where, where if you are, if you are, if you believe you have your rights violated, you can, you can apply for funds, you can sue, you can file a claim, you can go to court. In some of those cases, the state, the government, the federal government settles those cases. It's abhorrent to ever, ever touch a law enforcement officer, which is why anytime anybody does that and it's a federal officer, will prosecute them. But that's a completely different question with whether an individual is allowed to apply for a claim, whether they'll get a claim.

I mean, this guy is an idiot and deeply nefarious. Again, I was a civil rights litigator. There's no such thing as a person who attacks police officers and is convicted who gets paid money. That doesn't exist. That's not a thing. That would be the craziest thing that it exists. You attack police officers and then you, you get paid for attacking the police officers. And, and again, it's also deeply disturbing to me that you have police union heads who will support this stuff. It, it, it is outrageous. You know, I, I support our law enforcement. You know, and I know that there's a lot of law enforcement support for what we're doing here at the Midas Touch Network. I, I, I see it when I'm out and about, and I know that that exists. It's deeply disturbing though that sometimes at the leadership level— and, uh, sheriffs and, and officers will, you know, know what I'm talking about though— they're— what are we talking about there? They're saying that people who attack cops get money for attacking the cops? That guy's supposed to be The, the acting attorney general, that's not a thing.

That's—

that never exists. In contrast, let me show you Governor Newsom. He's in Washington, DC. I did a whole report on Newsom going to DC. Here's what Newsom told our reporters, Pablo Monriquez, about Donald Trump's slush fund. Let's play the clip of Newsom.

What you're doing, Governor, quick question for Midas Touch. Yeah, uh, what do you make of this $1.7 $76 billion fund.

It's a criminal enterprise. It's not just corruption, it's not just graft, it's a full-on criminal enterprise and it needs to be shut down. It needs to be stopped. It's just crazy.

And I count on my congressman to do it.

Sorry.

Yeah, yeah. And then you had Newsom speaking at an event in D.C. Here's what he said. Jeremy, we have the event. I don't have that one. Okay, um, let me then pull up Donald Trump, uh, so we could have the contrast between Newsom and Trump. Uh, here's Donald Trump being asked about affordability. Here's what Donald Trump says about affordability. We got that one, Jeremy. Let's play it then. You want to, you want to play it, or no, we don't want to play it? Okay.

Uh, from day one they said affordability, affordability is a word, because they're good at that. They're good at words, but I'm good at words too. But they hit me with affordability. I just got there, they hit me with eggs. Uh, we had a news conference on my third day, and they said, uh, egg prices are through the roof. I said, I just got here, tell me about eggs. And we got the prices down, way down, actually lower than it was 4 years before.

Okay, there's a lot of other things that I'm seeing in that photo that are in that video that I'm not going to comment on there. But, um, are you attending your son's wedding? Pretty basic question, right? One of those things that usually a parent would say, yes, I'm attending my son's wedding, right? Ultra controversial on this one. Are you attending your son's wedding, Donald? Let's play it. Your son's wedding this weekend, by the way?

Uh, he'd like me to go, but it's going to be just a small little private affair, and I'm going to try and make it. I'm, I'm in the midst I said, you know, this is not good timing for me. I have a thing called the Iran and other things. That's one I can't win on. If I do attend, I get killed. If I don't attend, I get killed by the fake news. Of course, I'm talking about now. But he's got a very— a person who I've known for a long time, and hopefully they're going to have a great marriage.

Mr. President, actually, to add to the art. I just actually passed by it. Huh. Can we just— just at a basic level, it's like the guy doesn't have a dog at the White House or a cat. Nope. There's like so many— so many red flags about this guy. And you're not going to attend your son's wedding because you say it's a small affair. Okay, well Usually if it's like a small affair, usually parent is one of the people in the inner circle who, who attends the wedding of your, of your son. Um, and you said you can't attend because you're dealing with a little something called Iran. Okay, but then he says the following about the Strait of Hormuz. Let's play this clip.

They've had a relationship with them before, uh, and we'll see. Uh, we have total control of the Strait of Hormuz, as you know, with our blockade. The blockade's been 100% effective. Nobody's been able to get through. It's like a steel wall.

Okay, so we have 100% control over the Strait of Hormuz, but now you have to deal with— what do you have to deal with if we control it? Shouldn't all the ships be leaving? Shouldn't everything be great? So I'm just, I'm confused what it is that you have to deal with. And didn't— when was it, April 29th? When he went on Fox and he said back then that Iran had 3 days left to live because the pipes were so congested that everything was going to blow up and that Iran wouldn't be able to deal with the pressure. There was just so much pressure in the pipes.

Isn't that what—

isn't that— you play that, play that clip if we've got it.

When you have, you know, lines of vast amounts of oil pouring through your system If for any reason that line is closed because you can't continue to put it into containers or ships, which has happened to them, they have no ships because of the blockade. What happens is that line explodes from within, both mechanically and in the earth. Something happens where it just explodes. And they say they only have about 3 days left before that happens. And when it explodes, You can never, regardless, you can never rebuild it the way it was. In other words, it will always be— if you rebuild it, it's hard to rebuild it all, but it would only be about 50% of what it is right now. So, it's a very powerful thing that takes place, sort of having to do with nature. But when that gets clogged at the end, in other words, when you have to turn it off because you have no place to store this oil, either put it on ships or storage tanks, which they are just about finished with, uh, a very bad thing is going to happen.

A very bad thing is going to happen. I promise you, it's going to be very, very bad. They've got 3 days left. Yeah, let me explain to you the way it works. Remember, my— the Midas Touch Network was saying, okay, it's not going to happen. That's not the way science works. That's not the way pressurization and oil pipelines work. Like, that's It's just not, it's not a real thing. It's not going to happen. And I mean, here you are now almost a month later and that didn't happen. And it's, isn't it just like COVID? Like a miracle. It's all going to go away by Easter. We're going to bend the curve by summer. It's going to be so hot and it's going to go away. Ukraine. I'm going to get it done in one day. I'll get a peace deal done in the first week. I need two more weeks. We got a meeting with Putin. Things are going very well. Actually, we made a big breakthrough. Here's what's going to happen over here. I'm going to huff and I'm going to puff and I'm going to blow your house down. Nobody's buying any of this anymore.

Nobody's buying any of this anymore. And by the way, that should be absolutely disqualifying. The President of the United States making a statement like that in normal times, that'd be it. You're done. You're impeached. His approval should be 0% after that. He addressed the people— I mean, don't— there's— trust me, he's done that 3 weeks before that, 3 weeks before that, 3 weeks before that. But you make a declarative statement like that and it doesn't happen You're done. You have zero credibility. And here we are, and we're moving very close to it. We're moving very close. And people just treat this guy like he's a baby. Again, E for effort, you know, he's trying hard, he's trying. You're the President of the United States. You should be SEAL Team 6 of SEAL Team 6 of SEAL Team 6. You should be the most elite of elite of elite person. Every word you say should be methodical and careful. And accurate. You should be multi-dimensional chess and not this crap. And again, this isn't Democrat-Republican.

This is not—

this is just, can we just be normal?

He—

that, that didn't happen. What, what else do you need to— you know, I'll, I'll try to, I'll try to find this, this, uh, clip. Well, I won't show it here, but I showed it on other videos of Congressmember Smith and he's cross-examining some of Donald Trump's top military people. And Congressmember Smith is like, so what's the strategy here about lying about the deals all the time? Like, you, you think this is three-dimensional chess? Because it just makes us look pretty stupid that you lie and you lie and you lie again, and it's not hap— who, who's the audience? Who's the audience for all of this, right? And, you know, with all of this mounting, it's just fascinating to me that now the Senate shutdown The House will be shut down soon and they're all going home. I think that's probably what they'll try to do for the end of this term. I think they're just going to try to not show up anymore because showing up means having to deal with all of this. It's like what NATO's doing. NATO's not doing meetings at the prime minister and president level. Why even deal with this?

Just, just try to get through these next 2 years and just, just, just ignore it. This just pretend that, you know, it's not happening and just, you know, and just, just wait it out, I guess. The problem is, while that's happening, our adversaries are strengthening. The BRICS bloc is strengthening as a credible alternative to NATO. The dollar is becoming, uh, used far less. You just look at Turkey, just a country like Turkey. Quietly, they've reduced their bond holdings by 95%. As they've dropped their US Treasury holdings, China's slowly dropping their Treasury holdings. Our bond market's a complete mess right now, and all we have is the Trump regime, you know, their hope— wake up, manipulate the market, wake up, manipulate the market, wake up, manipulate the market, and then talk about the ballroom. So I'll leave you this. This is what Donald Trump's now saying about the ballroom, which by the way, Republicans are not funding right now to the tune of a billion dollars. They pulled that out with Democrats. And look, Democrats deserve the credit for showing leadership and standing up to this, not Republicans, for finally doing the right thing. I'll be clear about that.

But here's what Trump says about his ballroom. I'll leave you with this. Let's play.

The ballroom is, uh, being a tremendous amount of what's being done with respect to the ballroom is for national security, including, as an example, a drone port on top of which was top secret until litigation made it less than top secret. But we have a drone We had— we have also— we have the glass that's 4 inches thick, bulletproof glass. We have bulletproof walls. We have— you need a place like this. But this is being made as a gift from me and other people that are great patriots and spent a lot of money. We're building what will be the finest ballroom anywhere in the world. If they want to spend money on securing the White House, I think it would be very very much a good expenditure, but the ballroom is being built.

I'm also just being— I'm a little distracted by the guy in the background. I just gotta— the guy in the background's, you know, just distracting me a little bit on the right. Um, it's a, it's a drone— it's a drone empire ballroom, and the litigation exposed my plan and secret hospitals, and it's a, it's a shield for ballistic missiles, and I Yeah, yeah, yeah. So there, there, there you have it. There you have it, folks. Make sure you watch the Brother Show tonight, 8 Eastern, 5 Pacific. Hit subscribe, uh, help us get to 7 million subscribers. A great late birthday gift if you can gift memberships to people who can't afford memberships by joining if you can afford them. That would be great. Also, will you do me a favor too? As soon as this episode ends, I did a whole video on Greenland and the protests there. There's 12,000 people watching live. We had 15,000 people watching this live before. Will you all do me a favor? When this ends, just go to the main Midas feed and can you watch the video I did on Greenland and tell me what you think? Spent a lot of time working on that before the live.

And sometimes when we put that right when we're live, this audience is watching the live, so they're not watching that video. So watch that video when this ends. Tell me what you think about that video. Leave a comment there. Check that out now. I'll see you at the show I do with the brothers tonight at 8 Eastern, 5 Pacific. We'll see you soon. We'll keep you posted. Thanks everybody. Yeah, go Greenland, go Canada, go NATO.

I will—

we'll get out of this mess together, I promise you that. This has been Ben on Breaking News. I'm Ben Myselis. This is your breaking news. Check out the last video I did on Greenland on the main Midas Touch feed. Thanks everybody. Shout out Midas Mighty. Want to stay plugged in?

Become a subscriber to our Substack at midasplus.com. You'll get daily recaps from Ron Filipkowski, ad-free episodes of our podcast, and more exclusive content only available at MidasPlus.com.