heymama

Trump Jr. is currently invested in rare earth companies while his dad is president. Those companies are getting $735M in government contracts. And we’re conducting military operations in countries with the exact minerals those companies need.
Timeline:
- Nov 2024: Trump Jr. joins 1789 Capital, helps screen Pentagon officials
- Aug 2025: 1789 invests in Vulcan Elements (rare earth magnets)
- Nov 2025: Vulcan gets $620M Pentagon contract
- Dec 2025: Military strikes in Venezuela and Nigeria (both rare earth-rich)

So yeah, if we’re doing resource wars, fine, but this isn’t America securing resources for America. This is using American military force to secure resources that directly enrich the president’s family.

That’s not geopolitics. That’s just a shakedown with extra steps.

At minimum, shouldn’t there be a rule that says “maybe the president’s son shouldn’t invest in defense contractors while dad is in office using military force in mineral-rich countries”?

Exactly. Except this time it’s not oil, it’s rare earth minerals.
Venezuela and Nigeria both have massive rare earth deposits ($1.36 trillion and $700 billion in mineral wealth respectively). These minerals are essential for defense systems, EVs, and tech.

Here’s the kicker:
• Trump Jr. joined 1789 Capital in Nov 2024 (right after the election)
• 1789 invested in Vulcan Elements (rare earth magnet company) in Aug 2025
• 3 months later, Vulcan got a $620M Pentagon contract - the largest ever from that office
• Companies in 1789’s portfolio have received $735M in government contracts in 2025 alone
Rare earth magnets (what Vulcan makes) need rare earth minerals (what Venezuela and Nigeria have). China controls 90% of the global supply.

So we’re seeing military pressure on mineral-rich countries > securing supply chains > benefiting companies Trump’s son is invested in > those companies getting massive government contracts.

Same playbook as oil wars, just updated for the 21st century tech economy. And this time the president’s family is directly positioned to profit.

quote:

---

Demonstrators today are hired agitators that are anarchist at heart. They need to be destroyed.

---

stop talking about Jan 6th for goodness sakes, give it a rest, they were peaceful patriots! :usa:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the DOJ just announced they’ll investigate, but no findings, no charges, no conviction so far?

So at this time, Cook “has not been charged with any wrongdoing” but Trump has found her guilty?

quote:

---

You're missing the "fraud" part of your then when scenario.

---

you’re missing the whole due process, congressional oversight and the whole point.

quote:

---

I hate it, but burning the American flag is covered by the the 1st amendment, right?

---

Nope, this is Trump’s America, Federal overreach is in fashion. You don’t just get to do whatcha want!

quote:

---

I will only see white or Asian male right wing doctors,

---

at first I thought you were a brainwashed idiot, but I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt - you’re gay and just enjoy the way white and Asian men give you a prostrate exam. They know what they are doing bc they are big, strong, smart men! That’s ok. You do you!

I’m curious about the PT’s thoughts / level of concern about this? Do you support what the Trump administration is proposing here? Not about birthright citizenship, but rather the way in which constitutional legal battles should be fought and resolved at the individual / class action level.

Supreme Court Weighs Nationwide Injunctions: Your Rights May Be At Risk

Lisa Remillard:
“In perhaps the most consequential case of this term, today, the justices heard more than 2 hours of oral arguments in a case to decide whether one single federal judge has the power to issue a nationwide injunction that could stop a president’s executive order. The backdrop of the question is President Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship. Birthright citizenship is a constitutional right clearly defined in the 14th amendment of the constitution and has been interpreted by Supreme Court precedent for more than 100 years. Not to mention, a law passed by congress that solidifies that precedent.

I know this sounds like a wonky legal question but I can not stress to you enough. The ruling in this case is going to affect every single person in this country and depending on how the justices rule, could allow a president to move forward with illegal or unconstitutional policies in certain parts of the country.”

quote:

---

What's becoming of that 80 yr old, is a man who loves his country and is fighting to save it.

---

actually, he’s is doing such a terrible job that I’m starting to wonder if he was sent over from the Democratic Party to destroy the GOP.

they changed the definition of “winning” when you weren’t looking.