Note: The information provided here or in any related communications is for informational purposes only and should not be considered as financial advice. We do not provide personalized investment, financial, or legal advice. Gateway Pundit benefits from purchases made through our sponsors.
by Aaron Gentzler
The first time I saw the words, I scrolled right past them.
Most people did.
It was January 2026, and President Trump had posted a message on his own website in capital letters.
Six words:
“I WILL INSTITUTE THE INSURRECTION ACT.”
I assumed it was Trump being Trump.
A warning to protesters. A shot across the bow at Democratic governors. Something designed to dominate the news for twenty-four hours before the country moved on to the next outrage.
But one guy I heard about—a former advisor to four U.S. Presidents—did something that sounded extreme.
He quietly began moving more than $1 million of his own money.
That got my attention.
Rickards has spent nearly four decades in Washington.
He has advised the CIA, the Pentagon, the U.S. Treasury and four American presidents.
In 1998, when a collapsing hedge fund threatened to bring down Wall Street, Rickards helped negotiate the $4 billion rescue.
Before the 2008 crisis, he warned John McCain’s presidential campaign that a financial meltdown could strike before Election Day.
They laughed him off the phone.
Weeks later, Lehman Brothers collapsed.
Nearly $8 trillion vanished from American retirement accounts and stock portfolios.
In January 2020, Rickards warned his readers about a coming “contagion.”
Three weeks later, the fastest stock market crash in history began.
So when someone with that background takes six words from the President seriously enough to move his family’s money, I want to know what he sees.
I began with the law itself.
The Insurrection Act was passed in 1807 and signed by Thomas Jefferson.
It gives the president extraordinary authority to deploy American troops inside the United States.
That much I knew.
What I didn’t know was what happened twenty years later.
In 1827, a case called Martin v. Mott reached the Supreme Court.
The question before the Court was simple:
Who decides when the conditions for military intervention have been met?
Congress?
The courts?
The governors?
The Supreme Court ruled that this authority belongs “exclusively to the President.”
His decision, the Court said, is “conclusive.”
That ruling has never been overturned.
I read that sentence three times.
Then I started reading about the moments when presidents had actually used the law.
In 1871, a hooded society was terrorizing entire counties in the South.
Its members had allies inside local courts and sheriffs’ offices.
Men who wore hoods at night sat in judgment during the day.
President Grant sent federal forces into those counties and broke their power.
In 1957, Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus used the National Guard to prevent nine Black students from entering Central High School.
An angry mob gathered outside.
President Eisenhower placed the Arkansas National Guard under federal control.
Then he sent roughly 1,000 soldiers from the 101st Airborne into Little Rock.
The same “Screaming Eagles” who had parachuted behind enemy lines on D-Day were suddenly walking American children into an American school.
The last invocation came in 1992.
Los Angeles was burning.
Stores were being looted. Buildings were on fire. Local authorities had lost control.
Federal troops moved through an American city while families watched it happen on television.
That was thirty-four years ago.
No president has invoked the law since.
Yet now the President of the United States had named it himself.
“I WILL INSTITUTE THE INSURRECTION ACT.”
Why?
Rickards believes he knows.
And it begins with a confrontation already taking shape between Washington and a group of defiant states.
Thirteen states and the District of Columbia are refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.
You may agree with those states.
You may agree with Trump.
But here’s my question: What happens when neither side backs down?
The Supreme Court established nearly two centuries ago that federal law is supreme.
The same Court said the president’s decision to invoke the Insurrection Act belongs to him alone.
And Trump has already told the country what he is prepared to do.
I went back and looked at his original post again.
This time it hit different.
And Rickards apparently agrees.
He now says America is spiraling toward a major confrontation between now and November 3, 2026.
What happens next?
Darned if I know…
But he says a wave of criminal prosecutions could strike the political establishment.
A confrontation between the White House and defiant state governments could spill into the streets.
A rapidly expanding war overseas could hit oil, gold and the value of the dollar.
And an overlooked fourteen-word passage in the Constitution could open a path for Trump to remain in power beyond 2028.
Any one of those events could shake the markets.
Rickards believes all four may collide around the midterm elections.
If you think that sounds extreme,
I did too.
Then something happened that made his warning much harder to dismiss.
On July 27, at 1:27 in the morning, President Trump shared Rickards’s presentation on Truth Social.
The President didn’t explain why.
He didn’t say which part he agreed with.
He simply posted three words and a link:
“The Midterm Meltdown.”
Then nothing.
For twenty-eight days, the post sat there.
And then, just after midnight on August 24, Trump shared the presentation again.
I won’t pretend to know what the President meant.
Neither will Rickards.
But Trump has now returned—twice—to a presentation predicting that his next moves could trigger one of the most dangerous periods in recent American history.
The second time, there were only seventy-one days left before November 3.
So here’s the question…
What does the President see in this warning that made him come back to it?
Rickards has recorded a complete briefing laying out his answer.
He explains why the Insurrection Act may be far more than political rhetoric.
He identifies the four forces he believes are converging on November 3.
He reveals the fourteen words that could become the center of the next constitutional crisis.
He even shows you where he moved more than $1 million of his own money before it happens.
And no, he isn’t telling you to hide in a bunker.
He believes the same political shock that could devastate unprepared investors may create a rare financial windfall for people who understand it early—much like what happened in 2008.
Back then, most Americans didn’t react until the collapse was on every television screen.
By then, it was too late.
Rickards saw it coming weeks earlier.
Now he has issued another warning.
And this time, something extraordinary has happened:
The President of the United States has shared it twice.
You can watch Rickards’s full presentation free of charge.
Click the link below and decide for yourself why the President keeps returning to “The Midterm Meltdown.”
Ad block users: Some site features may not work correctly while an ad blocker is enabled, because they break scripts and content this website depends on. If you can’t see comments below, for example, please disable your ad blocker.
