Have any of Julie Green's predictions come true or failed?

1. The headline predictions under scrutiny

Among Green’s most widely reported claims are that “Charles will actually have his mother murdered,” that prominent Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi would die before key elections, that legal indictments against Donald Trump would collapse, and more recently that Trump would be found “innocent” in his Manhattan criminal trial; she has also forecast an “overthrow” or transfer of power in the United States ^{[1] [2] [4] [3]}. These examples are drawn from national media profiles and clips of her livestreams that have circulated online and been highlighted by outlets ranging from Rolling Stone to Newsweek and the Times of India ^{[1] [3] [2]}.

2. Documented failures: the Trump verdict and other disproven forecasts

A concrete, time‑bound prediction that failed was Green’s public claim that Donald Trump would be found “innocent” in the Manhattan hush‑money criminal trial; the jury instead returned guilty verdicts on related counts, which Newsweek reported as a direct contradiction of Green’s forecast ^[3]. Similarly, the lurid prophecy that Prince Charles would have Queen Elizabeth murdered did not manifest; reporting catalogues the claim as an outlandish forecast and notes it was phrased in ways that make it difficult to test, while Queen Elizabeth’s death in 2022 was not publicly attributed to murder by Charles ^[1]. Media outlets have also cited past predictions such as an early death for Nancy Pelosi and the collapse of Trump indictments that, as of the reporting, had not occurred ^{[2] [4]}.

3. Why some “misses” are hard to pin down: vagueness and timing

A central complication in adjudicating Green’s record is that many of her pronouncements are deliberately broad or deployed without precise timing, a tactic long familiar to analysts of modern prophecy; Rolling Stone notes she mixes vague international name‑drops with specific political claims, making disconfirmation difficult unless a narrowly framed event is specified ^[1]. Several outlets emphasize that Green’s language — promises of a “shift of power,” “reinstatement,” or unspecified “major scandal” — can be read as forecast or exhortation, allowing proponents to reinterpret outcomes after the fact and critics to point to non‑fulfillment ^{[2] [4]}.

4. The political context and competing interpretations

Reporting situates Green not only as a religious figure but as a partisan actor whose prophecies overlap with MAGA narratives; she has appeared in GOP‑adjacent political settings and her messages echo grievances about elites and legal establishments, which some commentators see as political theater rather than theological insight ^{[1] [5]}. Scholars and faith writers offer an alternative framing: prophecy can function symbolically or politically rather than as literal prediction, a view that places Green’s work in a tradition of prophetic rhetoric that mobilizes supporters even when factual claims fail ^[5].

5. Bottom line — what the record shows and what it doesn’t

The verifiable record in major reporting demonstrates that multiple headline predictions from Julie Green have failed to materialize — most clearly the wrong prediction about the Trump trial verdict — while others remain unproven or are framed so vaguely that they resist simple true/false adjudication ^{[3] [1] [2]}. Sources document both outright misses and a pattern of rhetorical ambiguity; beyond those documented instances, available reporting does not provide exhaustive tracking of every forecast, so a definitive, long‑term tally would require systematic archiving of her statements and outcomes ^{[1] [6]}.