Why Iran is Playing Games with the Nuclear Deal

From Highway 2, 2005. Top Fox News headquarters in New York City. Always seeking solutions, never sowing division. It's Brian Killmead. Back in studio here at 48th and 6 in Midtown Manhattan, heard around the country, around the world, Brian Kill Mead Show.

We have a big show coming your direction. Brett Fair is just getting out of the shower. He wants me to buy a little bit of time. He's going to be with us shortly. Bottom of the hour, one of the foremost experts on the Middle East, all things Iran, Israel, Dennis Ross, as you know, author of Statecraft 2.0: What America Needs to Lead in a Multipolar World.

And we're also seeing, by the way, no one's talking about it. We're also moving to Phase 2 and the. Board of Peace is meeting for the first time about financing Stage two in the rebuilding of Gaza, but if certain things have to happen.

So before we get to Brett Baer, let's get to the big three. Number three. Mark Zuckerberg believes he's above the law, whether it's censorship or kids' safety. He thinks he can walk away. He thinks he can addict kids and harm children without any punishment.

I'm hopeful that the court is going to exact penalties on these companies for what they've done to our kids. Zuckerberg front and center on trial that could affect everyone in America, especially parents and kids, which will answer the question: is social media intentionally addicting and hurting, and in some cases, killing our next generation? We have the latest from Los Angeles. Number 10. Iran has consistently pursued a strategy aimed at the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

We are hopeful that negotiation will lead to a sustainable and negotiated solution.

Well, we'll see. The foreign minister immediately came out from Iran and said, we got a framework going, really? Iran playing games, announcing progress in new talks, and asked for two weeks to consider it after the last round yesterday, why their actions tell a different story and why President Trump asked to follow through. Number one. But the midterm elections is really going to be about a choice.

A choice to go backwards to the economic pain they were feeling or to go forwards for things to continue to get better and ultimately be better off than they were ever before. That is James Blair. He is considered the guru of all things politically oriented in the White House. Let the debate begin.

Next gen Republicans versus Democrats, socialism versus capitalism. That's how the battle lines are shaping up as Vance, AOC, Sanders, and Newsom stake their different positions. Brett Baer getting set to host his show at 6 o'clock today. You know, he's got his podcast and author of To Rescue the American Spirit. Brett, welcome back.

Hey, Brian. Hey, so, Brett, this whole thing is heating up ever since the Munich conference. I know it's not unprecedented, but did you find it. Relatively noteworthy and, in my words, disconcerting that you had so many Democrats from Chris Coons to Gavin Newsom to AOC to Hillary Clinton just ripping the current president overseas? Yes, we used to not see a lot of that.

The politics stops at the water's edge. It used to be the mandate, but a little bit less so and definitely more this time than we've seen in a long time. And President Trump, I think, does that to some Democrats. And I agree with you. It's a little disconcerting.

Yeah, I mean, it's somewhat surprising. I mean, what I'm usually seeing is if people want to sit you down and talk about your policy, I can understand it. But if you go out and just attack, like Gavin Newsome, listen to this, cut 11. Donald Trump is doubling down on stupid. Hmm.

California has been a leader in climate policy going back to Ronald Reagan. You may not believe in science, but you've got to believe your own eyes. I mean People are burning up, choking up, heating up. We have simultaneous droughts and floods. Historic wildfires.

You know, maybe a little about California. You've seen those images of these wildfires. Talk about being as dumb as we want to be.

So obviously, he was not for the rollback of the EPA that was announced that Friday.

So instead of saying that's not my policy, what I would do, he goes down and makes it like WWE. Yeah, listen. I mean, this is on the international stage. It's not that the Europeans don't feel that way on the issue of climate change, but when you bring it publicly, it does add a different element. I mean, it's not a campaign as of yet.

This was a national security conference. And if he wants to talk about the fires, clearly Governor Newsom has a lot of criticism that he has incoming on how he handled the fires and how his administration dealt with not only preparations for them, but dealing with them and the aftermath of them. Yeah, how about the arson? The arsonist that was Arrested for starting the fire and then him forgetting to use water or have it ready. Here's more, Cut 12.

But I want to remember all those images of masked men, the secret police, something familiar in Germany. Those first images came out of my state.

Okay. The second largest city in the United States of America. We saw 4,000 National Guard federalized. First time. We've never seen anything like this.

And 700 active duty Marines sent not overseas, but to the second largest city in the United States of America, militarizing the streets of my city. Masked men, masked men showing up. Unaccountable. No idea. IDs.

He's just clueless. He's in Germany comparing ICE to the Gestapo, not to get a headline in Politico, but to the Germans and who were the, where Nazism was born and killed. Yeah. Yeah. I don't think that that's the right plan.

It's not the way to win over who's he trying to win over? The Europeans to his presidential run. I think all of those moves were designed to get headlines or sound bites. And I think in each case, it kind of hurt those Democrats more than it helped. You know, big picture.

Those folks in that room are worried about Russia and Ukraine and where Russia goes next. They're worried about Iran and what looks like is a massive buildup of military force around Iran to the point where we've moved more refueling tankers and assets than we have in more than a decade. And, you know, having covered the Pentagon, when that kind of movement happens, it's not a joke and it takes a lot of logistics.

So, I mean, those people in that room were more, I think, concerned about that than fighting over, you know, the perception of ICE in California. I know, especially because it's a Munich Security Conference. And that's usually the opportunity. Have you covered it before? Have you been there?

Yeah, I've been there several times.

So isn't it? Isn't the theme always about the military and different tactics and things to that nature and less about politics? Yes. I mean, it was always about the NATO alliance, about what's the next threat, about military, about the specifics of capabilities, about that's where Rumsfeld did his old Europe, New Europe line about paper armies. That was before Donald Trump came in and said they all had to step up their payment defense spending in NATO.

But yes, that's what Munich was all about.

So, the foreign minister, after the second round of talks about the nuclear program, which we at least, to be kind, set back, said that they've set up, says we managed to reach a general agreement on a number of guiding principles based on which we will move forward from now on and start working on text for a possible agreement. It was agreed that both sides start working on the text for a possible agreement and then they exchanged the drafts and then decided on a date. In the third round, he went on to say, you need about two weeks. But I want you to hear what the Ayatollah said through an interpreter, cut 20. We have more.

They say we sent a ship to Iran. Of course, a warship is a dangerous vessel, but even more dangerous is the weapon that can send it to the bottom of the sea.

So and they did that and did war game shutting down the Strait of Hermuz, where twenty percent of the world's oil flows through. Or do we believe the words of a guest on your show, the former the current foreign minister? Or we supposed to believe the eighty six year old Diatova Khomeini? Yeah, I mean, there's always two sides to the Iranians. The Ayatollah is out on X and giving statements that are very aggressive, you know, putting ships at the bottom of the ocean, and the foreign minister saying everything's great moving forward, progress here.

I would think that the foreign minister is more like Baghdad Bob when the tanks are rolling behind him saying Saddam Hussein's in power, everything is fine. And that's what I experienced on special report when I had him on a number of different fronts. But, you know, even in that, where he was trying to give a rosy picture, he was never relenting on enrichment of uranium done by the Iranians and a ballistic missile program done by the Iranians. Both are stipulations that the U.S. wants changed.

Well, the problem is this would be if the president walks away without military action, I just think these talks are a total waste of time. I don't know anyone that says is excited about it.

So if he were without military action, I think it's even Even worse than President Obama when he didn't reinforce the red line and said, use chemical weapons again, and we're going to hit you. They used chemical weapons, we didn't do anything. The president's got this fantastic international reputation right now about doing what he says. I can't imagine a scenario where we've already met with the prime minister and president have already met one-on-one. There's been weeks to get the Israelis all ready to go.

There's no missile defense. 90% of the population in Iran seems to be wanting to overthrow their government. All they're missing is a way to do it.

So everything is in place. And if I could take it the next step further, my analysis would take what you want of it. If we don't do anything, it's not that we're choosing not to go to war, we're just postponing it.

Sooner or later, we're gonna have to confront this menace.

So, whether it's under Trump. or somebody I'm less less confident in, sooner or later we're gonna have to do it.

Okay. Maybe. You know, I think that the hope is that you, because of how you've acted before, in moving this force, that the Iranians back down and, you know, do some negotiating. It's just there's not a lot of history there that the Iranians live up to what they say even in the negotiations.

So I agree with you on one front. On the other front, we just don't know, you know, you can't really get regime change without some element on the ground. And I don't have a good sense of what the Iranians look like as far as organization on the ground. It's not the exiled crown prince that's leading them from afar.

So I don't know what that looks like. I don't know what the CIA is doing on the ground. But I do know that... That air attacks alone, while being very successful, could leave a vacuum that we don't know what the answer is after that. I would assume that the intelligence that the Israelis already displayed that they had when they killed a lot of these generals in their beds.

might have the same intelligence on politicians, which you would think might be even harder targets. And you just wonder how much of a leeway they need and if they made contact with somebody they might be able to work with on the ground, like the the Delsi Rodriguez in Venezuela. Yes. And clearly, the more we learn about that, the more that had to be baked in the cake before all of that happened. Because this what we're seeing in Venezuela now doesn't happen without some preamble to the effort to get Maduro out.

See some intelligence on the ground, absolutely.

So do you think there's any daylight between the Vice President and President when it comes to Iran and our policies? I don't know. I listened to the whole interview with Martha yesterday. I don't think so, but I do think that Secretary Rubio articulates the policy. A little bit differently and better for the world stage, at least digestible, than Vice President Vance does in the year before in his speech in Germany.

Now to his credit, he credits Rubio for doing that and says it's a great speech. But I do see a change in how both men talk about things. Here's that remark when asked about when Martha asked him about Rubio, and both of them at the top of the ticket cut too.

Well, I think the president is very smartly saying we've got three years to go. And how about everybody focuses on the job the American people elected us to do rather than something that is very far in the future? As you said, look, Marco is my closest friend in the administration. I think he's doing a great job for the American people. But most importantly, we all have to continue doing a good job for the American people from the president on down.

And that's what we're focused on. I think it's so interesting the media wants to create this conflict where there just isn't any conflict. Marco's doing a great job. I'm trying to do as good of a job as I can. The president's doing a great job.

We're going to keep on working together. But surely, as vice president, you'd like to be president. Would I?

Well, look, I think, again, I'm going to try to do as good of a job as I can right now. Right. I just don't see a scenario where if JD runs that Rubio does too. Do you? Not unless President Trump weighs in.

And annoys Rubio or something. I agree with you. I mean, the going bet is that JD Vance is in the poll position. I'm just saying that there are more and more circles in Republican parties that are looking at Rubio. And we're a long way out.

And to the Vice President's point, they're focused. But don't make any mistake. Once we get to the midterms, the 2020 election is on. Absolutely. Lastly, it looks like I know there's two things you like: politics and golf.

And I'm sure you noticed the governor of Florida golfed with. I like my family. That's true. I didn't say only. I say there's two things I know you like.

But by the way, if your family's listening, he would have always put family number one.

So Governor DeSantis golfed with President Trump. And with Junkin out of a job, and DeSantis about to be out of a job. What are the chances that DeSantis joins the administration knowing he still has a conflict with Susie Wiles? I don't think they speak. And Youngkin, too?

What do you think? You know, there was talk about Defense Secretary or Secretary of War. I think Secretary Hagseth is in good stead with the President. And so I don't think that that's the thing. Kirsty Noam, you know, is she on her way out?

I don't know. I don't sense that the President is anxious to do a turnover. That said, I could see some place, some role for Governor DeSantis. I don't think he's going to run for president again, but I could be wrong about that, too. He probably learned a lot from the last run and still is considered a successful, very successful governor in Florida.

He's fantastic. I don't think there's any one pound for pound better. I think Democrats would even tell you that in terms of an effective chief executive. Brett, I look forward to your show tonight. I'll talk to you soon.

Okay, we'll see you man. You got it. 1866-408-7669. When we come back, I'll squeeze in some calls, bottom the hour, and we'll keep moving forward. You're listening to the Brian Kilmead Show.

Diving deep into today's top stories, it's Brian Kilmead. This is Ainslie Earhart. Thank you for joining me for the 52-episode podcast series, The Life of Jesus. A listening experience that will provide hope, comfort, and understanding of the greatest story ever told. Listen and follow now at FoxNewsPodcasts.com or wherever you listen to podcasts.

A radio show like no other. It's Brian Killmeade. Mr. Zuckerberg, why should your company not be sued for this? Why is it that you can claim, you hide behind a liability shield, you can't be held accountable?

Shouldn't you be held accountable personally? Will you take personal responsibility? Senator, I think I have already answered this. I mean, this is these. Will you take personal responsibility?

Senator, I view my job and the job of our company as building the best tools that we can to keep our community safe.

Well, you're failing at that.

Well, Senator, we're doing an industry-leading effort. We build AI tools. Your product is killing people. Will you personally commit to compensating the victims? You're a billionaire.

Wow, so Senator Josh Hawley ripping Mark Zuckerberg. That was a year ago. What about now? What is that? That was January of 2024.

That was two years ago. What about now? He made some reforms as some parental controls. We also know that he basically got out of that wokeism and the Zuckerbox and came full circle. And I know he's a big now supporter of the president.

I'm not sure this president over another president, but he certainly isn't an enemy of the president.

Now, what about the tone today? At stake with this social media trial that's taking place in Los Angeles, is really: are social media products out there to addict your kids and make and have a negative impact on it? with the social media companies to say, we're out there, we're doing the best we can to provide a product that families want. Is it like tobacco is to hook you in and make sure that you become a perennial customer to addict you? That's what's going to be decided.

The more you listen, the more you'll know it's Brian Kilmead. We would very much like, as the president has said, to resolve this through a conversation and a diplomatic negotiation, but the president has all options on the table. And, you know, one thing about the negotiation I will say this morning is: you know, in some ways it went well. They agreed to meet afterwards, but in other ways, it was very clear that the president has set some red lines that the Iranians are not yet willing to actually acknowledge and work through.

So we're going to keep on working it, but of course, the president reserves the ability to say when he thinks that diplomacy has reached its natural end. We hope we don't get to that point, but if we do, that'll be the president's call. Remember, we had five rounds when they came through the sixth round. The president bombed instead, and Israel led the way. And then we finished off that nuclear program, which they are clearly starting to rebuild.

They've built. Rooves, so you can't see from the sky what they're doing underneath, still assessing perhaps, but that's what they're going to do. And why are we just debating the nuclear program, not the financing of Hamas and Hezbollah, the Houthi rebels, ISIS? That wouldn't be ISIS because they're Sunni, but any other renegade organization, including what they were up to over in Venezuela. Hopefully, those days are done.

Let's bring in my next guest, who knows the region quite well. And as long as he's been in public service, he knows that Iran has been a big problem. He's William Davidson Distinguished Fellow, William Davidson Distinguished Fellow, Washington Institute for Near East Policy, author of Statecraft 2.0, Dennis Ross. Ambassador, welcome back. Always good to be with you.

Thanks.

So, Iran's foreign minister quickly went to the camera and said, We made progress. We have a framework. See you in two weeks. What's he up to? He's certainly trying to create the impression internationally and probably here as well that there is a basis on which to be talking, there is a framework of principles that we are generally agreed on and that there's a reason to keep talking.

Now, one thing we know the Iranians are expert at is They don't mind talking, they don't mind buying time, they don't mind stretching this out. And then since the purpose is the longer you stretch it out, then the harder it becomes to stop talking. At least, that's, I think, their theory. Um So why are we only negotiating? Why are we even entertaining the fact that we would just look like to them to decelerate?

They're Nuclear program. Didn't we kind of take care of that?

Well, we obviously set it back dramatically to the point where they are not enriching. When I hear talk that one of the things that they are offering is a suspension of enrichment for three to five years, the odds of them doing any enrichment while President Trump is still president is close to zero.

So that's fine that they shouldn't be enriching, but A, they want to get sanctions relief for it. we shouldn't give them something for nothing, number one. Number two, there really has to be a whole range of issues on which their behavior is going to change. I don't mind the principle of them not enriching, that's fine. But they also have to ship out all of their highly enriched uranium, which is enrichment may be four hundred kilotons of kilograms of sixty percent enrichment, which is very close to weapons grade.

And then there's the question of the ballistic missiles. And then there's the question of their regional network of proxies. They clearly, at a time when they're squeezed dramatically on the inside and they're clearly vulnerable, not only because they have no air defense, but because they have a very angry public, the more the public knows that they're still giving money to Hezbollah, that's only fuel to the fire of what creates the grievances within Iran.

So a negotiation needs to change the behavior of Iran in a way that is no longer a threat to the region, a threat to others, the idea that they would give up being a threat to their public would mean they're giving up who they are. I don't see them negotiating that. But certainly, the present's objective should be you change fundamentally the character of the nuclear program, you limit the range of their ballistic missiles and the numbers they can have, and you end the military support for their regional proxy network. The Israelis dramatically weakened all of them, but they're still there. And there needs to be a different approach.

Ultimately, if Iran wants to succeed on the inside, it can't keep doing what it's doing on the outside. Tuh.

So Do you see the unrest? Higher than any other point since 1979. The way we've seen in the streets, the video that we've all witnessed, and then the crackdown that's followed. This is different than what we've seen. In twenty twenty two, when the religious police arrested and then beat up and killed Masa Amini, That was different than the preceding ones because the unrest was, A, not driven by an economic grievance.

And B, it covered most of the country. The rural parts of Iran have always provided the backdrop and the support for the regime, for the Islamic Republic. They're much more conservative socially, more conservative religiously, and they always supported, they basically provided, as I said, probably 30% of the Iranian public had always supported the Islamic Republic, and the backbone of that was in the countryside. The Masomini reaction involved the countryside as well because they crossed the line. A young woman, 21-year-old Kurdish woman, was wearing a hijab but portrayed as not appropriately, and she paid for that with her life.

And that just struck people everywhere in Iran as wrong.

Now, that went on for a while. And it was still not the same as what we've just seen. Because here, every single province in Iran was involved. There was no part of Iran that wasn't the case. Maybe in 2022, a significant part of the countryside was involved.

In this case, all 31 provinces in Iran. There was an outburst uprising. I say an uprising not in terms of violence, but an uprising in terms of outrage. everywhere within the country because the grievances touched everyone and the and the government had no capacity to respond to the source of the grievances, which ran from lack of water, lack of electricity, a currency that had absolutely no value.

So it was different, but what was also different was the scale of the repression and the death. You talk about massacres. We know over a three-day period, at least 7,000 were killed. That's the floor. I've seen numbers as high as 50,000 killed, another 50,000 arrested, a couple hundred thousand wounded.

this being done in three days' time. I mean, for those who care about human rights, it is extraordinary to me that we don't see activists up in arms over what Iran did. to its public. It carried out basically a massacre in three days. And that Is different than anything before.

It shows this is a regime that will do anything to hold on. That's what it shows. But it does show too, I saw protests around the world. I saw it in New York City. I saw it, I think it was in London.

I saw a peaceful protest against the Iran regime. I was relatively hopeful. Did you see that? There was I know there was one big one in Berlin that involved about two hundred fifty thousand people, but it we haven't seen some of what we saw against Israel over Gaza. And it's I'm not trying to say that it being protesting what one saw in Gaza is necessarily wrong, but I don't understand for the people who are out there protesting in Gaza why is it that killing large numbers of Iranians doesn't matter to them.

Yeah, that's a good point. It makes absolutely no sense because you do have a huge Iranian population around the world who knows, just like the Cuban government, how evil it is. And the only reason they're in power is because they have foreign backing and they have the guns. Here's the Ayatollah Khomeini, cut twenty. They say we sent a ship to Iran.

Of course, a warship is a dangerous vessel, but even more dangerous is the weapon that can send it to the bottom of the sea.

That and shut having war games, live military action, just going through drills, sort of shutting down the Strait of Hormuz. Does that sound like a plot and plan for somebody who wants peace? Yeah. No, I mean, look, I think what we're seeing right now, they're trying to signal. President Trump.

who they believe wants to use force in kind of a one and done fashion, that this won't be one and done and that they'll shut down the Strait of Hamuz, which will drive up the price of oil. They're acting in a way that's designed to somehow signal, look, You should have a stake in getting this done peacefully because look what we'll be able to do to you. Meantime, we have the President clearly obviously signaling with a lot of force as well. Both sides could be signaling with the idea of, okay, you on the other side should have an interest in doing this, working out a deal. The key here is going to be now I think there's a kind of momentum building up behind the use of force.

And last time you and I spoke, my attitude remains the same. I really hope the President has a very clear objective in mind. And I'm not sure if I were shaping the objective, I think I would focus more on dramatically weakening Iran's ability to suppress its own people, meaning go after the sources of control, the Revolutionary Guard, the besieged, number one. Number two, dramatically weaken their ability militarily to threat anybody else in the neighborhood. and make it clear that you're doing these things not because necessarily this is going to change the regime, but it's going to change it's going to weaken the regime to do more against its own public on the one hand and weaken the regime to do to threaten the others in the neighborhood.

At least make very clear what the objective is so you can also define an end point to this. Yeah, that would be, for example, if you have airstrikes and the airstrikes damage and maybe we take some casualties in some of our bases and the Ayatollah speaks defiantly and he's able to withstand some of our blows, does he come out stronger is what you're saying. It is what I'm saying. I'm saying you have to you really need, if you're going to use military force, military force is an instrument. What I say in the statecraft book is we have lots of instruments.

Military force is one of the instruments. Don't confuse your means with your objective. our objective is we need to define clearly what the objective is. For me, I would say, again, have in mind a scale of what you can do in terms of setting back their repressive capabilities on the inside, And their ability to threaten everyone else on the outside have a very clear definition of what we have to achieve as it relates to those two measures. That's what I mean by having a clear objective.

Dennis Ross, our guest. Dennis, how do you feel as though the Gaza rebuild is going as we move to Phase two and the first meeting of the Board of Peace takes place? Look, I think the key, and you and I have talked about this before, the key comes down to is Hamas going to disarm or not? If you can and it doesn't have to, it's not realistic to say all at once. I'm I totally accept the idea that it's a process of disarmament, but it has to be real because if it's not real, there'll be no reconstruction.

And it's not because this is, I like to say, that's not an argument, it's a fact. The Saudis, as an example, will not invest. in reconstruction in Gaza if Hamas still has its arms and can do this again. They're not going to invest knowing that whatever they would be building will be destroyed again because of Hamas.

So Hamas has to disarm. I think it's very important that the Board of Peace as a collective make it very clear a process of disarmament will have to proceed as it does As it does, meaning in parallel to that, you can begin to do rehabilitation, rubble removal, reconstruction in those places where, in fact, Hamas has been disarmed. But if there is no disarmament, that can proceed. Make it very clear: the key to the future of Gaza and the key to rebuilding Gaza depends entirely on Hamas disarming. If the whole focal point is put On Hamas, and the onus is on Damas on Hamas.

That's one form of pressure. Plus, obviously, there's the Israeli threat that if it doesn't work, Through these means, there's obviously always the military option as well. You need a combination of political pressure, cutting them off economically, and the threat of military force. Those three things could produce the process of disarmament. If that's the case, then I become quite hopeful about what can happen in Gaza.

It is pretty amazing. With all the different things and nuances and approaches, this is a very unique approach, don't you think? Yeah. I do think, look, I I One of the key things about effective statecraft is knowing how to use all of your instruments. You know, military, diplomatic, economic, informational, how you how you can shape incentives There obviously clearly here are potential economic incentives.

Letting the public of Gaza know. they have a chance to have a future. They have no interest in Hamas remaining in control. But they will remain in control if they can keep their arms. And by the way, there's two kinds of arms.

They have the heavy weapons, obviously rockets and mortars and anti-tank missiles, but they also have AK forty sevens. And that's the AK forty sevens that they use to control the population. They're supposed to be, as part of this whole approach under the Board of Peace, there's supposed to be an international stabilization force. Indonesia has made it clear they're prepared to take part. I see now signs that Greece and Morocco will take part, but none of them want to be responsible for going in and actively disarming Hamas.

So here you have to create a process with pressures, with incentives, with a Palestine police force that's been trained by the Jordanians and the Egyptians, maybe with the ISF backing them up. All of this has to be done in a way where, again, Hamas sees the cost of blocking it. And the world has to focus on Hamas in a way that also builds the political pressure. Hamas likes to define itself as being organic to the Palestine people. If you can construct this in a way where it's clear the Palestine people are fortified because they see the whole international community focusing on the need for Hamas to disarm, that increases the prospects that can succeed.

That's what I mean. Integrate all of your tools. Fascinating time. Ambassador, I wish they would call you. I would feel even better about it.

Ambassador Dennis Ross, thanks so much. Oh, it's great to be with you. Back in a moment. Politics, current events, and news that affects you. Brian's got a lot more to say.

Stay with Brian Kilmead. If you're interested in it, Brian's talking about it. You're with Brian Kilmead. I think Americans are constantly responding to affordability, and that's a real issue for many people now. But I don't think that the economy is in the kinds of, and it's not really in the kinds of condition the way the extreme rhetoric would describe it.

Similar like it was back in 2024. I think the economy is much stronger and more resilient for that.

So for me, I would focus on the things that don't really get anybody any upside for that and focus that.

Now, thankfully, inflation actually was below the kinds of expectations, and the stock market is up.

Now, I think it hit 50,000 now.

So, for me, focus on those kinds of affordability things. Yeah, that was Senator John Fetterman. And I don't know who he was giving advice for everybody, I guess, but also pointing out that if you see these numbers, it's hard to say things are terrible and Trump lied.

So, everything is coming into fray. And what I would say to this: if you're a Democrat or Republican listening to me right now, I could tell you: if a Republican's re-elected, if the president continues with the majority in the House, then I'll tell you exactly what type of programs and things that he would do. Can you please tell me what Democrats would do that would help the economy, a wealth tax, a billionaires' tax? Do you think that works? I don't know, giving, I mean, taxing wealthier people, I don't get it.

Would they do anything to drive down rates and bring inflation down? Would they print more money? They spend more money for sure. But tell me the program that they have that'll make things more affordable. Oh, flood more subsidy money into a healthcare program like Obamacare that even David Axelrod said has become unaffordable.

That's a plan, I guess. From the Fox News Radio Studios in Midtown Manhattan, it's the fastest-growing radio talk show. Brian Killmead. I'm one from 48th and 6th in Midtown Manhattan, where the snow is beginning to melt and Mondami's going to get credit for it. Yes, we won 44 degrees yesterday, but we didn't really plow much or shovel much.

We didn't really think about that under the new administration where we're going to raise taxes and make your life more dangerous. It's an interesting philosophy that they elected New York City, where we just got a speech yesterday from the mayor. And basically, it turns out he wants to raise taxes. We're in debt. And he wants to give the money and leave homeless on the street and give the money out to other people.

That's fantastic. It's not capitalistic, but we never thought we were electing a capitalist. Gerard Baker is going to be with us. He's editor-at-large of the Wall Street Journal. We'll do a simulcast with Stuart Varney.

And we got Congressman Byron Donalds, who wants to be the next governor of Florida standing by.

So let's get to the big three. Number three. Mark Zuckerberg believes he's above the law, whether it's censorship or kids' safety. He thinks he can walk away. He thinks he can addict kids and harm children without any punishment.

I'm hopeful that the court is going to exact penalties on these companies for what they've done to our kids. Daniel Cochran with Heritage, Zuckerberg, front and center, on trial that could affect everyone in America, especially parents and kids. Which will answer the question once and for all: is social media intentionally addicting and hurting, and in some cases, killing our next generation? Number 10. Iran has consistently pursued a strategy aimed at the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

We are hopeful that negotiation. Will lead to a sustainable and negotiated solution. Yes, while you kill your own people and finance terrorists around the world, please. That is the foreign minister of Iran playing games right now, announcing progress in noob talks and beating us to the microphone, asking for two weeks to consider what we proposed, why their actions tell a different story, and why President Trump has to follow through. Number one.

But the midterm elections is really going to be about a choice. A choice to go backwards to the economic pain they were feeling or to go forwards for things to continue to get better and ultimately be better off than they were ever before. Yes, as James Blair, considered the political guru in the administration, let the debate begin.

Next generation Republicans versus Democrats, socialists versus capitalists. That's how the battle lines are shaping up as Vance, AOC, Sanders, and Newsom stake their positions. Congressman Byron Donalds joins us now. Congressman, first off, what would you think of that Democrats going very critical of the president immunity? You have Newsom saying he's stupid.

You have AOC saying he's an autocrat. And you have Senator Coons talking about how bad the foreign policy is. We're abandoning our allies. That's not the way we usually talk overseas, is it? No, but this is what happens when you have a Democrat Party that doesn't have real solutions.

And so, what they have to create is an environment where it's us versus them. And what they're trying to do is just be against Donald Trump so they can have something to stand for. But the truth is, they don't have any real policies that are going to make life better or even improve our foreign policy because we saw their policies under Joe Biden's administration. AOC clapped for all of them. Boons voted for all of them.

Newsom supported all of them. And it was disastrous for America.

So they're trying to really reassert themselves to gain power politically. The only way they can do that is to oppose Donald Trump.

So they're going to say whatever they need to say to oppose them, whether it's based in reality or not. And the truth is, it's not based in reality. This is all politics. It's all performative. It's just for them to try to win an election this November.

We saw core inflation. I know you have a financial background. We saw core inflation drop. we saw inflation drop. We saw the job numbers come in strong.

With the GDP is over four, it could come in over five.

Now it doesn't mean that prices are all going down, but listen to how Hakeem Jeffries paints it, cut five. The state of the real economy in America right now is a mess. There is an affordability crisis. That is not a hoax. It is very real.

People are struggling. with housing costs. People are struggling. with healthcare costs, people are struggling. with the cost of groceries.

People are struggling with childcare costs. People are struggling with the cost of running a small business, particularly. as a result of the Trump tariffs. The state of the real economy is a mess.

So how do you paint it? The exact opposite of what Hakeem Jeffries said. Because if you notice, he said a lot of things, but he didn't have a solution of what Democrats would do. And that's how you know he's just running his mouth. Here's the truth of the Trump economy.

Inflation is under control for the first time in five years, and that is because of Donald Trump and his economic policy. Wages adjusted for inflation are up for the first time in almost six years, and that's because of Donald Trump's economic policies. Economy is growing very strongly because of Donald Trump and his policies. If the Democrats actually had an economic record to stand on, how come none of those metrics occurred when Joe Biden was president, Nancy Pelosi was speaker, and Chuck Schumer was leader in the Senate? It didn't occur because their policies are dumb.

They don't work. They don't stand for true economics. They don't help people in their lives. They don't help people afford goods and services. They don't help people buy homes.

What Democrat policy, unfortunately, does is it creates shortages, it creates inflation. It actually slows down the economy. It creates stagflation. And that's not just the Biden years. Go back to the Obama years.

During the Obama years, they were saying that the time of the American economy going at growing at 3% in a year was something that was from post-World War II that's never going to happen again. And then Donald Trump became president, and what happened to the economy before COVID? It was growing. Everybody was getting ahead. What's happening now?

It's growing again, and people are getting ahead. The Democrats don't have a leg to stand on because they embrace terrible socialist economic policies that have never worked.

So we have Congressman Byron Donalds, our guest. Congressman, also, you have a situation where New York is being compared to Florida and Texas. And it looks though not only is, you know, we're still a financial capital here, the New York financial services industry still remains more productive, $330 billion to about 71% more than Texas, but they're growing a lot faster.

Wells Fargo opened up a new Dallas campus. We have more JP. Morgan Chase employees now in Dallas than New York City with that brand new building built, and their budget is way over your budget, but you have more people. Yeah, I mean, look, New York's terrible. They've really messed it up.

The Democrats, and this is now the Democrat socialists who run that place. And it wasn't just Mom Donnie. It was Bill de Blasio before him. They've screwed up New York City. Companies are leaving.

Productive people are leaving. They're going to Florida and they're going to Texas because we embrace common sense, economic, and conservative policies. It's really not that hard. Common sense runs our states, runs Florida. Governor DeSantis has been a true leader in this regard.

And that's why people are continuing to choose our state. And it's not just New York. Look at California. California decided to do a stupid billionaires tax.

So guess what happened? The billionaires are leaving. And they're coming to Florida and they're going to Texas. You know, I think it's important that the American people understand that this stuff is not hard. It doesn't have to be hard.

You've got to stand for common sense and you've got to stand for economics. And when you do that, you create a good society that people want to be a part of. New York City elected a socialist, a Ugandan socialist, who is way over his head, can't even shovel the snow, can't get them to pick up the garbage. I don't know what happened to sanitation, but they just not into it anymore. I guess they want to do other things, so they have exciting hobbies.

Here's the mayor yesterday who says, Hey, we're buried in debt, I got to raise taxes, cut 35. We want to work with Albany to raise personal income taxes by 2 percent on the 33,000 New Yorkers earning more than $1 million a year. and to raise corporate taxes on the most profitable corporations. And we know that for far too long. New Yorkers have given far more to the state than what we have received in return.

It is time to end the drain. If we cannot follow this first path, we will be forced onto a much more damaging path of last resort. One where we have to use the only tools at the city's disposal. raising property taxes and raiding our reserves. If we cannot pursue the first path.

The only option we have remaining is the second path.

So he says I'm going to cut into my rainy day fund, but he flat out says it. The problem is rich people. But he's crazy. He's crazy. Look, what they need to do in New York is what they should have done a long time ago.

They have to cut the city's budget. They can't just continue to do all these various programs they have in that budget, making outlandish promises that they can't deliver on. And you have to embrace free market capitalism so you can grow New York's economy. That is the way this works. It's the way this always works.

Just running the more tax increases now on the millionaires in New York. You know what's going to happen? He's going to be realtor of the year in Miami because I'm going to get more New Yorkers who are going to say, enough of this. I'm leaving. I'm not putting up with it.

And look, Milton Friedman said it best. You judge the policy of a society by the movement of feet. And when people leave your area, that's because your policy sucks. That's why people are leaving California. That's why they're leaving Illinois.

And that's why they're leaving New York. Because these Democrats suck. They don't know how to run real policies. They don't know how to run local economies. They don't know how to run governments.

They're out of control. And when they get caught not having enough money, their only answer is to go tax more. Congressman, when's your primary for governor? August eighteenth, down here in Florida. Things are going great.

We want everybody to get out, want to earn their votes. Go to my website, ByronDonalds.com. Follow me on social media at Byron Donalds. We're really excited about leading Florida into the future. What do you take away from Rick Scott's eight years and what are you taking away from Ron DeSantis' seven and a half?

Well, Governor Scott, now Senator Scott, his time was really having to rebuild Florida's economy out of the financial collapse of 08.

So that's what Rick Scott spent his time doing, and he did a great job. Governor DeSantis' role was actually protecting our state from woke indoctrination and crazy liberal policy that was trying to infest every part of American society. You know, it started with COVID and went from there, but it was really about common sense policies, ignoring the radical left, ignoring the political dogma, and actually doing what's right about Florida. And what we saw out of Ron DeSantis is now seven and a half years, you've seen a great migration of people from other states who came to Florida and said, you know what, this place makes sense and it works. I want to be a part of this.

And it's been based on conservatism. That's what both governors have brought to our state. That's why we're the best state in America today. And I was in Fort Myers on Saturday and it was great, but I saw a lot large swaths still haven't been rebuilt yet from the flood. Are you guys still struggling with insurance like some other states?

We are, but I think it's gotten a lot better. Again, this is credit to the governor. They did some major torque reforms in our state, which is starting to stabilize our insurance markets, bring new terriers into Florida, and that's a good thing. In terms of rebuilding from Hurricane Ian, that was always going to take about three to four years. We were really devastated by that hurricane.

We had sixteen feet of storm surge in Fort Myers Beach and Sanibel Island. And so it was always going to take some time to rebuild a lot of that stuff. But I got to tell you, the recovery efforts Happened very, very fast, and it's really because of the leadership of Ron DeSantis. He did a great job leading our state during not just Hurricane Ian in my district, but in every hurricane that's hit our state. Congressman, we have Wes Moore says he's not being invited to the White House because of race, even though President Trump had said because.

Uh it's his performance. Uh what do you say to that? Westmore is looking for a talking point. If he's not invited, it's because of his poor performance leading Maryland and, quite frankly, idiotic policy that actually has that state falling behind when it should be thriving. Go get him.

Congressman Byron Donalds, thanks so much. Take it easy. Back in a moment. It's Brian Kilmade. Radio that makes you think this is the Brian Kill Me Show.

He's a peace president. He will always put diplomacy first and give it a chance. But it is backed by the very real stick of the United States military that we demonstrated to the world through Operation Midnight Hammer can be incredibly effective.

So Iran has to give up its enrichment capability. It has to give up its already enriched, highly enriched uranium. There's no reason, except for a weapon, that it's enriched to that degree. Also, its support for terrorism and its long-range ballistic missiles. All of those things we've been very clear are on the table.

We'll see. They should listen. The president means what he says when he means he's going to take decisive action. And they're trying to delay as much as possible. And he's talking about Iran in particular while trying to make gains over in Gaza.

If you want to make things better in Gaza, you let Hamas know. You might not want to put down your weapons, but the money's stopping. We just took out the Iranian regime.

Well, we thwarted it even more. And by the way, taking in these ghosts, Russian ghost ships of oil that's hurt. That's hurt Russia even more. The flow of money from Russia to Iran has been, I guess, down to a trickle. Syria is no longer with Assad out of power, no longer an ally in the region.

Qatar is scared to death. Iran's going to they have no military going to do something. That's why our bases are there.

So there are people in the region that they consider friends, like Turkey, which is a dicey member of NATO, probably the one on the bubble that if they weren't such a lethal enemy, we'd probably get rid of them. Turn the page there if it was possible for everyone to vote out Turkey. But they're pretty much isolated. Massive sanctions. Their main customer, China.

They're no longer going to be in Venezuela if they're not out already. That's an oil customer for them, too. And a place for distribution, but the ghost ships are being stopped and everywhere. And Russia knows they've been hurt because the price of oil and gas is low, not as high as it was during the Biden years. That hurts the revenue because Russia is selling almost all their oil at a discount to the allies that will take it.

Hopefully, India will stop. Stopping those ghost ships will help. It's China, Turkey, and Brazil and South Africa that are buying a lot of the Russian oil, but nobody's paying full price to them.

So that war machine is really running on fumes in many respects. They're also losing more people in Russia. than they're actually able to recruit.

So that affects it all. See how it ripples.

So if you want to bring some peace to Gaza and have a chance to get rid of Hamas, right now they're still able to be funded partially by Iran. That ends. If we could get somebody in power to run that country, they would be representative, roughly, not a democracy if you don't want it, of the people. And there will no longer be a terrorist state. The ripple effects and the chance of changing things.

are enticing. I know nothing's easy. But I fully believe that we're working on a plan that would be effective, and I hope we're talking to people in Iran that would run that country. CUD 17. We would very much like, as the President has said, to resolve this through a conversation and a diplomatic negotiation, but the president has all options on the table.

And, you know, one thing about the negotiation I will say this morning is, you know, in some ways it went well. They agreed to meet afterwards. But in other ways, it was very clear that the president has set some red lines that the Iranians are not yet willing to actually acknowledge and work through.

So we're going to keep on working it, but of course, the president reserves the ability to say when he thinks that diplomacy has reached its natural end. We hope we don't get to that point, but if we do, that'll be the president's call. So the Ayatollah came out yesterday and says, the U.S. Army says they're the strongest, but when sometimes you get hit so hard, you go down and you can't get up. And then they did war games over in the Straits of Vermuz saying, for a while, we're going to shut it down just to practice.

What is that message? Two weeks ago, sending a drone after our aircraft carrier.

Now we got another aircraft carrier. I mean, come on. Nobody wants war. But this country's been at war with us for 47 years. Think about what it did to the Obama regime.

They always lost, they lost credibility almost immediately with that. J C P O A And of course their ally, Syria, using chemical weapons and then allowing the Russians to come back into the Middle East. Think about Iran. Think about what they did with Iran-Contra. Reagan thought he'd find some people that he could work with there or some of his people did, and that ended up causing the Iran-Contra scandal, which led all the way into Bush 41's term in office, first term in office.

And then you think about Donald Trump. takes out their number one terrorist mastermind, Salamani. then takes out their nuclear program or seriously damaged it. And now, without air defenses to speak of, they continue to try to rattle our cage. While doing everything possible to make sure Ahezflua and Amas Makes Israel every day a dangerous, you know, puts them in danger every day.

Do us to the Brain Killing Show. Breaking news, unique opinions. Hear it all on the Brian Kill Me Joe. Here's the fundamental issue in the midterms, and I think we're going to make this argument to the American people. And the American people are obviously, they're going to be the ones who make this decision.

Is look, if you go back to the Biden administration, the average American lost about $3,000 in take-home pay during the four years that Democrats were in charge. In the first year of the Trump administration, they've gained, average Americans have gained about $1,200.

Now, there's kind of a good news, bad news dynamic there. If you're looking at it from the perspective of the last year, Americans have done better. If you're looking at it from the perspective of the Biden administration, we're still digging out of the hole the Democrats put us in. And I don't think they did a good job explaining that right off the bat. That's why they said, okay, things are going to change and you campaign.

You say, I'm going to change right away. But you cannot turn that battleship around on a whim. You can't just say, hey, you know what? I'm in charge now. Everyone, start spending and start buying, sell your house.

It's not going to work. Geord Baker joins us now. He's editor-at-large of the Wall Street Journal. Geord, was J.D. Vance right in characterizing that?

I think broadly, Brian, yes, I think so. Look, I think that is what happened in the last five years was we did have four years where inflation really did take off. After the pandemic, and thanks to some of the policies of the Biden administration, we saw inflation really, really accelerate. That really unnerved Americans. We'd never seen inflation, Brian, like this for thirty years, 40 years.

It almost reached 10% at one point. It was out of control. It started to come down at the end of the Biden administration. It's come down further under Trump. We've basically got inflation back under control.

But people are still thinking They're not thinking about prices compared to where they were a year ago when President Trump took office. They're thinking about prices to where they were two or three or four or five years ago, and they're much, much higher. And I think people still feel uneasy about that. Look, the other thing I think, and I think that will change. I think people will come to realize that actually inflation is down and actually it's much more, prices are heading much more towards stability.

But I think the other thing, and this is also something that the Vice President really touched on, is look, the economy is in good shape right now. It is to some extent a little bit of a mystery why people give the administration such low marks for the economy. I mean, really, really low marks. When the economy is, you know, more, I mean, I hesitate to use the word booming, but we had 4% growth in the second half of last year. That's one of the best second-half performances we've had in the last couple of decades.

Unemployment is still low. As I say, inflation is coming down. I think it's just a question, I think it is a question of taking time that people are going to catch up and realize actually that the economy that is. Inflation is very much under control now, but things are getting better. And this affordability crisis, as wages, as Vice President Van says, as wages are increasing, I think sentiment will improve quite dramatically.

And I think you could see, you know, because, but the other thing we haven't talked about is, you know, you've got this amazing productivity boom that's going on, which is going to lift wages and living standards too, thanks to AI. Look, I think things are pretty set fair for what could be a very, very good couple of years for the U.S.

Well, a couple of things are also happening. People are waiting for these data centers to start getting built. Japan and the deal has been finalized. They said they're going to invest $550 billion here. The one thing they expect to have an opportunity with energy.

All these states want energy because utility costs are going up as AI is being built in Louisiana, a major outpost is going in there.

So do you see that bringing jobs and the kind of jobs that Mike Rhode talks about? Sure. Yeah, look, obviously there are multiple impacts from AI. A lot of jobs are going to go, and let's be blunt about that. We're seeing that already, I think, to some extent, because those jobs that have previously been done by humans are going to be done by machines.

But two things. I mean, one, we're going to learn how to work with AI, and that's going to create many, many jobs, as all industrial innovation does. That's already beginning, too. Two, as you say, we've got this massive boom in energy and data centers, data centers and the energy needed to supply them.

Now, that is pushing energy price up a little bit. Demand is so strong for energy right now to power these data centers. That is having a bit of an effect there, which is spilling over into the cost of living, too. But look, that, again, I think as more supply comes online, as more, as you say, we're getting more of this investment here in the US from around the world. The US is really still seen as the place to invest your money.

People are not investing it in Europe. They are going to continue to invest it in the US. As much as we get more money invested in US companies, in US in actually in US production, then that will significantly improve the situation with regard to supply. And again, I think that's and then the benefits of AI, which are already flowing through into significantly better productivity, that means instead of, that means that that will be reflected in real wage growth and in real incomes. And I think we could be on the customer of a really positive period.

What do you think about what Lee Zeldon did last week with the rollback of, they say, the single biggest rollback of red tape in American history with the EPA? And rolling back with the emergency situation, the executive order that Obama put into play in 2009. Very important. Look, one of the most important and most encouraging things that's happened in the last 10 years, and I will give President Trump a lot of credit for this, is the climate catastrophism, the idea that we're all going to die because the earth is getting too hot because of climate change, which was so, so prevalent in intellectual circles, very prevalent on the left. The Democratic Party, under both Obama and Biden, pursued these policies that were putting tight regulations on energy use, cars, factories, companies facing these restrictions, placing restrictions on even energy production.

That era, I think, really is over. That catastrophism is over. People realize the world isn't going to win because of climate change. There is climate change, but we're managing it. We can manage it with technology.

We can manage it with better investment. And so actually rolling back that particular piece of regulation, that I that principle of legisl of regulation, which was that carbon dioxide, that greenhouse gases are a toxic pollutant, had so many ill effects on the economy. We know on the effects it had on things that you can get on cars, on how you can on how many on the ways so many ways in which Americans live. That's going to reduce costs. That's going to help to reduce energy costs.

It's going to help to reduce costs more widely. And it is going to it's a very important way to contribute to broad-based economic growth in this country, and it's something I think that was very, very welcome. Jordan Baker, our guest, here's Governor and Gavin Newsom. Does not agree with you, believe it or not, cut 11. Donald Trump is doubling down on stupid.

California has been a leader in climate policy going back to Ronald Reagan. You may not believe in science, but you got to believe your own eyes. I mean, people are burning up, choking up, heating up. We have simultaneous droughts and floods. Historic wildfires.

You know maybe little about California. You've seen those images of these wildfires. Talk about being as dumb as we want to be.

I mean, what planet is he on? But go ahead. I mean, it's amusing, isn't it, to hear that, Brian, to talk him say California's a leader in this stuff. Yeah, California's a leader in driving people out of the state because of the crazy regulations and taxes that they've imposed, in part because of the environmental regulations. You know, one of the environmental regulations means, you know, people can't build houses in all kinds of parts of California.

So house prices are through the roof there because housing supply is so low. They've imposed all kinds of restrictions on energy use. They have the highest taxes, some of the highest taxes on gasoline and other things in the country. I mean, for him to be boasting about California's record to me is just absolutely laughable. This is the state where, again, it is over-regulated, it's a bit obsessed with pursuing these green policies.

And what's the result? People are leaving. People are going to live in places like Texas and Florida with low tax, low regulation places where they can actually grow their businesses, where the economy can grow. To sort of plentiful and relatively cheap energy, where there's plentiful housing, where there aren't these crazy restrictions on housing development.

So, you know, I'm sorry, but if that's Gavin Newsom's message to the American people, if he's thinking of running for president, then, you know, bring it on because I don't think that's going to go over very well. Trevor Burrus, Jr.: And 2035, no gas cars, right? They're not going to be able to sell gas cars. Their gas per gallon is up and may $1.50 or $2 more than the rest of the country because of the taxes they put on it.

So I mean, I think a lot of Democrats seem to be backing off because they understand how much energy we're going to need to update our grid in order to handle AI. Do you believe, even though you don't want to jack utilities up, but do you believe next election we're going to hear very little about climate change on either side? Yeah, I do. I mean, again, that's why to some extent I was so surprised to hear Newsome boasting about that, because I think, you know, the Democrats I speak to do realize that, you know, this is not a vote winner. People are no longer scared by this climate catastrophism.

You know, Bill Gates, the most interesting, you know, a very, you know, who's been one of the loudest voices promoting this idea for decades that unless we make radical changes and basically, you know, all, you know, stop eating meat and, you know, stop driving gasoline-powered cars and basically stop doing anything that's fun. We're all going to die. He even, he's backed off it, right? He backed off it famously, you know, a few months ago, said, no, no, no, the world isn't going to win. We've maybe overplayed the climate extremism.

You know, so I think for that, the idea that that would be a winning message for Democrats, just don't buy it.

So, you know, it's another reason I think why Newsom is frankly so out of touch with most Americans. What you guys do every day is talk about the economy. That will make or break the midterm elections more than anything else. Thanks so much. Appreciate it.

John Baker, thank you. Thanks, Brian. When we come back, we do a simulcast on FBN, the fastest-growing cable network in the country, and then we'll take your calls.

Now, the Brian Kilmead Show joins Fox Business's Varney and Company with Stuart Varney live on your radio and on Fox Business. Here's Brian Kilmead. Hey, welcome back. Stuart Varney is going to be with us in a second, and then I'm going to be able to take your calls. And then, of course, tonight I'm hosting Laurie Ingram at 7 p.m., so I'll be filling in for her upon further notice.

So we have a busy day. Also, I just got to remind you: thanks to everyone at Fort Myers who came out. If you know anyone who came out to the show, live in the Naples area, the surrounding area, it was truly an honor to meet 1,600, 1,700 people on Valentine's Day. It was just great. And thanks to everyone who watched on Fox Nation.

So let's listen in. That's happened to me. Oh, look, it's 10:51. He bailed you out. Thank you.

It's time for Brian Kilmead, who joins us now. Trump's affordability tour returns tomorrow after a three-week hiatus. Watch this. Great financial numbers you saw. Low inflation, very low inflation.

Prices are down, way down. Um Gasoline is less than two dollars in many places a gallon. Which nobody expected to see, but I did. That's where. Going by the Initial expression of drill baby drill, as goes gasoline and oil and gas.

Uh so goes the rest of Uh other products. We inherited a mess and we've uh Brought our country back very, very powerfully. All right, Brian Trump's going to make his first stop in Georgia. He's not on the ballot in the midterms, but do his appearances around the country help the GOP? Yeah, but it can't be him alone.

I mean they every you know these congre these congressmen and women Democrats, too, they got to go and talk to their own districts, and they got to get the messaging. The White House is pretty good at that. Here are the things that we're working on. This is the way we've improved right away, and this is what we got to still do.

So, what the president is always selling, I mean, that's the way he was brought up from day one. You got to sell, you got to sell, and then you got to market, and then you got to talk about what you've done. And that became that's why he became president twice. And even the election he lost, he got more votes than any other Republican.

So, what's he saying there? He's 100% right. Wages are up past inflation, inflation is down below where it thought. Core inflation, what everyone talks on FBN about, was down for a 10-year low. GDP, which people can feel you would say in volume, is over four, and they say it could be over five.

These are a lot of good, this is good news.

However, the housing is still stuck. Certain prices on beef and some vital things that people are buying every day in groceries are still up.

So, the president should say that. Yeah, this is up. This bothering me. You know, I'm handling this when it comes to bananas and fruit coming from Central and South America. What I still got to do is this.

And here's the trade deal we're doing with India, and this is how it's going to affect us. This is the data center we're building in Louisiana, and this is what we're going to need. And I love that he's going to go visit small businesses when he gets to Rome, Georgia, too, because that's what he needs to see people eye to eye. See the person in the apron working every day. What is it like?

What kind of tips are you getting? How great is it going to be not to pay taxes on those tips and the gratuities that you get in various industries? But the president went out and it took three weeks off. I think it's got to be almost every week. And I think he's got to get other surrogates.

Besant is really strong. Commerce Secretary Howard Luttnick can deliver a speech. Other people fanned out in strategic areas and selling the story, not spinning, selling the accurate story while still acknowledging we're not all the way there yet. I think that's what people appreciate. I also would love a plan when it comes to housing.

Yep, yep, that would work. I've got one more for you, Brian. I need to get this in. Have you noticed that the Democrats seem to have a new line of attack against the administration? Just watch this.

But the so-called SAVE Act is not about free and fair elections.

So-called leadership Pete Heckseth, the so-called Secretary of Defense. The most recent so-called offer from the White House.

So-called absolute immunity. Disgraceful performance. By the so-called Attorney General. ICE is the most Unpopular so-called law enforcement agency. The so-called president, the Republican so-called big beautiful bill, the so-called Save Act.

Yeah, so-called, so-called, so-called. I just don't think that's a very strong attack line. Do you? No. What it does, it digs people in that when you illegitimately try to delegitimize Trump.

That's your 2017-2018 playbook, right? He's not a real president. He really didn't win the election. His programs aren't real. His own staff doesn't like him.

No one listens to him. He doesn't know what he's talking about.

Now he's back again with four more years famously, and he's here again. You don't like his policies. Don't try to delegitimize him. Just say you don't agree with him. And the so-called SAVE Act is what 70% of Democrats want, which is voter ID so we make sure that their votes count just as much as Republican votes.

And that's what they don't understand when you diminish and say so-called. What are you talking about? Thinking that minorities can't get an ID or thinking that women can't get an ID if they do this horrible thing called getting married and changing their name as if they haven't done it on every American Express and Visa card and everything else in their life.

So to me, they were out of touch. But I do think, number one, this game is yet to be played. If you're a Republican and feel confident, you're a Democrat and feel confident, the ball's still got to roll out and you got to play the game. This is yet to be done. And this other thing called with the actual economy and what other world challenges is still out there.

It's going to be a fun year and then we're going to have 28. You get out there and do it. Hey, Brian, good stuff. Thanks for joining us. See you again real soon.

Thanks so much, Stuart. Appreciate it. I just think, yeah, when it comes to the so-called, I mean, Nakeem Jeffries, I understand. You're a minority and you want to make sure that you become the Speaker of the House. But once in a while, could say, Yeah, I love the way the GDP is growing.

I like this. But did you see how much beef is? Did you see that cars have not come down yet? You know, the President of the United States did these trade deals where every felt, okay. That's legitimate.

but just to not like anything. And then to have a governor of California tell the people of in Germany that the ICE is equivalent to the Gestapo secret police. Are you crazy? You ever see those black and white images on the history channel? That's what you're comparing it to.

And by the way, your neighbor could be an ICE ICE enforcement officer, especially now that you made it an evil thing to be able to do that.

So in Munich, I think think really you really got a chance to see. And I saw the Wall Street Journal story this morning and just say the Republicans really put themselves in a good spot in 28. What? Because, whatever you want to say about Sal Gore, Al Gore was an experienced senator, became vice president and president. Whatever you want to think about John Kerry running for president, he was chairman of foreign relations.

I don't agree with his policies. I think he was a secretary of state. I didn't agree with his JCPOA. He did it. He did it.

But he wasn't inexperienced. If you asked him about Taiwan, he'll give you an opinion. He asked about Greenland, he'll give you an opinion. AOC, Gavin Newsom, Wes Moore, clueless. They have not put the time in.

Do what Marco Rubio did. He became a senator in his 30s. He became as knowledgeable. Michael Waltz, as knowledgeable as anyone in Washington. It's just pure work, making an effort, using your contacts, and then finding out what you believe.

From high atop Fox News headquarters in New York City, always seeking solutions, never sowing division. It's Brian Killmeek. I'm so glad you're there. It's the Brian Kill Meet Show. Martha McCallum coming up in about 20 minutes.

Carl Robe is standing by, and we have a lot to get to today. We are watching a few things that are happening, including the President of the United States going back on the road to talk about the economy. First stop is Georgia, where he's hoping to flip that Senate seat and more.

So let's get to the big three. Number three. Mark Zuckerberg believes he's above the law, whether it's censorship or kids' safety. He thinks he can walk away. He thinks he can addict kids and harm children without any punishment.

I'm hopeful that the court is going to exact penalties on these companies for what they've done to our kids. There you go. That's what's at stake. Zuckerberg, front and center at the trial that could affect everyone in America, especially parents and kids, which will answer the question once and for all: is social media intentionally addicting and hurting, in some cases killing, our next generation? Number 10, Iran has consistently pursued a strategy.

Aimed at the peaceful use of nuclear energy. We are hopeful that negotiations. will lead to a sustainable and negotiated solution. There we go. Does anyone believe that?

The foreign minister, Iran, playing games, announcing progress in nuke talks, and asked for two weeks to consider our latest proposal. They're just playing delay of game. Do you agree? Number one. But the midterm elections is really going to be about a choice: a choice to go backwards to the economic pain they were feeling or to go forwards for things to continue to get better and ultimately be better off than they were ever before.

James Blair, he is considered the political guru at the White House. Let's let the debate begin. The next generation Republicans versus Democrats, socialism versus capitalism. That's how the battle lines are shaping up in 28 as Vance, AOC, Sanders, and Newsom stake their positions. Carl Rove, you are an avowed capitalist.

Yes, I am. Absolutely. So, I mean, did you ever think that that would be a minority position in a race? I mean, I guess Republicans are pretty much in line with this, but Democrats are really might be talking about wealth tax, raising taxes. to make things more affordable.

Are we looking at a is their approach, let's make this working class against the upper class?

Well, look, the left populism comes from that angle. They believe that out there is a vast majority of Americans who feel aggrieved at our free market system and are ready to rise up if only the commissars call them to battle. I think this is ridiculous. Most Americans understand that limited government, low taxes, provides economic growth and prosperity that raises all boats. It's the rising tide that lifts all boats.

And the Democrats will, in my opinion, make a mistake. If they try and take politics, it might be happy, might be well received in the precincts of San Francisco and the five boroughs, or at least four of the five boroughs of New York City, and try and sell them nationwide. It ain't going to work. Yeah, it isn't. And now we have AOC weighing in, where it essentially says that she's trying to do some damage control about her appearance in Munich.

Let me remind you, when asked with the tough question that every 11th grader needs to deal with, China, Taiwan, where do we stand? Cut 13. Yeah. Would and should the US actually commit US troops to defend Taiwan if China were to move? Um you know I think that uh this is such a uh you know i i think that This is a um This is of course a very longstanding Policy.

Okay, you get it. Obviously, couldn't answer your question. Oh my god, so painful. I mean, I almost felt sorry for her. I mean, I wanted to throw my arm around her and say, you know, don't worry, you'll be taught this in the seventh grade next year when you graduate from the sixth grade.

I mean, how bad was that? I mean, and yet this is a woman who's now being spoken of in reverential terms in precincts inside the Democratic Party as either a presidential or a vice presidential candidate in 2028. Wouldn't it be great? We could take a, you know, we could take a Shapiro or a Newsom or a Pritzker and couple them with AOC, and they would, what a winning ticket we would have. Oh my God.

Oh my God. No, I hear you, but didn't you, if you were advising her, number one, would you have asked Bernie Sanders foreign policy expert to help you? Obviously, I don't know anything good about Bernie Sanders foreign policy except for he liked honeymooning in the Soviet Union. And here's what she said in damage control: This reporter came up to me and was like, is like, like you're Valley Girl, is Munich the news? New Hampshire.

And I cannot say enough how out of touch and missing the point that genuinely is. Global democracies are on fire the world over, and established parties are failing to right-wing populist movements. And she names Bolsonaro out of power in Brazil. She adds Argentina's leader, and she talks about other people arising on the right. I guess like Maloney, she looks at that as a right-wing populist movement that's got to be stopped.

Well, again, this is, she is not ready for prime time. She has not been. I saw her when she first got elected, she appeared down here in Texas at one of the, you know, we have Texas, South by Southwest and the Texas Tribune Fest, and a lot of people come in and out of town here. And I went to see her, and I was completely unimpressed. I mean, yeah, she may be good on TikTok and she may be good on social media, but there is not a great intellect behind there.

I mean, this is ridiculous to think that she's got the stature to be the president or vice president of the United States.

Now, let's talk about Texas if we can. Everyone's talking about how much money is flowing into the Democratic primaries and the Republican primaries. Here's the president of the United States. When it comes to Wesley Hunt, when it comes to Paxton, when it comes to Cornyn, here's how he feels. I just haven't made a decision on that race yet.

It's got a ways to go and I haven't. He's a good man. John is a good I like all three of them, actually. I like all three. Those are the toughest races.

They've all supported me. They're all good. And you're supposed to pick one.

So we'll see what happens. But I support all three.

So, what does that mean for the primary next week? Two weeks.

Well, it means that each one of them is going to have to stand on their own. And Wesley Hunt, John Cornyn, and Ken Paxton have all been supporters to some degree in some ways of the president. Wesley Hunt voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. He claimed that he did so because it was a strategic vote. He failed to vote for the president, I guess it wasn't in 2020.

He showed up for only 40 percent of his committee meetings, has missed over 20 percent of the votes since he's been in Congress, doesn't show up for virtually any vote on Monday. Not exactly an energetic guy. And Ken Paxton is covered up with all kinds of scandals. That's the Democrat hope, is that Ken Paxton is a nominee? Because we know he's got three girlfriends, that he did favors on behalf of the corrupt business guy who's now in jail, who gave a job to one of his girlfriends that she didn't need to show up to work.

I mean, this guy has got so much warts that the The Democrats are afraid to even let a frog get near him for fear of what would happen. And, you know, I'm a longtime friend and supporter of John Cornyn. I hope he wins. I believe he will win. But the president understands that if it is not John Cornyn, if it's John Cornyn, that race is over.

He will win and win comfortably in November. And if it's not John Cornyn, particularly if it's Ken Paxton, then the Democrats will pour. They're pouring $30 million into an organizational effort in January, February, and March of this year. If they're willing to do that now, imagine how much money George Soros is willing to pour in to flipping Texas. He's already done this in DA races.

The prosecutors, the district attorneys in four of the five largest counties in Texas are all George Soros candidates who benefited by multi-millions of dollars of money that Soros has poured into him. He would love nothing better than to flip Texas, and he will spend vast sums of money to do so. If Paxon's a nominee. And the thing is, people are upset about John Cornyn and gun legislation. There's nothing unreasonable about his gun legislation.

But I'm not from Texas. I'm not a gun guy. I'm not anti-gun, but I just never grew up with guns. I think they were reasonable. No, no, look, look, we had a terrible shooting with a guy who was kicked out of the Air Force, who showed up in a little town outside of San Antonio and I think killed 22 people.

And in the aftermath of that, Cornyn found out that the reason that he'd been able to get a gun was that the Air Force failed to meet the legal requirement that having violated the law and getting kicked out of the military, they were supposed to put that into what's called the NICS system, National Crime Information System, and they didn't. In fact, upon examination, John found out that blue and red states alike were not keeping, not providing accurate and complete information of that system. Washington State, we don't really care about it. We're more concerned about the homeless. Idaho, we're big gun people.

We don't really care about it. What was happening as a result of that was that people were getting and finding themselves. I can still see you. Oh, okay, good. They were finding that the NICS system didn't have the information to get these people and keep them from buying a weapon as established in the laws of the United States.

So, John Cornyn got a bill passed with significant bipartisan support that basically said: if you're a state or you're in military service, there will be penalties if you do not provide this information in a timely fashion. And they gave them six months to get their act together and get everything in, otherwise, they'd start to have penalties. Do you know how many pieces of information they got during that period of time that said the person connected with this piece of information should not be allowed to purchase a gun under the existing laws of the United States? It's in the millions of pieces of information.

Now, it's not millions of people because bad people tend to do multiple bad things, but that's entirely, you know, if we're going to have laws in which we say certain kinds of people who violated the law shouldn't be able to buy a weapon, then we ought to enforce that law, not allow people to, you know, either ignore it or drive holes through it.

So, uh, On the other side, the Democrats crocket against Tallerico, and now we have this whole fair use thing, and the CBS battle is raging. And now, because Tallerico, if he went on, they said you got to put on Jasmine Crockett, they decide he's going to have a Tenter tantrum and they go over to YouTube. Here's Crockett on this whole CBS debacle, Cut 10. We actually received a phone call, and that was a little bit earlier today. And in that call, they explained that they actually told CBS that they could go ahead and move forward with the interview of James Tallarico.

They just needed to offer me equal time. I did not get a request from the Colbert show to go on. As you know, I've been on Colbert multiple times. And frankly, if we would have gotten an offer, that would have been great, but we're in the middle of early voting.

So I'm kind of focused on being in Texas at this moment. And I don't know what to believe, that's for sure, but I got that phone call as I was out talking to voters.

So, where's this going? What's going on with these two? Crockett's got a lead, it looks like, by about eight. What? Now look, first of all, think about what you just said.

Yeah. She went on Colbert. That Teller Rico didn't back then. Yeah, she got on Colbert and Colbert interviewed her and gave her high profile. And then now, Tallarico, to talk about being smart use, I mean, he's like.

He's like taking advantage of this. Colbert has now taken the interview with him and put it up on YouTube, and he's had 5 million people watch it on YouTube. That's several times what Colbert would normally get. In terms of viewership. And he has also raised millions of dollars off of it because he put it up there with a link to his fundraising.

So if you like the interview on Colbert, Give me some money. He's raised, I think it's nearly two and a half to three million dollars off of that YouTube video.

So, adroit use on his part of it. But look, this is this. She was on Colbert, and nobody screamed and shouted and said, Oh, that's unfair to Tallarico and a third candidate who's in the race. But now that they put Tallarico in with Colbert and then didn't allow the interview to be shown, he's turned it to his advantage.

So, smart move on his part. I still think he ends up winning the primary. She is not a particularly effective player. Member of the Congress, one-term member. She was a terrible member in the Texas House, ignored by her colleagues, Democrat and Republican.

And Tallarico, say what you will about him, he's in the legislature. He's been an effective legislator who has called out the Republicans and attacked them constantly, but in a way that gets him public attention and doesn't cause permanent riffs with his colleagues. I mean, it's like, well, James has given us a licking again. And, you know, I think he's a pretty effective politician. I expect him to be the Democratic nominee.

Okay, so you think that he might be formidable in the general.

So Texas, now Texas, as you mentioned, got $30 million. They're combining all their forces to help all the candidates in Texas are the Democrats, not just Crockett, not just Tallarico, but everything. Have you heard of that before? Has it worked for them in the past?

Well, look, they have been doing this for years.

Soros has been pouring money in. These are mostly Soros funds coming through various entities. And it's been effective in some races, like the big counties where they've elected DAs. But if you look at it, they sort of peaked in 2020. Excuse me, in 2018, and by 2020, 2022, 24, 20, and we hope in 26, the Republican margins have widened out.

And that's because we're involved in, I'm the chairman of a group that's doing registration activity. We've registered 780,000 new Republicans since 2019, and that's having an effect. But let me tell you, we're doing it on a shoestring compared to what these guys have got. The Democrats have got vast amounts of money. Think about $30 million to spend in organizing, registration, and get out the vote activity.

I expect us to have very significant Democratic turnout in the primary. We'll have a significant Republican turnout. I think it'll be bigger by some measure than the Democrats. But the Democrats are paying attention to the blocking and tackling of politics, and the Republicans in this state ought to wake up. Our state party chairman sent out a letter to everybody saying, Will you renew your support of the Republican Party of Texas?

Here are four things that we're going to focus on. One is we don't want independence and decline to state. Don't have party registration in Texas.

Somebody said we want to have registration so that only Republicans. Are allowed to vote on the primary. And then three other things that had nothing to do with winning elections. And here are the Democrats spending $30 million on the basics of politics. Carl Robes, real quick, 20 seconds.

Um The wall's not being built. We have $48 billion for it, and the contract's sitting on Christy Noam's desk. It just bothers me so much. Absolutely. Look, let's not kid ourselves.

The president did a magnificent job in getting control of the border, but over the long haul, we need walls in some places, increased technology, and additional forces along the border. We're going to get the technology and we're going to get the additional border patrol, but we need the wall in certain places, and that needs to come off of that desk and get into operation. Go, Rope. Thanks so much. Exciting time in Texas, as usual.

You listen to the Brian Kill Me Show. Martha McCallum, next. Don't go anywhere, Brian Gilmead will be right back. The fastest three hours in radio. You're with Brian Kilmead.

Hey, Martha McCallum. We got a quick segment there because I went too long with Carl Rove. I know you're excited for your three o'clock show after last night's yesterday's big interview with the vice president. Can you match it today? Can we match it today?

Well, we have Mark Wahlberg today. That's it.

So that's also exciting. We talked to him about, you know, about his film career, about how it reflects on his life and where he is now with his faith.

So it was a fascinating conversation. I know you guys spoke with him this morning, but we're going to talk about Mark Zuckerberg as well. Wow. Two marks, two marky marks today. It's a little different now.

In 2024, people are thinking Zuckerbucks, he's a partisan guy.

Now, all of a sudden, when he's going to the inaugural sitting with the president, I'm wondering if. He's changed it all. If he's going to have the same approach. Uh and if he's going to be treated the same in Congress, where eventually he's going to end up. Yeah.

I I mean, I just think there are so many concerns about What's going on with AI? What's going on with social media in a way that was just beginning back in 2021 when those emails were discovered from where they talk about addiction as a part of the product?

So, you know, I also think there's an interesting piece today about parent responsibility. I think that a lot of it is going to come down to that. But I mean, this is a really important exercise, important testimony. Everybody should pay attention. Is social media just attractive or is it addictive?

Is there a difference? Maybe if it's just a good product as opposed to manipulation, we'll see what that means. The talk show that's getting you talking. You're with Brian Kilmead. Here's the fundamental issue in the midterms, and I think we're going to make this argument to the American people.

And the American people are obviously, they're going to be the ones who make this decision. Is look, if you go back to the Biden administration, the average American lost about $3,000 in take-home pay during the four years the Democrats were in charge. In the first year of the Trump administration, they've gained, average Americans have gained about $1,200.

Now, there's kind of a good news, bad news dynamic there. If you're looking at it from the perspective of the last year, Americans have done better. If you're looking at it from the perspective of the Biden administration, we're still digging out of the hole the Democrats put us in. So that was J.D. Vance with Martha McCallum yesterday, and Martha McCallum with us today.

What was your impression?

Well, you know, I I think that um A lot of what is happening right now is preview for the State of the Union address. I think the administration is very aware of the train that's coming down the tracks of the midterms. I think when you look at the numbers on the economy, I dug into Latino voters and young voters yesterday before our interview to kind of get a sense from how much they have drifted since 2024, because they were clearly the. Potion for success in the 2024 election. And their disapproval numbers are between 50 and 60 percent on the economy and on immigration.

So that's the area of the most concern, I think, for the midterms for the GOP. But the numbers for the economy are worse than the numbers on immigration from both of those groups, Latinos and young voters. And really, that model stretches across all voter groups.

So you do have a lot of concern about the economy, but there's a lot of positive signs in the economy. And I think that's what the vice president was digging into yesterday. I think that there is improvement in wages. There's improvement in the inflation number. It's around 2.4% right now.

So these numbers are all heading in the right direction. And I think their argument: do you want to go back to where you were four years ago with those kinds of policies? Or do you want to sort of stick with the horse that you are riding right now and see if indeed things start to improve? And right, he's going to Georgia, he's going to be speaking about the economy. But you know, I would point out.

Hey, bananas are too high. Meat is extremely challenging. We're working on these areas, but look at the progress we made. But if you say everything's great on all counts, and people kind of that's white noise. But if you say, here's what I'm happy, this doesn't make me happy.

This is what I'm going to be fixing, and this is the trade deal that's coming in, and this is the data center that's going to be hiring 1,200 jobs over the next six months. And he's talked about the Japanese deal yesterday, how they're going to put $550 billion, and immediately they're going to start having factories here, I guess. But this is what was pointed out by a so-called nonpartisan foundation. Health insurance is up 41 percent in the last eight years. Rent is up 50 percent.

Home sale prices are up 80 percent.

So they say wages are up 38 percent, but child care is up 40 percent.

So we have things going in the right direction. But if you go back to like, excuse me, back to 2022, which is four years ago, things are really continuing to rise. That's when people say things are unaffordable. But I just want to parry it right back. I wish I, when I go to take my notes in the morning, what I like to say, this is what Republicans will do when I got a big list.

I don't have anything except billionaires and wealth taxes. For Democrats. I don't, you know, pay your fair share. We've got to get billionaires. There's got to be taxonomy.

Governor Newsome says, you can't do that. We're going to lose everybody. But what is the Democratic plan? I don't know. Be let ICE defund ICE?

I mean, well, I think that was glaringly obvious in Munich this week, not to get off topic from the economy. But I think that when asked, I think that the agenda that you saw AOC and Gretchen Whitmer and the others, Newsome on that list as well, go into Munich with was just like, oh, this is easy. We just show up, we just bash Trump all day long. And then when someone actually asks them a question about their own take on foreign policy, you know, AOC can't articulate anything beyond um, um, um about it. And I think that speaks to the economic side of the equation as well.

One area, you know, it's not a good thing that the average age for the first-time homebuyer in America is 40.

Okay. We need to if we're going to be encouraging people to have families, to get married, to dig in on that part of life, which I I think is a huge problem in this country. I think we need a lot more of that and a lot more optimism in that area. We have to make it possible for people to afford homes at a younger age. And I think that something there's real meat that could be put on the bones in terms of tax incentives that make it more attractive, that there's a reward for making that choice financially.

And I think that would be something that might be interesting if it came up at the State of the Union. I have not heard from anyone that I've spoken to that there's a specific plan for that other than, and Vance brought it up yesterday, well, you know, we're trying to get equity. Investors and hedge funds to stop buying up all the homes in America. That's like 10% of the issue out there in terms of inventory. There's a bigger issue at hand, and I think that some tax incentive or enticement, you know, you could maybe make your down payment with pre-tax dollars, something along those lines, is necessary.

I think that would get a lot of. positive feedback. I know they're talking about the 401k being able to access that without penalties. But the downside is that is your retirement. Exactly.

But the hope is that you're beginning your career and that you're going to make your real money down the line. I think that they did talk about a couple of things. I did not know the advent. You probably did because of your business background. The reason why these major corporations got involved in buying houses, it was like to help out the housing market after the collapse in 2008.

All these houses were just empty.

So I always confuse BlackRock. I think it's Blackstone. Blackstone said, all right, I'll help you out. And then they go, wow, we're able to turn these around and make a profit.

So we expanded them. But they were dragged into this. That was almost a favor. I think it was initially, but I think what ends up happening is that it sucks the inventory down to such a dramatic extent that it drives prices up for everyone.

So although the entry might have been somewhat altruistic, I think that they realized that the kind of balanced risk on those portfolios was worth it and they were making money off of it. It's not unlike the mortgage situation that ended up blowing up in the early 2000s to make that kind of bet on housing. But I don't think that change, it's beneficial as it might be. Is going to make a huge difference for average entry-level home buyers.

So, when we look at the midterms right now, all of a sudden we catapulted. We're back in 28. We already see a separation because Sanders, Senator Sanders mentored AOC. They believe wealth tax, billionaires tax is fine. Gavin Newsom is not for that.

I haven't heard Shapiro, Governor Bashir weigh in on that, but I imagine Pete Buttigiege would be for that.

So, there might be, it's going to be very interesting to see when they line up on the left. Is anyone going to really look at the back of the baseball card and say, hey, Pete Buttijudge, I think it was political or axios. You were a terrible Secretary of Transportation. You didn't even spend the money that you were given in the infrastructure bill, and it was basically built around you. Eight terminals built.

You're supposed to build something like 800. And the fact is, he was a no-show, never filled out his staff or spent the money. And then they're going to flip over Gavin Newsom's card. And it's going to be awful. And you heard Barack Obama yesterday over the weekend say, I can't go to Los Angeles and see these 10 cities.

Nobody wants to see that and say it's humanitarian to leave, just to paraphrase, to leave them out there.

Well, guess what? We got a socialist in New York who's pro-10 city.

So this is going to be a very interesting debate. It is. And, you know, but the issue is whether or not people will turn over that baseball card. And will they look at the actual card? I don't want to be you.

I'm flipping that card. I hear you. You know, my fear is that we live in such a sort of quip, soundbite, click-bait society that, you know, people hear, oh, tax the rich. You know, ding, I like that guy. Because that's always been a very popular idea.

Although in New York, with what Momdani is doing right now, the rich could turn out to be people who make $120,000 a year. And if you live in New York City, I'm sorry, but that is not rich. That is just barely getting by. Yeah. And yeah, you live in a very small apartment.

Yep. And then you take home, so let's say $120,000 with all the taxes, you're probably lucky to take home $75,000. $75,000, right? And then you got to hop on a subway. You got to want to get lunch.

Right. And you want to go shopping. And now your taxes might go up by 9.5%. Yeah, I mean, and by the way, he should know that because that's roughly what you think he was making as a lawmaker in New York City. But I want you to hear a little bit.

Oh, that's right. You know, those immigrants from Uganda have trouble making ends meet. Here is the Mondami talking about his choices, cut 35. We want to work with Albany to raise personal income taxes by 2 percent on the 33,000 New Yorkers earning more than $1 million a year. and to raise corporate taxes on the most profitable corporations.

And we know that for far too long, New Yorkers have given far more to the state than what we have received in return. It is time to end the drain. If we cannot follow this first path, we will be forced onto a much more damaging path of last resort. One where we have to use the only tools at the city's disposal. raising property taxes and raiding our reserves.

If we cannot pursue the first path, The only option we have remaining is the second path.

So he's going to go into his rainy day fund and he's going to go into retirement funds in order to do that. Has he ever thought about cutting back some services? He hasn't even started getting the ripple effects of freezing rent, which now he might have the votes on the rent control situation here in New York to actually pass freezing rent. I think he's just so new still at the job that he feels like he doesn't have any choice but to muscle this thing and figure out how to. Cover the billions of dollars of spending that he ran on, free health care, all of these programs that he promised people he was going to be able to produce.

And when I interviewed him, we went through all of these numbers. This doesn't add up. Where are you going to get the money to do this? And oh, taxing 2%, you can't get it from there. Corporations, wealth tax, can't get it from there.

And he said at the time, well, there's other things we can do. And now we're learning what those other things are. Tap into the Rainy Day Fund. I mean, these are desperate measures that no responsible person would ever do with their own personal finances or would always try to avoid. He has never managed anything.

And basically, one of the biggest things on his resume was supporting a taxi strike.

So, this is a huge test for this. New mayor of New York City. Listen, being mayor is not It's not like being a senator, okay? You have to manage the city. You got to make the city run.

We have something like seven no, it's not politics, it's management. It's like more like being a governor than anything else. And believe me, New Yorkers will sit up and take notice when they see all of the things that are already happening. Eighteen homeless people died during the freeze. S City streets that are still covered in dirty snow, and the streets are narrowed.

It takes forever to get around. No one's picking up garbage. No one's picking up garbage. So these are like the most, and so many mayors prior to him have learned this lesson the hard way that it's obvious that nobody said to him, Look, here comes your first snowstorm. You got to get this right.

We're going to make sure that everyone is safe, that the streets are, you know, we want no one to be able to say that you can't handle this job. And he's tripping up on these things in a big way. And he's trying to make these promises come true. Gonna have a lot of problems with Kathy Hochul, who's also running. And now suddenly he's endorsed her when he.

Was reluctant to endorse her all along in his own campaign after she endorsed him. Why is she afraid of him? I think she was just sort of trying to fence straddle the whole thing. And you know, none of them wanted to. Jeffries, none of them wanted to support him in that race until they actually got all the way down to the finish line.

And then the reluctant never did. No, that's true, Schumer. Yeah, and he didn't show up at the inaugural either. But she's afraid of him. Yep.

And it's so interesting because remember last time, she won. I know this is a national show, but this rally matters because it ripples across the country because the whole socialist movement. And if he's successful here, believe me, there's a bunch of 30-year-olds who would love to bring socialism to your city. But. Remember, she says, I'm not doing the congestion pricing.

She runs and wins. And then the first thing she does is put it up. And we have the first ever congestion tolls in New York City. She said, I'm not going to raise taxes. If she beats Bruce Blakeman, then she will raise taxes.

And because look at her track record, because she stands for nothing. She doesn't even have control of her own legislature. And she's hated on Long Island. That's pretty clear. And upstate New York, he's vulnerable.

We'll see if Bruce Blakeman is the Nassau County executive. What's interesting now is I watched some local news coming to work because I'm from Long Island. And local news, ICE is going all over Nassau County. And because Bruce Blakeman said, go. You're welcome.

Right. Come on in.

So I don't know if that helps or hurts. I'm for it. I'm pro ICE. And when people say ICE has been ill trained in that guys, Number one, the people that were in those shootings, it's unfortunate shootings, they both had like 20 years' experience. Those weren't inexperienced, change the training type approach.

What happens is if you have no outside help from cops, you have to control your own perimeter. And I don't doubt that after a while being screamed at every day. And being racked out in my hotel room. These guys were on edge.

So it all combined to be combustible. You're showing in your windows that you have an eighth-grade education, and how do you sleep at night? How do you look in the mirror? No, it was, that was horrific. All right, more with North McCow in just a moment.

Unless she storms out. I've had guests storm out in the break, or make up stories like, I got to run, or phone calls that never happened. We'll see if that's the story. Can't wait. Where big stories meet bigger conversations.

Stay informed and energized with the Brian Killmeat Show. He's so busy, he'll make your head spin. It's Brian Kilmead. Sponsored by Previgen. Previgen made for your brain.

Well, I think it'll be very interesting because Meta employees admitted in internal communications they referred to themselves as drug pushers. They compared their product to digital narcotics. And indeed, that's what Instagram and similar social media platforms are.

So getting them on the stand, I think this is the first time that parents are going to see real accountability for how these platforms have harmed their children. It's really important. And that's what we're talking about, a trial today in which Mark Zuckerberg is going to be there. And what's going on in that trial is really interesting because there were some entities that settled out of court. They wanted to avoid this, but Meta and YouTube went forward.

So here, Mark Zuckerberg will be front and center. He's not the best public speaker, Martha McCallum, but we know this is taking place in Los Angeles Superior Court. It was brought by a 20-year-old woman who identified in court papers as KGM, her name Kaylee, and her mother, and by the way, her mother's name is Kaylee, I should say, began using YouTube at age six, Instagram at age nine, and alleged she became compulsively addicted, spending 16 hours a day on the Meta-owned platform by age 16. The lawsuit claims the company's engineered addiction.

So it's up to the the plaintiff to show intent. What do you think? I know it's impactful this trial because it's going to cost a lot of money. You know, I I think we're in the middle of a reckoning that has been coming for a very long time. I think that, you know, we've been living in the wild, wild west of social media and You know, allowing kids to be on their phones 24-7.

I think that. One of the things they have to show in this trial is that there is a correlation, a direct correlation between the outcome for these children and their use of social media. Difficult to do because it's a mental health issue. With the tobacco story, it was, you know, you could sort of show a diagnostic correlation between tobacco use and lung cancer, for example.

So they're going to have to kind of climb that difficult hill, I think, legally to show a direct correlation between the two things. They're going to be able to say, well, look at all these millions of kids who used it and didn't end up with these problems. The question is: were they aware of? Diagnostic study that showed that there is a risk of mental health issues for children if they use these products. And was the company?

Manipulating those users in order to addict them. There's a lot of emails that they have, several emails, I should say, that show that the company was aware that the product was addictive.

So, all of this obviously is going to be the back and forth of this trial. It's going to be very interesting. I'm not a psychologist, but like, for example, people love American Idol. I'm addicted to that show. I love soap oppers.

I had to watch every day. I had to tape it. That's the goal of a media outlet. That's the goal of a candy bar. That's the goal of a restaurant.

How do you disseminate that goal from social media? I want people to watch as long as possible so I get most from my advertising. I don't want anyone to kill themselves, jump off a bridge. But when you don't control the content, that could happen. Yeah, I mean, the difference, I think, if you were arguing on the.

On the plaintiff's side, is that watching a soap opera or watching American Idol isn't anyone reflecting on you day after day after day, not liking you, comments that are destructive, all of this very difficult stuff. I think, I honestly, I think parents have to be the main managers of this. More on this with Martha at 3 p.m. Eastern.