The Brian Kilmeade Show

Hi everyone, it's Brian Kilmead here. Are you tired of those uncomfortable dress shirts, especially when they bunch up under a sweater? If so, then you must check out Collars Co., makers of the dress collar polo. Listen up. These shirts are four-way stretch, buttery soft polos with firm dress collars on them, so they give you the dress shirt look, but extremely comfortable polo feel.

You can wear them with anything under a sweater, with a blazer, or by themselves as an elevated polo. They work for any occasion. These polos are perfect, whether it's in the office, on a golf course, or a night out. Collars Co. is exploding and have gone viral on social media thanks to the 1 million investment they received on Shark Tank from Mark Cuban and Peter Jones.

You don't have to worry about collars that flop down and spread out. They stay firm and sharp all day. It's an amazing array of sweaters, quarter zips, pants, and outerwear. If you're looking for the performance dress shirt or polo that looks great all day, check out collarsandco.com. Use promo code Brian for 15% off.

of any purchase of a hundred dollars or more, that's promo code BRIAN. From the Fox News Radio Studios in Midtown Manhattan, it's the fastest growing radio talk show. Brian Kilmead.

So glad you're there. It's the Brian Kill Meet Show. I hope you had a fantastic weekend. Sure, you did. RNC Chair Joe Gruyers is going to be with us too.

Now, Joe has an advantage over the DNC. Why? Because he's not buried in debt. The DNC comes out with this revelation. They have earned something like they've raised $16 trillion.

The problem is, $16 billion, I should say. $16 billion. But the problem is they owe $18. And they've asked vendors to stop sending in invoices until after November. That's the advantage the RNC has.

They have millions in the coffers.

So we'll be talking to him about that. Also, I got to urge you, everyone's talking about my YouTube channel, youtube.com/slash at the Brian Killmeat Show. You will love it.

So let's get to the big three. Number three. Whether it's his calls for the arrest of Netanyahu or urging New Yorkers to come out and protest Netanyahu, it's the same thing. It just shows how juvenile, immature, and really the lack of experience that this mayor has. Congressman Nicole Meliatakis of New York, do your job.

Mayor Mamdani of New York, a radical and epic failure focusing on Israel, vilifying the rich, bragging about slapping taxes on the most successful while taking aim at his own party, costing them millions in primaries, and yet taking on the prime minister of other countries. Get with it. Number two. As the president said, we are locked and loaded. Even more assets are going into theater.

But he's giving talk some space. He's giving it a little bit of room. You think? Mike Waltz, yes, he is. Three-day pause after 14 straight days of strikes and no shooting at chips in the strait.

I'm sure they're related. What's next in the Iran fight? And is the Red Sea open or closed? We'll review. Number one, there are people who claim to be Democrats that are running against the Democratic Party.

There are people that will vote in this election who are not inclined to vote for Trump that will believe that stupid. And that is why I am depressed. Yes, you should be depressed, James Carbill. 100 days to the midterms. And history shows them should be flying high.

But no, they're having an overt civil war. Yes, socialists versus the DNC, who, by the way, as I mentioned, Fight out broke. Millions of dollars in debt, really, since 2024. Whatever you think of this guy running, uh, this guy running the DNC now, I'm not sure he's to blame, except people are saying you spent so much money on the special election. Why didn't you focus on the midterms?

But that's for them to work out.

So, I've told you about the socialist movement. I'm very wary of people grabbing onto something and making it too big because I don't know, it gets ratings or people like to talk about it. But this is real. This is real. 150,000 members, they're running all types of candidates in all important races.

Even the ones that are not officially DSA members seem to be running off the DSA sign in line, and that is with Bernie Sanders. I'll give you an example: Abdul Saeed over in Michigan. He's running against. He's running against Haley Stevens over in Michigan, who's considered just very liberal.

Now Haley Stevens is getting millions of dollars, got just the sitting governor to endorse from Senator Schumer to endorse and that's big news. Steve Mark Peters, who had the spot that is leaving the Senate, endorsed Because Abdul Saed's got Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and zillions of dollars.

So, the DSA loves this guy, even though he says I'm technically a capitalist. I don't believe it, but technically a capitalist, he's got every socialist polling for him. This is going to be something we all have to pay attention to. I think Mike Rogers has a much easier job with El Saeed, but this other woman, Haley Stevens, is also not exactly a formidable candidate, in my view.

So, I think Rogers is going to win, even though the Cook report says that it leans left because no Republican has won their sentence since 96. But if you want to know what the DSA believes, Instead of you accusing me of reading off some random website, and it's not really true, I thought it would be great, and I thought Shannon Bream did a great job, just a QA format, has the DSA national co-chair, Megan Romer, on to basically find out what she believes. Are you ready? Cut one.

So, should Van Jones and Rahm Emanuel and James Carvel and all of the establishment Democrats be worried about DSA plans from within their tent? The establishment Democrats should be worried about the voters and about what the voters think and about what the constituency thinks. And right now, they have not been delivering, and our candidates are and have been, and it's resonating with voters.

So far, you'd have to say they have a lot more money. And so in a recent poll, I think a Fox poll, 54% of Democrats are a supporter of socialism, but only 17% of independents. As both parties know, you don't win anything with just your party. You need independence.

So you want a rundown of exactly what the DSA believes? Cut to.

Okay, so we're going to put up on the screen a few of the things that are part of your platform, and I want to ask you, just give me sort of a true or false on these. Abolish the sentence. True.

Okay, replace the Presidency and Supreme Court as we now know them. Yep. Abolish ice. Absolutely. Abolish borders and give amnesty to anyone currently in the U.S.

illegally. As a long-term plan, yep. Defund the Pentagon. Absolutely. Abolish prisons, at least in large part.

Yeah, again, as part of a long-term program, yeah.

Okay, so no prisons. Government or public ownership of most large corporations? Yeah, absolutely. Do you believe this? You believe this?

Can you believe that she answered like that?

Now, if she was running on a socialist ticket and they get 1% of the vote, I probably wouldn't even cover this. But they decided to just jump into the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is, well, Rahm Emanuel and Governor Polis. I don't know what Gavin Newsom stands on this. But Bill Moore, none of which are actually political politicians.

They're outraged by this. What are you kidding? No one believed this? But listen to them try to defend their stances. For example, abolishing prisons.

Have you ever heard of anything more asinine than abolishing prisons?

Well, let's hear her explain it. It gets worse. Cut six.

So if we talk about abolishing prisons, then does that make society better? I mean, is there anybody that should be incarcerated? I mean, rapists, child predators, murderers? Yeah, so the long-term plan, when we think about most people who are in prison, they are mostly in prison for crimes of poverty.

So when we. I'm talking about the really. Yeah, no, I hear that. Yeah, so when we get rid of this need for crimes of poverty to exist, when we get rid of that destabilizing force that creates so many people who are living in desperate situations and doing desperate things, that brings those numbers down to very small numbers. And then we can collectively decide what we do with those people.

I suspect it won't look like the prison system as we know it today. Right. We'll see what happens. watching a guy with a a rap sheet of thirty years in the streets of New York over the weekend. And starts shooting at people and kills a 12-year-old kid who's just buying a ball in a bodega.

Shouldn't be in prison. Why wasn't a prison to begin with? But with the D S A we'll never see prison.

So Rahm Emanuel writes, ultimately, This is about policy. It was socialists, he writes this in the Wall Street Journal, who led the change to defund the police. It was socialists who opened up the borders. It was socialists who abolished prisons, release violent criminals onto the streets, and degrade the flag. We know those are electoral losers.

In 2020, after protesters chanted to defund the police, Joe Biden was swept into office without coattails. After Mr. Biden instituted an open border policy, we lost control of the House in 2022 and the White House and Senate in 2024 to win the places where it matters. Democrats need to emphasize the common ground they have with the majority of the electorate. Makes total sense.

By the way, he's not resonating at all in the primary so far.

So when that was read back. When that was read back on Face the Nation to Bernie Sanders, I thought it was interesting to see what Bernie Sanders said, and he basically just dismissed it. As something that we shouldn't be paying attention to, is as well. Rahm Emmanuel really has no popularity. He is not somebody, he is not somebody that really resonates with the crowd.

So listen to what he said about that Bernie Sanders, cut eight. That is what Rahm Emmanuel is saying, who no doubt has the support of millions of working class people. Look. Uh this is an argument. There's no no Debate, there is a strong division within the Democratic Party.

You have an establishment like Rahm Emanuel. uh who are dependent on billionaire campaign are contributors that want to maintain the status quo. Then you have a progressive movement, which, by the way, what is getting these guys there is we are winning all over this country. The American people are tired of a rigged economy, a corrupt campaign, finance system. They want real change.

They don't want Rob Emmanuel and the establishment maintaining the status.

So, this guy says the same thing his whole career: never does anything. He's never achieved anything. I'm talking about Bernie Sanders. And what Rahm Emanuel just said: we're not for defining the police, we're not for opening borders, we're not for changing the government around all this stuff. That's absolutely right.

Now, when you say Medicare for all, we know this for a fact. If you read the Washington Post editorial, do the math, it's going to cost $8.2 trillion. Nobody has that. It's unaffordable. You're going to kill all private insurance.

Nobody wants that. Nobody who has Medicare right now wants you to destroy Medicare because the way it is right now, you still need supplemental. If you bring everybody in under that, you will destroy the program and destroy our health care system.

Now, nobody wants the Canadian system. Nobody wants the United Kingdom system. Nobody wants the socialist system, single-payer healthcare. It doesn't work.

So he just says stuff. I want change. And when someone says, well, that's not radical change, it's because you're giving it to billionaires. Billionaires want prison, so do millionaires, so do working-class people. Because you don't want to have your house robbed, you don't want to get shot, you want the criminals in jail.

That's not a billionaire class of backing up the establishment. Nobody wants an open border except for people that want to destroy the country. That's not a billionaire move. He is not taking PAC money to say that.

So but when you're on Face the Nation and you're Bernie Sanders or you're a Democrat, express expect just to float right through. They gave him the easiest time. This is the guy that gave us Graham Plattner. Had one question on Graham Plattner. Do you regret endorsing him?

Well, we found out some stuff and we got rid of him. No big deal. Yeah, it's a huge deal. I mean, we found out all this stuff should have been disqualifying.

So, Bernie Sanders is responsible, but for some reason, people treat him with kid gloves. We come back. We'll take some calls: 1866-408-7669. I want to tell you the latest on about the Iran war and what the truth and fact, truth and. Separate fact from fiction when it comes to that New York Times story about why the president's not bombing today.

Where do you stand? I know the polls say he's underwater when it comes to fighting in Iran. I actually don't believe the people that understand what's going on in our foreign policy are against the conflict. They just want to see the plan. Back in a moment.

Big guests, bold opinions, better information. This is the Brian Killmead Show. Cheers to America's 250th birthday. Get 20% off your first purchase at Foxnewswineshop.com with code FNRadio20. 20% discount excludes wine club offers and cannot be combined with any other promotion.

Expires July 31st, 2026. Must be 21 or older to order. Please drink responsibly. Radio that makes you think. This is the Brian Kill Me Joe.

It's giving diplomacy some space, it's giving diplomacy a little bit of time. Of course, the president tried diplomacy last year, he's tried it this year. He is a president of peace, he is giving diplomacy a chance. We'll see over the next coming days, but make no mistake. Assets, additional military assets are Moving into the region, they should believe the president.

The regime should believe the president when he says they're locked and loaded and where all options are on the table.

So I know for a fact, do you know? Ambassador of the UN, Michael Waltz. You know that he's got the Greenberry background for 20 years and stayed in the military up until three years ago. I think he just got officially out, he was in the reserves. And then he served under Dick Cheney for a while, so he got a sense of the Pentagon.

He did his homework before. He doesn't want to say things inaccurate. He woke up to this story, New York Times. President Trump has set aside, at least for now, plans to sharply escalate the military assault on Iran, with particular concern that the intensifying the war could dangerously drain the Pentagon's already diminished stockpile of Patriot Anti missile interceptors and other defense munitions in the Middle East. Threat to the Inceptor stockpiles is one of the many considerations.

Trump and his top aides are also uneasy about the prospect of a widening war in the Middle East with the alienation of key Gulf allies.

So I know for a fact, spoke to the President last night. He says this story is absolutely not true.

Now it doesn't mean they made it up. I believe that there's people in the West Wing that don't want the President to continue to bomb Iran. You can use your imagination.

So what do you do? You plant stories in the New York Times that hamstring you and let Democrats tee off on you on the Sunday shows.

So I know that for a fact. What happened is, and what is true of the Axio story. Is it The actual story: the top U.S. commander of the Middle East, Brad Cooper, recommended stopping the bombing campaign around the strait because it has reached its limit of potential. That's true.

They said the recommendation by Cooper, the commander, as you know, together with other advisors, impacted President Trump's decision on Friday. He also said the Gulf states really want the president to ratchet it down, afraid about ratchet it up. Why? Because every missile defense, including Israel, has got its holes. They don't want to see any more damage, but they also do not want to see Iran emboldened.

So they say. The massive hit. has all the elements there, but has nothing to do with the type of hits they've been doing over the last 14 days. The decision came after a meeting with top advisers and military officials who presented him with the new strike plan for the day. In the days before the meeting, Trump had been leaning towards returning to major combat, but the mindset started to change on Thursday.

His decision to pump the brakes on bombing the strait solidified on Friday when he got some calls from the Gulf states. While registering their concern. Cooper gave his recommendation on the way forward. He goes on to say he stressed that the two weeks of strikes in the Strait had significantly degraded Iran's ability to attack ships. Cooper noted that the designated bombing targets have been mostly exhausted.

CENTCOM commander said a possible next step would be to resume major combat operations to finish. The 20% Of targets, the U.S. military has designated that they didn't strike during the original. Operation Epic Fury.

So, do you get it? It's not that they ran out of targets. They were hitting different targets, focusing on the straight. You notice nobody's been hitting the straight over the last three days.

So You have the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Kane cautioned that Defense Secretary B. Hagseth and Trump in private that assurance of defense interceptors could hamper the ability to protect U.S. forces.

Now Very good sources. We have enough interceptors. We absolutely would like more. But that wouldn't be hesitant, especially with all the assets we now have in the area. The challenge is the other as expected at some point, the Red Sea is now going to be a challenge because the Houthis got a got a plane full of supplies and some commanders on the one hundred eight hundred had to f how to stop a straight.

So they're going after the Saudis. I also think Russians are helping with the targeting. I love that President Vladimir Zelensky is going to go to the White House. And he's going to show the proof that the Russians are providing satellite surveillance to Gulf states and other U.S. military facilities in and around the area.

allowing him to hit things like one room. in a building. And that one room is where the CIA headquarters are. And only the Russians would be able to detect things like that.

So there's a lot of moving parts. And I think you have an executive branch That has two schools of thought.

Now you know. It makes a better president when you have opposite points of views.

Some people willing to say him as president, I think you're wrong. In fact, you got to hire people like that, people not afraid to tell the President when he's wrong. Who I would actually always have a Democrat or two in my cabinet just to say, what are they thinking? Where am I open vote? Where am I open politically?

Where am I vulnerable? But I think that in this situation, Having Part or staff of some people. who are high ranking in the executive branch. And I believe it's the vice president's office. Reeking to the New York Times.

I think it is absolutely awful. And as Mike Waltz said, and I'll play this at some point. They should be arrested. If in fact is whoever's doing that. If you have a problem with the president, just say it.

Don't leak it. Breaking news, unique opinions. Hear it all on the Brian Kill Me Joe.

Now, House Democrats have outraised Republicans in the most recent quarter, our House Republican counterparts. And we're going to have the resources necessary to make sure that our incumbent members are re-elected and that we can stand behind great working-class champions like Bob Brooks and ensure that he becomes the next congressman from the 7th Congressional District. The guy that wants to be Speaker, Hakeem Jeffries, not telling the truth, the Democratic National Party Committee is facing a significant cash crunch with 100 days to go. According to the latest FEC filing, cash on hand, $16.3 million. Debt and loans 18.5 They're leaving them $2.2 million underwater.

By comparison, the Republican RNC has reported $128 million. In cash there is no debt. Do you know they had to put their building up for collateral in order to get an equity loan out in order to help on these special elections? Hey, everybody's got to make decisions no matter how much money you have on where to spend. Joe Gruyter's as RNC chair, you got to feel good about where you're at, especially when you look at your counterpart.

Yeah, listen, we're so fortunate that we've been holding a lot of our money back. You know, when the president asked me to serve as chairman over a year ago, he said you have one goal, and that's to win the majorities. And so we've been laser-focused on that. And the DNC, it gets worse. You know, he's, you know, he threw a phone at a staffer.

He's making all of his officers sign NDAs. I can't imagine being under that type of pressure and asking my fellow officers to do the same. We're in phenomenal position because when you look at the cash advantage that we have and you add in the fact that we just had that coordinated campaign law struck down by the Supreme Court, which makes our dollars worth three times as much, we are going to obliterate these guys in November.

So, and right now, think about this. I mean, you got to make you have to make decisions all the time. Where are you spending your money? In late 2025, the DNC took out a $15 million line of credit, the largest ever. Off-year loan to fund investments in the 2026 election cycle.

The financial findings show the party already entered the election year in debt. of fourteen million cash and seventeen point five million in debt.

So they added to the debt. This is from twenty twenty four, when Vice President Kamala Harris spent over a billion dollars to lose every battleground state and the popular vote. Think about that. And she's the front runner to w to to win the nomination. You know, I think they had people robbing them blind.

I don't think that they had a decent handle on where the money was being spent, but obviously they completely wasted it all. What a horrific campaign getting blown out by the president who won the popular vote as well. But listen, we focus every day and we do have to make spending decisions. And I get calls from candidates. You know, over the last year, we've lost some of these special elections and these little towns and mayor's races and state legislative races.

And we've taken the hits that people have hurled at us. But our focus has always been the same. We need to make sure the president has a full four years. We have to defy history. We have to win these midterms.

And because there's no other option. If we don't win, The Democrats are going to investigate, obstruct, and impeach. It's going to be an absolute disaster. You know, we're, but now, when you look at it with 99 days to go, the fact that we're sitting on so much money and there's fewer races out there because of all the redistricting that's happened and gerrymandering that's happened by the Democrats over the last 30 years, that we are in prime position because we have the candidate matchups we want because these guys are electing, they're nominating these radical leftists, a lot of these DSA mini mom damis winning from coast to coast. And we have hand-selected candidates that have been endorsed by the president, these MAGA warriors that are ready to go, that are laser-focused on affordability and making sure that everybody can achieve the American dream.

Who do you want Mike Rogers to face in Michigan? Do you want it to be for the Senate seat? Do you want it to be Stevens, Haley Stevens, or do you want it to be Abdul El Saeed? And we have this debate in our office all the time. El Saeed is a radical leftist, the guy is absolutely crazy.

I mean, he is a mini-mamdami, and he's already talking about. You know, I read some article that he wants to take out Feterbib, and he's openly talking about it in a primary, you know, in the next cycle.

So, the interesting thing is, here's the real debate. El Saeed may be able to motivate because he is a motivational type speaker. But the guy is a radical leftist. I mean, it's crazy versus common sense. Haley Stevenson says a typical normal Democrat we would normally face.

So do you as a party leader, do we want somebody who is more radicalized, you would think that would turn off voters, but may be able to motivate their base to show up? It's a 50-50, but I will tell you, no matter who they nominate, we are going to crush them because Mike Rogers is one of our best Senate candidates in the country. He's raising money. He's solid, common sense, professional, excellent on national security issues, almost won last time. And so I don't care who they put up.

We're ready to do battle and we're going to win that race.

Well, what about what's going on with your predecessor, Mike? Watley, he's now going from 15 points down to four. What what could you do for him? Because now they're going to pour money into Cooper because they thought that was an automatic flip.

Well, listen, Cooper, I always tell Wally, got a bad draw because Cooper was a popular governor, and we needed to make sure that Wally's name ID increased. And we know that as his name ID continues to increase, that those margins that he'll get closer and closer to the lead there. Cooper has never broken 50%. That is a winnable race. And what I tell people about Wally is the guy is one of the hardest workers that I know.

He is literally traveling coast to coast, city to city to raise the money he needs. And he's like an Eagle Scout. The guy is picture perfect. He's great on policy. He will work every day.

And we just need the macroeconomy to get a little bit better. But I know that as we continue to spend, we're going to be doing well there.

So Governor Cooper is not a socialist. Whatever he is, he's not. Jared Polis is not either. You could say a few others, Fetterman. But this DSA, which has been accepted by a lot of these people like Senator Kaine, has no problem with the DSA.

It's crazy. Um you know obviously does Carville does and We have Van Jones that does, and people like Bill Maher, but in terms of politician, no.

So the DSA national co-chair was on, Megan Romert. Said we've got to abolish the Senate, abolish the Pentagon, we have to abolish The Supreme Court. They got to change the entire presidency. And then, when asked, do you really want to abolish the border and abolish prisons? Listen to this explanation, Cut Six.

So, if we talk about abolishing prisons, then, does that make society better? I mean, is there anybody that should be incarcerated? I mean, rapists, child predators, murderers? Yeah, so the long-term plan, when we think about most people who are in prison, they are mostly in prison for crimes of poverty.

So when we. I'm talking about the really. Yeah, no, I hear you. Yeah, so when we get rid of this need for crimes of poverty to exist, when we get rid of that destabilizing force that creates so many people who are living in desperate situations and doing desperate things, that brings those numbers down to very small numbers. And then we can collectively decide what we do with those people.

I suspect it won't look like the prison system as we know it today. So once we give the criminals money, they're going to have a great time and a great life. Joe, I mean, this woman is sober. How do you feel about it? Yeah, th this is a coup from within.

They're fundamentally trying to change a country. And these TSA candidates are winning from coast to coast. I call them mini mandamis because it started. This is what happens when you have Mondami, Bernie Sanders, and AOC in control of your party. That's who's running the party.

Look at El Said. He's another disciple of these guys. These guys are nuts. They literally want to change the way we live. They want tens of millions of illegals to come in.

Forget about cashless bail, what a disaster policy that is. They want exactly what she just said. They don't want anybody in jail. This is a disaster. This is what the Democrats are offering in November.

This is why we could defy history and we could win because our batchups against some of these radical leftists are exactly what we need. We have more money, better candidates, and I think we're going to have better messaging with the president. And then we're going to, of course, you know, the president's going to be in Michigan and we're going to start barnstorming the country. We're going to hit all these tough districts, hit all these tough states, and we're going to make sure that we bring the truth to people. And I think it's going to really help our candidates out.

So, what do you think as you look at these midterm elections? The big difference is you're going to run against crazy, common sense against crazy. That's what the Speaker of the House Johnson says. The other thing you're going to do is look to hope the redistricting helps you out and the money helps you out. How much money do you have to put into the Paxson race, being that he's got this background check problem?

And he's going against Tallarico, who's not without talent.

Well, listen, Tallarico is raising a lot of money, but at the end of the day, Texas is a ruby red state. We'll spend whatever it takes there, but I'm not anticipating us having to spend a lot because Paxon has won statewide there numerous times. He just won a primary against an entrenched incumbent by 20-plus points. I mean, it was a blowout. He knows how to win.

I've spent some time with him both at the office and outside trying to help him raise money and do other things. I anticipate him running away with it. You've got to remember, Ted Cruz ran against Beto. I think Beto was a more reasonable candidate than Talla Crepo. And even Cruz won big.

In this case, Paxson is going to crush Tallarico. Tallarico is a candidate for Austin, not for Texas. Texas will remain red, and we'll move on. All right, I guess we'll see where we go from there. I have not heard much out of New Hampshire yet.

I thought John Tanunu would be formidable. in terms of flipping that seat. And you would think that, you know, we're Scott Brown. Where is that battle going? Yeah, listen, Sunudu is a phenomenal candidate.

I think the latest poll we had is him down by one against Pappas, but we are very bullish on Sununu. You know, he's an engineer by trade. He had the seat before. He's a phenomenal individual. I've campaigned with him numerous times.

I think you could put that also in the win column for the Republican side. And when you look at these races, Rogers, I think that's a win. Sununu, I think we're going to win there. We just have to make sure our voters come out and that we're united in our efforts to beat the Democrats, but we're in solid shape in both those states. I guess the other question would be, what about Georgia?

Mike Collins has got a lot of money. Osoff has got a lot of momentum. He said this goes well. He's probably going to run for president.

So what do you do to turn things around? Because Mike Collins is trailing. And that was one originally they said on paper. Um that might be flippable.

Well, listen, that's a very tough state to win because Ossoff is sitting on over $80 million and Osoff is being considered as a presidential contender. But yeah, again, Collins is a great candidate. And I think what you have to look for in this race is the fact that the governor's race is going to be so expensive. And I always say a rising tide lifts all ships. Can that massive turnout that we get as a result of the governor's race there, can that lift Collins up?

I think that he's in contention. He has to run a solid race. We have to support him financially to make sure that he's going to have the resources he needs to compete. But that is a seat that we're looking at and hope to win. RNC Chair Joe Gruz, our guest.

Joe, you guys are trailing in almost every category. In terms of the polls, even on immigration, even on the economy, you guys are trailing. On foreign policy, you guys are trailing. You're coming off Joe Biden's. But regardless of what you think of it, How do you win with with w winning in so few categories?

Well, listen, people soon forget how bad it was under Joe Biden, what their administration left us with. We're stealing with the ramifications of that disaster auto-penn administration. But we are moving the nose up. We're pulling the nose up. The president's been focused on everyday issues since he's been in office, the working family tax cuts, which I read most people don't even know what's in it, but that's the no-tax on tips over time and Social Security.

And that's why we're doing things like the Trump Apalooza, the midterm convention. We have to get the messaging right. We have to get it out there to the American people. We have 99 days to do that. I think that midterm convention will go a long way in helping us do that and spread the message of all the great things the president has done on behalf of the average American worker and all the things he wants to do on behalf of the American worker.

Listen, D.C. has sold out. The average American for the last five decades. This president really does care about the average American and their opportunity to achieve the American dream. And so we just have to get that out there and get that message out.

And all, like I said, all the great things he wants to do. We can lay it out to the American people and explain the contrast between common sense and crazy. Right. Have you ever thrown a phone against the wall because you're mad at a staffer? No, but listen, I read that and I told some of my staff members, I said, watch out.

I said, I'm going to send you over to the DNC and you'll have to start dodging phones. No, I'll tell you what. You know, the reason why I'm so successful as a chairman so far in terms of money raising everything else is we have some of the best staff in the entire country. That's why this coordinated campaign limits is going to go so far. Forget about the money.

It's the fact that our political operators on top, the ones that are working in the trenches every single day, we have top talent helping the President and we are going to be able to utilize them. Directly with these campaigns all across the country. That's going to be the biggest difference maker. And I'm glad you brought up the staff because I'm so excited to talk about the fact that our staff is a thousand times better, light years better, than what the DNC and the Democrats have nationwide. Joe Gerz, thanks so much.

He's RNC chair. Appreciate it. Thanks, Brian. All right, 1866-408-7669. I'll have a few moments at the top of the hour, so get online now.

We'll be able to talk to you. Also, if you prefer to write like you did over the weekend, BriankilMe.com, don't move. Both sides, all opinions. It's Brian Killmeat. The fastest three hours in radio.

You're with Brian Kilmead. What really bothers me. Is there are people who claim to be Democrats that are running against the Democratic Party, not against Donald Trump. And stop god lying to people. That's why I'm getting down.

And I'm afraid there are people. That will vote in this election, who won't, who are not inclined to vote for Trump, that will believe that stupid. And that is why I am depressed. You should be. You should be.

I mean, between running out of money, between having these crazy candidates have a common sense against crazy, and with the redistricting, Trump has rebalanced. And now, if the war comes to a successful end, not just an end, but a successful end, you guys are going to be in a lot of trouble because Trump will just be able to coast through the economic principles and fundamentals I believe are in place. And if they're not in place, I'll be wrong, and the numbers will show it. Senator Dave McCormick was on with me on One Nation last night, and he said, from the Republicans' perspective, it's been disconcerting to see. Cut 13.

The Democratic Party is not just the extreme, it's the mainstream of the party. Is embracing a philosophy that is anti-military, anti-law enforcement, anti-business, anti-Semitic. and anti-American. And these ideas Socialism, communism. When I was a soldier, we were fighting in the Cold War.

And I never dreamed for a minute when the Cold War ended and these ideas of socialism and communism went into the dustbin of history. That they'd rise from the ashes and be what the Democratic Party is running on. It really is crazy because I don't, you know. Like Leonard Brezhnev and Khrushchev, they never said abolish prisons. They made more prisons.

They never said abolish the border, they enforced their border, so it's not even communism. What part of socialism is just crazy? I never heard Bernie Sanders bring it up, but they're not pushing back. I heard Hillary Clinton, you know, Hillary Clinton, when she was first lady and senator, she wanted to enforce the border. When she became Secretary of State, she realized the party was changing.

She suddenly says, I want a borderless society once we straighten out Mexico.

So it began to change back then. But not like this. Not like what we just heard on Sunday. Not like what we just heard others say that won elections in New York City and in Philadelphia and in Colorado. Listen to Brian Kill Me Chow.

Keep it here. And make sure to see me on stage coming up big shows this fall at BrianKillmeed.com. Don't move. From high atop Fox News headquarters in New York City, always seeking solutions, never sowing division. It's Brian Killmead.

Hi, everyone.

So glad you're there from 48th and 6 in Midtown Manhattan, heard around the country, around the world. This is the Brian Killmead Show, where we have a mayor that thinks he's president of the United States and then realizes that we found out he wasn't. And his pledge to arrest Benjamin Netanyahu would have gotten him arrested, so we backed off. We're going to talk about a lot of what's going on right now. This hour, we're going to talk to Admiral Daryl Claudell about the war in Iran.

And we're also going to talk to Matt Continenti about that, Director of Domestic Policy and Studies, and Neil chaired AEI and columnist for the Wall Street Journal. But before we get to that, let's get to the big three. Number three. Whether it's his calls for the arrest of Netanyahu or urging New Yorkers to come out and protest Netanyahu, it's the same thing. It just shows how juvenile, immature, and really the lack of experience that this mayor has.

It's so true. Do your job, Mr. Mayor. You're a mayor of New York, a radical and epic failure so far, focusing on Israel, vilifying the rich, bragging about slapping taxes on the most successful, while taking aim at his own party, costing them millions in primaries, yet still a darling of the left-wing press, we examine. Number two, as the president said, we are locked and loaded.

Even more assets are going into theater. But he's giving talk some space. He's giving it a little bit of room. Uh 100 days, excuse me, three-day pause after 14 days straight of strikes and no shooting at ships in the strait. What's next in this Iran fight?

As the Red Sea, is it open or closed? Can someone tell me? We'll talk about it. Number one. There are people who claim to be Democrats that are running against the Democratic Party.

There are people that will vote in this election who are not inclined to vote for Trump that will believe that stupid sh ⁇ . And that is why I am depressed. Should be depressed, James Carvo. 100 days to midterm elections in history shows Dem should be flying high. But no, they're having an overt civil war politically, and their socialists and DNC reveal massive financial woes.

It's unbelievable. They are $2 million in debt. And they asked all vendors to stop building them until after November because they're embarrassed to say, We don't have the money to pay you. Matthew Coneni joins us now. Matt, welcome back.

I'm just commenting on, just well, saw your column about intensifying the conflict with Iran as opposed to backing off and stopping it. I thoroughly agree. We have a low-intensity conflict going now, and it turns out Admiral Cooper, who's charting it and scripting it, said, If we're going to do this, I'm done because I'm focusing on the straight. But if we're going to amp it up, I'm ready. You believe amp it up, even if it brings more casualties, costs, and hurts him in the polls temporarily.

Well, Brian, thanks for having me. We have to weigh the costs of a potential intensification of the war against the costs of the status quo. And as we learned last week in Jordan, The status quo also carries the risk of casualties. The status quo also carries the risk of destabilization and damage done to our Gulf allies. And the Status quo also carries the risk of high gas prices.

because the status quo will gives the advantage to Iran. We spend a lot of time talking about who's in charge. In Iran. But the fact is The IRGC, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, they're the ones with the guns. They're the ones running the show.

And they believe that they can start and stop this conflict. At their choosing. And from my perspective, if America wants to win this war, And end the hostilities and be able to remove our buildup from the Middle East. We need to set the terms of the conflict, and that means intensification in the short term.

So Admiral Cooper made it clear. The low intensity thing, uh focusing on the straight is one thing. Done. And maybe that has a lot to do with why there's been an attack in three days. And evidently, there's talks going on.

They're making progress between Oman and Iran. But the other thing is, he has left 20% of the targets from Operation Epic Fury still undone. And he's saying I have the assets now to finish that off. And if we were to do it, it would be with the IDF.

So, the upside of that is actually the best chance of achieving the goals. The downside about stopping now is. Do you really expect a better MOU now than we had a month ago, which was absolutely terrible? No, I don't expect anything. Look, we have to think about the problem here.

The problem is the Iranian regime. For forty-six years this regime has done nothing. But so terror Cause havoc, oppress its own people. and seek weapons of mass destruction to use. Against Israel?

But also against the West, against the United States, to hold us hostage once they have a nuclear weapon. President Trump is the only president. Since the Islamic Revolution, to actually hold Iran accountable and and punish Iran for its malign behavior. But the Iranians used diplomacy. as a way to buy themselves time.

That's what happened in the April 8th ceasefire. They used that time to restock. They used that time to move the centrifuges. That's what happened with the MOU in June. They used that time not only to accomplish those two objectives I mentioned, but also to plot against President Trump again.

For revenge. Right? And they'll use this pause, this three-day pause so far, in the same way.

So we have to understand that as long as this government is in power, As long as the IRGC is running the show. This conflict's not going to end. Because the Iranians Their objectives The nate their nature. has not changed.

So I found out the New York Times, according to the president, told me the New York Times story is not accurate.

So he says the plans to sharply escalate or stop because we don't have enough interceptors. and that we don't have enough in the stockpile. He says, I don't think it's necessarily fiction. There are sources in the executive branch that told the New York Times this story. But Ambassador Waltz.

made it clear and I talked to him offline too. That they have enough interceptors. They like that more, but they have enough and they got assets in the region. Cut 29. I want to be crystal clear.

The U.S. military, and I've verified this every which way, has everything that it needs to conduct this campaign as effectively as it needs to be. And I have to tell you, the people that are leaking this nonsense deserve to be in jail. Yes, so it was legitimately leaked.

So I'm not saying the New York Times reporter is wrong. I think there's a divide in the party, and instead of dividing the executive branch, instead of them just debating it. They decide, okay, I'm going to try to shape the president's message by leaking it. To the media. And I think the president's got to rein that in.

He's got to know it's got to be the vice president's office because he tells everyone who's got a podcast that he was against this war. Think about how the conflict started. Even go back to Operation Midnight Hammer last June. In Operation Midnight Hammer, our strike against the nuclear facilities, and then on February 28th, the launch of Operation Epic Fury, that four weeks of intense fighting. against Iran, where we accomplished many objectives.

Yeah. President Trump set the tempo. It was President Trump dictating events. Same thing with Venezuela, same thing when he got Casim Soleimani in the first term. He set the terms.

of the conflict. Since this April 8th ceasefire, And since the MOU in June. It's Iran. That's been setting the terms of the conflict. the pace of events, And that gives People who are disagree with our objectives.

and our policy toward Iran. the space to leak to the New York Times, to sow dissent. To create A debate. that shapes the president's perceptions.

So I think it's important for President Trump to return to the way he viewed this conflict at the outset. He's in charge. He will set The terms And that means, in my view, Ramping up the Operations for the next few weeks, just as Admiral Cooper. says we're ready to do. Yeah, I mean, a CBS poll says when people ask what should the goal be in the strait, eighty six percent to open up the strait, seventy nine percent make sure the Iran people are safe, seventy six percent permanent Does end to their new program seventy two stop Iran from hitting other countries?

So I understand part of the deal, if we go in, was to ask the Gulf states to participate. They, you know, Kuwait did pretend that Kuwait did bomb inside Iran. They didn't announce it, but they did.

So the UAE.

So let's see them be able to, for their own self-esteem, to hit back. That would be key. And of course, the IDF playing a role with their incredible intelligence, with the prime minister coming here, I'm sure he'll push back. But I know that The vice president's got a huge problem with the prime minister and with Israel. That makes it pretty clear.

I like having dissenting opinions in the administration, I think that's healthy. But I just think it's healthy when not healthy when you forget who the President is. That's the not healthy part. And the President could numbers would benefit if it ends right with us getting the nuclear uranium out. If it ends right with the unrest beginning to foment inside Iran, The foreign policy numbers go up, the economic numbers go up, and it's called winning.

The American people would like a quick win. That will help him in November. Oh, I agree. I mean, the alternative to winning is to just drag this process out. Was President Trump always Against, he's against Forever Wars.

But I think what we're seeing emerge in the Middle East with this kind of Serve and volley Tit for tat retaliation between the United States and Iran. is a emerging forever war where they shoot some rockets Then we retaliate. Then we decide, oh, let's give n negotiations another chance. And then the Iranians break the cycle again. That, I think, is only going to lead to Worse numbers for President Trump.

And more inflation in the sense of the energy prices. staying relatively high. Yes, they've gone down this weekend. Uh because of the pause and attacks. But Of course, we know as soon as The Iranians launch a few more missiles.

Oil's going to spike again. That's what we have to stop. And that's what takes, I think, President Trump has the. Leadership ability. to stop it.

He does. And what's your take on Saudi Arabia and Yemen And the Houthi rebels and the Red Sea. And right now I think they hit two or three ships. The ships moved on without it.

Now they've bombed the Aramako, the big gas and oil company inside Saudi Arabia.

So these two have their own rivalry, but the Houthis are acting on behest on behalf of the Iranians, right? But the Yehouthis are a proxy of Iran. Ryan.

So of course, anything they do, Iran knows, Iran is behind. And it just goes to show you that the war is expanding. even when we're not calling it a war, even when we're not attacking Iran. The Iranians have ways through their proxies, really the Houthis who are extremely damaged. are one of the few remaining proxies left of Iran.

they can mess up things in the other important choke point. which is the choke point into The Red Sea.

So, this requires leadership, it requires strategy, and I think most importantly, it requires commitment and resolve. And let me just say, too. It also requires us to get serious about our defense budget. Right now, we're having a debate in Congress over funding defense.

Well, if there are any concerns about our stockpiles, That's a reason for every Representative and senator to vote for a major expansion of our defense budget so that we can replenish those stockpiles and we can. pursue the president's goals, America's goals. denying Iran. a nuclear weapon and the ability to hold global trade hostage. Through the Strait of Hormuz.

And put 5 percent of our budget into the defense industry as we've asked everybody else in NATO. That's what $1.5 trillion would do. Senator John Kennedy weighed in on some of the problems with the message in Cut 32. I'm having breakfast next Wednesday. with General Kane.

Um I've seen the poll. It looks about right. I support the President in Iran. We all need to do a better job messaging. I may end up with a sombrero on my head by saying this.

But we all know the President. He he exists loudly. Um he he grows anxious when he has an unexpressed thought. He's not always disciplined in his messaging. I'm not saying he should stop talking.

He's the president, I'm not. But I would put Rubio and Kane and Radcliffe and Hedge Seth out there. Either in a speech or in a long press conference, to explain what's going on in Iran, why we went in, why we're still there. And what we've hit. I see no video.

I get in the morning to tell the story. I have to scour everything in order to find out what we hit. It's very easy to find out what Iran hit, but it's very hard to see what we hit.

So we're not messaging enough. On how to do it, what we're doing, and why am I getting this through unnamed sources in Axios? You should be making public uh press conferences and say, Look, uh, the best I can tell you, I'm not going to tell you what I'm going to do ahead of time, but I'm going to tell you what I did. That would help, wouldn't it, Matt? One thing about Rumsfeld, he could explain things.

Yeah, he could. You know, if the concern, Brian, is the poll numbers, the way to get those poll numbers better is not to avoid the subject. It's actually to lean into them. It's to talk about what is happening in Iran. It is to explain the reasons.

We know that when President Trump explains the reasons for his actions in Iran, People respond. It's in these down times, in these periods where we're not hearing from the administration all that much on the war, but we are seeing the volleys of missiles go back and forth. We're seeing a few days of peace before all of a sudden another ship is hit. That's when the people sour. on the on what's happening in Iran.

And it's when the Congress is saying, well, what's the plan here?

So I think we need to see more explanation. And part of that explanation is something that's been undercovered, which is we have reimposed the economic blockade. And that's very important. We have re-imposed the sanctions, we have re-imposed the blockade on Iranian ports. That is denying the regime an economic lifeline.

And that is going to hurt them. And so President Trump, I think, has a tool there that he has re-imposed. It probably shouldn't have been taken off to begin with, but he's reimposed it, and that's something too that he can communicate to the American people. That this is serving his ultimate objectives in Iran. All right, Matt, those lovely columns, Wall Street Journal, AEI, Matthew Contani, amp it up, go in hard and get a win.

And I thoroughly agree with you. Thanks so much, Matt. Appreciate it. 1-866-408-7669. Your call is on the back end, and then we expand the conversation with a military officer when we return.

You're listening to Brian Kill Me Chill. Very, very busy day. Keeping you informed, engaged, and always a step ahead. It's the Brian Kill Meat Show. The talk show that's getting you talking.

You're with Brian Kilmead. The mayor of New York is basing himself on this criminals. Bogus charges. That's what he's using. And look at what he's doing.

He's fomenting hate. He's supposed to be the mayor of all New Yorkers: Jews, Christians, Muslims, everyone. But he's trying to turn one group against the other, and he's foisting hate and fear. I speak to Jewish Americans in New York, and they're afraid right now. And I don't think it's accidental.

that after he made this hate speech against Israel and against me, The next day, A Jew is stabbed coming out of a synagogue. Yeah, there's no doubt about it. He does nothing to help it. And you could be any race, religion, ethnicity, it doesn't matter. He's making it clear, he has no interest in calming things down.

He does not feel like that's on his report card. I think he's playing to the Muslim audience more than any other audience. And I know he feels he's got three and a half more years before he has to play it somewhat down the middle. But I don't even think he's going to change. He's just so confident he's going to get four more years after this.

But what his agenda is, it's not built for a mayor. Mayors are really not very political, ideally. I have so much to implement. There's not really ideology there.

So that's why so many times they have trouble being national figures because they're used to dealing with so many Democrats and Republicans, regardless of going with the other side. Remember, even as governor, George W. Bush, when he was governor, said, I have a great reputation of working with Democrats. Conservatives didn't love that, but you have to as a governor. In New York City, you have to work with everybody.

But your radical views are accepted here. I think he's eyeing maybe the Senate seat that Chuck Schumer is going to be up for because he's primarily everybody else. He's so busy, he'll make your head spin. It's Brian Kilmead. All right, we're back.

And I was talking to Matt Cottony before about what he wanted. Holmes about in the Wall Street Journal. He's saying, look, we're in a pause right now, three days, and there's been no strikes in the Strait of Hermuz. I can't say the same thing on the Red Sea. Where there is some disruption.

So the market loves it up 500 points. But are we really solving anything by waiting? Key says you got to amp it up in order to eventually. Amp it down, even if means prices go up, and sadly casualties might happen. But we have to.

Pick up the intensity of this conflict. The low-intensity conflict is dragging it out. Admiral David Cardle joins us now, Chief of Naval Operations. Admiral Darrell Caudle, I should say. Admiral, welcome.

I appreciate you being with us. Where do you think we stand right now in Iran? Hey, uh good morning, Brian. I think from a Navy perspective, we're ready. We're ready to enforce the blockade.

We are ready to conduct our portion of major combat operations if ordered. And so the Navy just continues to stand watch and provide options to the President. The blockade is fully intact, sir. What can we do uh with our naval assets with the Red Sea? What are we positioned to do?

I know that was the big story during the Biden years.

Well, you know, the Red Sea, it depends on, you know, what the threat you're referring to. If it's passaging through the Babau Memdeb, you know, the way we would secure transits through that could come from the Red Sea or from the Gulf of Aden, either side of that, depending on, you know, what, you know, the threat is and the geometry of that.

So additional naval forces could flow into the Red Sea, but all of that is, you know, within our range of the assets we have in the Arabian Gulf.

So when you talk about missile defense and interceptors, we also have lasers, don't we? Yeah. We do. We've got our toe in the water in that space. I definitely want more resources, more energy, more academics, more engineering to be applied toward directed energy.

So what would you tell me about high energy weapons that we have right now?

Well, you know, we've kind of filled it on a few ships and in some prototypes that we're looking at. You know, these things are in the, you know, at a power that the dwell time on the actual target to me is not fully matured to where I can scale that. You know, we're talking about devices that are between 30 and 60 kilowatts. You know, what I'm looking for is, you know, to get that into the, you know, at least 300 to 500 to 1 megawatt kind of class. And so that's a different, fundamentally different engineering challenge.

And then once I get to that, though, what I get to do with that is I get to better match the use of that to the threat.

So I don't use my offensive weapons. My terminal and point defense is much enhanced for our surface Navy. I get to use electricity instead of magazine volume to actually generate those effects. And I just think it expands our offensive lethality.

So I know. they I think they had success with it in Israel. What kind of success have we had?

Well, I mean, you know, lasers have been around for a long time servicing targets at range, you know, really, you know, I'd say for forty years. You know, and some scale and use electricity to do that fully, like free electron lasers.

Some are based on chemical properties.

Some are based on different semiconductor properties. And so they've been around. We've just struggled, Brian, engineering it to a shipboard use, which is no question in a fairly challenging environment with sea state, so it's got to be stabilized with mist and sea spray can get on the optics, and that's a challenge. And then just having the courage to put the maturity level into that technology so that we can place it on the ship in lieu of other ways that we're servicing targets today. Yeah, and of course you could do that and maybe have a backup until you feel as though it's up to snuff.

I'm sure the Patriot missile, I remember in the first. Persian Gulf War, people were amazed that we actually had this rocket that shoot other rockets out of the sky. Think how much better it got, the Thad missile system, the Arrow, David Sling, what you're seeing with the Iron Dome. Do you think this is just the beginning when it comes to laders, even though they've been lasers, even though they've been out there? I do.

You know, you see the question you're asking me scale across almost every facet of what we do in the Navy and I think the joint force is our defense industrial base has to have a clear signal that we're going to invest in this technology for them to take the risk to actually start looking into the engineering challenges that they face to overcome to field it successfully.

So there's this kind of vicious circle kind of cart horse issue that goes on until we commit that this is the way we're moving so that they'll actually commit the dollars, the people and the research to actually solve some of these technical issues.

So right now, I mean, we're really, I guess, we're really being tested with our naval assets, right? We are and you know again we want to be lethal to the extent we can and payload volume is everything.

So when I load my ships and I have to make a decision to utilize that payload volume, you know today on a surface ship some of that will be land attack missiles, some of it will be missiles that are for point defense and for self-defense and some of that will be offensive weapons that you know can go against surface and air targets.

So wouldn't it be nice to have directed energy available for all that point defense? You can think of standard missile two and I'm not have to load any of those and I can you know load more standard missile six. It makes me more offensively lethal. Right. So Um in terms of saying policy now.

If we walk away at this moment, is Iran stronger or weaker? Um I mean, they're certainly weaker militarily. I mean, we've desecrated their Navy. We've, you know, hit countless targets that basically of how they project power. And certainly have done a a lot of damage to how they, you know, what they were on track to do to enrich uranium.

So I think overall they're much more militarily weaker and their ability to project power is weaker. You know, but as far as like their ability to assert their control over what is, I think, most would agree is the center of gravity for Iran, which is the Strait of Hormuz. You know, I don't think we're in a good place to claim victory there yet. And I think there's more work to do for the Strait of Hormuz for us to feel like that the flow through that can't be in any way, shape or form taxed by Iran, can't be impeded by Iran, and that that's fully open. And that's what Navies do, and I think that's a key piece we've got to get right before we stop.

So I want you to hear what the Secretary of War said about what Russia and China are doing, CUT 30. Are Russia and China? uh helping Iran. And if so, how?

Well, Senator, as the Chairman alluded to, there is definitely adversary alignment at attempts to do so, and there are many ways that we deter that. There are ways in which both of those countries are at different levels. uh enabling some of the things Iran is doing.

So, what are they doing in your mind? Because the President says both leaders told him they won't do anything. What do you think?

Well, I mean, this is a long alliance here. You know, there's a noted relationship, I'll call it. Maybe not alliance, it's probably too strong, transactional relationship between Russia and Iran, Iran and China, and Russia and China.

So those three countries definitely, you know, have similar interests, I think, in the region. It's complicated. You know, I don't think the straight home removes being impeded by Iran is in China's best interest, for sure. But I think, you know, these are opportunistic countries, Brian. And anytime they can do something, I think, to help that relationship and to further their transactional power between each other, they'll take advantage of it.

I mean, the targeting really only comes from sophisticated use of satellites. Am I correct? Yes, in general, targeting is a challenge for countries like Iran to have the type of targeting they need.

So Admiral Darrell Caudle, the Chief of Naval Operations.

So in terms of what you have in the region, I hear that you guys have muscled up just about across the board. And if there was going to be Epic Fury two, You're more ready than even you were then. In terms of when you look around and see what you have, or is there still more assets coming? No, I think we're in a fairly much a steady state on the what naval numbers look like in that region. We're in the Eastern Mediterranean.

We have some presence in the Red Sea. We have a lot of forces, two carrier strike groups and an amphibious readiness expeditionary strike group there. I don't think you're going to see much change in that in the near term. And we think that's sufficient for us to do the missions we're currently tasked with. Yeah, do you think right now if people were to ask you, what do you need with that $95 billion that they're asking for, is that a desperate need on the Navy side?

Yeah, I mean we're burning bright. I mean it's no question that the FY26 budget that was passed did not have Epic Fury factored into it. You know, I've testified on that. You know, our operational costs, you know, fuel costs, flight hour costs, you know, more sailors are retained in conflict. They re-enlist in combat zones.

That helps them from a tax perspective. We see record retention right now. People need the PCS, you know, do permanent change of station moves. And munitions that we've cut through to actually, you know, service the targets that we've done. All of that's baked into the Navy's ask as part of that bill, sir.

All right. That's great. Admiral, thanks so much. I appreciate you joining us. Best of luck.

Thank you, sir. Appreciate the time. All right, Admiral Darrell Caudle doing a great job, putting the blockade, answering the request. That the administration says be ready for whatever we decide. Over the last three days, it's been quiet.

When did it happen? Thursday night to Friday morning. The president decided from Epic Fury 2, massive hit with the IDF. He seems to have decided to dial it back. I am not privy to everything he does.

Nobody's privy to everything the president knows, but I am surprised that we're talking about this on Monday from when I left off on Friday. That's just me. Just real quick, I want you to hear Brett Sadler weigh in. I know. What he thinks the reason is for the pause got 37.

Two reasons come to mind. First is the potential to resupply, rearm, and reposition for exactly that major strike. And the advice that was just commented on earlier that the commander CINCOM, Admiral Brad Cooper, that the current attacks against the coastal areas reached the end of its effectiveness, it could be that being the reason. They want to reposition for a new type of focus of a more large-scale attack. The other, of course, is the one that seemingly on the surface is to allow negotiations between Iran and Oman to play out, but there's very little hope that's going to have any meaningful change.

I agree. Uh they're both going to say, Well, listen, let's both charge for this trade.

So That'll never fly. They're not going to give up their nuclear weapons. And I fear in three more days we'll be talking about this, and they're going to shoot at our ships next week. And that's the worst scenario. Got 100 days to the election.

Then it'll be 10 more days, 90 days to the election, they start shooting at ships again. What are we going to do?

Well, that's my interpretation. We'd run the straight. I told you we'd run the straight, and we'll come back and say, no, you don't. And by not escalating to de-escalate, we get ourselves in this cycle. Unless they've made all types of Concessions, and they're going to announce it this week.

I'll be waiting. We know the President of the United States has got a big week. He's going to be speaking. I said at Lindsey Graham's funeral. He was in the Brain Kill Meet show.

Where big stories meet bigger conversations. Stay informed and energized with the Brian Kilmeat Show. Yeah. Information you want, truth you demand. This is the Brian Kill Me Show.

Looking at all the news coverage, you'd be looking at all the polling of President Trump, and you would think that Democrats would be able to take advantage and be dominating Republicans when it comes to who is trusted to handle the Iran war. That, simply put, is not the case at all. I mean, these numbers are quite surprising. Trust Demonstrate Republicans on Iran. According to CNBC earlier this month, you'd think, okay, that's one poll, the Republicans trusted by two points.

But then CBS News comes out yesterday, and what do you see? You see the exact same thing. Trump and the Republicans take the cake. They are trusted by two points on Iran.

Now, one poll is one thing, but you put the two of them together and you can see that the American people, simply put, are not buying what Democrats are selling on Iran. They still trust Republicans more, even if you look at President Trump's approval ratings on the subject, and they're negative too. But yet, Republicans and Trump are still more trusted than Democrats are in Iran. Yeah, so that is Harry Inton. Of CNN.

So everybody knows you look at the polls. Donald Trump's got 41% approval. At this point, going into the midterms, Joe Biden was 39, 44 for Barack Obama. And they say, well, Barack Obama lost 63 seats, and Joe Biden barely lost below Trump. Add to that, the redistricting.

Add to that, the money problems the DNC had. Add to that, the rise of socialism and common sense versus crazy. That is going to be the scene, common sense against crazy. What the president would love to do at the end of this, it's not going to work for this election, is get some version of the Save America Act passed. And that could be national voter ID.

New Jersey has voter ID. Virginia has voter ID. I think the whole country has to have voter ID. And you heard James Carville come out and say, why don't we just give it to him? Fight another battle.

80% of the country wants it. Why keep it out?

So what's going to happen this week? Senate's got to get stuff done. They want to get the $95 billion supplemental. They want to find a way to fund the government past the election to December.

So, Democrats don't bring the government to a halt for political reasons, of course, in September.

So, they're looking to push that. But Senator Kennedy believes there's also a way to put elements of the Save America Act in the supplemental. And he did something he doesn't really do. He's a little bit. Critical of John Thune, Cut 25.

Maybe take a few extra days. Look, I mean no disrespect, I love John Thun. Uh he's my leader. He's got a big brain. He's uh uh he's better looking than me.

But I think he's just being too cautious. He wants to spend the rest of our time talking with Senator Schumer. about shutting down government. And the Graham Platinum wing of the party is his party, is not going to let Schumer. Agree with us.

They already want to give Schumer a bathrobe, a popsicle, and an early bedtime and have him retire. I don't think Chuck can agree with us. He's not.

So if you have the financial, if it's budget-oriented, you can get 51 votes. And the question is: Murkowski, Collins. Tillis I'm not sure Corn is a a maybe. I think he's basically affirmed yes. Maybe it's Ram Paul.

There's another one.

So what the President could do is talk to Jonathan and say, maybe he could help me out. Collins and Murkowski. Maybe Murkowski is threatening to leave the party. But and him and Trump have a horrible relationship, Trump and Murkowski. But maybe Collins and Tillis, there could be some calls made, not by the President himself, but by other staffers.

What is it going to take to get you to a yes here? And what they could do is say, on the way out, I could just be a no, or I could try to get more things that I want in there. They also want to get Todd Blanche among many people confirmed and out and up and running.

So right now, Tillis and Cornyn have some questions. And Collins and Murkowski have some questions. And I'm sure Cassidy's got some questions. President really killed off three of those senators, so they're dead senators walking, going in. They think they're going to be able to save the seat.

So Senator Kennedy says you could do the Save America Act. He went on Cut 24. In my opinion, for both sides to have credibility in the elections, in our elections, we need to do two things and only two things. Number one, you have to prove you are who you say you were in order to register to vote and to vote. And number two, however, you decide to vote, that's up to the states.

We need to go back to having an election day. not an election month. We've got to know the results of the election that night or shortly thereafter if it's close. That to me is what the SAVE Act is all about. And I think we can pass it.

Yeah, I think it's a passion. I think you can. Maybe not all of it. I mean, the transgender and sports, a parliamentarian will look at that and say, what does it do with the budget?

So maybe there's certain things with a voting act, for example. They say the way you get around the fact that that's policy, not money, is the policy is going to need money to be implemented to get voter ID and set up a system.

Now, getting rid of mail and ID at this point might be too big of a bridge to cross. But voter ID, two forms of ID. I think it would be great. And it'll show progress and go back and finish it off. Maybe there's some horse trading to be done in the second term.

They just imagine they could get a lot done if they hold both chambers. Don't move. From the Fox News Radio Studios in Midtown Manhattan, it's the fastest-growing radio talk show. Brian Kilmead.

Hi, everyone.

So glad you're there. It's the Brian Kilming Show. We have a lot going on today, and I'm so glad you had a, I imagine, had a fantastic weekend, a productive weekend. I've been watching everything that's going on right now in politics. I watch every single one of the Sunday shows.

And man, I got caught up and I cannot believe some of the things that are happening. Sean, Carl Robis, the perfect guy to talk to about this. Then we'll close the hour with Sean Davis, CEO of the Federalist. And Carl, I'm used to liberals against Democrats, moderates against conservatives. I'm used to Tea Party against conservatives, traditional Democrats.

I'm used to MAGA people against conservatives, MAGA against Democrats. I never thought. I will be seeing extreme socialists. They're in between communists and socialists. And they're gaining steam in this primary season.

Can you put this in perspective?

Well, yeah, look, the um The Democrats are unhappy.

Some part of the Democratic basis wants more to be done to deal with Donald Trump, attack him, stop him, keep him from doing what he's doing. And when the Democrats are unable to do that or unwilling to do that or can't do it simply because they're in the minority in both the House and Senate, then you have people like Platiner, Graham Plattner in Maine, who seize on that angst. and bend it their way. Yeah, I understand it. I mean, and and then we have the DSA, the Democratic Socialist of America, in a very organized fashion going after congressional nominations in deep, deep, deep, deep blue districts Like New York 13, where they knocked off the leader of the Democratic Hispanic caucus.

But these are not America. You know, that they're not representative of the country writ large. I mean, Donald Trump got 11.1% of the vote in New York 13. He got 49, nearly 50%, in the nation as a whole.

So one of the real big tests is going to come, ironically enough, in Wisconsin here in two weeks, where the Democrat front runners are both. Very far left and associated with DSA, if not in specific, at least in principle. And This is going to be set up an open race for the governorship in the fall. Tony Evers, the Democrat, is not running again. He's backing the county executive from Milwaukee who got in the race and then got out of the race and is back in the race when the normal Democrat frontrunner bailed out because she turned out her campaign manager is lying about how much money they had in the bank account.

You know, but this is going to be one of the more interesting races because you talk about tight as a tick state. It's Wisconsin, which has barely been for Trump and barely been for Biden and barely been for Trump again.

So it's going to be interesting to see how a DSA acolyte, probably Representative Hong, fares against Congressman. Tom Tiffany in the general election.

So I want you to hear this for everybody else to hear it. Shannon Bream just said, I'd just like to know where you stand on some issues. Cut to.

Okay, so we're going to put up on the screen a few of the things that are part of your platform. And I want to ask you, just give me sort of a true or false on these. Abolish the Senate. True.

Okay, replace the Presidency and Supreme Court as we now know them. Yep. Abolish ice. Absolutely. Abolish borders and give amnesty to anyone currently in the U.S.

illegally. As a long-term plan, yep. Defund the Pentagon. Absolutely. Abolish prisons, at least in large part.

Yeah, again, as part of a long-term program, yeah.

Okay, so no prisons. Government or public ownership of most large corporations? Yeah, absolutely. So that's a dream opponent to run against in America, I think. What about you, Carl?

Well, I'm disappointed you didn't read my column last Thursday in which I spelled out exactly those points as being part of the DSA and their weakness. I thought Shannon did a terrific There was no calling her names. There was no hyperbole. She just simply said, Are these where you're coming from? And there's a lesson in there, which is conservatives ought to say, This is what the Democratic Socialists of America are in favor of.

And my opponent, it'd be interesting to know if my opponent is in favor of these many things and put them on the record. And if they oppose them, so much the better. If they're for them, so much the better. But let's treat this effort by the Democratic Socialists of America to come into dominance of the Democratic Party as a real threat and ask them: do you really believe? I mean, their platform document says.

You're not going to have any bills. You won't have a mortgage. Because you won't have a landlord. Why? Because the government is going to give you the apartment or condo in which you live.

Really? I mean, one of the great ways to build wealth in this country is for people to save. For a down payment and to buy a house and get a mortgage, and it's like a savings account. They're building wealth. And what the Democratic Socialists want to do is take it away.

Well, ask them to account for that. Really? Do the American people want to have a government bureaucrat assign them an apartment someplace in a city and that's where you live? No, I don't think so. I don't even know where you get the money.

Who's going to pay for anything? No one's working. And when they were.

Well, it's all magic. It's all magic. It's all magic. It's all magic. I mean, by the way, the Soviet Union had prisons and they had borders, right?

They had a president, you know, they and then they had a Politburo.

So, okay, the power of that is up for grabs. But since when do you defend when does a socialist? get rid of defense and a border and think that's going to be okay. I mean, it's the craziest thing ever. If I handed this paper in with my theory in ninth grade, I'd give it back and go put some thought into this.

Yeah, well, they have put a lot of thought into it, and their thought is utopian and socialist in nature.

Now, it's really important we not just sort of dismiss them by calling them names. We've got to treat this as serious and say these people advocate taking over not only all major corporations, but what they call essential sectors of the society, which include food, energy, housing, transportation, and communications.

So, they're not only just talking about we want to have government take over Apple Computer, they want to be in charge of all of those sectors of the economy as well. And really, do we want to surrender that power as consumers? One of the greatest powers we have in a free society is to say, if I don't like you, your store, what kind of service you're giving me, or you're good, I can go find something better somewhere else. And they basically want to take that away by saying, We're in charge of making those decisions for you.

So, Carl, it was so interesting to see how people respond to it. We watched Jared Polis over the weekend, measured, said, I'm a capitalist. You know, it's Tom Suazi and some others. I'm a capitalist. But then we watch other people not push back at all.

I wish Senator Kelly doesn't say anything. You know, he's up in the air in Arizona, doesn't really want to comment, hasn't been following it much. Senator Tim Kaine, been around forever. Didn't think he was a socialist. Listen to this.

When confronted with all those beliefs that you wrote about and that Shannon Bream interviewed the socialist director about, Cut 12. I do think the Democratic Party has always been known, and mostly this is good.

Sometimes it's not, as a Big Tent. And so I don't think that somebody says, I'm a DSA candidate. I don't think you should use that to throw them out. Why would you do that? Candidates have to rise and fall on their own merits.

And so, you know, whether you're a DSA member or a third-way Democrat or, you know, I just call myself a small D Democrat. People have to put their platform before voters and try to be responsive to voters, and voters get to judge them. But to have a litmus test, that if somebody says, hey, I'm a DSA member, you know, they can't be part of the party, I strongly disagree with that. think about his position on this. He's forgetting the fact that when a DSA member challenges a traditional liberal Democrat, that's knocking off somebody who's actually took the time to be a member of your party as opposed to DSA who seem to be the barbarians at the gate.

So Bill Clinton faced this dilemma in 1991. A prominent black uh you know figure came out, Sister Solchia came out and said some bigoted things about white people. And Bill Clinton had a choice. He could take the Tim Kaine approach. We're a big party.

People are entitled to their opinion. Instead, he stood up and said, this is not what the Democratic Party stands for. And it catapulted him from the back of the line to the front of the field and became the Democratic nominee and won for president, in my opinion, in large measure, because he showed that kind of courage. Think about this. It's the late 1940s and early 50s.

The so-called progressives of the era, led by the former vice president of the United States, are attempting to modify the views of the Democratic Party with regard to the Soviet Union. And a progressive mayor of Minneapolis, Hubert Humphrey, stood up and said, we cannot allow the communists and we cannot annihilate these allies of Moscow to lead our party and change our policy. And it made him a national figure. I mean, think about what, put that, put the hat on the other head. What if the Republicans said when David Duke, a bigot, a racist, was running, trying to run for the Republican Party?

Nomination. What if we'd all said, Well, you know, we got to be a big party. We got to let all these people in. I call myself a Republican with a small R. No, we did the right thing by saying we will not stand as a party for that kind of bigotry.

So, yeah, Tim Kaine is welcome to his opinions, milquetoast as they are, but he is doing no favor for his party, and he is showing a lack of courage by saying we're willing to accept people in our ranks who say defund the police, get rid of borders, give up the world to the communists, and the Russians, and the Iranians, and the South Koreans, and the Chinese by dismolishing our military. Who is he? Think he is? He was the vice presidential nominee of the Democratic Party not too long ago, and this is where he is-gutless, frankly. You know what you gutless.

I'll give you a great sports analogy. You can use it in your column and say it's your own. You ready? It's like as if you opened up the locker room for some people on the other team that don't even get your philosophy in promise of helping filling up the stands. You'll be able to sell out that crowd if you let these people in your locker room.

But by the way, they have no interest in learning the plays, and they have no interest in you being successful. They just want to blow things up. And they just opened up the locker room and turned for maybe possibly getting more votes. But in the end, they wouldn't be able to govern.

So Rahm Emmanuel writes a column in the Wall Street Journal. He says, it's important to understand how radical this socialism is. Essentially, blowing up the constitutional separation of powers, letting Congress choose the president means adopting the parliamentary system that prevails in Britain. It would essentially remove your president, your veto power, your founders, and design everything about the founders. He went on to say that this group is the one who said to fund the police and everything else.

So here is Bernie Sanders. Answering uh answering Hakeem Bernie Sanders answering Rahm Emmanuel. Cut a That is what Rahm Emanuel is saying, who no doubt has the support of millions of working-class people. Look. Uh this is an argument.

There's no no Debate, there is a strong division within the Democratic Party. You have an establishment like Rahm Emanuel. uh who are dependent on billionaire campaign are contributors that want to maintain the status quo. Then you have a progressive movement, which, by the way, what is getting these guys nervous is we are winning all over this country. The American people are tired of a rigged economy, a corrupt campaign, finance system.

They want real change. They don't want Rob Emanuel and the establishment maintaining the status quo. Fighting words. Yeah, they are fighting words. And it came from a guy who ran for every office except the president of the United States as not a Democrat.

He ran as an independent candidate. He didn't have the guts to get in until finally he got entrenched with the idea that he was going to be president of the United States. And then he finally said, well, no, I've been elected to Congress. I've been elected to the Senate as an independent. And I've caucused with the Democrats reluctantly because they were the most left-wing element of the political agreement.

But now that I have a chance to be president, I want to be a Democrat. And now that I've twice run for the presidential nomination of my party and lost, I'm going to declare myself the leader of a movement to take over the Democratic Party on behalf of the socialist movement.

Well, Democrats better wake up and realize their party and their future as a political entity is at stake. If they are taken over by the Democratic Socialists, yes, they will win in New York 13, but they ain't going to win in a lot of other places in the country because the country is particularly Hispanics and blacks believe that. They have an opportunity to move up in our society by hard work and dreaming big and rising. And the Democratic Socialists are not people who believe in that kind of an opportunity. They believe the government ought to be in charge.

And that ain't a winning formula.

So the DNC adds a staggering story out. Their chairman, Ken Martin, has come out with some numbers. They went out to vendors and say, please don't bill us until November. Why? They can't bill.

That's illegal. It's illegal. It is? It's illegal. Under federal election law, you have to bill at the time of the service, and you cannot give them credit, which is what a six-month, or four-month, or five-month delay in sending them a bill would be.

That's illegal. So the FEC, they file with the FCC. Cash on hand, $16 million. Debt and loans, $18.5 million. That leaves the DNC $2.2 million in debt, basically from the 2024 campaign.

The comparison is the RNC has $128.5 million with zero debt. They took out an equity loan on their building in order to fund some of these special elections, and now that payment is due. I mean, this is some terrible decisions.

Well, it's not due until next year. And look, parties occasionally do that. I think this is like the fourth time that the DNC has done it. The Republicans in the 70s and the aftermath of Watergate were similarly pressed. But look, this guy is incompetent.

He was put in there as the most left-wing of the available candidates. Isn't David Hogg more left-wing than him?

Well, but that's it. I mean, you're not going to put a 24-year-old in charge of the Democratic. Wasn't he deputy DNC? Oh, yeah, but that, you know, he wasn't the chairman. He was, of course, you know, they're trying to placate the elements inside the Democratic Party.

And so they put David Hogg in there, who, of course, lives off of a political action committee. I read their report, their finance report. I've read it. It's amazing that I will say the guy is not staying in fancy hotels, but he's constantly on the road and staying in hotels and billing his political action committee for his meals and his lodging and his expenses and his salary. But, you know, no, this guy, Kemp Martin, is a disaster for the Democrats.

They made a mistake when they made him chairman. They're stuck with him through this election. I can just imagine that Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer are sitting there pulling their hair saying, you know, we have a DNC that is not only not helping us big time, it's not helping us at all. Carl Rove, you're fired up today. Man, for I mean, you're always fired up, but I think I get credit for getting you going.

Well, no, Shannon Bream got me going. I thought it was a superb interview, and she hit the exactly right tone. It was very factual, no name-calling. Is this yes or no? And of course, give credit to the Democratic Socialist, I think she's vice chair, who's, yeah, this is exactly where we are.

We're proud of it. Absolutely. Okay, Carl Rope, thank you. Thank you. All the best.

All right. When we come back, I'm going to try to give myself some credit in the break and then come back and start fresh. Real talk, real guests, real insight, where curiosity meets conversation. It's the Brian Kilmeat Show. Uh From his mouth to your ears, it's Brian Kilmead.

I think one of the bedrocks of our city is protest. It is something that has been a part of what makes our city so special: that New Yorkers can express themselves, whether they are in support or in opposition, no matter on whatever topic. We are talking about someone who has been charged with crimes against humanity, someone who Has visited the city on many an occasion and who has been welcomed by previous mayors. And I want to make it very clear that that welcome ends with me. Yeah, good.

Nobody wants, he doesn't want to see you anyway. Number one. Number two is it was the ICC who we don't subscribe to, you idiot. Stop saying that over and over again. And it wasn't genocide.

Spend a minute over there and understand. October 7th happened. The response was the most. Targeted? The most targeted, the most well-executed battle plan, and one of the densest populations in the world, and they still did it, reluctant to go in until they were attacked and were given no choice.

John Spencer from the War College, a college he would never be accepted or applied to, went ahead and looked at it. And if you are doing genocide, do you drop flyers on buildings saying we're going to hit? We're going to hit here in one hour or one day. Make sure to get out. And if anyone died as a civilian, it's not by a mistake, not by targeted.

Because they set up the Hamas and do set up in schools Daycares and in hospitals. You clown. He thinks we're all idiots. We come back, an update on the war in Iran. A talk show that's real.

This is the Brian Kill Me Show. I think that I continue to have confidence in state and local authorities in making sure that there's going to be a free and fair election in November. And if modest or minor challenges emerge, such as the one that was disclosed voluntarily, By the authorities in New Jersey, that it is immediately corrected. And that's what I expect will continue to happen. Unfortunately, what we've seen from Donald Trump is that.

In this particular case, Republicans have adopted voter suppression as an electoral strategy because they have failed. To actually deliver on making life more affordable for the American people. Yeah, that last sentence is a total fallacy. What I have never heard it in behind closed doors or anything else where people say, I want less people, I want less minorities to vote. I want to make sure this group does, and nobody says that.

And it's an insult to minorities to say that they can't get voter ID. I would not have put anything else into the Save America Act, except for things that had to do with voting. They have some things about trans men and women's sports. I would not have put that in there. But having said that, maybe it's a bridge too far to say get rid of all male and voting, because in some Republican states they really like it.

But I do think putting a limit where it's got to land by election day. I think that works. Joining us now is Sean Davis, CEO of the Federalist, Sean. I expect Keem Jeffrey is a politician that's playing politics, right?

So. But how significant is the discovery that Governor Mikey Sherrow brought up last week of over 4 million people getting registered and even though they were illegal aliens. I think it was a pretty big development because we've heard for years, if not decades, that that never happens. There's never illegals who vote. There's never anyone who's getting fraudulently registered.

And yet what we find time after time is that that thing that never happens keeps happening all the time. And for it to have happened in the numbers and at the scale it did in New Jersey suggests that it's probably not just limited to one state. I suspect that every state that is relying heavily on motor voter is doing the same thing. And by the way, that's why Democrats wanted it initially under Clinton. They knew what would happen.

They wanted to get as many voters registered as possible so that they could then go out and chase ballots.

So for Democrats to pretend otherwise, I just find kind of like cloying and tiresome. I wish everyone would just be honest. It's key to their franchise. It's key to their electoral hopes. And so they're for it.

And it's really that simple. You realize the data company pushed back and said, do not blame us on this. They did not accept the blame. Yeah, I don't blame them for not wanting to accept the blame. Regardless of whether it was a data issue or a deliberately designed program to do this, I think everyone with a brain and common sense knows what's going on.

They want to get everyone with the polls registered, and then they want to send a mail-in ballot to every address on earth, and then they can just send out the minions to go collect the ballots. Doesn't really matter if they're real voters or not, as long as they get the ink on them. We've known this for years. And again, I wish they would just be honest about it. We could be adults.

We're all adults. We can talk about things like adults and just talk about the ramifications of this instead of playing this dumb game that if you want people to have to prove they're who they say they are, that somehow you're a racist who doesn't want anyone to vote. It's absurd and insulting. And if I'm a Republican. I would make it clear if we lose.

I'm okay with it. I just want the right person to win. And I'm concerned about the outcome in these voters. I mean, the ballot harvesting is farcical. Why would anyone allow people to pick up your ballots, round them up, hold them to Election Day?

And what we just saw, Los Angeles was the laughing stock of the country. With what happened with Spencer Pratt losing when he was almost winning. He ends up dropping to a distant third where all the late ballots come in for the second place finisher, allowing a runoff between two Democrats. And the fact is, they took over a month to collect the ballots. Does anyone comfortable with that system?

The polls say no. No, it's absurd. And normally what you see in these things is even distributions throughout. If you were winning before all the late ballots came in, you're probably still winning after. But to have the third place person magically get significantly more than the person who'd been in first place the whole time, it begs belief.

It's ridiculous. And the thing about elections is they're kind of like currency. Fiat currency has value as long as people believe it has value. Our elections are assumed to be honest as long as people assume they're honest. But once you start getting into this business where you really have no idea.

If each vote is legal, if people actually cast ballots, that's when you start ending up in Banana Republic territory. And it's a really, really bad place to be in as a country. And so I would think, not even for partisan reasons, but for existential reasons, we need to clean up our elections so people can have faith in them regardless of the result. When people say cleanup roles, it's just to get rid of dead people and people that moved. That's it.

So, why is that not controversial? Yeah, but they go, well, you just want to get rid of minority. I mean, that's not true. Have an independent. Have an independent board do it.

Just clean them up.

So I want you to hear just a little bit more before I move on from this New Jersey Assemblyman, Brian Bergen, CUC 23. And I got to tell you one other thing about this whole blame game that's going on. Mikey Sherrill blaming the former governor, blaming the software company. The reality is the real people who screwed this up are members of the state legislature. But Mikey Sherrill has been led around by the throat from them ever since she got elected.

She is not in control. It's Senate President Scatari and Assembly Speaker Coughlin, both who screwed this state up to begin with and put these processes in place. They're the real people to blame. She just can't say it because they're her bosses. Yeah.

Do you think so do you think that's the dynamic there? I wouldn't know. I mean, that seems pretty convenient to blame it on these kind of unnamed legislatures. No one knows who their state legislator is in order to let off the hook the person who's at the actual top of the government. Seems a little convenient to me.

What I'm going to do, I'm going to blame everyone involved in it. I think everyone who had any sort of involvement in this deserves some of the blame. I don't care if it all goes to Mikey Sherrow or all goes to the legislature. They're all culpable because we all know what they're doing.

So I like to know what's, by the way, they have voter ID in New Jersey. already. But now they say Chris Christie says the person in charge doing an independent investigation is somebody that he trusts. He says this guy will do an honest job.

So I'm curious if this ends at four point four million. Or or not, if this gets bigger, because We know in that governor election, I never expected The Republican candidate to get trounced like that. That was a huge surprise for me because he barely lost the last time, and nobody even knew him. Yeah, and it's the thing. It's not the result.

Sit around. It's not who wins exactly that matters. It's that you wanna know: hey, they were only counting legal votes. If that mail-in ballot got sent in and 100% came from that person and that person intended to do it the way they wanted, I don't care if it's a red state, a blue state, or a purple state. First off, we should be able to have all these votes in in one night.

Florida can do it. It's one of the biggest states in the country. This business of taking months is absurd and it's insulting to the intelligence of everyone in the country. And the only reason you do that, the only reason you allow a process to do that, is if you want to take advantage of the process to rig it. And I'll tell you, think about this, California is the worst.

And people think, what's the big deal? It's a big deal. You know why? And you know this, Sean. It's because the House could be make or break for either party by how California goes with those different district races.

So if we wait to the last minute, the House is going to be decided. I think we all agree this 16 by 16 seats, and it's most likely going to be five or six either way. A lot of that could be in California, especially with the drama of the redistricting. You have no precedent in a lot of these areas. And now we're going to wait two or three weeks to find out who's in control of the house?

This could be a really big deal. You're more optimistic than I am. I don't think it'll be two, three weeks. It might be one or two months. We might not know until the end of December or early January.

And then, if you think that's bad, imagine if the left is able to get away with this national popular vote compact. Can you imagine us having to wait into January for California to count when we know it's all shenanigans? Can you tell me what that means? I actually don't know what that is. What did you just say?

So there's a group of people who are trying to get states to go along and end the Electoral College without amending the Constitution by changing state laws to basically force half the states to allocate their electoral votes to the popular vote winner nationwide.

So if you were to have a national popular vote, you kind of nullify the states. It's just whoever gets the most votes. Every single election will come down to how Karen Bass counts votes in Los Angeles County two months after the election. That is a recipe for America being a laughing stock and not being a serious country anymore. Right.

I don't think really people care that much. Lastly, about the vote of the American American. Save America Act, Senator Kennedy on what it would do, cut twenty-four. In my opinion, for both sides to have credibility in the elections, in our elections, we need to do two things and only two things. Number one, you have to prove you are who you say you are in order to register to vote and to vote.

And number two, however you decide to vote, that's up to the states. We need to go back to having an election day. not an election month. We've got to know the results of the election that night or shortly thereafter if it's close. That to me is what the SAVE Act is all about, and I think we can pass it.

And I think we can craft it in a way to survive a bird bath. Do you think so, Sean Davis? Personally, when it comes to procedure in the Senate, when he's talking about a birdbath, he's talking about statutory rules in the Senate about what's allowed and not allowed in a reconciliation bill. I don't think the Save America Act is going to get through that process. I just don't.

It's too policy-focused and not budget-focused enough. It's why they need to pass it in a regular order. I think a lot of the talk about getting it through reconciliation is a fantasy, personally.

So I'm going to give you a little bit more candidate to give his opinion because it's rarely he goes against Jon Thune a little bit here, cut 25. Maybe take a few extra days. Look, I mean no disrespect. I love John Thun. Uh he's my leader.

He's got a big brain. He's uh uh he's better looking than me. But I think he's just being too cautious. He wants to spend the rest of our time talking with Senator Schumer about shutting down government. And the Graham Plattner wing of the party, his party, is not going to let Schumer.

Agree with us. They already want to give Schumer a bathrobe, a popsicle, and an early bedtime and have him retire. I don't think Chuck can agree with us. So he says it's up to Thune to try to get those Republicans in line. And if they put the vote, and Sean, you tell me if I'm wrong here.

Put elements of the Save America Act in the supplemental defense bill, which is ninety five billion, but sixty seven billion of which goes to defense. And if you put that in, the Voting Act in, there are elements of it in, and they say, well, what's the money?

Well, the money is you're going to need some money in order to implement These voter ID laws that are got involved in the Save America Act, and maybe forget about the mail-in ballots, or you just do the ID part of it. a portion of it. Could you see the parliamentarian let that go pa go by? Yeah, so the supplemental is a little different. It's separate from the reconciliation process.

So that just becomes kind of like a political power game, force one side to vote against it because they don't like the voter ID elements. I think that's probably a fine strategy. I agree with Senator. You need simple majority, right? Yes.

Potentially. Yes, if you're doing a supplemental bill. I personally agree with Senator Kennedy that they need that Thune actually needs to start doing his job. Too often, he acts like a scheduler and not a leader, where he just kind of looks around, throws up his hands, and says, Oh, well, we don't have what we need. Let's just move on and schedule something different.

That is not what a leader does. I worry that the job may be too big for him. That either he doesn't understand the procedure or he just doesn't have the willingness to do the hard work to get hard things passed in the Senate. But we need voter ID. We need it.

It is essential to faith in our elections. And whether they put that on a standalone bill or they tag it on to a supplemental appropriations bill, it needs to get done. And I, frankly, am tired of the excuses from Thune.

So I think it is a matter of calling up Mitch McConnell if he's taking phone calls. Say, Mitch, I need you on this. You know we need this. And going up to Murkowski and go, look, I know you got a problem with Trump. I understand that.

But on this Your country, the country, 80% of the country want this.

Now on voter ID, I get it.

Some people live a thousand miles in Alaska, they say, from a voting booth. Maybe you need some mail-in balloting there.

Okay, maybe, but go with me here. And then on Collins too, Collins usually has to pick her spots when to go with Trump. But you just got to get to the 50. Right now, we don't have the 50. And Tillis, I know you're angry, but what do you need?

I'll put something in here you need so you can sleep better at night. Cassidy, I know you hate him. But uh and I know you bitter. But We should really play ball here. Don't be mad at me.

Don't hurt the country. I mean, that's what you want to see happen. Exactly. And if there's anything we know about politicians in the United States Senate, they are largely, almost entirely transactional. Find out what they want.

They all want something. And by the way, that goes both ways. Murkowski, you want to keep your leadership. You want to keep a committee chairmanship.

Well, you can kiss that bye-bye forever if you don't do what needs to get done.

So there's all things they want that are things we can give them or things that can be taken away from them. Boone has tried nothing and is all out of ideas, which I just think is unacceptable from a party leader in his position. Yeah, I look forward to him doing something because if it is a simple majority, get some of the Save America Act, it really should be done. I just want the right person to win. I don't care who it is.

Just make sure the right person. I like to know the referee doing my game has not been paid off by the other team. That's it.

Right? As long as you can guarantee me that, I'll be okay with the outcome. Sean Davis, thanks so much. The CEO of the Federalists, appreciate it. Thank you, sir.

All right, 1-866-408-7669. I'll be back to wrap things up, and we've got much more to talk about, including some revelations on the Red Sea and Saudi Arabia. Strong opinions backed by hard facts. Get the truth behind the spin with Brian Kilmead. A radio show like no other.

It's Brian Killmeade. Sponsored by Previgen. Previgen made for your brain. It is a massive change, but it's actually, when you boil it down, it's pretty simple. We have two core principles.

They're the pillars of what we do: it's free markets and personal liberties. We think these are core American values, and that's what we're advocating every day. We're not aligned with a party or any movement. We just have our principles, and we interpret the news through that and try to give our readers and our viewers, wherever they're finding us, a balanced interpretation of the news through what we think is important and how it affects them. And with that is Adam O'Neill.

You probably don't know him, but he's the editorial director of the Washington Post. And he's an opinion editor. And if you notice, Washington Post, once in a while, now it's almost every week. You see an opinion, you go, what? It can't be this.

It's the Washington Post. It came out against peanut allergies. How it started, how to handle it, how we stopped this whole craziness. When you talk about the Mahab movement, they came out in support of it, a lot of elements of it, too. And you see Adam O'Neill and others just balancing out the page, not making it more conservative, just allowing conservatives to speak outside Mark Deeson.

Got 54. I'd say overwhelmingly, just when I hear from people privately, they're pleasantly surprised and they didn't know what we were up to at first. And now we've got a body of work and we can really stand by it and we're proud of it. And I'd say internally and externally, it's an opinion section. It's always going to be controversial.

We want to be provocative. We want to start conversations.

So I won't pretend that everybody's always thrilled about with us every time, but we wouldn't be an interesting opinion section if that were the case. And one of the last things that did really caught my attention and made me want to book Adam was the last one. Washington Post did a breakdown of any time these candidates say Medicare for all. I'm thinking, okay, this is what they would do. Instead, he goes, it's impossible.

You can't pull it off. The people with Medicare don't want it. And if you do the math and give Medicare for every American and you say we're going to come and get the money from the billionaires by taxing them and paying their fair share, if you wiped out their fortunes, you still would not be able to pay $8.2 trillion annually. With a price, it's only going to go up. And plus, you're going to lose every doctor because it's not enough to pay for the doctor's overhead.

So, all these people, Medicare for all. Just push back and say, what are you talking about? And know what you could say? I read in the Washington Post. And you do the math, you'll find out the same thing.

By the way, the big news: Saudi Arabia got hit by Houthis again.