Don't Worry, Manchin SWEARS His Deal Won't Raise Your Taxes or Inflation

Live from the Fox News Radio Studios in New York City, fresh off the set of Fox and Friends, it's America's Receptive Voice. Brian Killmead. Thanks so much for being there, everybody. It's the Brian Kilmeat show. I appreciate you coming back to us after a busy weekend, I am sure, as we say goodbye to July and hello to August.

A lot of Division I athletes. are heading to camp, whether it's uh football, soccer. Whether it's Uh field hockey. Trying to think what other false sports we have on the women's side, of course, about women's soccer. But Division II, Division III, a little bit later.

So a lot of the summer is coming to an end, and some we just about the halfway point. Will Hurd's going to be with us at the bottom of the hour, former Texas congressman, former CIA guy, who's got a great perspective on the party problems, and that's what he wrote a book about.

So he's going to be with us, too. And we know there's a lot of tension in the air as we try to find out what Speaker Belosi is going to do and where the president is going to get over COVID. He got it again. Or did he ever lose it? Let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. It's a close election almost everywhere, and it's a 50-50 country.

So I think it's way too early for either side to be assuming they're going to have a great election or a disaster, for that matter, this fall. Inside 100 Days to the Midterms, where do we stand as a party, race to race? We will take a glance and check the backstretch goals and polls. Number two. This is all about fighting inflation.

That's what it's about. Inflation is just absolutely destroying families across West Virginia and across America. Yep, that is Joe Manchin. Did every single Sunday show. Mislabeled.

Disappointed, and deceived. That's how I assessed the Inflation Reduction Act. Co-authored by Joe Manchin. Any examination of the contents of this 700-plus page bill shows it will not lower inflation. Dems vote on this at your own peril.

Number Wong. Good luck telling Nancy Pelosi where she can and cannot go. She's been protesting on the issue of Chinese record on human rights since she arrived in Congress decades ago, and I do not think she'll be swayed even by another Democratic president. That is Susan Page. Let her land.

That's what is in the best interest of America. When it comes to the Speaker's visit to Taiwan, China's threats need not to, China threatens us, and we need to confront them. All right. In case you do not know, just give you some backstory. In April, Nancy Plusi put out the rough format of her trip.

And we'd have a southeastern tour. Go to Singapore, go to Japan, go to South Korea, and go to Taiwan. Not much of a reaction. And then things changed. And a lot of people think it has to do with President Xi coming up and trying to get another ten years as a leader of China, which will put him in basically Mao territory.

And ever since he took over, they've been belligerent economically and militarily. And they've been doing some terrible things in terms of the pandemic, not only inflicting this poison on the world, but never owning up to it. But we don't confront them. And then when they challenge us, we haven't been confronting them like we should. And then the speaker goes out and makes that statement, and they come out and make some strong statements, basically warning the speaker not to go.

And to me, you have to for sure go. Here is the fly in the ointment. The President doesn't want it to go. The Pentagon doesn't want it to go because they're all timid. Nobody wants a world war.

But do you understand when it comes to Iran, Russia, And when it comes to China especially, anytime that you try to play it cold and calculating, that looked at it as weakness. Anytime that you pull back to be the mature person of the room, they take a little bit more and a little bit more and a little bit more. Here's Susan Page on what really should be happening, cut to. Good luck telling Nancy Pelosi where she can and cannot go. She has been protesting on the issue of Chinese record on human rights since she arrived in Congress decades ago.

Remember in 1991, she unfurled a ban. She was on a congressional delegation to Beijing, went to Tiananmen Square, unfurled a pro-democracy banner, which really riled up China.

So ask Bill Clinton. She didn't listen to his entreaties during his presidency about taking a softer line on China. And I do not think she'll be swayed even by another Democratic president.

So the response from China. They said that while they had collected some intelligence, this is to the Pentagon's assessing from China what they would do if Natsuplosi doesn't fact land, because they said such dire things, basically threatening almost to shoot the plane down. They said while they had collected some intelligence on China's likely response, they were not yet ready to release it publicly, and they conceded that they did not know the extent to which Chinese officials were willing to risk a confrontation with America. Really?

So they're talking belligerently. They're threatening us not to go through with our own foreign policy with an ally of ours.

Well, respecting the one China policy, nothing would change. We have to over we have to arm those people to the teeth to prevent an invasion like what happened with Hong Kong, who never had an army. China you know, Taiwan's got money. They are an economic powerhouse. They know computer chips get 60% of our computer chips from them for cars and computers.

And everything else that we use.

So we have to be willing to defend. The Foreign Minister spokesperson for Singapore is happy to see Nancy Pelosi. The American Chamber of Congress is happy that she's going. It's going to be good for business. Happy that she's going to the Southeast.

She's going to be going to Japan, going to be going to South Korea. Will she stop down? In Taiwan. What's at stake?

Well, you know what she did? She did reach out to Michael McCall, the ranking member on the House Foreign Services Committee, and You asked him to go and he says, no, I got plants. But he does say, this is my recommendation. Cut eight. If we want to have deterrence against the Chinese Communist Party from invading Taiwan, we need to provide the weapon systems to Taiwan.

And the problem is the defense industrial base is not prepared to get this done. I just recently met with the head of SITCOM, the commander, and the former one, McKinsey, told me, both of them, that foreign military sales are the number one problem right now. If we can't build these weapons, and this involves both the Defense Department, State Department, Congress, and defense contractors, we can't backfill with Eastern NATO flank. My sales to Taiwan have been denied for three years. This administration has not gotten them out the door, and that projects weakness.

It will invite aggression. No question.

So let's pivot to something else. Listen, Joe Manchin didn't totally sell out. There were things in this package that he signed with Schumer that were 700-plus pages. It was sprung on the Republicans. It outmaneuvered Mitch McConnell.

And I think, in a way, that poisoned the well for future bipartisan work packages to come down the pike, at least for the next year and a half. No doubt about it. He embarrassed a lot of Republicans who just said, you know, if Joe Manchin was going to do a package, you let us know.

Well, he did it behind the scenes. And we keep money, he's a Democrat. It has $369 billion for energy and climate programs, $451 billion revenue from tax increases. Medicare will now negotiate directly with pharmaceutical companies. Obamacare subsidies extended.

Yeah, what about that program supposed to pay for itself? $300 billion in deficit reduction. And of course, they have that the elimination of carried interest, which is supposed to really tick off Kirsten Sinema, who said in the past, I will not sign a product to get rid of carried interest.

So Manchin admits that he did a deal, but he says, I got a lot out of this. I got, for example, a lot of fossil fuel things. For example, in fact, I wrote this down over the weekend. I worked on Sunday. The measure requires the federal government to auction off more public lands, like a million acres for oil drilling.

It expands tax credits for carbon capture, allowing them to do more work with coal and gas-burning power plants. It would make permanent federal trust funds to support coal miners with Black Lawn. It would also secure a promise from Democratic leaders to vote on a separate measure to speed up the process of issuing permits. See, a lot of this stuff has to be executed, and I would like to know that they'd be able to execute them because permitting is one of the big problems. Interior Department will hold lease sales for oil and gas exploration in the Gulf of Mexico so they get back to offshore drilling in the Gulf as well as in the Cook Inlet in Alaska.

$5 billion in the package would allow existing coal-fired power plants to improve their efficiency.

So he got some things for fossil fuels, but there's no way this can be labeled the way it's labeled. Listen to how they call what they call this, the Inflation Reduction Act. Nobody thinks it's going to reduce inflation, which is the number one problem. Call it the Climate Act and just tell people what's in it and stand by it and let the chips fall where they may. But you want people who are doing two jobs, have three kids, rushing around to say, well, honey, let's vote for the Democrats.

They did have the Inflation Reduction Act. The Wharton School of Business says there's no way this is reducing any portion of inflation. Maybe a little after 10 years, more likely, it would be an increase.

So Joe Manchin did every single Sunday show to his credit. But he also did not have a lot of answers when it comes to details. Here's what he said about. criticism in the past when it comes to inflation. Listen to Brett's question.

The rescue package of one point nine trillion that he signed off on when Joe Biden took office, I think he was one month in, they said that was not going to infect or affect inflation and the economy in a negative way. Cut sixteen. But there are some analysis groups, some nonpartisan groups. University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School, says the act would. Very slightly increase inflation until 2024, then decrease inflation after that.

But it says roughly it's indistinguishable from zero, and they don't think it'll have an impact on inflation.

So, I mean, that's a group that's looking at this. Brett, I respectfully disagree on that, but you know what? We can have differences of opinions. We had seventeen Nobel laureates the time before say that all Inflation is going to be transitory.

So people have difference of opinion. Yeah, we'll see. It did raise taxes, and he says he was wrong when he signed off on it, and it did raise taxes. There are taxes increases in this, a 15% minimum corporate tax.

Well, right now, the corporate tax is 21%. And sometimes when the write-offs and the old, when things come, push comes to shove, it drops down below 21%. He goes, well, it's got to be a minimum of 15%.

So let's hear if corporations feel taxed by this, then they're going to affect who they employ, how much raises they get. It ripples down.

So employees don't take the hit, especially publicly traded ones. There's a couple other things that I think are important to go over. It seems as though with this package, the Wall Street Journal believes that this package is going to affect this package is going to affect the manufacturing base. It's going to cost about $14 billion in taxes from manufacturing. And this is not something that was intended.

$16.7 billion for taxpayers that make less than $200,000 overall. They'll take $14 billion from people who make between $200,000 and $500,000. $500,000 a year.

So I just don't think that there was any calculus that when inflation is high, from Carter to Reagan. To Bush, that anyone said when inflation is high, we should raise taxes. I didn't think that was in anyone's economic plan, but it seems to be in Chuck Schumer's and the President of the United States. But it is not done because, Senator Christian Sinema, and as the Wall Street Journal says today, any Democrat in a moderate district that sees that this is done and signs his or her name to it. Let your fate be decided come November.

This is the Brian Kilmead Show.

So glad you're here. Your calls are next: 1-866-408-7669. Or you can go to BrianKilmead.com, click on comments, and I'll read them. Don't move. Coming to you on a need-to-know basis, because man, do you need to know.

It's Brian Killmead. From the Fox News Podcasts Network. I'm Ben Dominich, Fox News contributor and editor of the Transom.com daily newsletter, and I'm inviting you to join a conversation every week. It's the Ben Dominich Podcast. Subscribe and listen now by going to FoxNewsPodcasts.com.

Precise, personal, powerful. Is America's weather team in the palm of your hands? Get Fox weather updates throughout your busy day, every day. Subscribe and listen now at Foxnewspodcasts.com or wherever you get your podcasts. Information you want, truth you demand.

This is the Brian Kill Me Show. Either he doesn't know what we're living through or he knows what we're living through and he's trying to tell us that it ain't bad. And neither one of those is good for his standing with the American people. There's a reason why this president has the worst approval numbers of any modern president at this time in his term, in his first term. Nobody else is as bad as this guy.

And it's because he and the people around him in the White House have misplayed things like this time and time again. You put your finger on it. Kabul was a great success, and isn't that fantastic? And inflation transitory, and now it's transition, not recession. I mean, we're not that dumb.

We're not. What Carl Rope said to me on One Nation Saturday night that you saw repeated a couple of times, and that's what he said. He said, Listen, if you just call people, if you just identify with people going through and then tell me how you want to fix it, that's how we judge you. But if you deny people Their reality And you pass an act called the Inflation Reduction Act that doesn't even address inflation when inflation is by far the number one concern of almost every other American, and you say, Well, I'm addressing it, and you put a package together that doesn't address it, that's when distrust weighs in big time. And that's why his approval rates are between 30 and 36 percent.

It's the lowest of any President ever. Will that change with this passage? I mean, the left wing of this party, the Senator Elizabeth Warren, the AOCs, they're elated with this. And Joe Manchin wants everybody else to be.

Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal writes today in op ed, they suggest that this that all Americans will pay more taxes because of this. They say that Leader Senator Schumer probably this week will ask for a uh a vote on this partisan tax deal. What I love is people describe it as compromise. Compromise with what? Two Democrats compromised.

That's two family members compromised on the far and on what will happen with the entire block.

So the National Association of Manufacturers said in 2023 they will pay take $68 billion out of the GDP in labor income. 17 billion, take that, will come out, plus six billion from those making two hundred thousand, as I told you before, between two hundred and five hundred thousand, fourteen billion comes out. This conclusion is if cinema and other Dems want to sign up for this bill, And chain themselves, a ball and chain themselves for the next three months to this bill. They will be directly responsible to the election consequences for their new tax on workers. They are unlikely to not hold you accountable economically and politically.

It is not a winner. That's today's Wall Street Journal, which in the past they don't necessarily cut on party lines. They lean conservative, no doubt about it.

So that's where we stand right now in terms of this bill that passed. And I just don't know what happens next because if you want to get anything done for the next year and a half, Mitch McConnell does not like being embarrassed. But this totally caught him by surprise. I don't think there's any question about it. Also, weighing in on this was Bill Cassidy.

Bill Cassidy is somebody who voted to impeach the president. Trump. In the past, cut fourteen. Much of what he says is just not true. For example, they are raising taxes according to the Joint Committee of Taxation.

Taxes will be raised almost $17 billion in the first year on those who are making less than $200,000. And the percent of taxes raised for individuals increases over time for the middle class and the lower income. They're raising taxes on people who make less than $10,000, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. And in terms of ra lowering the price of fuel, they're going to raise excise tax on the every barrel of oil by $17, roughly. That is going to increase the price of the pump, increase other fuel-related costs.

And that's no doubt about it. I mean, if you put that type of price on fuel, if it comes down to the barrel, the price per barrel comes down to $50, $60, it'll probably end up being about $3.25 when it comes to the pump.

So, Penn Pat Toomey is another one, not a firebrand, not somebody who's a blatant partisan. When it comes to dollars, he's pretty consistent. He gets critical of President Trump when he thought he was spending too much, and he's very critical of President Obama. We know that for sure. Still won out and got six more years from Pennsylvania.

And now he's going to be calling it quits, which is why Dr. Oz is battling it out right now with. A left-wing candidate to replace Senator Toomey, which is mind-boggling if you ask me. But Toomey came out and said, look. Don't let anyone tell you they're not raising your taxes with this bill.

So you have that in the chip spill. If you look at the Democrats, they're beginning to say Joe Biden is much more successful than he seems. Because he's got the bipartisan. Gundo. He's got the bipartisan infrastructure bill.

And now he has the bipartisan chiefs bill. And he could be having the mansion bill. If Match can get his votes. But I think Dick Durbin tested positive for COVID. You gotta be voting in person.

Is he gonna be able to do that? Is he ever gonna be able to get Cinema, Tester, and others? Hey, it's Will Kane, co-host of Fox and Friends Weekend. Join me as I share my thoughts on a wide range of topics from sports and pop culture to politics and business. The Will Kane podcast.

Subscribe and listen now at FoxNewsPodcasts.com. From the Fox News Podcasts Network. In these ever-changing times, you can rely on Fox News for hourly updates for the very latest news and information on your time. Listen and download now at FoxNewsPodcasts.com or wherever you get your favorite podcasts.

Okay. Information you want, truth you demand. This is the Brian Kill Me Show. All eyes are on Kirsten Cinema. She and her team said that they were going to review the bill over the weekend.

I've been talking to a source who's close to the senator, though, who points to the fact that this new reconciliation bill includes the carry interest provision that she has long said that she opposes.

Now, Manchin's team says, tough, they're not taking it out, but this could be where battle lines get drawn. The question is, though, Chuck, is there just too much pressure on cinema? Does she need to find a way to support this? Does she find compromise in some other area like prescription drugs? That's where you have some Democrats saying, look, they might be able to move a little bit and give her a win.

But she wasn't a part of these final rounds of discussions, and that could create a last-minute snag here. That is true. Kristen Welker of NBC on Meet the Press saying that they're trying to reach out to all these key players who might be on the fence who are concerned about their own election, Mark Kelly, but especially Kristen Sinema, who's shown tremendous courage, and said that whole carried interest thing is a non-starter for her. What are you going to do? You know, so and she doesn't have many allies, but Joe Manchin was very nice to her, but he didn't even check with her, clearly did not check with her.

Let's bring in a special guest, Will Hurd, former Texas Congressman, cybersecurity executive and officer in the CIA, author of American Reboot, Reboot, an Idealist Guide to Getting Big Things Done. Former Texas Congressman Will Hurd. Welcome back, Congressman. Hey, brother, it's always good to be with you.

So I don't know how much you had to have been able to digest a 700-page bill. I don't think anyone really has. But it was ready to go in a matter of moments after the chips bill was done. And Mitch McConnell seem to have been outmaneuvered, but I think long term it's going to be bad for the country and getting anything done. But having said that, what do you think the what do you think Manchin and Schumer have done here?

Well, look, they obviously negotiated this in advance. They should have been negotiating with the other folks that will be required to pass this. If you actually wanted to pass it, you need to make sure Mark Kelly is going to be on board. You need to make sure Chris and Sinema is going to be on board. And again, I don't know if Mark Kelly has already come out and spoken in favor of this.

So that was a tactical misstep on what they were doing. And but look, also my friends on the Republican side, you shouldn't be shocked that they're going to continue to try to use a reconciliation.

Now you get to use that fifty vote threshold once a year when it comes to a budget cycle. And so to think that, oh yes, we're going to negotiate something that everybody kind of agrees on and not do this other thing, I think that was silly to think that that wasn't going to be brought back up. Yeah, I just think they were being kind of transparent along the whole way and all of a sudden they went dark and then they came up with this seven hundred page compromise bill and make people wonder what's going on here.

So was Mitch McConnell outmaneuvered? Look, this is my question is, why were we wanting to use the CHIPS bill as any kind of leverage? I think the CHIPS bill is important, especially the provisions around semiconductors. And this actually had that piece alone.

Now, the piece of legislation that was ultimately passed by the Senate had some other things in it. But this part around the semiconductor industry was important and we have to double down in order to be ready to deal with the Chinese government. The fact that most of our semiconductors or all of our semiconductors are made outside the United States, 60% of the world's semiconductors are manufactured in Taiwan. China has about another 10%. And so what happens when China invades Taiwan?

They're going to have control over 70% of semiconductor manufacturing, which is the building blocks of every piece of electronic, not just people's cars, not just people's smartphone, but your refrigerator, your T V, your Xbox, all these kinds of things.

So But what does this chip spill do? It puts money to the system to bring manufacturing back here that private business should be wanting to do on their own?

So, yes, look, private business should be doing it on its own. I think one of the things that should have been included in the chips bill was. If the government is putting money in some of these manufact in some of these things that we get an investment stake in that so that when these people make money, so does the federal government, it goes back into the federal coffers, right? I think that's something that should have been looked at to make sure that those tax dollars are being used wisely. But here's the reality.

If we think supply chains are bad now, Just wait until the Chinese government has control of that entire supply chain. 100% it is. And look, the Chinese government has made it very clear. Taiwan is one of the single most important things. And control of Taiwan is one of the single most important foreign policy objectives.

they will try to overtake Taiwan by twenty forty twenty forty nine is the end kind of deadline. This is one hundred years of communist rule in China. And Xi Jinpin, the President of China, has said there's going to be reunification by that time.

However, The Chinese believe that by the middle of 2030, Taiwan would be able to be prepared to. to defend against an invasion.

So, the real deadline is probably the Chinese thinking about going sometime between 20 and 2030. That's a decade away. And if we're going to move manufacturing back to our allies back to America. That takes some time before that eventuality ever happens. ultimately, all this is because the Chinese government is trying to surpass the United States as a global superpower.

This is what we're having to ultimately deal with. This is why there's a lot of talk about Speaker Pelosi's trip to Taiwan and what's going to happen. And so all of these things are connected. But to your original question is, um was was was m the major the majority leader outflanked. Um we shouldn't have been been using uh uh something that is in the national security interests um that a lot of Republicans and Democrats agreeing on as some kind of hedge Against a piece of legislation that the Democrats could do all by themselves.

So, do you believe Nancy Bullis comes out and says, in April, I'm going to be going there? They have a fit in July. And the president, when given a chance, tells the media, Yeah, the Pentagon doesn't think it's a good idea to go. Odd. Both parties, they couldn't have handled this internally.

It's embarrassing. Then the Chinese come back even more belligerent, back basically threatening that all bets are off if she decides to go. She has not confirmed whether she should go or not, Will Hurd. I want you to hear what Mike Pompeo said, cut four. Yeah.

Think of the 13 Americans that were killed in Afghanistan or the fact that our President said you could have a small invasion in Ukraine and that would be okay. I think that risk, the risk that we've lost the deterrent force, the power, the good work that we did for four years increases the likelihood that Xi might use this as an excuse to do what he has long wanted to do. We shouldn't underestimate that risk, but at the same time, we shouldn't allow the Chinese Communist Party to issue a statement and tell American leaders where they can and can't go. Yeah. And by the way, the New York Times says Biden's aides said that she was expected to proceed with the plan for the highest level visit by an American official in twenty five years, and they said that the President decided against asking her not to go.

Don't you think Will Heard even know there's There's risk. We have to go now. Yeah, look, nobody tells us where we can go, what we can do. Period, full stop, right? And I actually think Speaker Pelosi is one of the few Democrats that are doing anything when it comes to foreign policy that makes sense.

Now, should she have just done the trip, right? Don't announce it. You know, it's always like when we were still in Afghanistan, a president made a trip to Afghanistan. It was always last minute, not many people knew about it. You were told about it after it happened.

You could have done something like this in order to minimize the saber rattling and the hand-wringing. But here is the broader problem. When the majority of President Biden's national security people are always talking about the fear of World War III. You know, Jake Sullivan is always saying, I'm worried about World War III. Yeah, look, everybody does nobody wants World War III.

But when that's all you're talking about, then your adversaries are going to use that against you and say when you do something that they don't like, you're going to say, ha, that's going to start World War III. It even got even more aggressive. Maybe it was yesterday that one of these n Chinese newspapers that's in that sense a government apparatus even talked about shooting down Speaker Pelosi's plane. I think Speaker Pelosi should go. I think we should be rethinking this one China policy.

The one China policy started back in the it actually started in the 60s, but Um Carter said Said, it's this difference between acknowledging China, the People's Republic of China's claims on Taiwan versus recognizing it. And so it started with we acknowledge it. Basically, said, we heard what you said. But we do not we're not going to give you our opinion on what we think about that, right? And so this ambiguity has what has influenced our relationship with Taiwan over the last fifty years.

I think we need to be clear about Taiwan is our ally. We need to be doing everything we can now to help Taiwan defend against an invasion of the Chinese government. And quickly, too. Yeah, quickly so so so this is this is an argument that everybody always wants to talk about, and especially in this Biden administration. Escalation.

This is going to lead to escalation. We said that if we gave weapons to the Ukrainians, that That was going to lead to escalation. And it was an excuse not to do something and not to defend our friends. And and and that argument has always been wrong. And we can go all the way back.

I'm telling you, history, you know more about this than most. Um and so so this is this we're falling into that same trap. uh when it comes to to Taiwan. But we also need to be ready And to defend our own interests, but also to help make sure that our friends are ready to defend themselves. And here's the statement you were talking about.

This is from the Chinese state-affiliated media. If Pelosi visits Taiwan as planned, the Taiwanese authorities are an accomplice. The mainland will definitely carry out severe punishment actions on Taiwan at the same time. The unbearable consequences will fall on the SAI authorities, meaning the Taiwanese authorities. And they've even threatened to shoot down our plane, as we mentioned.

And they said there better not be a military escort. And they had military exercises over the weekend and planned some more. This week, but she's got to go at this point. And I would just think this: if I'm Japan, if I'm Australia, if I'm India, if I'm South Korea, I'm worried about China. And of course, worried about North Korea.

And if we show any equivocation, they're going to have to cut deals for survival in that region instead of saying, I'm going to stand with America because they're standing with us. You're 100% right. And this goes back to that: we are in a new Cold War with the Chinese government. Period, full stop.

Okay, there is, you know, the Chinese government wants to say, oh, America's provoking it. No, this is not us provoking a war. This would if the if the Chinese were to do something to Speaker Pelosi, they are the ones that are that are doing the provocation, right? And so let's we we have to stand firm. There is no country.

In this world, with the exception of Russia, Russia would have China's back on this because China has their back when it comes to Ukraine. Every other country in the world, if the Chinese government were to shoot down a plane, Do anything untoward towards the third most, the third highest ranking U.S. official, the consequences to them globally, the U.N., like there will be so many impacts. And so I think this is saber-rattling on their part. This is not an escalation.

This is us showing our friends that we have their back. And guess what? If you want your friends to have your back when you need them, you need to have their back when they need you. And this is about us not blinking and making sure that we're executing a foreign policy that makes sense for us. Got another minute.

I just want to absolutely, I just want to give you just on the border. Do you believe and what's going on? Arizona is now going to start filling in the gaps in the wall. They say that is an homage to try to save Kelly's Senate seat. On the Texas side, do you believe it's a single-digit race between Beter O'Rourke and Governor Abbott for the gubernatorial race?

Look, those numbers seem closer than reality on the ground, and this issue of the border is going to drive a lot of voters to vote Republican in November. And this is about the fact that the Biden administration is treating everybody like an asylum seeker and letting hundreds of thousands of people come into the interior of the country. When you have the governors, excuse me, the mayors of D.C. and New York City saying, hey, there's a problem, you know you have a catastrophe on your hand, and that's going to drive a lot of the vote here in Texas. Will always great to talk to you.

You have so many different facets to your career. There's so many expertise. Will heard, former Texas Congressman, his book, America Reboot, talks about how we could move together both parties in the future. Thanks, Congressman. Always a pleasure.

Thanks for having me. You got it, 1-866-408-7669. I'll take your calls in just a moment. Go over your emails when I can. You'll listen to the Brian Kilmeat Show.

Both sides, all opinions. It's Brian Killmead. From his mouth to your ears, it's Brian Kilmead. There's been a little story after story about Democrats expressing concern or flat out saying that President Biden should not run for re-election in 2024. Do you think he will?

I can't predict 2024. I truly can't, and I don't think we should. Would you support him if you did? I'm everyone's so upset about. Let me just say this.

That's what everyone is so upset about. Everything that we do here is calculated on the 2022 election, 2024 election. I'm not going to get into that. Whoever they send me, and if I'm still here, I work with whoever, whether it's a president, President Biden or a new president, whoever it may be, I'm not going to make those decisions. And Brett did ask: Did you talk to your donors about you running?

And he just dismissed it, but I don't think he can dismiss it. I think that he will put his name into that hat into the ring. But you know, this won't you know, that whole moderate image will take a beating now. No question.

Uh although listen. Even if Joe Manchin went way left like AOC tomorrow. He stopped. The packing of the court. He stopped the blowing up of the filibuster.

He stopped the $4 trillion Build Back Better plan. You cannot dismiss that because you're disappointed with this. I don't. He does have some drilling in this. I worry about the execution, make permitting.

Easier. Open up federal land and something like millions of acres each and every year. Also, offshore drilling.

So that is in there. But these climate provisions, having $7,500 for an electric car, which has to be bought in America or made in America, really? That means we can't buy a Tesla? Because Tesla's over made in China. Most is manufact what about Mexico?

Does that mean we can't buy a Ford? As to the Ford 150, are they all made in the U.S.? I hope, you know, the the Lightning. I guess we'll see. And about the criticism?

That Joe Manchin says that this whole plan is getting because of inflation, he opens up to it. You know, in terms of what Senator Pat Toomey said, I think it's he's somebody who's going out the doors, probably more candid than ever. Take a listen, cut seventeen.

Well, it's going to make inflation worse, actually.

So they've got a big corporate tax increase that's going to probably make this recession that we're in worse. All of this spending is unnecessary. It's going to exacerbate inflation. It is not going to reduce the deficit. And what did Senator Manchin get for this?

Look, I'm a big fan of Joe Manchin. We are friends, as he said, and I like Joe very much, but I think he got taken to the cleaners. Yeah, by Senator Schumer, which means we got taken to the cleaners. Because he was our defense. Hey, go to BrianKillme.com, especially if you're going to be in Albany, New York, September 8th, or you're in the Newark, New Jersey area.

on uh August twenty seventh. Because I'll be on stage, and of course in Tulsa, Oklahoma, November 13th, and before that, in Brandon, Mississippi. America, Taking Back America's Story, a thousand people at a time. I'd love for you to be in the audience and meet you face to face. Many of these will be streamed on Fox Nation.

From the Fox News Radio Studios in New York City, giving you opinions and facts with a positive approach. It's Brian Kilmead. Hi, everybody. Thanks so much for being here. It's the Brian Kill Meet Show coming to you from Midtown Manhattan, 48th and 6th, heard around the country, heard around the world, especially in the Ukraine, where war rages on.

This hour, we're going to be joined by Michael Goodwin of the New York Post. His column is based on Sunday's column, which I talked about when I filled in on Fox and Friends on Sunday from 6 to 10. Four hours. I thought three hours on radio was a lot, but four hours is a lot, six to ten. But it was fun and have a chance to do that.

So Michael Goodwin basically says this, what we're all saying. Can we see the transcripts of some of these phone calls with these world leaders, especially President Xi of China? Because nothing ever gets better, and he doesn't seem to ever want to confront these leaders. He's really tough when he's talking about Donald Trump or about Peter Doocy or blowing off a question from Fox or coming off someone who says there's a big push in his party not to re-elect him, but not too tough when it comes to world leaders and defending America's interests. And now we're in a huge problem in China.

So let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. It's a close election almost everywhere, and it's a 50-50 country.

So I think it's way too early for either side to be assuming they're going to have a great election or a disaster for that matter this fall. Inside 100 days to the midterms, where do we stand? Party to party, race to race. We will take a glance and check the back stretch polls. Number two.

This is all about fighting inflation. That's what it's about. Inflation is just absolutely destroying families across West Virginia and across America. That is Joe Manchin. Not too sure this will help.

Mislabeled, disappointed, and deceived. That's how I assess the Inflation Reduction Act. Co-authored by Joe Manchin. Any examination of the contents of the 700-page bill shows it will not lower inflation.

So why put it in the title? Dems vote on this on your own peril. Number one. Good luck telling Nancy Pelosi where she can and cannot go. She has been protesting on the issue of Chinese record on human rights since she arrived in Congress decades ago, and I do not think she'll be swayed even by another Democratic president.

Susan Page wrote a book on Speaker Pelosi: Let Her Land. That's what's in America's best interest when it comes to the Speaker visiting Taiwan. China's threats need not to be worried about. Let them try to confront us. Michael Goodwin joins us now.

New York Post columnist Fox News contributor. His column is going to be front and center of what we're talking about today. And now the Speaker of the House, Michael, has not said where she's going after Singapore and Japan and South Korea, but somewhere in between, you've got to figure she has to go to Taiwan. Am I right? Good morning, Brian.

Look, I think if she doesn't go to Taiwan at this point, It will be kind of it will be seen, I believe correctly, as knuckling under to China's threats. which were conveyed to President Biden in the phone call last week with President Xi.

So I believe that this whole thing now has become a test of will, a test of courage, and a test of principle for the administration and for Speaker Pelosi. President Biden, according to the New York Times, has not asked her not to go. He's indicated on the periphery to others the Pentagon doesn't think it's a good idea. But when they come out and say something like this through their state-affiliated media, if Pelosi really visits Taiwan as planned, the Taiwanese authorities aren't accomplished. The mainland will definitely carry out severe punishment actions on Taiwan at the same time.

The unbearable consequences will fall on the Sai government. How dare they talk like that? This is the number three person in the country.

Well look I mean, there have been other reports that the Chin Chinese speaking through multiple mouthpieces uh said something to the effect that that if the speaker's plane was escorted by American military planes, that would be regarded as an invasion of China itself. They have said other things about, you know, apparently she himself said to Biden. Those who who play with fire will perish in it.

So there have been all these direct and indirect threats of military action if the speaker goes there. And this Times report that Biden has not asked her to go I believe it was Politico or Axios, one of the other, said that, in fact, the administration has been working behind the scenes for more than a week to convince her not to go.

So maybe Biden himself didn't say it, but it seems pretty likely that they've been putting a lot of pressure on her not to go. And the fact that she said she was going to go and then has now become silent on the issue clearly reflects, I think, the pressure on her as well as the sensitivities involved. Right. She doesn't seem like somebody that would be pressured by her own party to do something she didn't want to do at this point.

So let's go to your op-ed. I feel the same way as you do, but I don't write nearly as eloquent and direct as you do. I am so fed up with hearing about these confrontations in Saudi Arabia with China, with Vladimir Putin, and not finding out later that he didn't even confront them with the main issues that should concern the American. People in our country. And the latest one is the pushback on the Whiggers.

He said through our press person, she has. The press secretary said that he brought up human rights issues. They said they did not. And you write this. The White House insists that President Biden scolded the Chinese president about forced labor and genocide involving the Uyghurs.

China says that's fake news. And Biden never raised the topic during the Thursday phone call between the two men, which, can I add, lasted over two hours?

So, what's the truth?

Well Yeah. The point, Brian, that we need to get the truth because it matters that the president is playing straight with the American people. If he's saying one thing to the public about the phone call and then China's saying that's not true, he did not raise those topics, we should know that. And there's a way to find out. Release the transcript.

It's a very simple thing to do. If they want to edit it, fine, edit the transcript. But tell us, did he raise these topics? And also, the White House press secretary would not answer the question of whether President Xi threatened violence if Pelosi went to Taiwan. Let's hear.

And the White House will not answer the question whether that's true.

Well, then, let's see the darn transcript. I mean, it's not like this is some kind of holy sacred scripture. Let's see the transcript. There's nothing, there's no reason why the American people cannot. Find out exactly what their president said to China and what the Chinese president said to America.

These are just words. These are human beings. There's no reason why these words can't be given to the American public. I mean, for gosh sake, there's no great mystery here. Let's have the answers.

Well, put it this way. I mean, we heard that the murder of Khashoggi wasn't brought up with Saudi Arabia, with Vladimir Putin. Where was the threat? Where was the threat? If you invade Ukraine, X, Y, and Z will happen.

We don't know what goes on. We know what he said publicly. He was giving mixed signals about what a Ukrainian threat would look like.

So now we have a strong stance, perhaps if we did something ahead of time. I still don't have an answer to this question. Are we going to give Taiwan the arms necessary to repel the best they can a red China attack? What is taking so long?

Well, I mean, that's the other thing. Biden has said three times That we would militarily defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese attack. Three times those remarks were walked back by the White House, which said, No, no, no, no, this is not a change in policy. Our policy remains that we would sell them. The military equipment needed to defend themselves.

And, Brian, I think we also need to mention that part of the concern about Biden's conversation with Xi and our policy toward China goes to the Hunter Biden issue and the fact that the Biden family was paid at least $11 million by one Chinese conglomerate. And don't forget, this is the same conglomerate where Tony Bobolinski, the former CEO, said that Joe Biden That's right. Joe Biden was going to get 10%. He was secretly getting 10%. Of the revenues that would come from this deal, which effectively was about the Belt and Road Initiative of China in America.

Um Now again, if if Any of this happened, and we know some of it happened at least. That means Joe Biden is severely compromised toward China. I mean, I'll give you another quick example. When he talks about lifting the tariffs on Chinese goods to lower inflation, Wait a minute. What is How does that help lower inflation?

I mean, what you're doing is boosting Chinese exports. I mean, you're making Chinese products more affordable for America. I thought we had a different policy on that. I thought we were trying to bring back manufacturing to the United States. I mean, so all of these things to me just raise the questions of where is the FBI investigation of Hunter Biden?

It has taken four years now. Four years, not a single indictment, not a single charge. The grand jury apparently finished its term without any results. And then, of course, we have Senator Grassley and others in Congress. saying they are getting whistleblowers contacting them, saying the FBI is dismissing valid allegations against the Bidens, calling them disinformation.

I and Bill Barr, I thought, was a significant event last week when the former Attorney General, who had opposed a special prosecutor for the Biden case, now believes that one is warranted giving these latest revelations and the fact that it's taken so long.

So something fishy is going on with the FBI again. Christopher Wray is going to testify this week before Congress. But as always, Christopher Wray will downplay any concerns, nothing to see here, move along. And I just hope Congress doesn't let him bury them in BS. Yeah, I hear you on that.

I want to get you also on this Joe Manchin deal with Chuck Schumer. He says he's got a lot of fossil fuel things in there. You've got to be able to drill more, more permits. You've got to get rid of a lot of the permitting problems. They're going to allow offshore drilling and guarantee it, even in Alaska to the Gulf.

But the main thing is $369 billion worth of energy and climate programs. Obamacare subsidies in there. $300 billion toward deficit reduction. I like to see that to believe it. Medicare gets to negotiate directly with pharmaceuticals.

And also this carried interest is now eliminated. They're allowed an exemption on carried interest.

So what do you think about this bill?

Well, look, I think we have to examine sort of Manchin's motives. I mean, he has been resisting a lot of these things all along. And now he said, well, he's got all these promises Um, you know, why would you believe the promises of the Biden administration? Why would you believe? that Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi can deliver anything having to do with fossil fuels.

I mean, they have a very thin margin, and there's no reason to believe that these tax hikes are going to be used in the way that this bill is done. This bill is done simply to give the Democrats cover for the fall elections. It is about saying, look, we got something done. We can govern. Give us two more years of our congressional majorities.

That's what it's about. And I think for Manchin, this must have come down to: look, Joe, if you want to be a Republican, go be a Republican. But if you're going to stay as a Democrat, then you've got to help the party now, because the party is about to get swamped in the midterm.

So I think ultimately it was about an appeal to Manchin: are you a Democrat or not? And I think he decided: look, This is the party that brung me to the dance, and I'm going to go home with it.

So, to me, this is very much just a test of his party loyalty. And he passed on that, but he certainly reneged on a lot of promises to a lot of people about not adding to inflation. This deal does not do anything to inflation, and therefore it just furthers these problems. But the fact that they put it in the title is such an insult, the Inflation Reduction Act, when it doesn't even address it.

So, here's the conclusion. This is according to the Wall Street Journal today, which I know is a publication to respect. Conclusion: If cinema and other Democrats want to sign up for this ball and chain three months before an election, she will be responsible for the election consequences. Their new tax on workers are unlikely to be an economic and political winner. Wow.

I I agree. I I I think that this is This is a kind of dead of the night deal. That is done, as I say, only for political purposes. I mean, to say it's the deficit of the Inflation Reduction Act, it's silly. It's silly.

I mean, I thought Vladimir Putin was the cause of inflation. Gee, now it turns out you can fix it with a piece of legislation done in the middle of the night. Um It doesn't add up. It doesn't make sense. That's why I think it's just purely a political deal for the sake of the Democrats in the fall election.

All right. Michael Goodwin, thanks so much. Always great. My pleasure. Thank you, Brian.

New York Post, Michael Goodman. We come back 1866-408-7669. I see up there a couple of lines open, and then at the bottom of the air, we go to Governor Mike Huckabee. You're listening to the Brian Kill Me Cho. I think.

Expanding your knowledge base. It's the Brian Kill Meat Show. A radio show like no other. It's Brian Killmead. You can't afford a full tank of gas.

You can't afford a week's worth of groceries. And what Manchin and the Democrats and the president are now proposing are the two cardinal sins that you don't want to do when the economy is in such a dire situation. Number one is they want to raise taxes in the middle of a recession.

Now, I know Joe Biden says it's not a recession. But if you Google recession, it's a recession. Two-thirds of the American people believe we're in a recession. They're living it. The other is they want to do massive government spending.

They have a 725-page bill, and it's over a billion dollars a page. At the time when we're at 40-year-high inflation, this is going to make inflation worse. And that is Senator Tom Barrasso. It's not unusual for him to come out against a program that passed by pure Democrats, for Democrats, but there is some fossil fuel things in there.

So it's not like Joe Manchin got nothing. Let's go to the phones right now. Alex, you're listening over in Brooklyn on WABC. Hey, Alex. Hey, good morning, Brian.

Thanks for taking the call. I wanted to say that the Democrats are no now taking woke to another level because we're in a recession right now. Their solution to that is to spend more money by passing an anti-inflation bill. And that's what caused the problem. All this spending is what ca put us in this inflation crisis in the first place.

So what the Democrats are doing is they're identifying the problem as the solution, and that's why they're spending more money, which is the problem. And I also wanted to say that it's interesting that the Democrats now realize after all this time that blaming other parties isn't going to help them because the American people aren't buying it. They're not blaming Trump for this recession. They're not blaming the Republicans. What they're doing is they're now changing what a recession is.

They're saying That the definition of a recession is something other than what it is, which and they're moving away from this blame game. Game because people realize that people aren't buying it any longer. I think so. And the fact is, they're jamming this climate change stuff down our throats at a time in which we are terribly in a crisis from baby formula to supply chain issues overall, to the fact is we have a situation with 11 million open jobs and economy, two months of negative growth. And then we go, okay, now's the time to go for clean energy.

Absolutely not. Do you see how bad it's getting over in Europe? They are so desperate for natural gas or oil they are telling people no longer get hot showers in Germany. I mean, think about the natural gas, what we could be doing over there if we focused on getting us through this crisis now. And then gradually use technology to transition to cleaner fuels.

But right now, China locked up this stuff. The more you listen, the more you'll know. It's Brian Killmead. And this is an Inflation Reduction Act. We're investing.

We're not spending money. We're investing. We've taken a $3.5 trillion aspirational bill. That I never could come to an agreement on any way, shape, or form, but I tried, couldn't get there. And we've taken 3.5 trillion of spending.

down to $400 billion of investing without raising any taxes whatsoever. We've closed some loopholes, didn't raise any taxes.

Well, it's just not the case. If you look at the Wall Street Journal, it's going to raise $6.7 billion on people that make less than $200,000 and $14 billion on people that make between $200,000 and $500,000. Manufacturing to the greatest hit. I have nothing but respect for what Joe Manchin has done for the last year and a half, but I found this bill in particular, from what I know, I haven't read all 700 pages, a total mystery. Governor Huckabee has seen it all, Fox News contributor, former Arkansas governor.

Governor, you know, we've been heralding what Joe Manchin's done. I don't want to jump ship yet. But this is does have some Fossil fuel provisions in it. But for the most part, I find it baffling that he signed off on it. Do you?

I really do. And it's not that much different from the one that he said he would never support because it would raise inflation. He even have said this weekend with Brett Baer that he realized that the last big spending bill Contributed to inflation. He wouldn't be doing that again. And yet he's turning around and doing it again.

It makes no sense to me. And I think that one of the sort of political nuances, a game he plays, and a lot of political people do it, and I understand it. But saying, oh, we're not raising taxes, we're closing loopholes. Brian, when you close a loophole, you're raising taxes that originally had been carved out for good reason. And people hear that word loophole and they think, oh, yeah, we've got to get rid of those.

What a loophole sometimes means is that a tax policy was counterproductive to the economy. It was hurting people, manufacturing, building, creating jobs.

So let's take the current provision that you can completely expense out an expense on a major piece of equipment and put all 100% of that equipment in one year for tax purposes. That's a huge benefit. I don't want to get in the weeds, but bottom line is. You take that away and people don't buy big ticket items. Why does that matter?

Because somebody's got to make that big piece of equipment, somebody's got to service it, somebody's got to sell it, somebody's got to deliver it. And you know whose jobs get lost? Not the people at the top, the people at the bottom. That's who suffers when those kind of quote loopholes get closed. Yeah, it's just interesting.

$369 billion for energy and climate programs. Right there, this is not the time to do it. I know there's no time in which we're awash in cash, and it's time to buy that island we always dreamed of. I get that. But this is supply chain issues that are coming off a pandemic that places like China can't even shake.

They just locked down a million people the other day.

So we have all these challenges right now with the rise of inflation at 9 percent, and this is the pure agenda. What I find most despicable is the name of the bill, Governor, Inflation Reduction Act. There's nothing that reduces inflation in this Act. It's like me saying that the all you can eat buffet at the Golden Corral is the Calorie Reduction Act. No, it isn't.

I mean, come on, this is nonsense. But this is the political game these guys play. I'm sick of it, and I hope the American people will see through it and realize they're being had. The worst part of this is that this pretense that we're going to create the Green New Deal, we're going to put all this money in renewable energy, which we're not ready for, and somehow encourage people to go out and buy an electric car.

Well, the people who can afford to buy an electric car have probably already bought one. The people, though, who are struggling to pay for the kind of gasoline and pay their rent and put groceries on the table, telling them to go buy a $70,000 electric car is like going to the homeless shelter and saying, Hey, why don't you guys get off your rear ends and go out and buy a million-dollar home? Then you won't be homeless. And then they look at you and say, You stupid idiot. If I could live in a million-dollar home, that's what I'd be doing.

But I can't. I'm staying in a stinking homeless shelter. You know, it's sort of like that great Saturday Night Live skip when the motivational speaker played by the absolutely amazing Chris Varley said, I'm living in a van down by the river. We got a lot of Americans living in a van down by the river, and we've got this administration telling them to go out and spend money and buy an electric car. It's insanity.

Elizabeth Warren kind of blew the party open by saying, I love this. Overall, this is the quote: Democrats were jubilant about the final bill, which will pump hundreds of billions of dollars into low-carbon energy technologies like wind turbines, solar panels, and electric vehicles, and would put the United States on track to slash its greenhouse gas emissions to 40% below 2005 levels by 2030. Great. And what is China doing? Building coal plants.

What are they using to use that to fuel their economy and surpass us? And do you think Russia is concerned about climate change as they're torturing prisoners in a country they invaded? In Iran, do you think they're worried about climate change? It's maddening, especially when it affects our daily lives. Remember, you mentioned what Joe Manchin.

Said about signing on to the Rescue Act. Brett Baer asked him this. Listen.

So last year you said the American Rescue Plan, the COVID Relief Bill, would not cause inflation. But most experts now believe, Senator, that that spending, that bill did spark the skyrocketing inflation.

So why should Americans believe you now when you say that this new bill will not exacerbate inflation? I made sure that I don't make that mistake again. That's the bottom line. I made sure I didn't make that mistake again. It's really beyond me to understand what he was saying.

He basically said, What I did before was a big mistake and it contributed to inflation. But by golly, I'm going to do it again. And I hope I don't get the same result. Yeah, you know, that is the definition of insanity by every possible person who ever looked at insanity. It's sort of like saying, you know, in the days of George Washington, you're one of the great students of history and the great writers of history, so you will remember that people say George Washington died because in that day medical treatment was to let blood out of a person.

They thought the infection was in the blood, and they bled them. And they kept bleeding George, thinking, well, maybe he'll get better if we take some more blood out. And eventually the guy bled to death. That's what they're doing to the economy. They're bleeding the economy to death, somehow believing that if you put enough leeches on the American economy and we suck the blood out of it, we'll all be healthy.

Well, we're not. We're going to die from that. And I just wish people could wake up and see it and get rid of these Democrats in November. All right. So four in ten Americans are forced to cut back on groceries due to what many people are saying is Biden inflation.

This is according to a new study, a Suffolk County study, a Suffolk University study. They asked respondents about their habits. They also said we have between 60 and 70 percent of the country already living paycheck to paycheck. The percentage of registered voters is coming back 58 percent, driving less 48 percent, postponing or canceling vacations 45 percent, cutting back spending on groceries, as I mentioned before, 43 percent. That everybody's lifestyle has been affected.

And when you come back and say I have the deficit reduction act, and what they're doing is telling you we're eventually going to build solar panels when 80 percent of solar panels are. made in China and between 90 and 95 percent of the materials used for the batteries we need for the electric cars that we don't have are contained or owned by China, we have to suspend belief that this is positive for America right now.

Well, we really do. I mean, this is the full China Recovery Act so that the Chinese economy will get back on track after they unleash the virus on the world. Why people don't see through this? I don't understand. Are we protecting Hunter Biden's business interests over there?

I'd love to know. But we are not protecting American jobs and American technology. It simply is going to do more damage to the average American's household. This is. I I think A whole program designed by people who have never signed the front of the paycheck.

And as a result, They just don't understand what it's like to try to make a business, work and pay their employees and meet the payroll every week. And the truth is, they don't have to because they can keep spending money. We're broke. I mean, the bottom line of about America, we're thirty one trillion in debt. We're broke.

So when you're broke, you don't go out and see if you can spend another few trillion just to throw on top of that. I hear you.

So the other over the weekend, the Live tournament came to New Jersey Bedminster, and I just thought it was relatively entertaining to see them act like it was Donald Trump's idea. He has a great golf course. The PGA decided to blow him off for political reasons. And the Live tournament comes up and said, We like to play here. He says, Great.

Are you amazed how they're trying to link him to the Saudi back league, which, by the way, they own two or three. Premier League soccer teams. They're very invested in world global soccer as well as there's a lot of investments here.

So we could debate this, but to see the press go out of their way to act like it was Donald Trump's idea because he owns a golf course astounded me. Nothing surprises me about the mainstream media anymore and their hatred toward Donald Trump. I'm looking any day for a headline that says Donald Trump kidnapped the Lindbergh baby. He was the one who brought down the Hendenburg and he started the Civil War in 1860. Look for that any day in the headlines of the New York Times.

Absolutely. Do you think the president is going to run again?

Okay. Uh I think so. I don't know. And he certainly hasn't told me. But It's he's giving all the indications of of doing that.

Do you think that he should announce before the midterms? No, absolutely not. I think it would be a huge disaster and mistake if he were to announce this before the midterms. Because right now, the focus needs to be solely and completely on getting Democrats out of control of the House and Senate. and setting up for a much better situation going into twenty twenty four.

And to distract the American public from those elections in November, I think would be a huge mistake. That could have disastrous consequences. Would you tell them that? Oh, absolutely. Yeah.

I I mean, if he asks me, I'll tell him. I don't know that he's going to ask me, but I'm if he's listening today, which I'm sure he listens to Brian Kill Mead every day, Uh that would be my exact advice, please. Hold off any announcement. And by the way, that would be true for any presidential candidate. You know, it's sort of like.

Don't take a date to your wife's funeral. Make sure that you let. The whole thing plays out a little bit, and you do things in the proper order. And it's just out of really out of sequence. to be planning the 2024 election before you even have the twenty twenty two election.

Right. That's very good etiquette advice. Don't take a date to your wife's funeral. I've never heard that statement, but it says it all. It's so inappropriate to take a date to your wife's funeral.

I get it. People will talk when you do that. They really will. Governor, thanks so much because you have that real world experience. But not that, thankfully.

Governor, thanks so much. Appreciate it. Talk to you later, Brian. Governor Mike Huckabee, 1-866-408-7669. We'll finish this hour with some phone calls.

I also want to touch on a little what Nancy Pelosi is doing. And there's also another thing we have not really discussed much of late, and that is into the midterm specifically. In the governor's race, it's Pence against Trump, two pick candidates in Missouri. Who's going to replace Senator Blunt? If it's Eric Brighton, he's going to have an uphill battle.

We know that because of the disastrous way he ended his governorship.

So that'll be trouble.

So we'll see. This is the brief. And by the way, some bad information is out there about Dr. Oz as well as Herschel Walker, and people saying these are candidates that are wallowed and struggled. Just not true.

I'll explain when we come back. Educating, entertaining, enlightening. You're with Brian Kilmead. If you're interested in it, Brian's talking about it. You're with Brian Kilmead.

Would you support him if he did run in 24? I'm not going to get into the 2024 election. All right. Well, how about this? Have you talked to your donors?

Have you talked to your donors about possibly running in 24? I'm getting I'm not going to get into 2024. No matter what happens in 2024, there'll be plenty of politics between now and then. Can't we just fix what's in front of us right now? Wow.

I think he's going to run. I I know he's seventy-two, I think. 73, but he's young, obviously vibrant. And I know a lot of people listening right now are in their 70s, and it is the new 50s, I think. Not even the new 60s, the new 50s, the way people keep themselves fit if they're lucky enough to avoid serious illness.

So I think that Joe Manchin, pretty fit guy, would run. I'd be fascinated to see him. in New Hampshire and Iowa. I don't know. Because they rejected Elizabeth Warren.

They rejected. Everybody. I mean, they kind of, I think they kind of like Bernie Sanders in Iowa, and then he went to New Hampshire.

So. Is Joe Manchin going to be hated by South Carolina Democrats? Isn't that third? Is he going to be hated by Nevada Democrats? Every time I brought up Joe Manchin, as disappointed as I am with his pizza legislation, to me is the best option for Democrats.

Kamala Harris certainly is not a legitimate option. She might be jammed down our throats, but she's not legitimate. Pete Buttigieg is remarkably unqualified, arrogant, and smug. Nobody, I don't think anybody really is charmed by him. Let him be charmed by the Transportation Department.

If you try to get on a plane, if you try to get on a train, if you wanted to see our supply chain and say to yourself, I can't believe how early our projects are coming in. I can't believe our plan landed on time, then you're living in another country.

So, in terms of performance, he's not the guy. Amy Klobucher is charmless, and evidently she's hell on wheels to work for.

So, to me, he would be a.

Somebody the Democrats Should probably take a look at. What they are doing, the Democrats, with, I think, five more primaries tomorrow, is they're putting money in to the most pro-Trump election with stolen candidates out there, millions of dollars in there. That's why Doug Mustriano, Mustriano, is the gubernatorial nominee in Pennsylvania, who, by the way, is within five points. Susan Page. Says this is really risky to do this because they have a lot of pro-Trump nominees there, and there's a lot of passion in a year in which people aren't necessarily pleased with Democrats.

Cut 27. You know, it's risky and it's hypocritical. It's risky because sometimes the candidate you don't expect to win turns out to be stronger than you think and they win and then they're in office. And it's hypocritical because Democrats have been saying that election deniers threaten our very democracy.

So you're going to go out and in effect campaign for an election denier because you've got made a political calculation that it might serve your interest? I think it means Democrats cede the high ground on this. I think so too. James Carville says there's nothing wrong with it, and other people are really upset about it. And that's just it.

To me, if you want to come out and you want to, in an interview, promote somebody as an opponent that you think you do better than, I get it. But actually write a multi-million dollar check for an opponent that you think you can beat easier. Can you imagine you're in a Final Four and you go, well, I hope Gonzaga wins because we'll do better against them. And I don't know, going and injuring another a player on the other team. Or giving the plays to the other team or to Gonzaga so they do well, so you beat him in the final.

There's something unethical about it. But go ahead, live with yourself. It doesn't really matter. I think on the other side, As you heard, Governor Huckabee, who's as staunch a President Trump supporter as anyone I know, including his daughter, I think Governor Huckabee. is even more of a fan.

Terrible idea to announce before November. You're running, Mr. President. He basically was telling people at the terminal of the weekend I pretty much made up my mind. The terrible idea why.

Because it gives Democrats who are already bringing millions of dollars to talk about 2020, to promote candidates that want to talk about 2020. And now all of a sudden they'll say, not only are we talking about 2020, if you vote for him or her, you got Donald Trump.

Now you might love that Donald Trump's going to run and that candidate. But what you're talking about is independents, you're talking about moderates, the people that actually swing elections. And right now the Trump name as currently being marketed is not big for moderates and independents. Just think about winning and losing. Brian Kilmeacher.

Live from the Fox News Radio Studios in New York City, fresh off the set of Fox and Friends, it's America's receptive voice. Brian Killmeade. Thanks for being here, everybody. It's the Brian Killmeat Show. We have a lot on our agenda today.

I hope you had a fantastic weekend. I truly believe that you'll enjoy this upcoming hour. We've got Brett Baer, who just did a fantastic job hosting Fox News Sunday at the bottom of the hour. And that'll be great. And also we're going to have Along with that, Jonathan Ward standing by, author of China's Vision of Victory and the founder of Atlas organization.

So, Jonathan Ward is going to give his perspective on the Pelosi trip and who is behind maybe blowing it up. We'll talk about that and also take your calls. But right now, from 48th and 6 in Midtown Manhattan, let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. It's a close election almost everywhere, and it's a 50-50 country.

So I think it's way too early for either side to be assuming they're going to have a great election or a disaster, for that matter, this fall. Inside 100 days to the midterms, where do we stand? Party to party, face-to-face, race to race. We'll take a glance. Number two.

This is all about fighting inflation. That's what it's about. Inflation is just absolutely destroying families across West Virginia and across America. Mislabeled, disappointed, and deceived. That's how I assessed the Inflation Reduction Act, co-authored by Joe Manchin.

Any examination of the contents of the 700-plus pages shows it doesn't even address inflation. Why start with a lie? Number Want. Good luck telling Nancy Pelosi where she can and cannot go. She's been protesting on the issue of Chinese record on human rights since she arrived in Congress decades ago, and I do not think she'll be swayed even by another Democratic president.

Susan Page of USA Today, who just did a biography on Nancy Pelosi, I say let her land. That's in America's best interest when it comes to the speaker's visit to the region and to Taiwan. China's threats. Are something that should be digested, but also confronted. Also, special thanks to KLBJ in Austin.

We're so excited to be back on the Brian Kilmey Show. We're so excited to be back on in Austin, Texas, News Radio KLBJ five hundred ninety.

So let's bring in Jonathan Moore. Jonathan, right now, The belligerence from China has astounded me. The direct threats Or something that makes me feel as though we should double and triple down on going to Taiwan where the speaker's plane. Do you agree? Brian, great to be with you.

Look, I think the speaker's trip in many ways is the right thing to do. I mean, this tells us where our values stand. I mean, we're not really, I think, a place that wants to let the People's Republic of China dictate what is going on in the Pacific. And the history with Taiwan is, of course, very carefully established that we would maintain our relationship with them, provide defensive weapons. And Congress is direction really when we established diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China in nineteen seventy nine was that that would be predicated on the idea that if anything were to be resolved between Tai Taiwan and mainland China, it would be done by peaceful means.

So Beijing in many ways is undermining the entire substance of the U. S. China relationship here by undergoing so many provocations in recent months, aligning themselves with. Vladimir Putin making clear in the Putin no limits. Document that they will essentially support each other in Europe and on Taiwan.

So we're dealing with two countries now that are trying to take apart the U.S.-led order, and I think it's important to show resolve. Live fire. Live fire exercises right by Taiwan, making threatening measures, threatening words. They had destroyers out there in the open seas.

Meanwhile, the Chinese Navy was conducting military exercises off the southern coast. They're going to be doing that again. They say it was scheduled before. I highly doubt it.

So far, we understand that Pelosi, they also made a gesture, and if I could paraphrase, that if Pelosi's plane is escorted by fighter jets, that would be a declaration of war. Really?

Their affiliated media, Chinese affiliated media, said if Pelosi really visits Taiwan as planned, the Taiwan authorities will be an accomplice. The mainland will definitely carry out severe punishment. What is behind those words?

Well, I think they're trying to tell us in every way that they can. You know, they're threatening us, they're showing aggression. I mean, this is in some ways par for the course. I mean, they've been. Ramping up their rhetoric and their actions.

I mean, the sorties that we've seen into the ADIZ that have been going to higher and higher numbers over the past. 12 to 18 months. I mean, this is all, I think, predates certainly this visit because, you know, we've had at this point a string of congressional visits and former officials going to Taiwan.

So in that sense, Pelosi's trip is is not out of the ordinary and and Beijing is is now, I think, trying to To assert itself and tell us what we can and cannot do. Jonathan Ward is our guest. He is author of Chinese Vision of Victory.

So, Jonathan, if other Congress sitting, Congresspeople and VIPs have gone to Taiwan, and obviously the President made his statement that we'll militarily defend Taiwan if they're invaded, which was walked back by his administration, then doubled down by the President, he's getting a pass on that. What what is this about? President Xi's reelection?

Well, I think he's got that. You know, let's not forget it's not an election. I mean, it's essentially the Communist Party together to ratify his third term. I mean, that's been on the books for a while now.

So I think there is an aspect to it that we overlook in the U.S., which is the military nationalism that has been ginned up and taught to the general public in China by the Communist Party. And I think it, you know, this sort of rhetoric appeals to many of that persuasion.

So there is a domestic politics aspect of it, but it's also that Xi Jinping. His view of his own legacy is that he's going to show The world, in many ways, the power of the Chinese military. And that's what I've been telling people we're dealing with for a long time. That I think is a A trend that that um On one hand, events like this could influence that, but it's a much deeper thing than that. It's not that this one visit Is created these dynamics between China and the United States.

So we have to remember what we're dealing with. We're dealing with a hostile adversarial nation. that's built in military that's designed As its leaders say to fight and win wars for the character of the national, against their neighbors, and then certainly including us. I mean, you can see the kind of things that are being tested in the Xinjiang deserts, and that's been true for years now.

So that's the sort of warning that. People like myself have been trying to tell America that we're dealing with a place that, you know, the basic premise of the U.S.-China relationship, engage you know, um trade and and we'll wind up with a with a friendly place is false. And they've been You know, preparing, I think. for conflict with us for quite some time. And in that sense, I wouldn't want us to get too stuck on the immediate events because we're dealing with that far greater issue, and we need to counter that.

And that's why it's very important At the end of the day, to make sure that we are providing the right defensive posture in the Pacific, the right weaponry to Taiwan, which is entirely consistent with our diplomatic relations. Absolutely. Quickly, get them the weapons they need. I want you to hear, Jonathan, I want you to hear Josh Rogan's assessment, the Washington Post column, the CNN contributor, assessment on what's going on with Pelosi's trip. Why was it announced in April?

Why is it such a big deal now in August? Listen.

What Biden did was, first of all, he confirmed the trip, which was supposed to be a secret. Because the whole point is that you go, you don't tell the Chinese too far in advance, because then they have time to threaten you for a bunch of months, and then everybody gets all scared and you don't go.

So the whole point is to keep it a secret until basically you touch down.

So Biden blew that plan, first of all. Second of all, he revealed that the administration has these concerns, but his staff had been trying to work it out with Pelosi behind the scenes quietly.

So he really screwed up the negotiations at the same time because, you know, they were trying to convince Pelosi, hey, listen, let's just delay. Maybe after the election, when you're not really speaker anymore, I mean, she'll be speaker, but you won't be speaker. It'll be okay. And then Biden blurts it out, and the Pelosi people are like, what the heck? And they're like, now they feel like they have to go.

Right. And the New York Times says today the administration says it won't go out and ask her not to go.

So she'll probably end up going. What do you think about that behind the scenes posture? How awkward and amateurish is that?

Well, I think there's no question that there's some serious divisions over what the right way to proceed here is. And yes, it is a high-level visit. I think that's what really counts about this. And it comes at a I think what good time would there be during the conflict in Ukraine? I mean, these are events that we didn't.

precipitate.

So I think to me the fact that this was Not necessarily coordinated in in the best way is also um You know, I mean, we're dealing with a world that is Uh I think Sort of unraveling against us for reasons that we didn't create.

So to me, that's not. really our fault. I mean, we have to decide when and where we're going to continue with With a strategy that shows resolve in both Europe and Asia. Right, yeah, that was our enemies, it can't be decided through weakness. Here's Richard Haas on this whole phone call issue on the Biden-Chi phone call, which also is crazy because we can't get a clear read about what was actually said and not said.

Because we hear from the Chinese side that the president never even brought up the Uyghurs being in genocide and systematically eliminated from the face of the earth and take part in slave labor. Listen.

If there's any inflaming going on, it's coming from China's side. There's nothing new in our policy. We have said time and time again, the president said it yesterday, we stand by the one China policy. We do not favor Taiwan's independence. The Speaker of the House has made clear she's not going to Taiwan to fan independence.

Polls on Taiwan show there's no big push for independence.

So let's get real here. Xi Jinping has all sorts of economic problems. He wants an unprecedented third term to be greenlighted this fall when the party meets. He wants to attract, you know, distract attention away from China's economy. Maybe he thinks, you know, we're distracted by Ukraine or our internal things.

This is a self-generated for domestic political consumption crisis. We can debate the wisdom of the speaker going, she's not the first speaker to go to China. Newt Gingrich went. Cabinet officials go all the time. Again, this is taking place within the context of existing policy.

So I really think this is much more about Chinese domestic politics than it is about American foreign policy.

Well, that's interesting. Plus, we know they locked down a million citizens in Wuhan. We know there's a youth unemployment issue there. We know the economy is beginning to slow.

So Jonathan Ward, final question. What shape is China in?

Well, I th I think they are um You know, going through some real hurdles, but at the same time, We have not scaled back our economic relationship. And we continue to invest, we continue to transfer technology, and we continue to buy enormous quantities of Chinese goods.

So all of that is part of what's keeping their economic trajectory going. I mean, people are still willing to invest in this country because they see growth.

So until we have a genuine economic strategy, I think the problems that we're describing are not going to you know, slow them down enough. And Dr. Haas is right that this is, I think, very consistent with U.S. policy over decades now. And really, what we're dealing with is a much more dangerous and assertive China, but that's not just China.

Think that was always in the plant. All right. Thanks, Jonathan. Appreciate your insight. Jonathan Ward.

He is the author of Chinese Vision of Victory and founder of the Atlas organization. Thanks, Jonathan. Thank you, Brennan. All right, listen, when we come back, I'll take your phone calls: 1-866-408-7669. The bottom of the hour, we'll talk to Brett Baer about what's happening in Washington this week.

It's the president tests positive again for COVID-19. They call it a rebound effect. I'll talk about that and what it means for him, as well as the chances of this Manchin-Schumer alliance resulting in a bill. Because after all, Senator Dick Durbin tested positive. You have to be in person to vote on this.

Are they going to let people who are COVID positive vote? And will they even get Kristen Sinema's vote? This is the Brian Kill Meat Show. Learning something new every day on the Brian Kilmead Show. Radio that makes you think.

This is the Brian Kill Me Show. But the reality is that people still can't afford gas. And what I'm nervous about is with this Ukrainian conflict, food prices are going to become even more expensive and even more scarce. The reality for them is that this is legislation. It doesn't affect them from the moment they wake up in the morning until the moment they go to sleep at night.

And that's the challenge for the President. And Frank Lentz is really alarmed, by the way. The division of the country even indicated things were on the cusp of a civil war. But he just looked at the piece of legislation on this week with George Savanopoulos that had Jonathan Carl this weekend and said, Look, I'm looking at this and I'm just saying, you're all caught up in what Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer's doing. I don't know if it's going to be good long term, but in the short term, it doesn't address anything that really affects the American people.

The American people are concerned with everyday things. And as I know, six in every 10, maybe seven in every 10, live paycheck to paycheck. Hardworking people putting their 401k in pensions and Social Security to allow them to get to retire at 65 or 70. They see this happening and they say, Wow, this is interrupting my daily lifestyle. Or what you do is you go shopping and instead of saying, Well, it's a little more expensive.

I can get what I need. I got a barbecue coming up. You put it on a credit card. Then your bills get a little bit higher. It's a treadmill you can't win.

Here's Carl Rove. He was on with me on One Nation last night, and he said, One thing I hate is the title of the whole bill. Cut 20. Cut 20. Either he doesn't know what we're living through.

Or he knows what we're living through and he's trying to tell us that it ain't bad. And neither one of those is good for his standing with the American people. There's a reason why this president has the worst approval numbers of any modern president at this time in his term, in his first term. Nobody else is as bad as this guy. And it's because he and the people around him in the White House have misplayed things like this time and time again.

You put your finger on it. Kabul was a great success, and isn't that fantastic? And inflation transitory, and now it's transition, not recession. I mean, we're not that dumb. We're not dumb at all.

And so the question is, what are you going to do?

Now, what I thought, too, is you have these other guys from the Fed, and this guy, Neil Kashkari, we've seen him on before, talked about the state of the economy, two negative quarters on growth, on the GDP. That doesn't concern him as much as some other things. And what he's doing in code is saying he's upping interest rates, cut 23. Over the short term, the demand side effects totally swamp the supply side effects. And so when I look at a bill that's being considered that your two senators talked about, my guess is over the next couple of years, it's not going to have much of an impact on inflation.

It's not going to affect how I analyze inflation over the next few years. I think long term it may have some effect. But over the near term, we have an acute mismatch between demand and supply. And it's really up to the Federal Reserve to be able to bring that demand down. You know how you take demand?

You know how you bring the demand down? You make things unaffordable. You make people stop spending. You make the supply stop. You make people stop ordering.

Too much strain of the supply chain. Because you have some money and you place some orders. It helps the economy. But if you can't get the supply here, it strains the economy. People get upset.

Things start falling apart. Businesses can't execute.

So how do you get demand down? It's code. Code is you make interest rates go up. Therefore, you don't spend as much. Maybe you're not buying the houses.

Maybe you cool off the housing market. That bothers me. That's code for I got to slow down the consumer and the economy. That's you. And when we see stats that are out there now, that 40% of you have postponed or changed your vacation.

50%, over 50%, change the things that you buy. 46% don't buy as much when you go shopping, food shopping. That's the average everyday person. And that's what's going to win or lose this election. And I think, listen, abortion matters, absolutely.

The guns matter. School safety matters. But right now, it's pretty overwhelming when it comes to budgetary matters. And what's helping Donald Trump is that, regardless of the Russia investigation in January 6th, the average family was having a much better time even during the pandemic. Financially.

and felt better about the country than they do right now. And you can't say bad luck, Mr. President. You could say bad moves, Mr. President.

More agenda. More agenda items than items that we need. Your agenda, not ours. Brian Killmeek Show. Brent Baer here next.

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

So, last year you said the American Rescue Plan, the COVID Relief Bill, would not cause inflation. But most experts now believe, Senator, that that spending, that bill, did. Spark the skyrocketing inflation.

So, why should Americans believe you now when you say that this new bill will not? exacerbate inflation. I made sure I don't make that mistake again. That's the bottom line. I make sure I didn't make that mistake again.

But he just did make the mistake again. It was a great question. Brett Baer, Chief Political Anchor of Fox News, Anchor of Special Report, and just fresh off Fox News Sunday.

So Brett, it was I was confused by his answer. Yeah. I tell you, he was kind of all over the map, I thought. He was kind of waving off. Um the nonpartisan Um Assessments of the bill about raising taxes in different ways, about Inflation going up at the beginning and maybe decreasing at the end, but roughly at zero, according to the Wharton.

uh school at at uh Penn. And I think Listen, I don't know that he has answers and I I wonder if they're going to get Cinema's vote in the end. It's going to be tight, I think.

Well, I mean, the fact that 700 pages were written and after the chips bill passed, it's like, da-da-da, look at it, it's all done. Not the framework, not an understanding, not a summary, but it was done. Just to that point, that was the question you asked. We have it here.

So let's listen to Senator Joe Manchin on the criticism that this is going to, this has already been studied and it's not really going to affect inflation positively. Cut 16. But there are some analysis groups, some nonpartisan groups. University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School, says the act would. Very slightly increase inflation until 2024, then decrease inflation after that.

But it says roughly it's indistinguishable from zero, and they don't think it'll have an impact on inflation.

So, I mean, that's a group that's looking at this. Brett, I respectfully disagree on that, but you know what? We can have differences of opinions. We had 17 Nobel laureates the time before say that all Inflation is going to be transitory.

So people have difference of opinion. Right. Uh he used that over and over again. Uh he did all the Sunday shows. We go ahead.

Well, I just think that's not a answer. It's not. You know, I mean, it's just kind of. Not a great spot to be is that you don't have answers. And I think.

Um there. Yeah. I think it's going to be a tough sell, but they may have the numbers, Brian. I mean, it depends if they can get Kristen Cinema and all of the people who are out currently to be in, to be votes.

So, yeah, a couple of things. You mean out with COVID?

So, it looks like Durbin tested positive, and Manchin was just coming off testing positive. And now, with these rebounds off Paxophil, did I say that right, Eric? I always seem to say it wrong. I seem to be, I just pick a different drug to social theory. Yeah, I just yell out different drugs, so please don't take your medical advice from this show.

So, yes.

So, the fact that you have rebound, you don't know if anyone who's going to be in or out, and they can't afford to have one. And what happens is there a way to vote remotely in the Senate? Yeah. No, so I mean they would have to get those people in. And you know, you go back to nineteen eighty six Senator Pete Wilson from California.

They roll him in on a gurney from the hospital with a IVM. uh to cast a vote on Reagan's budget. because they needed the vote.

So you could imagine Dick Durbin in a bio suit or Senator Leahy coming in. And it's happened before.

So if they need to vote, they could do that. They could figure it out.

So you were there, and he chose your show when you were doing Fox News Sunday to come out and say it's dead. There would have been Bill Back Better is Dead. Did you notice the does it seem like the same guy? He didn't seem sheepish. I think he seemed relatively, I think he seemed as though he felt as though he was doing a good thing.

Wh what was your impression? Was there a different Joe Manchin?

Well, he's not as resolute. I mean, he's clearly making compromises. And like even on the electric vehicles, the subsidies. He he says you have to do something first. To get the stuff produced inside the US before you get their subsidies.

But it's in the bill, and so are taxes on coal plants.

So our increases in the IRS 87,000 more agents. to increase audits.

So, I mean, there's some stuff that doesn't fit on a bumper sticker ahead of the midterms. Here is what Kristen Welker said about Kristen Cinema on On Meet the Press, Cut 22. All eyes are on Kirsten Cinema. She and her team said that they were going to review the bill over the weekend. I've been talking to a source who's close to the senator, though, who points to the fact that this new reconciliation bill includes the carry interest provision that she has long said that she opposes.

Now, Manchin's team says, tough, they're not taking it out, but this could be where battle lines get drawn. The question is, though, Chuck, is there just too much pressure on cinema? Does she need to find a way to support this? Does she find compromise in some other area like prescription drugs? That's where you have some Democrats saying, look, they might be able to move a little bit and give her a win.

But she wasn't a part of these final rounds of discussions, and that could create a last-minute snag here. Right. And that was legitimate. I read how she was just walking around, someone came up to her, and she had no idea that this deal was done and the bill had been written.

So we don't know. I mean, would she stand without Manchin? Maybe. I mean, she's fairly independent. She was completely blindsided and he didn't bring her into it.

Um he didn't he said he didn't bring anybody into it. 'Cause he didn't want to have anybody disappointed again. But it seemed like they, you know, he wanted to get there after. Taking the heat, but we should point out that there's not just cinema. I mean, there's other senators who are on the line with a tough vote here.

Mark Kelly, Maggie Hassan. Um Cortez Masto in Nevada. Talk. not easy votes on some of these provisions that are easy to pick apart in the commercial in November. You know, I see that China controls more than 80% of the solar panel production.

What are we going to do about that? That includes 95% of the production of certain elements that are essential to making the panel, including polysilicon and different wafers. Much of the polysilicon supply for the world's solar panels is processed in China, where companies are accused of using, obviously, forced labor. We all know that.

So, if this is the deal and they've got to be made in America, it's going to fortify America. Where are we getting it from? That's a good question. And, you know, you gotta Go all out to bring that production on a number of fronts. Not just that, but pharmaceuticals.

back from China into the US. And that takes, you know. guts and foreign policy and Congress signing off. Great job yesterday, by the way. I just got to bring you to see another one of your passions.

That's golf. What is your take on the live golf tour as we know it, the New Jersey Bedminster Tournament? People point out there weren't that many people on Facebook Live watching, but they do have David Faraday in the wings ready to do the broadcast. They're not going to get Barkley. But what about the roster of players and the quality of play and the new format that you've seen?

Well, but First of all, I think Uh without a broadcast. it's really going to be tough. YouTube is not. cutting it. I think they had four hundred 50,000 viewers or something.

Um you know, it's not Average for a PJ Tour event. I think the format's a little screwy in that. you know, the winner could be finishing up on eighteen and then the nearest challenger is on three and four. because they have a shotgun start.

So it's a little weird, but I do think that the quality of players is going up as they get more money. And you can't fault these guys for taking the money.

So the list is growing and it's getting to critical mass here. Eventually the PGA Tour is going to have to do something. What do you think how has it happened? Do they qualify as a points tournament that could get players qualified for the majors?

Okay. I don't think so. I mean, they have to weigh in, the World Golf Association, but I think. That's a tough sell because it's a 54-hole event, not 72. and it's more of an exhibition kind of thing, but they're going to make an argument.

Some of these guys are playing on the Japanese tour now to get world ranking points so that they can play in majors. All right, Brett, best of luck. I don't know how you're doing it. I mean, because I know it takes like a whole full day of studying for Fox News Sunday because it's a new approach. Not like you're new issues, but it's a new staff.

How are you dealing with that?

Well, come on, Brian. I mean, you have 7 billion shows. But, I mean, there's only Fox News Sunday, and you're the editor, and you've got to come up with all this. I mean, I'll fill in here and there. But, I mean, I was talking to people that also do the show.

They say it takes a full day. Like, you just sit and go over all these different. Are they overstating it? Are they trying to get sympathy from it? I mean, it does take a lot of work, but the staff is great.

And. it helps that I do a Monday through Friday show where I'm talking about the same thing.

So it's a little bit Right. Plug and play, but I it does take some work. I like doing it, though. I think it's I think we can set set the news tone for the week. I agree with you.

So I enjoy your time. I know you look forward to more. I know a lot of times you're looking forward to Monday and you don't concentrate on Fox News Sunday.

So that's right. I'm thinking about this moment. Right. Because I was saying to Allison, why don't we cancel him so we could focus on Fox News Sunday and then put him back on the schedule at the last minute? Would that help?

Psych me out. Yeah. Okay. Now to help you focus.

So you're not looking forward. Like, what are you wearing now? Like, I don't give you a wardrobe deal for the radio appearances. That's exactly right. I s I just went for a workout.

I'm getting ready to get head into the office.

So it's a perfect con. I love my time with Kill Meet in France. Right. That's the old name of the show, but I understand. It's not the Brian Kill Meet show.

Thank you. Go get him, Brett. I'll watch you tonight on special report. That is Brett Baer, multifaceted. 14 minutes before the top of the hour.

Again, special thanks to KLBJ Austin. They put us back on for an hour, and we're thrilled. Great state, great city. News radio, KLBJ. 590.

This is the Brian Kilmey Show. A radio show of the people for the people. You're with Brian Kilmead. The fastest three hours in radio. You're with Brian Kilmead, the Tiny Amendment.

Doesn't change it from mandatory to discretionary. It's still mandatory. The Toomey Amendment is really about capping the fund. It's about putting caps on it. And Giving it a sunset clause for 10 years.

Now, We've been through this with the 9-11 first responders. What Toomey's amendment wants to do. Is make sure that our sick and dying veterans. Have the pleasure. That our 9-11 first responders at Ground Zero had.

of having Having to come back to Washington, hat in hand, riddled with cancer, and march through the halls of a hill. begging for money every year. They want them to have that player in caps. But Tummy's amendment, it's still mandatory. There's been no change.

Well Would I the way I understand it. Jon Stewart's going to bat for veterans, and this was all signed, sealed, and delivered. But Democrats moved it from non-discretionary spending, which means it's not up for a vote. It's just going to get paid every year. Like, for example, the Pentagon budget gets debated every year.

That's discretionary. You don't have to put that much money in. You could put in more money. They moved it to non-discretionary.

So it becomes automatic payment every year. And they said, wait a second.

Now that leaves the $400 billion slot there, and you could put anything you want into it. And he thought Democrats could do anything they want and put that into it. Here's what Pat Toomey said: Cut 29. This is the oldest trick in Washington. Uh people take a sympathetic group of Americans and it could be children with an illness, it could be victims of crime, it could be veterans who've been exposed to toxic chemicals.

craft a bill to address their problems and then sneak in something completely unrelated that they know could never pass on its own and dare Republicans to do anything about it because they know they'll unleash their allies in the media and maybe a pseudo-celebrity to make up false accusations to try to get us to just swallow what shouldn't be there. That's what's happening here. He's talking about pseudo-celebrities, meaning Jon Stewart. He went on to say this: cut 31. Let me be very clear.

The Republicans are not opposed to any of the substance of the PACT Act. My honest Democratic colleagues will fully acknowledge that my objection, and if I get my way, I get my change, it will not change by one penny any spending on any veterans program. It's not really about veteran spending. It's about what category of government bookkeeping they put the veteran spending in. My change, honest people acknowledge, it will have no effect on the amount of money or the circumstances under which the money for veterans is being spent.

We are spending way too much money to use, to hide behind a veterans bill, the opportunity to go on an unrelated $400 billion spending spree is wrong, and we shouldn't allow it.

So, do you understand what's going on there? It's really not bad guys. I don't care about the military. Good guys, I care about the military. I assume Jon Stewart's being sincere, but it's just amazing he's eviscerating.

He always loves to come out and eviscerate Republicans, and for the most part, Mitch McConnell. But there is more complexity to it.

So, we'll see what happens. I'm sure it's going to get passed, but they just want to make sure they don't tag a whole bunch of stuff to it that's agenda-driven instead of veterans-driven. Let's find out if there's more to know. More? To know.

And I'll tell you, this first story stuns me. Deshaun Watson, who's had 23 accusations of sexual harassment, excuse me, sexual assault, will get six weeks. Ban, just a six-week ban before he can make his debut with the Browns. That'll be week seven. As part of the probe, the league's investigators spoke to at least 10 of the women who originally filed the litigation against Watson.

A source told Yahoo Sports the NFL obtained information from the pretrial process in those civil lawsuits, none of which was sealed by presiding judges. The pretrial process included Watson sitting for multiple depositions and ultimately concluded on June 30th. Independent hearing officer Sue Robinson presided over the three-day disciplinary hearing in which the NFL and NFLPA, the union, presented their cases. Days before those hearings began, it was reported that the NFL pushed for a one-year suspension. A source told Yahoo Sports that the NFL wanted the public to know that it had pushed for that year-long suspension before the discipline hearing.

So, by the way, so six weeks got to feel great. I think we were just talking about this. Tom Brady got four weeks for deflating footballs. Yeah, four weeks. This is 24 accusers.

Yeah, they luckily won 500, 2-2 in that span.

Now, this, as we were talking over here, 18-game schedule, so it's a third of the season that he's in. But look, the Browns are going to win the Super Bowl. Anyway, but they want Deshaun Watson to be the franchise quarterback for the next four or five years, and they pay him a ton of money. But here's my question now. He's eligible to play in the preseason, right?

As far as I don't say he says he is, I don't know. Yeah, I'd say he is absolutely playing. What do you do? You play, but don't you also want to put time in to see who's going to be the guy for your first third of the season?

Well, yeah, in a way, that's true. I think they just signed up pretty good. But while we do this, try to see who else they signed, okay? You got next. Bill Russell passed away at the age of 88.

His family said it was a very heavy heart. They would like to pass along to Bill's friends and followers. Bill, the most prolific winner in American sports history, passed away at 88 with his wife Jeannie by his side. Arrangements for memorial will be announced. He was Bill's two-time state championship in high school over to Glimmer, the incomparable run of pure team accomplishment, twice an NCAA champion, captain of a goldmanning winning team in the Olympics, 11-time NBA champions, and at the helm of two NBA championships as the first player blackhead coach.

That's pretty amazing. Uh, next, Samuel Sandoval, among the last Navajo code talkers, pass away at 98. We know what he did in World War II. Uh, that was pretty amazing. What a life he had for the Marines.

Star Trek actress Nicole Nichols, dead at 89. Remember watching her.

Next, happy couples say the key to a happy relationship is the 2-2-2 rule. Get this. Try a swing date every two weeks, not a swinger date, a weekend away every two months, and a week away every two years. That, according to a study on Reddit, is the key to a successful relationship. I don't think that's possible, but it's good to have an aspiration that way.

It's very tough. I don't really take vacation. We don't take vacations without the kids until they get sick of us anyway. What's the final answer on that? Jacob Brissett is the backup quarterback, so Josh Rosen and Josh Dobbs will battle for the backup position.

Yeah, Rosen will get it. Put the power of over 100 meteorologists and the worldwide resources of Fox in your hands with the Fox Weather Podcast. Precise, personal, powerful. Subscribe and listen now at FoxNewsPodcasts.com or wherever you get your podcasts.