Debt ceiling bipartisan brawl continues; McCarthy confident

From high atop Fox News headquarters in New York City, always seeking solutions, never sowing division. It's Brian Kilmead. Hi, everyone. Welcome to the latest moments of the Brian Kilmead Show. I come to come to you from the beautiful studios of Fox News Channel, 15th floor.

You need ID to get in. 1211 6th Avenue, Avenue of the Americas. Rich Lowry at the bottom of the yarrow. We go inside 2024 and also talk about all the other controversial brewing on the right. And Jamie Metzel is here.

He's a member of the WHO Advisory Committee, Senior Fellow at the Atlanta Council, and former National Security Council official in the Clinton administration to talk about something extremely important. But let's get started with the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. Today was the deadline. He was given three weeks to produce a document.

So we don't have confidence in Director Wray. We're already in the process of drafting legislation to hold FBI Director Wray in contempt of Congress. It's really disturbing. That's why I described the FBI behavior and their treatment of whistleblowers and the ongoing protection of the Biden family, it seems. And now, Director Christopher Wray, the new law, says, I will not give the House what they want.

I'll try to explain. Number two, at the end of the day, leadership is not about entertainment. It's not about building a brand. It's not about virtue signaling. It is about results.

Wow, and there you go. The subtle shot to Trump, Governor DeSantis' full-blown candidate now. Iowa, New Hampshire are on Ron DeSantis' hit list officially this week. 12 stops in all, hitting the campaign trail. Donald Trump up by at least 35 points in most polls, including individual state polls.

One thing is clear: he will take on the former president, meaning DeSantis, but focus on Biden as Trump's game plan remains a secret. And Sununu, Pence, and Christie prepare to join the fray. Number one. This is just the first step. Anybody who thinks this is the end of reforming Washington, for God's sake, we've been waiting for years to get a chance to finally turn.

The direction of this country around Steve Scalise, the number two guy in the House for Republicans. The dead ceiling bipartisan brawl is picking up steam as a floor of a floor of vote in the House is hours away.

Well, maybe tonight we bring you the facts on the compromise and have the audio of what everyone is choosing to say about the. Lifting the debt ceiling deal. Jamie Metzel knows all about politics and knows all about AI. Real focus on China, the WHO, and everything. Jamie, there's nothing you can't handle.

Let's be honest. I just try to do my best. Right.

So, first off, On this debt ceiling debate, I was heartened. To me, and I haven't gotten through all 99 pages, but I had a chance to talk to a lot of the players. Like, nobody got what they wanted. They did a deal. And this is if we're going to be successful as a country, we have to start going in there and rolling up the sleeves and doing deals on almost everything.

On everything. I mean, government is about compromise. I mean, in any society, in a diverse society like ours, there are different people with different views and different interests. And that's what government does. You come together and you figure out, all right, well, I really want this, but I'm willing to trade that.

And our country, as you've said before, Brian, we've kind of lost the ability to find common ground, but common ground is the country. Otherwise, we're a bunch of islands. And I'm not going to dwell too much on this, but I know you can handle it.

So, even though you have other expertise, we spent about $6 trillion. We uh we have four trillion. And every year, we're going over budget. Every single year, one party may be more than the other. Obviously, Democrats are known as bigger spenders.

When it comes to defense, Republicans are bigger spenders. I'm okay with that.

So now they're like, we got to go in and cut.

Okay. Republicans want to cut, but they don't have all the power. They have a small advantage in one chamber. They don't have the Senate, even though it's two votes. They don't have the White House.

I don't care what his approval ratings are.

So to me, they did what's possible. When they got Joe Biden to negotiate, it was already beginning to be a win. Before I heard this, before I heard the debate, I was just amazed how angry people are that they didn't get everything they wanted. And that's on the right, the Chip Roy's of the world, the Congressman Normans of the world. Was it always like this?

When you were with the Clinton administration, they were known to do deals.

Well, when I first started in government, there was a much stronger center. I'm a Democrat. I worked with... It was Blue Dog Democrat. Yeah, I'm a centrist Democrat.

I worked with centrist Republicans. We all felt like we were kind of on the same team, and that team was America. That didn't mean we had to agree on everything, but there was much more of a common ground. This whole kind of that I'm only going to go for absolutely everything, and if I don't get everything, I'm going to sink the whole system. And we see that on the far left and on the far right.

It's so destructive. Government is about compromise. It's about people, different people, coming together in the name of a better future. Yeah, the CBO says $1.4 trillion. It'll cut.

Now, we have $4 trillion to play with until 2025 until we hit the debt ceiling again. How it works. I don't want to hit it. Nobody wants to hit it. Let's see if we can do it.

Also, you've got to make tough decisions. I don't know if it's a Simpson Bowl situation, but you have to take that blue ribbon. Council, and you have to empower it with the results. You can't have them do the work, got to get the budget in line, get your political cover, and then say, Yeah, I'm not going to do that.

Well, you're exactly right. I mean, the problem is that everybody, our political leaders, get rewarded for spending because if something is being built or there are more jobs, nobody is really rewarded for just having our expenditures match our budget. It's kind of for an investment in the long-term health of the country. And that's why, for example, with base closures after the Cold War, there was a sense, well, we have too many military bases, we have to close some down. But our political system wasn't able to do it on its own.

So, just like with Simpson Bowles, we created a special commission to say, all right, well, here's what we can do. And we could do something like that exactly now. And certainly, there are programs that could be cut. There are things like the carried interest deduction for private equity and hedge funds, where there's a huge benefit that a small class of investors are getting at the expense. Of everyone else.

There are a lot of things that we could put on the table in a bipartisan way and then go through them and say, what's a great plan for America? And it's very hard for us to do that these days.

Okay, I agree with you.

So one of the big stories yesterday, one of your airspectres is China. One of the big stories yesterday, I think, was when our fighter jet was buzzed within 400 feet by a Chinese fighter jet over the South China Sea. This is international waters. Both sides dig in. This, two days prior, Secretary of Defense Austin wanted to meet with his counterpart in China and discuss deconfliction and set up communication.

China said, no, I don't think so.

So where are we at with U.S.-China relations? How concerned are you? I'm pretty concerned. U.S.-China relations are getting worse and worse, and there's a reason they're getting worse, in my view, that China is just being incredibly aggressive, and China keeps pushing more and more. And basically, the Chinese strategy is they're going to keep pushing until we push back, we and others push back.

And so that's stopping. Starting to happen. But if we don't have the avenues for communications, we had that with the Soviet Union. It's not doing us a favor. Having military-to-military communications isn't a favor for us.

It's an investment on all sides in preventing conflict. And I certainly hope that China's leaders want that. They're experiencing another COVID variant right now. They're not being transparent about how bad it is. They're scrambling to get a vaccine to match it.

Meanwhile, this quote came out yesterday from the former top COVID official. Which I guess is our counterpart to the CDC. Correct. And he came out this, I guess, as George Go says, you can always suspect when it comes to this being a lab leak and the lab leak theories, you can always suspect anything. That's science.

Don't rule out anything. You would think that's not a big statement, but it is a big statement. It's significant. George Gao is the former director of China's CDC. In the early days of the pandemic, he was basically frozen out of deliberations on the Chinese side.

He lives in China, right? He lives in China. He's a very credible scientist. He's actually, in my view, at least from the outside, one of the more credible Chinese scientists who's, I think, been trying to maintain his authenticity and credibility and reliability. He was the one who, when these small number of Western virologists said, oh, we've proven it comes from the market and it comes from raccoon dogs, which was absolutely untrue, he was the one who said, Hey, that's not what we're seeing in the evidence.

He's been pretty good.

So it's significant that he is saying this. And I think the reason is there is just no sufficient evidence for these claims that a small number of Western virologists are making, that it comes from the market. There's a lot of circumstantial evidence it comes from a research-related origin. And we need to keep investigating. And in that same conversation, he said that he had heard that there had been some kind of Chinese internal examination of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but he didn't know who did it, and he didn't know what was the result.

And so George Gao is an important person, but it's clear there's a parallel process that he's not involved with. And it's clear that any scientist in China, no matter who they are, no matter how noble of a human being they are, they can't say what they want. They can't say what they want to do. And here's the thing: could they be culpable? If it comes out and the independent organization decides.

That they acted negligent, didn't inform the world when this was going to happen, it could actually result in human-to-human transfer of the virus. And they should have stopped people from China from leaving for at least a short period of time. Instead, everyone went about their way. Then they could be financially culpable for compensating the world, which, by the way, they should be. I totally agree.

So, there are two questions. One is: how did the initial outbreak happen? There are largely two hypotheses. I think it most likely comes from a research-related accident. There are others who think it may have come from the market, although there doesn't seem to be any real evidence of that.

And then there's, well, once it already started, what actions were taken? And we know that the actions were taken by the ICEs were a full cover-up, lying to the world, lying to the World Health Organization, preventing WHO experts from going to Wuhan. And so I believe there should be culpability and liability for China now. If China is able to get off scot-free and just say, hey, we're not going to allow any investigation. And we just want to move on, and the price of future collaboration with China is just forgetting the 20 million people who are dead unnecessarily from an avoidable pandemic.

That's too high of a price to pay.

So I absolutely think we should be our government, international leaders should be mentioning COVID origins every day, demanding a full investigation every day. And if China continues to block, I think that is evidence that they're covering something up. How does it relate to what's happening in Russia right now?

So it's very connected, just in the sense that Russia needs China for its political survival. If Xi Jinping today said we call on Vladimir Putin and the Russians to withdraw immediately from Ukraine, and we will fully support Western sanctions until they do, the Russians would withdraw immediately. And the Chinese are looking at what happens in Ukraine to see, well, what does that say for Taiwan? And if there is not a Ukrainian victory, that means that the Chinese are going to say, hey, maybe we can get away with this in Taiwan, and the risk to Taiwan goes up. And that's exactly what B.

Kim Shao, who is the Taiwanese ambassador, ambassador equivalent in the United States, said in her remarks yesterday, that Taiwan and Ukraine are deeply connected issues.

So number one, Ukraine asked and paid Rotacek for those people out there. Listening, we're not giving away arms. They're writing. They wrote a check three years ago to get this weapon system that would help them maybe to be able to defray or harden or become a porcupine for a China invasion. And we have not delivered.

How could that not be a priority?

So you mean Taiwan, not Ukraine? My fault. Yeah, yeah. Taiwan wrote a check for the weapons. They said, and we all agree this would be the best way for them to defend themselves on a would-be invasion, which we think is probably going to happen.

It's inevitable. All you have to do is make it too cost-prohibitive to make it happen, and we can't deliver it. Yeah, I totally agree. And the issue is also the United States, we have a lot of military commitments around the world. We have a lot of allies who we're supporting.

So if we're sending planes, for example, to one place and we don't have enough of the military jets, do they go to one place or do they go another place? And what's the priority of who gets what?

So I definitely think we haven't prioritized exactly, as you said, turning Taiwan into a porcupine enough. And now it's. In light of what's happening in Ukraine, we need to speed that up. And we're hearing things that Xi Jinping is saying to his military that you need to be ready for a full invasion of Taiwan by 2027. Right.

I think in w so many ways Russia's already lost. 200,000 casualties. They've been exposed as an inept military force. Their command structure is bad. Their equipment is faulty.

Their tactics were terrible. They've paid such an awful price. Ukraine has showed more sophistication, more dedication. The fact that they ran for the hills rather than run for the draft, that they don't draft rich people and successful people's children, they only get the peasants and empty their jails.

Now they have a second private. Military group off Gazprom. We had the Wagner group named after a conductor that Putin loved. And Hitler loved it too. Oh, nice.

They belong in the same pod, believe me. And now you have Gasprom.

So you have private industry who are grabbing from the military for this. It is chaos. They've been exposed. It's total chaos. And this is the way Russians have done their war.

They got wiped out by Napoleon, and then they pulled back, and then the winter set in, and they just survived, and then they won. Scorched Earth. Yeah.

Well, they got defeated by the Nazis. And then the same thing. They lost millions and stupidly lost millions in the early days of World War II after having done an alliance with the Nazis. And Stalin sits catatonic, thinking these days are over. But so for them, just surviving gives them a feeling that, hey, we can win because we've lost every war that we've won in our history, we've lost first.

And that's why we can't take our eyes off the ball. We can't feel like it. They did invade this time. They weren't invaded. This time they do the aggressor, unlike the other two.

No, no, I think we have to. My only point is we can't keep our eyes off the ball. This is a long-term effort, and Russians are doing bad, but they're trying to get their act together, and we need to make. Make sure that we are fully arming, fully supporting Ukraine. A couple of minutes on the other side about AI, okay?

I'm getting the most out of Jamie Ratzo. Don't move. Politics, current events, and news that affects you. Brian's got a lot more to say. Stay with Brian Kilmead.

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. He's so busy, he'll make your head spin.

It's Brian Kilmead. Hey, we got a couple of minutes with Jamie Metzel.

So, Jamie, you have a real handle on the possibilities of AI. Why are so many that marshaled this cause and engineered this advance so worried about it that they have a right to be?

So, every new technology, every big technology has a potential huge upside and a potential huge downside. If in the earliest days of agriculture, 10,000 years ago, someone said, Hey, this is going to be great. We don't have to run around chasing animals all the time. But someone said, Hey, wait, we're going to get cities and wars and all those kinds of things, both of them would be right.

So, we are now in the early stages of this AI revolution, which is wonderful in lots of ways. It can improve our healthcare, our agriculture, our industry, our economic productivity, and all these other things. But it also has a potential downside in the sense we are creating an intelligence that will, over time, become more intelligent than we are. But you guys, you were there with the the whole dot-com boom and bust. And we misjudged it.

And we wish we could go back and rejigger how we roll out social media. Is there anything to be learned from that? Oh, absolutely.

So, actually, my new book coming out next year talks a lot about this. But we now are at the beginning of this revolution. We know it's going to be transformative. We don't know all the details.

Now is the time we need to be saying, all right, how do we maximize the benefits and minimize the harms? And that it's not just conversations, it's regulations and others. Lawyers used Chatbot GBT to come up with sample cases for case law. It turns out Chatbot made up these cases. And when they were called out on it, they couldn't confirm it.

Yeah, so there's lots of, it's called hallucinations, and it's happening. But we do know that AI is going to get. And hallucinations within AI. No, it's incredible. I mean, when I do it, it'll come up with an answer to something with sources, cited sources, that look so credible, and you really have to check before you realize they've been made up.

But AIs are going to get smarter and smarter, and our brains are kind of what they are, so we're going to have to figure this out. Right.

Passes us, we can't jump out. That's what Elon Musk and others are worried about. Yep. Maybe it won't never pass me. I'm worried about you a little, Jamie.

I'm worried about all of us.

Okay, I'm only worried about myself. Jamie, always great to have you in. Thanks so much. When we come back, Rich Lowry, Inside 2024.

So glad you're here. Brian, Kill Meet Joe. Information you want, truth you demand. This is the Brian Kill Me Show.

So, I don't think anybody buys this idea that Cuomo and New York did it better. We're the fastest-growing state. If you say Cuomo did a better job with COVID than Florida did, first of all, that's not what he used to say. This is like new. Like, six months ago, he would have never said that, right?

He used to say how great Florida was. Hell, his whole family moved to Florida under my governorship. Are you kidding me? Um So some of this stuff, I think, is: look, if someone is saying that, I am going to counter punch, I'm going to fight back on it. Of course.

Governor DeSantis, I'm starting to see his strategy. We all are, as he's set to get into the fray, and he's now in, and he has 12 cities to stop in Iowa and New Hampshire in the next week. Yesterday, he had a big speech. We covered some of it live, where he took subtle shots and direct shots at the president, but his focus was on Joe Biden. I think that really should be the recipe.

If attacked, attack back. But understand that Republicans, for the most part, no matter who that candidate is, for 80%, you guys agree on 80%. You just want the same job. Rich Lowry knows all that, editor of National Review. He is with us now.

Welcome back, Rich. Hey Brian, how's it going? Google excuse me. Twitter aside, what do you think of DeSantis' initial launch?

Well, I'm still confounded by Twitterspace's thing. You have a beautiful wife, adorable kids. Get him up on a rally stage. Get that picture and every TV news broadcast and every front page in the country. That aside, though, I think he's been great.

I mean, he's clearly not afraid of fighting with Trump, which is one of the wraps on him during his intermediate phase when he's kind of in and kind of out. Will he ever criticize Trump? He is criticizing Trump. His team on Twitter is bare-knuckled brawling with all the Trump accounts, never back down. His pack, almost every statement is a shot at Trump.

And DeSantis himself is happy to do it, as you point out, mostly counterpunching, which I think makes sense. And I think the the way Trump has gone after him has obviously created some vulnerabilities. I think if you're Trump, you say, you know, DeSantis, he's an establishment guy, he's not proven at the national level, maybe he's done some great stuff in Florida, but the state was already in good shape. And it's a as Trump said, you know, it's a nice place regardless. You know, it's sunny and 80 degrees, so it's hard to mess up, and I'm the proven commodity.

But instead, because Trump just can't resist hitting everyone someone every way possible, he's done things like said, Oh, Cuomo's done a better job than you, which is crazy, you know, on every level. And politically, Cuomo, obviously, for understandable reasons, is a Republican villain.

So it opens up the possibility for DeSantis to punch back and raise the Fauci stuff.

So I think that all that's been good. You know, the question with DeSantis is. to perform its ability? Does he light can he light up a crowd? Is he likable enough?

I think those are the questions. But there's no doubt about his level of knowledge. There's no doubt about his determination. There's no doubt about his ability to work hard.

So he's in this thing. Trump has better odds, but he's in it. Right, he's up by about 40 points. We'll see if the gap closes individually. Also, a couple of things going on.

On the Biden side, Axios has this story today. Mark Halperin actually has this story today, that most people are starting to think that Joe Biden's actually not going to run for reelection. Remember, Steve Forbes said it the other day on our channel, kind of significant, but it's not like he's known as a left-wing insider. Are you hearing that? I've heard some some speculation from Democrats, but it's hard to say w so when would he when would he get out?

I think he would have to get out if he's not going to do it pretty quickly. You know, some of the speculation is, well, if it's not Trump, you know, Democrats will pull him. But that's not easy, because if it's not going to be Trump, we're probably not going to know until June of next year.

So what is Biden going to get out right before the Democratic Convention? It's sort of hard to see. My level of doubt more is not kind of these behind-the-scenes machinations. It's just is he up for it health-wise? And God forbid, I don't want it to happen.

I don't wish it in on anyone, but he could have a terrible fall anytime. We saw this stumble on the steps of the G7 summit where you're just, oh, you know, don't fall down. I mean, terrible international embarrassment. It could be a health crisis, all the rest of it.

So I do have a level of doubt whether actually he'll end up being the candidate. But it's not because I think there's cynical games being played. I think there's sincere doubt. Doubts about whether he can do it.

So here's the exchange yesterday with KJP, Cut20. It's been more than a month since the re-election announcement. Is President Biden going to hold a campaign event ever?

So I will say this to you, Peter, as you know, we follow The rule of law here. We believe in following the rule of law as it relates. Hold on. As it relates to the way in on the information. You'll have to schedule around rallies.

I'm about to answer your question here. As it relates to anything that is connected to the campaign, any rallies, any events, any endorsement, anything that is connected to the 2024 reelection that is not going to certainly come from here, that is going to come from his campaign or the DNC.

So, what do you think? I mean, do you think there's something to that that not many people can figure out why he's not doing anything? Yeah, well uh how weird is this, right? He he's a candidate for president and you have a reporter asking when he's going to do a campaign event and the White House press secretary dodging, right? Uh yeah, obviously it's going to be a a basement campaign.

It can't be as quite as basement Basement-ish as the first runaround, because he is president of the United States and does have to be seen. But clearly, he's the default guy. This is the whole thing. He was the default that stopped Democrats from nominating Bernie Sanders. He was the default that wasn't Donald Trump in 2020, and he wants to be the default who's not Donald Trump.

Again, and it's worked for him, so you can't say it's crazy. It's just not a very affirmative way to become President of the United States or to win a second term. And it's just fragile. It's just a fragile model. He's in a fragile state, and it's not going to get any better.

Yeah, I want you to hear a little bit more. Here's what Trey Gowdy said last night: cut 22. There is absolutely no excitement over Joe Biden, but there never has been. I mean, he's not excited about his candidacy. He is the path of least resistance to beat Donald Trump.

And that's why he was the nominee, and that's why he'll be the nominee again, because they think that he can beat Donald Trump.

So all this hand-wringing about him not debating, he didn't debate last time. The governor of Arizona didn't debate her opponent, and she was unscathed.

So, look, he's not going to do anything, and he doesn't have to do anything. To win. He did debate last time, but he's he's you know, RFK is closer to Biden than almost every Republican candidate is to Trump. Yeah, isn't that crazy? Yeah, I mean, I think it's an outrage that there's not a debate.

It's just a, as a matter of basic civics. You got someone who's, you know, RFK. He can be out there on some things, but he's a serious, thoughtful guy, and he has a fifth of the Democratic vote, and they're just going to shut him out. It's insane, and it's wrong. And there'd be a thermonuclear reaction in the press if a Republican we're doing it.

But Trey's right. There's never been any excitement. And they're banking there doesn't have to be any excitement as long as they can shoot at Trump. And I think Trump's a risky choice, but the people who say he can't win are completely wrong. You do give him a shot.

Number one, he's got a better team, and Joe Biden's been that bad. And a lot of the policies that Trump put forward that people thought were controversial were better that made the country better. Yeah, I mean there could be a a recession. The the record even without a recession hasn't been great. There could be a health event as we were just discussing.

So you know for whatever worth I'd put it like a thirty, forty percent chance that Trump wins. You know you'd rather be on the 60, 70 percent part of the equation, but thirty or forty percent chance things happen all the time. If you're a baseball fan, there's a thirty percent chance that a really good hitter is going to get a hit at any given at bat. And if he gets a hit, you're not shocked, right? That's a thirty percent event, but it happens all the time.

And he probably had about a forty percent chance of winning in sixteen Trump, and he did. Let's talk about the debt ceiling debate. This is unbelievable what's happening right now. You've got everybody on the Freedom Caucus. I don't know if Massey's on the Freedom Caucus or not, but he got it out of committee because he got something that he wanted.

They have in this bill to raise the debt ceiling, which Joe Biden said, I'm not going to negotiate. He negotiated for weeks. It destroyed the G7. It was the cloud hanging over it. It was embarrassing, if you ask me.

Cut off this trip to other countries. Comes back, still doesn't negotiate. Goes to Camp David. Janet Yellen looks like a total fraud, moving the date in which we default from June 1st to June 3rd. I think it's at June 7th now.

And now we find out that Kevin McCarthy went in there. Among the things he got his student loan, they start paying back in three months. Among the things he got, repurposing the pandemic money, which means billions, taking $10 billion off the IRS money for 87,000 agents that's going to not fund them for at least a year, then go out and win an election. Keeping caps at 1%, we know that. Having work fair, a work fair involved.

Involved in welfare outside of Medicare. They are going to have that when it comes to food stamps for those who qualify.

So there's a list of things they got, but most of the there's a lot in the Republican caucus who thinks it's a disaster. What's your reaction? Yeah, well, they backed down Joe Biden. Joe Biden staked out this position that they thought would prevail. No negotiations, nothing, not a, it's going to be a clean debt ceiling.

And once McCarthy unified the caucus and they passed something, that position became totally unsustainable. And here, lo and behold, they've gotten something. You know, and it's okay. You know, it's not great. Does it change fundamentally the fiscal trajectory of the country?

No. But you have a House majority, Republican House majority of four or five seats. The Democrats control the Senate and the Democrats control the White House.

So there are just limits to what you can do. And these House Freedom Caucus guys, I admire them. I'm friends with some of them. They're very sincere. I know where they're coming from.

I understand why they're not going to support this. But at the end of the day, Republicans had. Unified control from 16 to 18 and ran historically high deficits at a time of peace and prosperity. And didn't no one said boo really about that at all.

Now, when the Democrats have the White House, they're supposedly going to get everything they want. I mean, it just makes no sense. They have to elect a president who takes this stuff seriously and will actually work with them, and then you can get the fundamental changes.

Now, you're lucky if you get the stuff around the edges, and that's what this deal is. Right, it is. But it puts people on the right trajectory. I don't love the not increase in defense. Joe Biden doesn't even keep up with inflation, which goes against conventional thought.

Why is President of the United States would you want less in safety and security and military? I mean, it doesn't. It's for the longest time. If you want to please a Republican, you add to defense spending where it should please an American. But if you want to hear anger, listen to Ralph Norman, Cut Eight.

This bill is smoking mirrors. You know, never are we talking about the interest on the existing debt.

Okay. Forget everything else. $32 trillion. $1 trillion is $30 billion if you have a 3% interest rate. $1 billion.

Do the math. It's going to exceed just the interest. That's where I don't understand where we're coming from. And he goes on. Chip Roy Phil Sanway, Dan Bishop, even more dug in.

But other people like Derek Van Orden, Navy SEAL, conservative, no problem with Elise Stefanik, loves it. Patrick McHenry, this is the best we could get. I was negotiating every step of the way. I suggest the Freedom Caucus can involve negotiations.

So they get their hands dirty and they could see that you can't get everything in life that you want. Lastly, I'm fascinated to see what's going on with the Dodgers. The Dodgers decide to recognize on Pride Month a group of men who pretend to be nuns. And mocked Christianity, they're going to be honored. At a Dodger game, then they quickly saw the blowback and they got rid of him.

The angels said, We'll take him, and they quickly brought him back, and they're going to honor Christians after that. We see the market cap of $12 billion being lost on Target when they decide to roll out this trans kid wear. And then you have obviously the big story is the Bud Light collapsing, no longer the king of beers, after they go for this transgender person for a CoverGirl slot.

So, what's your reaction? You think this is all good for America? Yeah, I think to the extent that we can send the message, you know, just your corporation, just play it down the middle. Don't get involved in the culture wars. Don't get involved in issues that have nothing to do with your core business.

Now, some of these businesses are more vulnerable than the others. And Bud Light is just a classic example of a brand that's vulnerable, because their whole thing is supposed to be they're the Middle America, you know, patriotic brand, and then they associate themselves with this Freak show of a guy, Dylan Mulvaney, and there's this blowback. And the thing is, once you think about whether you want to drink Bud Light, it's a big loss to Bud Light, right? Because the whole point is that you don't think about it because it's there and you know it, and then you just grab it out of the freezer. But then you think about it a little bit, there's Miller Light right next to it in the freezer.

There's Corona, there's Medela. There's a dozen options. And I think that's why it's really caught fire with Bud Light. Plus, Bud Light's kind of become a national joke. And it's not just right-wingers boycotting it.

Everyone's like, why do I want to be associated with these people?

So maybe eventually, you know, it comes back around. But it's been a massive blow to them, much bigger than I would have expected. Target, you know, it's a low-margin business, so any turbulence is going to hurt it. Dodgers, I think it's a little harder, right? Because you don't become an Angels fan if you're a Dodgers fan.

And you might say, well, I'm not going to go, or I'm not going to watch, but that's hard to sustain. But for a major league baseball team to be honoring an anti-Catholic gay activist group, it's just A symptom of the bizarre world we live in. Rich Larry, thanks so much. Hey, thanks much, Brian. Covered a lot of ground.

1-866-408-7669. That's the number to call to be on the show. Or you can write me BrianKilme.com. I'll go over your questions and comments about 2024. DeSantis is in, hitting directly and indirectly back at Trump.

Trump still has a commanding lead. Where's this thing going? Don't move. It's Brian Kilmeade. From his mouth to your ears, it's Brian Killmead.

that women, white women in particular, want to protect this patriarchy here because it's to their benefit. They want to make sure that their husbands do well, they want to make sure that their sons do well, they want to make sure that their children do well, and they want to make sure that they do well. Most of the women in some of these studies are married white women and they do fall in line with what their husbands are doing, what their husbands are. How their husbands are voting.

So That is some of the genius coming off. And I hate, I'm torn about listening to the view. But when they make ridiculous statements like that, to the point, Jane Fonda comes on a little bit later and says some of the most crazy stuff about environmental, white supremacy, and how it's all related, environmental challenges, climate change, and white supremacy and how it's all related, as well as greed and Republicans.

So, and even the audience has trouble going along with it. People just want to keep hearing that. And if you're somebody who's a minority, you just feel as though you could say something. In perpetuity. Whatever you want.

It doesn't really matter. You're not going to get in trouble. No one's going to come down on you. But believe me, everybody wants their family to do better. It has nothing to do with the color of anybody's skin.

I thought this was clear, I don't know, fifty, sixty years ago. But a lot of people are also writing about 2023. Uh and other things. It says uh how about this one? Oh, no, I'm out can't read that out loud.

It's a little abrupt. Uh this is this. I can't seem to get a response anywhere. Why can't I attend one of Donald Trump's rallies? When is he going to advertise his rallies?

I have no idea. That's something you have to pull up for him. How the hell? This is from John over in Fleming Island. How the hell is Fetterman allowed to address the Senate in a hoodie and shorts?

Isn't this against the protocol in the Senate? I thought so. I mean, I thought people had standards. But you know, when you become senator, I thought a big thing was unbuttoning the top button that Jim Jordan does. But now you have Fetterman making a mockery of the Senate.

He looks like he doesn't belong there. And now he talks and acts like he doesn't belong there. Why would you do anything to make you look worse? That's what he does on a regular basis.

So, and the fact is, when you win and you have to go be treated for depression, not a good combination of how productive you're going to be. And when you can't ask a question, I also think that that tends to be a little bit of a negative. All right, we're going to go over all this stuff. If you ever want any of my books, go to BrianKilme.com. This way, you can order them.

You get them personalized, especially for Father's Day if you act in the next couple of days.

So, even the ones in the past, even paperback, just BrianKilme.com, it pops up like 1-800 flowers. Tells me your address you want, what you want said within a certain amount of characters. Keep it here. From the Fox News Radio Studios in Midtown Manhattan, it's the fastest-growing radio talk show. Brian.

In Kill Mead. Hi, everyone. Welcome to the latest moments of the Brian Kilmey Show from 40th and 6th in Midtown Manhattan, heard around the country, around the world. This hour we're going to be joined by Congressman and Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Congressman Jason Smith. How is he going to go in the debt ceiling debate?

Where is he going to vote? And what does it mean for our wallets? The CBO has. Has chimed in on what this deal would be if we are okay, went ahead and had a vote on it. The market's down 235 points.

I don't think they're too optimistic. If it does, in fact, pass, what do it mean for our economy? Jason Smith on that. And Greg Jarrett is in studio. Brand new book is now out this week: Trial of the Century.

And of course, he's a Fox News legal analyst. Before we get to Greg, let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. Today was the deadline. He was given three weeks to produce a document.

So we don't have confidence in Director Wray. We're already in the process of drafting legislation to hold FBI Director Wray in contempt of Congress. Yup, sickening. That's how I described the FBI behavior in their treatment of whistleblowers and the ongoing protection of the Biden family. And now Director Chris Wray hits a new low.

I'll explain. Number two. At the end of the day, leadership is not about entertainment, it's not about building a brand. It's not about virtue signaling. It is about results.

Ron DeSantis, full-blown, ready to go. Iowa and New Hampshire are on DeSantis' hit list this week. He's officially hitting the campaign trail. 12 cities down by at least 35 points to Donald Trump. One thing is clear: he will take on the former president, but focus on Biden and Trump's game plan remains kind of a secret.

Sununu, Pence, and Christie prepare to join the fray in weeks. Number This is just the first step. Anybody who thinks this is the end of reforming Washington, for God's sake, we've been waiting for years to get a chance to finally turn the direction of this country around. And that is the number two guy in the House, Steve Scalise, dead-sealing bipartisan brawl, picking up steam as a floral voice vote takes place in the House in hours. We're going to bring you the facts on the compromise and have the audio of what everyone is choosing to say about it and divorce of some of it being reality, just rhetoric.

Greg Jarrett, all about reality, not about rhetoric. Welcome to the studio. This is unreal. What is it? We'll be here with you in studio.

It's been a while. Fresh off your virtual signing with Sean Hannity last year. Yeah, absolutely. We had a great time. You know, people can still go to my website and they can order a signed copy of my new book, Trial of the Century.

And we're going to get to your book. I just got to ask you about this. When people listen and go, Chris Ray, what is he being held in contempt about? What is going on here? What did he do?

Defining a subpoena that was duly authorized and served on him by the House Oversight Committee, House Judiciary Committees both have been investigating wrongdoing involving President Joe Biden. And look, they have a constitutional oversight duty. to look into these things, corruption in government. And if you start withholding documents, you're covering things up.

So I was just astounded to see four FBI agents with great backgrounds come forward two weeks ago and say I'm a whistleblower. And ever since I came out and blew the whistle, which is supposed to be whistleblower protections, my careers have been ruined. We've been fired. Can't get our records. Can't get my gun permit if I want to go back and be a local cop and an investigator.

And they came forward about things they were not happy with in terms of this, the Justice Department, and what was happening at the FBI specifically. And then we have a bunch of Democrats going after their credibility and a bunch of Republicans just saying, tell me your story. And now we moved on. And I feel like their careers have been ruined. And word goes out: if you're a whistleblower, you're going to be isolated.

Well, the same mainstream media that peddled the phony Russia collusion narrative is now taking the same position. Nothing to see here. Let's move on. You know, they have been witting accessories to the cover-up of Biden family influence peddling schemes that are well documented now by the House Oversight Committee.

So, by the way, people don't think James Comer is doing a good job. You just don't want to hear what he's saying. I think he's doing a great job. Oh, yeah. Right.

And he isn't. Uncovered more information and evidence and documents, thousands of pages of wire transfers and banking records and 170-plus suspicious activity reports that the Department of Justice never revealed or didn't discover one of the two.

So it got a couple of things. You know, we find out about 12 family members benefiting from transactions in international business represented by Hunter and Jim Biden, but they have no product. They have no expertise, and their product is influence. Which suggests money laundering, because you've got, you know. A plethora of shell companies and LLCs that seem to have no other purpose, according to Chairman Comer, than to be receptacles for tens of millions of dollars flowing into Biden-controlled accounts, then distributed to family members.

And look, the law of money laundering is that if you're using these companies, which are by themselves legal, but if you're using them for an illegal purpose to hide the source of the money, that's money laundering.

So This whistleblower came years ago, came in and said, I got something to say. They have found out that, according to this one FBI agent, He possessed, he witnessed Joe Biden benefiting when vice president about $5 million that he made. And he went to the FBI and said, listen, I'm going to tell you the story. And I filled out. He filled that in FD1023 form.

So he goes and puts this in documentation. It says this is exactly what happened. And it gets filed away. Nothing's done about it. They go over to Congress and say, listen, this guy goes over and goes, listen, I'm telling you right now, Joe Biden personally benefited from when he was vice president off his influence campaign.

And so James Comer said, what'd you do about it?

Well, I wrote it down. I filled out this FD 1023 form.

So we went to the FBI and goes, can I see that form? And Chris Ray says, no. And he says, I need it. I'm going to subpoena it. He said, I'm defining the subpoena.

So here's Comer, what he's going to do now, Cut 23. Today was the deadline. He was given three weeks to produce a document and go into detail on what exactly they did to investigate the validity of the document. But thus far, he won't even admit that they have the document, Sean. He's given us the runaround for three weeks.

He's just stalling. He said there's a good faith effort. They haven't produced anything. They haven't even admitted they have a document.

So we don't have confidence in Director Wray. We're already in the process of drafting legislation to hold an oversight committee markup next week to hold FBI Director Wray in contempt of Congress.

So what changes if he's held in contempt? Because it's going to go to the Department of Justice who will do nothing. Not necessarily. There are two kinds of congressional contempt. One is criminal, one is civil.

And the first is what you're referring to. If you do criminal contempt, it goes to the U. S. Attorney in Washington, D. C., appointed by Joe Biden, who reports to Merritt Garland, also appointed by Joe Biden.

So that means the subject of the disputed document is being determined by the two people who report directly to Joe Biden. Not to mention the target of the criminal contempt is Christopher Wray, who also reports to Merrick Garland and Joe Biden.

So even though federal regulations require Garland to recuse himself as the Attorney General and appoint somebody else, he won't do it. He has a track record of ignoring disqualifications under the law.

So your other option is civil contempt. You file a lawsuit immediately, it goes to a federal judge. And if you are lucky enough to find an impartial one, I suspect that judge would say: look, you have no legal basis, Mr. Wray, to withhold this document. Congress has a constitutional duty and authority to look into acts of government corruption.

Hand it over. And it astounds me that a guy repo appointed by Donald Trump To replace James Comey. Who was recommended to him by Chris Christie, and you said Rod Rosenstein. And Jeff Sessions. And Jeff Sessions would be such an obstructionist to a Republican Congress.

You know, look, Donald Trump was a Washington outsider. He wasn't connected to people in Washington, D.C. He relied on advice for appointments.

Some of the advice was horrible. Any advice you get from Jeff Sessions and Rod Rosenstein is inherently suspect. And he relied on their recommendations, and Chris Christie appointed Christopher Wray, whose only goal as director of the FBI, it seems to me, is to cover up wrongdoing within the FBI.

So let's talk about your book. It's now out this week. It's called Trial of the Century. And this looks at the famous 1925 Scopes monkey trial. Tell us the relevance it has today.

Well, it established and helped solidify some of the cherished constitutional rights, including free speech, that we enjoy today. You have to remember, almost 100 years ago, at the time of this trial, America was on the precipice, staring into this abyss of censorship. They were banning books on things like evolution. In Tennessee, they made it a crime for a schoolteacher to teach evolution out of the state-approved textbook that had a chapter on it. A young man, a schoolteacher, was arrested.

The greatest trial lawyer who ever lived, Clarence Darrow, volunteered to defend him. The prosecutor in the case was William Jennings Bryant, three-time presidential nominee, who was the fundamentalist leader who helped get that law passed.

So you have this titanic clash in this tiny town of Dayton, Tennessee, between two epic figures in America. The first trial broadcast live on radio. To a riveted nationwide audience. And who is Clarence Darrow's client? John Scopes, twenty five year old school teacher.

And the climactic event occurred when Darrow, realizing the jury was stacked against him and so was the judge, knew he was losing the case and decided to roll the dice. And he called the prosecutor, William Jennings Bryant, to the witness stand as an expert on the Bible. And the judge said, You can't do that. You can't call the prosecutor. Brian stands up and says, Your Honor, I have nothing to fear.

I'll testify. Bryan was destroyed. in a withering, decimating cross-examine by Cross-examination by Clarence Darrell. And that moment in history was a sea change. It ended the suffocation of intellectual empowerment and academic autonomy and free speech.

But it's about where we came from. I mean, fundamentally where the human race came from, right? Yeah, exactly. And Darrow's argument had a dozen theologians and scientists renowned the world over there in Dayton, Tennessee, to testify. That these two concepts of evolutionary theory and creationism are actually harmonious.

They do not conflict. Evolutionary theory does not undermine. You should be allowed to teach it. That's right. And that's the position of most religions today.

The Pope has said evolution principles. Presupposes creationism. And that was Darrow's argument all along. All right, Greg, you have a few more minutes? Yeah, of course.

For you, anywhison, is it okay if we hold him over? Because this is a big audition. She's nodding her head. Audition? This was an audition.

And just like Carson. Remember, Johnny Carson would decide if the comedian was good enough to sit on the couch? Yeah.

I like her to stay, but Allison, you ultimately have the decision. She's not yes. She's nine years. Again, I was all in. I'd like to audition for American Idol if that's possible.

I don't have any pull with that, but it's good to have aspirations. I think they're looking for somebody younger with musical ability. I was the leading guys and dolls in high school, if that gives you any sense of my vocal ability. Do you have the VHS tape I could look at in the break? They had no VHS now.

Not even back then? All right, so I'm going to say no. I'm going to say no.

Okay. All right. Back in a moment. Expanding your knowledge base. It's the Brian Kill Meat Show.

A talk show that's real. This is the Brian Kill Me Show.

Hey, welcome back, everybody. A few more minutes with Greg Jerry, Fox News Legal Analyst, author of the brand new book, Trial of the Century, which is out this week. Where do you get it, Greg?

Well, you can go to amazon.com, BarnesandNoble.com, or just go to your bookstore. It's in bookstores nationwide. Do you have an appearance coming up anywhere? Or they just can't afford you? No, they can't possibly afford me.

I'm half of what you charge, which is unaffordable. Which is still unaffordable. Yeah, I'm doing some events here and there, but mostly I stick to television, radio. You know, podcasts, social media. You know, that's how you get the word out.

Understood.

So, Greg, I got to ask you, I know you're a. You're probably the attorney that Don even despite Donald Trump having about 50 attorneys. I think he respects you more than just about anyone. He always brings you up.

So I'm just wondering, out of all the cases he still has pending. What should he be worried about most, or would you, as an attorney, would say this is what he should be worried about most?

Well, the Bragg case is absurd. The Fannie Willis forthcoming indictment, if there is anything would be, yeah, in Georgia, would be doubly ludicrous. You know, the betting money is Jack Smith's special counsel. I don't think he's looking at January 6th. Mar-a-Lago.

Yeah, there's no there there.

So he's looking at Mar-a-Lago, and it's tough for him to claim that Trump essentially stole classified documents since Biden did the same thing times four in four different locations.

So I think instead, you know, he's going to try to focus on obstruction of justice. Trump was withholding an uncooperative with the FBI. That may be a tough sell because Trump has witnesses who are prepared to testify. Wait a minute, when the FBI came here armed with a subpoena, Trump told them to take whatever they wanted. But he also has eyewitnesses, valets that said, I saw certain rooms where documents were moved, reportedly.

And some lawyers, how about the fact that one of his attorneys was forced to become a witness and testify against their client, saying that he did not, we assume reports are that he did not give up, he didn't know about everything that Donald Trump had when he testified that he gave up all the documents. Yeah, you know, these are our news reports, and we learned during the Russia hoax that the media tends to get things largely wrong. And in fact, they win peelets or prizes for getting the story fundamentally wrong. How much Uh Do you credence do you put in? You might not know.

But last week there was a story that Boris Epstein, who is the coordinating attorney for all these cases, made it impossible for certain attorneys to do their job because he was screening well, what exactly the President could hear and not hear. And he thinks it was hurting the President. Do you hear any of that in the internal finding going on in the camp? Wow, attorneys disagreeing with each other and disliking each other. And not getting access to their clients.

I mean, that's a novel concept, unheard of in Western civilization. No, look, that's typical stuff that goes on between lawyers. And, you know, I. Again, I reserve judgment until there's an indictment. We can read the charges and so forth.

You know, a lot of the news reporting surrounding all of this has been erroneous. For example, the media never points out the fact that, you know. Presidents don't pack up their belongings and ship them off to their residences. By law, that's required to be done by the GSA, Government Services Administration, which is inherently incompetent to know what goes where, which is why everything ends up in the wrong place.

So, you know, I mean, it's hard to say that Trump was stealing documents, and especially if he told the FBI, take whatever you wanted. That's not what Garland wanted. Garland wanted a raid. Reportedly, FBI officials said, Wait a minute, you can't do that. He was going to give it to us.

It was unbelievable. The FBI should have just said no. Because they were already in the eye of the storm. Why would they want to be political? I agree.

Pick up Trial of the Century. It's Clarence Darrow, and he is the guy that everybody looks to as sort of the epitome of a great attorney. Greg, as you are. Greg, congratulations on the book. Thank you very much, Brian.

Good to see you. Jason Smith next. A radio show like no other. It's Brian Killmead. It does not say what we've been told that it does.

It doesn't cut spending. It's not a spending cut. They say it's going to cut $2 trillion in deficit over the next six years. This is a two-year bill. And that's just basically a hope and a dream and a handshake that you're going to commit to those spending caps when you may not even be in the majority two years from now.

It's bullshit. I mean, it's just it's it's a a lie to the American people and it's wrong.

Well, that's Nancy Mace, not for it. Kind of a bit of a surprise if you ask me, because I did think she'd be for it. She tends to understand that you got to compromise. I understand that it didn't get everything everybody wanted, but when it comes to raising the debt ceiling, Kevin McCarthy got a lot, a lot, considering the negotiations were they were told by the President they're not going to have any negotiations, clean the debt ceiling or forget it. Not going to happen, didn't happen.

We'll go over the details of it, but what about the chairman of the ways and means? Congressman Jason Smith of Missouri joins us now. Congressman, welcome back. It's great to be with you, Brian. Congressman, I looked at what was gotten by Kevin McCarthy's team.

And I think it's pretty good. I mean, I look, the CBO just said that it's going to save $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years.

Okay, that's needed, not done. But 7-6 have got out of the committee. They did the other thing on student loans. In three months, they're going to start being paid back. The rest is going to be worked out through the court.

They got permitting reform when it comes to pipelines. They're going to be able to do that. They got interned windmills get built a little bit quicker, too.

So you look at some of these things, including work fair for welfare. I think there's some positive things here. Why there's so many in the Freedom Caucus so down on it? Absolutely, Brian. You know, this is not a perfect bill, but no piece of legislation that I've ever seen in Congress has been a perfect bill.

But what this piece of legislation does, it's a step in the right direction. It's a step to turning the Titanic, is what I would refer to as our fiscal status as a nation. It's the Titanic. We need to turn it. I'd like to turn it much sharper, but guess what?

We are turning it here. What President Biden and Chuck Schumer was demanding was a blank check debt limit increase. And then whenever we finally started the negotiations, they wanted tax increases. This bill has zero tax increases. It's definitely not a blank check debt limit.

We haven't seen work requirements in two decades being addressed in TANF. It's being done here. We're seeing work requirements being expanded for SNAP benefits. That's something that can directly affect the labor shortage. have not In my 10 years of being in Congress, we have not passed A budget that spends less next year than what it does this year.

That's a step in the right direction. Could it go farther? Yes, but it is a step. We haven't had budget caps in two years. Under the two years that we didn't have budget caps, Brian, we saw the Democrats under one party Democrat rule of Navy Police, Chuck Schumer, and Joe Biden increase spending by $10 trillion, which led to the highest inflation in a generation.

We're putting budget caps for two years of spending for the next two years. I think that's pretty important. Here is Dan Bishop. Couldn't feel worse about this whole proposal, cut nine.

Well, they're up there 434 other members of Congress. Nobody could have done a worse job. Nobody could have done a worse job, even the Democrats? Excuse me. I shouldn't have said it that way.

There are 222 members of the Republican Congress. Nobody in the Republican Congress could have done a worse job. What's your reaction to that? I strongly disagree. There's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacks here.

And I can tell you right now, the negotiation that Speaker McCarthy, Garrett Graves, and Patrick McHenry did is huge. The Democrats yesterday, when I was presenting before the Rules Committee, every one of them voted against this bill in the Rules Committee because they didn't like work requirements. They didn't like spending caps. They didn't like Permitting reform. They listed all the things that they dislike.

Find what a Democrat wants in this bill, other than raising the debt limit. That's a victory, Brian. I mean, you didn't get everything that you wanted, but you got steps to improvement. We put into statute administrative PAYGO. That's basically saying that in order for the administration in any future executive orders, that they have to pay for it.

That means our student loan proposal that Biden did, it would have to have been paid for the half a trillion dollars. I mean, these are good steps in the right direction. Are they perfect? No, but it's steps. And what passes, if this becomes law, it will be the largest rescissions package in the history.

Of America to be rescinded. One-fifth of the pages of this bill rescind government funding. That's big. OMB, this is what the Republicans were saying, OMB has to enforce that and they're not going to with the pay go. They do.

And OMB will be held accountable to Congress. You know, people talk about increasing the debt limit. The real side is, is the appropriations process. And this requires a propro appropriations process. that all twelve appropriations bills have to be passed by September thirtieth.

If they're not all passed by September 30th, Brian, the Massey amendment will take an effect, and that will be a continuing resolution that will reduce all the funding in every program by one percent. until all 12 appropriations bills are passed. Those 12 appropriations bills is where we can hold OMB accountable, where we can hold the IRS accountable, where we can hold the EPA accountable, and where we can hold the Justice Department accountable. And so I think this is about good government. The only way that we'll max out this credit card is if all these members of Congress vote for that additional spending.

Understood.

So here is some Democrats upset by this bill, which a lot of Republicans point to the fact that Democrats aren't upset. There's no press conferences condemning the negotiators. But listen to Elizabeth Warren, Cut 11. have a lot of concerns. About this agreement.

It's about taking food away from people who are hungry. It's about squeezing students on their loan payments. It's about slowing down the fight against climate change. And it's about helping out billionaire tax cheats. That seems to me to be bad, bad, bad, and bad.

Right.

Where is billionaires tax cheats? I missed that little phrase. It's absolutely ridiculous. What she's worried about is that we are pulling back $1.4 billion in IRS funding to hire more IRS agents. Guess what?

Those IRS agents, according to CBO, Clarifies that the increased funding and the increased agents will result in 600,000 more Americans who make less than $75,000 a year to be audited.

So it's easy for them to throw out their billionaires. But let me tell you, the billionaires that Elizabeth Warren likes are her environmentalist-funded billionaires because all that clean energy stuff that they had in the IRA, all those tax breaks, they exempted billionaires. That's what's absolutely unacceptable. They talk out of both sides of their mouth. She's upset because this is a bill that moves us to more of a fiscally responsible nation and moves us in a conservative path.

Even Speaker Gingrich said this bill brings us to more common sense and more conservatism. Oh, look, you guys got to win elections. If you want more power, win elections, you'll be able to do more. If you don't do more with that, that means the diversity of opinions got you hamstrung. But if you win the presidency, you win the Senate, I don't care about the bad breaks or what happened January 6th, what happened with the runoffs.

You don't have that much power right now. You're exactly right. We only have half of one-third of government right now. I can tell you, in my time that I've been in Congress, only two years did I serve where the Republicans controlled the White House, the House and the Senate. And we weren't able to pass laws on work requirements.

We weren't able to cut spending. We weren't able to do a rescissions package this great. We weren't able to do permitting reform. Think about that. And we're doing that in a divided government.

Could the agreement be better in the future if we have a Republican House, Republican Senate, Republican White House? Yeah.

But this is still a better agreement than what we did when we did have Trump and Ryan and McConnell.

So I want you to hear, what bothers me is defense. And you're still below inflation. It's what Joe Biden bizarrely wants. Listen to Lindsey Graham. What I will not do.

Is adopt the Biden defense budget and call it a success. Kevin said that the defense is fully funded. If we adopt the Biden defense budget, It increases defense spending below inflation. 3.2% increase in defense is below inflation. The Biden defense budget takes the Navy from 298 ships to 291 at a time when China is going to increase their Navy by almost a third.

So the Biden defense budget was a joke before, and if we adopt it as Republicans, we will be doing a great disservice to the party of Ronald Reagan. He has legitimate concerns, am I correct? I don't know if I agree with him. I mean, a three percent increase when everything else is being decreased, I don't think is a strong concern. Let's look at this.

Americans over the last two years have seen a cut In their pay by 15.3%, because that's how much inflation's risen since Joe Biden's taken the oath of office. They haven't got a pay increase of 15.3%.

So everyone's going to have to live within their means. We do need to fund military. This, in fact, increases military by 3%, not as much as inflation. I grant him that, but we need to look at the defense budget. There's a lot of waste that needs to also be addressed.

We need to take a lot of wokeism out of the defense budget that has been funded by this administration. But we need to make sure we're prioritizing our soldiers and our equipment to make sure that we are truly guided and ready for anything that could come before us. All right. So listen. Like I said, nothing's perfect, but it's a compromise bill.

I think we've got to get back to it. If things are as they read, I haven't memorized all 99 pages. I think there's much more gains than subtractions. And the Freedom Caucus, I would say, listen, from now on in these negotiations, you've got to put somebody in there. and let them hear what's going on and say, okay, you take it from here.

You can't, you don't have total control. And even if you got sixty senators and had the House, there's always going to be one Senator that says, I'm not going to go along with that. The Joe Manchins for the Democrats and so many others. The Murkowski's for the Republicans.

So I just think that people are unrealistic about how our government runs. And it's it's discouraging. We need to understand that incremental progress is good when you're going towards anything in life. Don't vote against something because it's not everything that you want. You know, when you have a win, take it towards the bank, Brian.

And that's what conservatives need to do when they see you don't control all aspects of government. You only control half of one-third. Do you expect this to pass? Absolutely. Do you think that Kev McCarthy's job is in jeopardy?

Not at all. He has the highest approval ratings of any Republican speaker in the last three decades. And he has the faith of this conference. Do you have some people occasionally that get upset? Absolutely.

But there's no one that's unified this conference more than Speaker Kevin McCarthy. All right. I tell you what, no one is going to say he doesn't work hard, as you. Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Congressman Jason Smith, thank you. Thanks, Brian.

Take care. All right, listen, I'm going to open up the phones next. Many of you disagree with me. I look at this and I see mostly good. And I also know in all reality, what hand Kevin McCarthy had.

By getting the negotiation and making the president go back on his word not to negotiate, that is already a win and chose the power. Also, I don't mind that he came out of there not vilifying the president because you got to go back for another deal at some point, sometime. And if you go ahead and do scorched earth on one deal, you've stopped the next. You listen to Brian Killmee show. Don't move.

Both sides, all opinions. It's Brian Killmead. The more you listen, the more you'll know. It's Brian Killmeade. Israel continues to indiscriminately rain bullets and bombs on worshipers, murdering the old, the young, those.

Who carries? The Revolution. the people, the masses. those who brought the ferocity of the violence, those who need our protection, They will carry this revolution. That the law is a manifestation of white supremacy that continues to oppress.

and suppress people in this nation and around the world. It's unbelievable. That is the commencement speaker for the law degree from CUNY, which is a city-funded college system, which is just anti-American.

Now, keep in mind, this woman, Fatima Musa Muhammad from Yemen, was selected by her classmates to be the commencement speaker, anti-Israel, anti-American, anti-capitalism. Do you believe this? And that's the message. And I give Mayor Adams tremendous credit for spending the next day talking about the need to love this country again, think red, white, and blue, think patriotism, think about sacrifice and how great this country is. I love that he did that.

I want him to keep building on that. Believe me, it's a message that Democrats fundamentally, I think, want to hear. Hank, listen on WNIS. Hey, Hank. Hey.

How are you doing, buddy? Yeah, you're in one of the best places in America, Virginia Beach. That's right, home of the Navy SEALs. Listen, you're the hardest man in media, hardest working man in media, and mister McCarthy is the hardest man working guy in Congress. You guys have a lot in common.

I say sign that thing, get her done. and then let the world and the country know. Why we have 15% inflation. It's all because of Joe Biden shutting down that energy. We went from a energy war, now we're an information war to an energy war, back and forth.

Open up the gas, open up the pipelines, and we'll get back on track. What do you think?

So, how about this, Hank? I'll add to this. Uh on the G seven They were trying to talk to other countries, like India and others, and say, Hey, listen, you got to get off the Russian gas. Why are you buying anything from Russia? And they say, Well, we want to buy it from you.

And you know what we said? No. we don't have the rare earth. We have the natural gas that burns clean. We have customers that want to buy it.

We want to condemn them from buying it from Russia, but we don't want to sell it to them. How unacceptable is that?

Well, that's just the whole problem. Like in the very beginning I said I said Trump, Pence, common sense, Biden-Harris, nonsense. We're going between nonsense and common sense. It's almost like they're doing it intentionally. We have the cleanest oil and cleanest energy in the world, and we're not using it.

It's really strategically ridiculous. And now we've got these major corporations heading back to China, these U.S. moguls. Jamie Dimon's going back there. Elon Musk is going back there.

Charlie Munger is going back there. These guys are going back to maybe the first time in years going back to China for business purposes. I mean, do they understand that to a tremendous degree, you can't cut on a dime? I get it, but this is everything to do with being anti-American. That's their goal, to supplant us as the number one superpower in economic power.

Barry, listening to Los Angeles, Barry. Yeah.

How was it a victory that they got Biden to negotiate? It's Biden's constitutional responsibility to negotiate. The House of Representatives has. power of the purse. Why was McCarthy even negotiating after the House?

Passed the bill. He didn't even make the Senate vote on it. That's the problem. What do you mean, Barry? What do you mean?

After the House passed the bill, Barry, after the House passed the bill. They passed it. Wh w what was going to happen to that in the Senate?

Well, make the Senate vote. And how do you know? How do you know Manchin's not going to vote? You need sixty. No, you don't.

Why would you need 60?

So if you need 60, then that means the Democrats are filibustering it. That means the debt ceiling is on the Democrats. Barry, if you go and take this to the end, this dies in the Senate. The House bill, they weren't even expected to get what's in the House bill. To me, this is the best deal they possibly could have gotten.

They didn't have the leverage. They already forced him to negotiate when he said he wouldn't have. And the things in here aren't perfect, but I think it shows great progress. I think the Freedom Caucus has got to get involved. Jim Jordan, a founding member, said, I like it.

Elise Stefanik says it works. From high atop Fox News headquarters in New York City, always seeking solutions, never sowing division. It's Brian Kilmead. Hi, everyone. Welcome to the latest moments of the Brian Killmead Show.

He comes here from Midtown Manhattan, heard around the country, around the world.

So glad you're here. Brian Brenberg, Jackie DeAngelis, Taylor Riggs will be here. They are, of course, the host of their brand new show, which is kind of brand new. It's about three months old, wildly successful. All three of them talk, and they still like each other, which is amazing.

The show is. Called The Big Money Show. It's on every day at 1 o'clock on FBN. Liz Peake, Fox News Contributor Commonist with FoxNews.com. Always great to have you in.

Liz, great to see you. Good morning.

So happy to be here.

So let me see. There's a lot we could discuss, but let's start with the debt ceiling discussions. and the fact that eleven members of the Freedom Caucus are against it, people like Rand Paul firmly against it, Lindsey Graham for a different reason, not enough to spend spending. From what you see, from what Kevin McCarthy has done, what is your takeaway?

Okay, I kind of come down where Newt Gingrich is. And Newt Gingrich had a piece up on the Fox website a few days ago that I thought was exactly right. It was basically: this is a starter step. It accomplished a great deal of what the Republicans wanted to accomplish. After all, let's remember, just six weeks ago, Joe Biden was refusing to negotiate at all, wanted a so-called clean debt bill, debt ceiling bill.

And basically, they forced him off of that perch and made him negotiate some pretty significant changes. And first of all, it does cut spending, non-discretionary, sorry, discretionary spending other than defense back to fiscal 22 levels, which is not nothing, while still funding veterans and medical programs and things that are important. It does limit top-line Federal spending to 1 percent growth over the next six years.

So, what does that mean?

Well, it it basically uh we were on a we're on a trajectory, as you well know, Brian, uh that is completely unsustainable. And uh and I think you know, the way I would have sold well, I think the way the Republicans did sell their initial bill that they passed in the House was that we had this explosion of spending, a once-in-a-lifetime explosion of spending, which basically paid for the or tried to pay for the damage done by the pandemic, tried to keep the economy afloat.

So five, six trillion dollars. We've never spent that kind of money in our entire lives, so in our history.

So what What they tried to do is go back to an earlier baseline. The Democrats basically ignored that. Unusual aspect of this spending. They refused to acknowledge that this was a bubble that had to be pierced. And they just wanted to make the new trend line the new you know, kind of the ongoing numbers.

And the Republicans said no.

So I think it's very important that they did that. And when the people, the critics say, well, give me twenty nineteen. Don't give me 2022 because 2022 is pandemic spending. Right, right, still. No question.

On the other hand, you have to kind of work with the idea that what do Republicans have? A four or five seat majority in one branch of government. Don't forget this thing has to get through the Senate and it has to be signed off on by Joe Biden.

So, I mean, I think the idea that we could get everything we wanted, and I say we, because I am a conservative, I'm very alarmed about the spending levels in this country, and frankly, more than the level, maybe where it's going. But I think you have to just sort of say, okay, this is step one. And this is what Gingrich talked about, which I thought was really brilliant. He goes back to his battles, his contract with America, period, et cetera. They ended up with four balanced budgets in a row.

Last time in our history, that that happened. That didn't happen overnight. It was one step at a time, methodically moving towards that ambition. We have 12 appropriations bills coming up in the fall. All of those can be fodder for further cuts going forward, right?

This isn't the end of this argument. But look, at this point, I think, look, of course, there are two aspects to this: political and financial. The political game was being won by Republicans astoundingly. I mean, I think the White House told us that we never win this stuff. We never win.

And the White House basically assumed that the Republicans wouldn't come up with a bill, that they would be happy to throw the nation into default. And of course, that was all the chatter you heard from Joe Biden and his apparatchics: these are bomb throwers, they have no responsibility, you know, yada dee, yadda. And I think the Republicans really have handled this very extremely well. McCarthy went out of his way, number one, to be available, answer every question, 45 minutes. Absolutely.

And number two is he kept it upbeat. Number one, he didn't want to spook the markets. He didn't want to say, wow, this is terrible, and then the market goes fine. The other thing is, he didn't want to make it personal.

So the minute you say the President's in there and he's not paying attention or start commenting on the negotiations that are being insincere, then all of a sudden besides dig in, Kevin McCarthy had a tactic. Yeah.

And it seems I thought it worked, but listen to Chip Roy cut seven.

So we agree that this is about prospective spending. I've heard a lot of folks talk about it being making sure we, you know, all this is about default. We're always talking about paying our bills. This is really about increasing the credit card for, generally speaking, prospective spending. And one of the things he's saying is because the debt ceiling lifts until 2025, it has $5 trillion to move, the CBO says we're cutting $1.2 trillion over 10 years.

So how does this work out? And what you're saying is, yeah, it's not a home run, but it's moving in the right direction. Right.

And and I think again Did they really think that Chipwy, who by the way is a very smart guy, I've met him and he's not a dummy and he's not someone who's trying to undermine the country or whatever, but he really think that they were going to be able to really slash spending in this moment and get Joe Biden to sign off on it? He wasn't going to do it.

So I do think you have to kind of. Look at the real picture and balance that again, what's really kind of good for the country. I also do think, by the way, having made progress on the workfare comment, workfare rules was extremely important for Republicans. This is popular with the American people. The American people think that able-bodied people should work.

So did Bill Clinton. Yeah.

That was a compromise, but that was 1996. And what they say, you know, if you're a single parent and that's not, you know, there are certain criteria, you're not going to do it. Understood.

You're disabled. No one's going to make you go out there.

So there's certain criteria. And we all know, too, fundamentally, when you go and work, you meet people. That might be the next lead. What does your resume look like? A lot better in theory.

So here's Mike Thompson, a Democrat. Uh weighed in on on what he thought was negative from his side, cut thirteen. We have unnecessarily Worried veterans. We have unnecessarily worried seniors. We have unnecessarily worried anyone who is retired or about to retire and whose retirement is somehow attached to the stock market.

We've embarrassed ourselves in the eyes of our allies and our adversaries. And this was all unnecessary. Yeah, and who did that? Who's been out there saying, oh my gosh, they're going to cut Social Security? Republicans are dangerous for seniors, dangerous for veterans.

That wasn't our team. That was the other team. I mean, this constant hysterical warning to the country about what Republicans wanted to cut and how they were going to endanger our essential entitlements programs. No, that is not coming from us. That came from Joe Biden.

Right.

And Joe Biden chose to wait to the last minute to even engage. And then he goes to the G7, and it is one of the questions among all our allies, not China. What is America going to do? What does China say? America has a system that's unsustainable.

It doesn't work. And then he leaves early instead of going to those last two countries, so it all worked. And then he comes back and goes to Camp David rather than rolling his sleeves up and getting involved. Yeah, again, politically, this has really been a home run for the GOP because already Americans doubt that Joe Biden can do the job, but now they also think he won't do the job. Just showing up is an awful lot.

What is the person? Showing up is 80%, right? He doesn't even show up.

So I think that. I don't know whether Joe Biden actually is running for president or not, Brian. This did not help his cause. Most people think he is, and there's this other story out there. And Steve Forbes famously came out last week and said he's not acting like a candidate.

And that was one of the big stories.

So let's talk about politics. In many ways, Ron DeSantis is running as a conservative.

Some people say it's an old school conservative. How do you view his candidacy that really began in earnest yesterday?

Well, I think he has been leading up to this moment by. Playing to the far right, which unfortunately, as a Republican candidate, you have to do. And I say unfortunately only because it really kind of limits the positions that a lot of people can take. I think Ron DeSantis has an incredible CV. He's been an incredible governor of Florida.

I would rather that he spend more time, by the way, he did yesterday, talking about the economic results and accomplishments of Florida and how his state is has the second level, second lowest debt per capita, has an incredibly small budget compared to New York, even though their population is about the same. He has a lot to be proud of in terms of how he has managed Florida during the pandemic and also during the hurricane. People forget, Florida was clobbered by one of the worst hurricanes ever, what was it, two years ago, and you didn't see a single critic come out and say, man, he really messed up the recovery. He did a great job. And the apartment collapse, too, but I would add this.

Fort Myers is struggling. Evidently, it still looks like it got hit by. A nuclear bomb.

Well, absolutely. The place was devastated. But remember, they got that causeway out to Sanibel Island fixed in 48 hours. I mean, it was incredible stuff that they did.

So, look, I think he is a very effective governor. And I think obviously his challenge is to not only get through the thicket of the primary battle against Donald Trump, but also fend off. The criticisms he's getting from every front. He is now like a. Oh my gosh, it sounds like a lot of people.

So I want you to hear him talking about his energy policy. This is what you're talking about, cut eighteen. We'll be rolling out an energy policy. We are going to have biofuels. We'll be a part of that because I think we just need to have American-produced energy.

And what I don't want to see is Biden trying to force everyone in electric vehicles. Guess what? You've got to get the materials from China to be able to do that. That is not what we need. If you want to do an electric vehicle, that's your business.

And I know people that have them and love them, and that's fine. But we should not force Americans out of normal cars. And of course, biofuels in Iowa make sense. For sure. Everyone loves ethanol when they go to Iowa.

Look, I think seriously, the most damaging thing that the Joe Biden White House has done to this country is to push a climate change agenda that is going to damage our country. They are basically. It's relentless. It is relentless. It is in every activity we have.

Get rid of your gas stove. Oh, my, yes, down to the ridiculous, right? I mean, actually, I wrote a piece today about how they're going to come for your charcoal grills. Give it time, they will get there. John Kerry wants to overturn our agriculture industry, the most prosperous, successful agriculture industry in the history of the world.

But what's more concerning is that it's like building a house with three pillars and they don't add up at the same time. They want to move us to electrification, but they haven't figured out how to supply the electricity. They're going to get rid of fossil fuels, which supply a great portion of our electricity today, and they're hoping that solar and wind towers really will provide the difference. It isn't going to happen because, among other things, we are so bogged down in permitting and not allowing these things to go forward. It's hilarious.

But they did have some streamlining in this decade. Yes, yes, which hopefully benefits all energy creation, right? Not just.

Well, they do have a pipeline coming for West Virginia. Here's John Kerry on exactly what you're saying, Cut 29. It is an existential issue. It is an issue where people today are Are dying. 15 million a year die because of the lack of air quality.

10 million people are dying every year around the world because of extreme heat. It's getting hotter. There are going to be more intensive weather events, and it will cost us an awful lot more money.

So, as that happens, as people see their farms, You know, the crops ripped away or their homes destroyed. You watch the pressure grow. And I believe we're in a transformational moment. I think this will be one of, if not the, but it'll be one of the top three issues in the 24 presidential election. Coming for you, crops.

He hopes it'll be one of the top issues. He's rooting for global warming. And he's blaming the farmland. Listen to this: cut 30. A lot of people have no clue that agriculture contributes about 33% of all the emissions of the world.

We can't get to net zero unless agriculture is front and center as part of the solution. Getting rid of cows. Yeah.

Well, that's what they're doing in Holland. I mean, people think this is a joke. In the Netherlands, they're trying to the government has just appropriated tens of billions of dollars to buy out 3,000 farms. 11,000 farms are on the cutting block. There has been a tremendous political backlash against this.

There will be in this country, too, if they go after our farmers. It is, however, Brian, think about this. A nanosecond ago, it was world famine that was the big issue, right? But I guess people aren't starving anymore.

Now they're, yeah, I mean, yeah, it makes you crazy. Anyway, I don't think this really holds water. And I think John Kerry is on a quest with his 45 aides and billions of dollars in budget. He's just off in his private jet doing who knows what to whom. Yeah, just please ignore John Kerry on a stupid job, Climate Czar.

Liz Pete, thanks for both your columns on Ron DeSantis and John Kerry. Climate Crazies are coming for your burgers and your 4th of July. Liz, thank you. Hey, fun to be with you. Thank you very much.

Back in a moment with your calls. Brian Kilmead Show. Money, money, money, money, money, money, money. You're with Brian Kilmead. If you're interested in it, Brian's talking about it.

You're with Brian Kilmead. We cannot get over the fact that the Democratic National Committee is saying there will not be a debate to decide the nominee for president. Yes. Kidding me. There's no debate over an 80-year-old man who, if he lives, will be the oldest sitting president in the history of the country.

And if he doesn't live, he has a vice president whose approval rating is worse than his. The guy's obviously declining mental faculties. You're putting him up in front of a podium with flashcards telling him who to call on and what their questions are going to be. And you're telling us? There's no debate.

What about the will of the people? Not even the will of the people. What about the will of the people who voted for the guy last time?

So the DNC is openly ignoring bypassing the will of the people. Why? I thought this was a democracy of the people, by the people, for the people. If we don't have a debate, this is not a democracy by the people, it's a democracy by them.

Well, here you go. That's James Vanderbeek saying there's no.

Well, you mean there's no debates?

Well, we got to have a debate. We know that. Joe Biden has not been, well, I believe, a strong president. What he's saying is. If he has a challenger, and RFK Jr.

is a challenger, he's got 20% of the vote. That is closer than most Republican candidates are to Donald Trump. And nobody thinks there shouldn't be Republican debates. He's a sitting president. Yes, Marion Williamson's going up to 10%.

And these are, no offense to these people, they're fine people, but they're fringe candidates. But if you took the governor of Kentucky or if you took the governor of Florida, Colorado, I think Newsom is just such a joke with a terrible track record. But if he jumped in, the governor of Illinois, just the top of my head, you know, Joe Manchin, whatever you want. Why wouldn't they, if they all have ambitions, they want to be president? Why they wouldn't go and challenge Joe Biden, I don't get.

But what John Vander Beek is saying, is this big actor from Dawson's Creek, is just put it on Instagram. He's like, why does this make any sense? If you're a Democrat, why is this acceptable? Especially when you see how Joe Biden doesn't give press conferences, rarely gives interviews, oftentimes makes no sense, almost fell again, fell down the stairs twice, a third time, almost fell, could have wiped himself out at his advanced age. You see the failings in some of the things he says.

If you read a transcript of his remarks, a lot of the times they're incomprehensible. And to think that 60% of the Democratic Party don't want him to run again. The guy's absolutely right. But I just am waiting for a more traditional Democratic candidate to say, yeah, I've seen enough. I'm running.

I'm running. Because I'm better than him. And then that would force him to debate. But right now, they're going to use the basement strategy, the Rose Garden strategy. Let myself being, let the world see me being president.

That'll be enough for campaigning for me.

Well, for every other president in my lifetime, it was never enough. You had to grab Air Force One, run around the country, raise money, squeeze hands, make major speeches, go to conventions. Trade organizations, not this guy. Should I spaswork? Radio that makes you think.

This is the Brian Kill Me Show.

The Fiscal Responsibility Act is a historic step to restoring fiscal sanity and holding Washington accountable. This will be the largest deficit reduction in history. For the first time in a decade, spending year over year will be cut while still providing critical funding for veterans and national defense. All right. We are talking.

I have a little bit of an echo here. It's a little embarrassing, too. 'Cause I was just commenting, oh, it's with the last screen. There you go. With me right now is Brian Benberg, Jackie DeAngelis, and Taylor Riggs.

What that was was Elise Stefanik talking about the debt ceiling deal works, it's the best deal possible. It's the b it's the the type of things we were dealt a certain amount of ducks. And those ducks are all we're dealt with. What could you be referring to, though? I'm not even sure.

But Brian Brendberg and Jacob Teandos and Taylor Riggs are not just booked for us, they're also set to host their show in about 90 minutes, the Big Money Show on FBM, beginning at 1 o'clock Eastern Time. Welcome to all of you. Thank you. Good to see you. And of course, Taylor, you should start because you did say this is the hand, instead of saying the hands of the deal, you said the.

The ducks we were given. Yeah.

And I'm trying to think it just stopped the conversation. Cole. I'm sitting there trying to think, what's a duck? I'm like, is that one of these economic terms I don't know? That's something they're teaching at King's College.

It's been a long week of negotiations about the debt ceiling, right? That's why my brain is so fried. But Larry Kudlow is very positive of it. I agree. Yeah, you know, Frank.

And you are too. I am. You know, look. McCarthy. Don't have the Senate, they don't have the executive branch.

So they have a limit, slim majority of the House. They're doing that the best they can. I would agree. I like the working requirements. I know they only raise the age a little bit, but able-bodied Americans should be out there working.

I liked at least some of the caps on spending that we got for at least one or two fiscal years. And so I think that all of that helps bring down inflation, get people back to work. And those were some of the key issues that I think he really wanted to fight for. Yeah.

I'll add to that: no new taxes, no new spending. You know, we're bringing back the student loan debt, at least until the Supreme Court figures out where that is going. People have to start repaying their student loans again. Starting in three months. Right.

But it's a step in the right direction to get people back in the game. And the Fed can't just do the job all by itself by raising rates to bring inflation down. The spending's got to stop.

So those two things, hopefully hand in hand, will have an impact long term.

Now, not everyone's agreeing with that, Brian. You are not for this, and I'll give you some company. Here's Ralph Norman yesterday. Cut eight. This bill is smoking mirrors.

Never are we talking about the interest on the existing debt. Forget everything else. $32 trillion. One trillion is thirty billion if you if you a three percent interest rate. One billion.

Do the math. It's going to exceed just the interest. That's where I don't understand where we're coming from. Yeah, I mean, I don't call it a, you know, smoke and mirrors. I don't think there's any, it's not trying to be trickery, it's just a tiny speed bump.

On what's happening in Washington right now. I mean, you look from 2019 to today, the federal budget has grown by 40%, $2 trillion. This doesn't really do anything about that. But you get a debt ceiling increase that is basically uncapped for two years.

So at the end of the day, if you're a big spender, you kept all the spending you got from COVID, and you get to keep spending for two years without anybody asking any questions about the debt.

Now, that's not to say that McCarthy didn't get the best thing he could get. Maybe that is the best thing he can get. But if you're somebody who actually wants to see a trajectory change in Washington, this isn't even close to that.

Well, and I would pull up the Congressional Budget Office said that for now, at least their preliminary review of this deal, if it passes as is, at least interest on public debt would decline by $188 billion. I know in a world where we're throwing around a lot of T's for trillions, maybe billion doesn't sound like a lot of people. But that's all relative to the baseline of what we would have gotten under the existing spending.

So you have to just remember that it's not like we're going backwards. We're just going less forwards.

So again, that's not satisfying to a lot of people. You have to remember that you have a Democrat at the helm. President Biden's running the ship here.

So there wasn't that much that could be done. I agree with you. Why is you want to turn the country around? There are certain things you have to do. And that gets to the point that we've been hitting on our show, which is people need to realize what's going on.

They need to get out and vote. They have another bite at the apple in 2024. Instead, we have to go capture a dark. But the other thing, how many times before your show, before you do the rundown, do you call me, Brian?

Well, I try calling you all the time, but I'm doing the regulation.

So it's my fault. Yeah, you're always out for some reason. But you did give me this lead, but this is my own paperwork, my own printer. This is the one thing, it's going to be your A block. I was a little disturbed yesterday when this came out last night that Elon Musk, first time in three years, he's going over to China.

Jamie Dimon is going to be speaking over in Shanghai. Others, I guess it is Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger, Berkshire Hathaway, who's going to start investing back in China big time. What happened? Do we really isn't the isn't doesn't patriotism play a role here? Or am I being naive?

I don't like to see these guys there. Jamie Dimon said we should have more engagement with China. And my question is: well, what do you mean? They're communists. How do you want to engage with China?

You mean the same people that blew up our Secretary of Defense when we asked to set up a wave of communication?

So he says we want to have more engagement.

Well, where are you going to draw the line? When they say to you, your banking information would help us control our population. Are you going to say no? Or is that part of engagement? Same thing with Elon Musk.

He's selling cars over there. Those cars collect data. The government would like to have that data. Are you going to participate in their social credit scheme or not? Where are the lines here?

I think the only thing that maybe Jackie and I continue to agree on this, these companies have a fiduciary duty to one person, and that is shareholders and shareholders. You mean the same one where they put climate first and they put... Yeah, all the other social causes first over the investors. I understand but if their duty is to help make the most money they can for investors, I thought yesterday actually, frankly, good on Elon Musk. China for Elon Musk is the golden goose.

They have so many price war competitors over there. There's a lot of domestic companies that are coming up. If Tesla wants to win and be the leader, they have to be in China. I think this notion of decoupling economically, it sounds great. I just don't think it's possible, especially when China is now going to be probably the largest economy and overtake us in what, five years?

It's not possible right now. I agree with that. And so I think the only answer is for the leaders of this country to make it more attractive for these companies to do business here. If they make it attractive, if you put it in the business.

So don't you like the CHIPS Act? The CHIPS Act incentivizes these companies to come back.

Well, I don't like the CHIPS Act because there's all this other stuff in it that makes it unprofitable. A lot of the companies don't necessarily want to take the money from the CHIPS Act. Like what? Like the child care provision? You're required to unionize labor.

You have to have forced child care. There's all those other subsidies that they're trying to attach to it where the companies look at that money and they say, we want the money, but it doesn't work economically. We should say this: we will not force you. To get a babysitter. You're saying forced child, you mean any company that wants to get any of that money.

Because we don't want moms going, I don't want I don't need a babysitter. I'm home. Right.

I'm sorry. You took the chips. You don't need social policy masquerading as chips policy. That's what this thing ends up being. I think Jackie cut through just on this point about we have some disagreement on should Elon be there.

But the point is we shouldn't have a president who's always demonizing rich people in this country to invest money and build businesses. But they go to China because it's like, well, who loves us in America? Does the president love us? I don't think he loves us. And nobody in his party seems to love us.

Let's start treating people, create value well. That'd be a good step. And really quick, I think the CHIPS Act is smoke and mirrors. You don't really need the CHIPS Act. These companies have enough money to invest here.

What they need is labor to come down. They need inflation to come down. They need the economic situation to be like environment to be favorable to them and they can do business competitively. They want you to labor a dollar a week for a Taiwanese boy. They don't want $15 an hour minimum wage either.

Yeah.

And then the unions have the biggest supporter ever in Joe Biden. Mm-hmm. Uh so they say This is a this is what the Chinese said. The Chinese foreign minister, Quinn Gang, or Quinn Gang, told Musk that his country was committed to improving the business climate and even employed a car metaphor to make his point: We must step on the brake in time, avoid dangerous driving, and be skillful at using the accelerator to promote mutually beneficial cooperation. Take that apart.

He's there because we have a president who won't invite Elon Musk to the White House because Elon Musk is probably the only car manufacturer who doesn't use a union. Trump was the first. Everyone else is invited to conversations. GM's Mary Barra, Ford, all of these other car makers are there because they have, I'm thinking it's United Auto Workers. I could be wrong on what union it is.

But. You have Elon Musk going to China because the White House won't talk to him. They're also taking subsidies from the government and he's not. Oh, yeah. The other thing, what he does do, though, he also needs rare earth.

Where do we get rare earth? China. Right.

And guess who lo who who has sat like scooped it up? Is China. Our government is throwing tons of money at Elon Musk to go to China and make sure he can get rare earth. That's actually what's happening. By the way, when the Chinese government says we got to be like a car and accelerate and break, just remember when he's saying we, he means the party leadership and the road signs are Marxist road signs.

So if you want to get on board with that, Diamond or Musk, go ahead. But it's the CCP driving the car.

So I broke some news saying your A-block will be about China.

Okay. We're going to find out more about your show when we come back. Is that correct?

Sounds good. All right. Allison, should we keep them around for another block? Yes. You got it.

I just said no, I can't. I can't on air. All right. Listen, listen to the Brian Killmee Show. Back with some more insight that you can't get anywhere else unless you watch their show at one.

Don't move. Learning something new every day on the Brian Killmeat Show. Breaking news, unique opinions. Hear it all on the Brian Kill Me Joe. I think that women, white women in particular, want to protect this patriarchy here because it's to their benefit.

They want to make sure that their husbands do well. They want to make sure that their sons do well. They want to make sure that their children do well. And they want to make sure that they do well. Most of the women in some of these studies are married white women and they do fall in line with what their husbands are doing, how their husbands are voting.

I've always said that, and to hear Sonny Houston say that on the view, let me feel like I was on the right path. Brian Benberg, Jackie DeAndre, Taylor Riggs are here. The Big Money Show is coming up at 1 o'clock. And before we talk about what's on your show, Let's see, Jackie, what do you think about that comment? And even the audience didn't even respond.

A friendly view audience couldn't even support that. Why is everything black and white? It's so really difficult to sort of even take sound bites from that show and try to understand what those hosts are thinking and about how they look at the world. But, you know, that's why there are a lot of different media outlets and there are different points of view. There are people who subscribe to that and there are people who are going to hear that and they're going to change the channel.

That's all I'm going to say on it.

Sorry about that. You know, we got the job opening numbers this morning. There are 10 million job openings in this country. Crazy. We don't have to protect anyone.

If for the most part, if you want a job, there is one available if you want it.

So this idea of protecting certain people to protect your future, this is the most diverse economy I think we've ever had. And it turns to colleges, I hear that for the low this is the lowest participation. For colleges, among high school seniors, I think it's down to it, it went from 64 to 61 percent, and it's going south. You talk about high school kids going to college, going to college. Yeah, and you're just coming off a long stint of King's College as a professor.

Right.

Well, actually, I take that as a hopeful sign, frankly. You got to start thinking about college as an investment, not just the next step that you do. And for a lot of these colleges, they just cost too much money. And you go through these programs, and we've seen what a lot of students come out like on the other side, and the one thing they are not is employable. Employers look at them and say, You didn't learn anything in college and your attitude got worse.

Do I want to hire you to? I mean, what did you get here? There are some good colleges, but frankly, I think more and more young people should be saying, Wait a sec, what am I getting? What am I paying for? Is it worth it?

So, before we get expanded the college statement too much, because I have something here for that Cooney commencement speaker that even had Mayor Adams talking, We should be more patriotic and love our country more on Sunday. Can you tell me, Jackie, what's going on on your show on this day?

Well, we're kicking it off with a conversation about China because obviously, you know, you've got businesses that are flocking there right now, CEOs that are talking to the Chinese government that are being courted by them to a certain degree. And what's happening in China, and it's been building for a while, Brian, is this house of cards situation. They haven't been very honest about their data, but their data isn't great. It seems like that property bubble is starting to get to the point where maybe it's time to burst. I think that's why they're being so aggressive.

I think that's why they're trying to get an unemployment problem for youth, the youth. Absolutely. And they were hoping for a bounce back after their zero COVID policies and their lockdowns. The bounce back didn't materialize the way they wanted it to. They've got a lot of problems, and they're looking to us to get our businesses over there to fix them.

This administration has an opportunity right now with a week in China to turn things around and bring our businesses back home. They're not doing it. Can it wait another two years? I'm not sure. Yeah, Taylor, you're shaking your head.

But by the way, 65 million cases of this new COVID vi uh variant is now going to we hope it's not fatal, but it will absolutely affect a lot of people are going to get sick in China again as they scramble to come up with a vaccine for that. They weren't good at the first vaccine.

Well, and my worry about that is we've seen that zero COVID policy, the impact that it did, not Just to China economically, but then when they shut down all the exports, and then it impacts us. We always say China exports slowing growth to the rest of the world. We got data overnight. Manufacturing in China is back in a recession. The services numbers are slowing and getting closer to a recession.

So, if anything were to sort of hiccup that big recovery out of China that we were all expecting that hasn't materialized, my concern is that it exports slowing growth now to us. And we now then start to absorb that.

Now, Brian, you were against China in the A block. It looks like it's going to be the A and B block.

So, how do you feel about this?

Well, the COVID thing? I mean, this is why Jamie Dimon used the word de-risk. We've mentioned decouple before.

Okay, to me, it's like, well, what do you mean by either one of those? The point is, how much exposure do American businesses want to the risk that China poses? Look, forget about all the stuff we're talking about with spying. If there's zero COVID policy, all those plants you got in China aren't going to be able to produce things. Anymore, and you're back to where you were three years ago under COVID.

So the point of de-risking is find other places. India might be one of those. There are others where you can get out of that, you know. Huge problem area and find places that aren't going to close down the first sign they get of a new variant. Like, what are we going to do?

Are we going to go back to three years ago on this? My only concern is: we've been talking about this AI-fueled rally that we've been seeing. Shares of NVIDIA have been through the roof. NVIDIA gets 21% of their revenue from China, 26% of their revenue from Taiwan. The fact that we think that we can just flip off a switch, I know that maybe they would try to look to move some of that manufacturing to Thailand, Vietnam, you know, you name it, but these companies are so embedded.

Jackie, can I call in Audible? Oh. I was going to come back with that Cooney professor that just kind of tick everybody off, but I want you to hear John Kerry talk about the future. Without finally, and I've been saying this long time, I'm so tired of the farms, I'm so tired of the food.

So, this is his idea of the future, Cut30. A lot of people have no clue that agriculture contributes about 33% of all the emissions of the world. We can't get to net zero unless agriculture is front and center as part of the solution. So he's looking to crush farms and about time, right? Oh, this one for me.

I know, Jackie. It's about time to crush farmers. I'm being sarcastic.

Okay. Oh, my God. We're all out. He wants us to also not be able to, you know, eat essentially anymore. Either that's crazy.

No more cows, no more anything. Look, at the end of the day, maybe he's trying to get to net zero, but not everybody is. Everybody's looking at a long-term path to try to reduce emissions, but also live a sustainable lifestyle. You put the farms out of business, you're going to cripple our country. Not to mention, I have serious concerns about the kind of food that they do want us to eat.

They're all GMO and chemicals and horror. Horrible. The impossible burgers, impossible. Right, yeah.

So I really think about this strategy, and it's definitely not right for me. I scared her, didn't I? You did. Yeah, you got to be fair. Hey, watch their show at one o'clock, please.

The big money show. Thanks, guys. Thank you. You got. Listen to the show ad-free on Fox News Podcast Plus, on Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music with your Prime membership, or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

Mm.