Yo, we're doing this for real this time?
I've just seen McCarthy showing a picture of a baby.
He's probably using some liberal tactics
and being like, he's a baby, please vote my bill.
I'm just inviting speakers,
so Dan is you let you do what you think.
Yeah, as people come up, you know, just wanted to make sure that everybody was aware of what's going on exactly.
We spoke earlier today when there was a vote on the floor or vote, a rules vote that allows the actual vote to happen on the floor.
That Bill did pass on the rules vote, but now the real vote begins.
You know, what I really wanted to focus on to get started.
was actually the, not the vote itself,
because we know likely the vote is going to go on
and it's going to be fine.
It was more around the implications of what has happened
from a financial markets perspective.
And then also, hey, Robert, hey, everybody.
And also kind of walk through a little bit about
how the markets will react to this news.
So, you know, Robert, I wanted to start with you
Everything that's going on, you know, your initial thoughts around the debt ceiling, the provisions that have been accepted in the Fiscal Responsibility Act, anything of note and what do you expect the markets to, how do you expect them to react?
Let's just say not surprising.
I think everyone thought that we were not going to default on our debt.
And I think that we should just start from that part, that you had the five most senior people,
Schumer, Jeffries, McConnell and McCarthy and Biden, take immediately the big elephant out of the room
and said immediately that there would be no default.
So the negotiation was the budget.
And you had two bookends.
You had the Biden wish list and then you had the GOP wish list.
And neither was going to get completely their way.
Mainly because I've said before, this is nothing like, you know,
2011, 2012, when the Republicans had a 22 or 24 majority.
They had a five-person majority, and they didn't have the Senate.
So this was not going to be kind of my way or the highway.
It was going to be somewhat bipartisan.
I thought the deal was probably more similar to what Biden's wishes were than the GOP deal.
I'm not surprised that the progressives aren't voting for it.
The Freedom Caucus aren't voting for it.
you know, get near 100% for either of those sides to vote for it.
But Robert, what you just said is what we keep hearing.
It was interesting in terms of the gamesmanship because the Democrats were saying,
hey, hey, hey, don't gloat yet.
Let's get this through the vote.
No, no, I don't think, listen, I think Biden's been clear.
I think McCarthy and Biden handled it like they should in a non-confrontational manner.
Forget about the populace rhetoric when they're on the bully pulpit.
But I'm talking about when they were in their meetings, they had a negotiation on what they thought they could pass.
And if you look at the president's wish list, it really starts with his legislative victories.
Didn't touch the infrastructure, didn't touch the Inflation Reduction Act, didn't touch the Veterans Pact Act, didn't touch the Chips and Manufacturing Act, kept the social safety net of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security whole, got a increase in military, which is what he was looking for.
And so, and you could also argue the baseline is really 2023 and it's a post-COVID baseline.
So if you look at, I think the big things, they definitely lean to where Biden should feel good.
But I don't think there's a gloating. There's no winning and losing.
Losing would have been a default.
a budget negotiation is something that, you know, both sides kind of give.
I just think that McCarthy was not going to get the votes, you know, to pass a budget
that wasn't, you know, somewhat more negotiated, I think, to the center left.
So, Robert, you know, wanted to...
And I think for the markets, just before I had...
I think for the markets...
The markets are going to think that the Treasury is going to have to issue a lot of debt,
coincided with an inflation tale, coincided with the Fed kind of intimating.
They're not hiking in June, but likely hiking thereafter, kind of during a time where, you know,
smart people, whether it's Larry Fink or others...
I was said it. I won't call myself in that camp, but that there's likely more rate hikes coming.
So, you know, my gut tells me, and we spoke about it, after the Fed had their meeting,
and we heard firming in 2%, it feels like to me that, you know, we're going to be in an increasing rate environment for the foreseeable future.
Yeah, you know, one thing that I wanted to push back on is around default being the only bad outcome.
I don't, you didn't use the word only, but I'm going to use it to make my point that, you know, is default the only bad outcome?
for the American people, I think there's another school of thought that is worried about the fact
that there was no reigning in of debt and of spending. And I think that that is something that a
lot of Americans are worried about right now. And if we truly want, and again, you may know,
I'm not sure, but I'm actually very left, I'm left of center, clearly. And, you know, I worry about what this does
to the working class Americans who, by the way, have the greatest of regressive taxes, which is inflation.
Inflation affects poor people way more than it affects me and you.
Let's just be honest, Robert. It doesn't affect you. You have to pay a little bit more for eggs.
That's okay. But that poor person is going to struggle and our balance sheet looks ridiculous.
You know, and I know that it's impossible for one negotiation to fix that,
but I really was, a part of me was hoping that we could see some reform here.
Right, but Mario, that is a bit idealistic.
I'm not disagreeing with anything you just said, but you got to look at what's in front of you.
What's in front of you is a debt ceiling approval, making sure we don't have a default,
and something that could pass...
And what you're all looking for is, I think,
what everyone agrees with,
how do we decrease deficits?
and that's not going to come to an agreement
because the right's going to want to hit the social safety net some way.
The left's going to want to increase taxes.
And those weren't getting passed at all
You only can take the win you can take, and the win right in front of us is not a default.
I'm not, I'm being pragmatic.
And Robert, and by the way, Danish.
Yeah, sorry, that was Danish before.
Who asked the question, Robert.
But Robert, one question I have is something which Danish alluded to.
Yes, people are struggling.
And when you see a 3% increase, which you said was something Biden wanted,
is that another example of the military industrial complex being more important than the American people?
Well, as you know, I'm on the Pentagon Advisory Board.
So I'm not going to say anything that would put me and all you in trouble.
But we know what's right in front of us, right?
There is incredible geopolitical risk, both here and abroad, right?
We have increased, you know, terrorism on our own homelands,
and we have threats of nuclear capability, you know, proliferating.
You know, certainly we're a, I'll call it a frenemy or, you know, competitive adversary with China.
You know, certainly there's nervousness of what's happening in Iran.
There's nervousness in North Korea.
There's nervousness around the globe.
And then you have a war, right?
Not as DeSantis said, although he wasn't questioned, not a territorial dispute, but a real war.
So yes, I think it's important that, and I'm not hawkish, to be clear, but I do think it's important that we make sure the military is funded the way they need to be.
And it seemed that Biden put in a number that he was comfortable with, and it felt like to me most conservatives would have put in a higher number.
Yeah, I mean, it's fascinating because, you know, as an old school liberal, I guess now I'm considered.
You know, I thought we were the ones that were anti-war.
but it's fascinating how things change so quickly.
And I will say, and I know that you can't really comment too much on this,
but I will say that as we deal with inflation at home,
and it affects poor people, inflation across every aspect of their lives,
not only in terms of their health, but also their sickness,
I think that we really do have to have a reckoning about what is most important.
Listen, we, during COVID,
The K-shaped economy reared its ugly head.
And it continues to rare its ugly head now with inflation, right?
Those who got hit the hardest was the middle and lower class during COVID.
It continues during this time of inflation, which is why I have been saying all along, all along.
that with the Fed, even though they have a few things that are important to them,
labor, inflation, bank supervisory,
inflation's one, two, and three,
because it impacts 300 million plus people on a daily basis,
where when we have the economy, you know,
the labor market going up and down a few hundred thousand jobs,
it impacts a few hundred thousand people.
So, you know, when I think,
that we should all look from a macro perspective. I think we as a group, collectively,
we've been spot on that inflation's one, two, and three, just like we were bitching and moaning
when it wasn't transitory. Yeah. Now, O'Hare, I wanted you to jump in, because I know that
you also tend to kind of agree with some of the points that we've been making. We'd love for
you to weigh in on the debt versus default.
argument, obviously we're not going to have a default.
It seems highly unlikely, but we will be covering it live here.
But, you know, which one bothers you more?
And by the way, for the people that are listening, as O'Hare unmutes, you know,
wanted to let everybody know that we have put a poll in the comments.
Tell us which one would bother you more right now and why.
And then with the best comments, we'll bring you up.
O'Hare, I can't hear you.
Yeah, I'm in the car here just driving in the Bay Area, and I'm liking what I'm hearing.
Look, I've been pretty adamant in my opinion that I don't think this is going to get done.
I mean, it's going to go down on the wire.
Everybody's very optimistic, as they always are in these debates.
I mean, every single time you go back in history on both sides, the speaker, the representatives on both sides are always
O'Hare, you're in and audio and not great.
O'Hare you're cutting in and out quite a lot.
Yeah, we may have to fix your audio and get back.
Thanks for, Ryan, did you have a thought?
First of all, thank you for having me on the space donation, Solimani and Mario.
You guys are awesome, love these spaces.
I agree 100% with the dinners.
I think that's the one factor that people are forgetting here is the American people in
the middle of this discussion.
We talk about the debt ceiling and raising the amount of money being spent, but the separation
gap between the wealthy and the poor keeps increasing and it's been increasing at a massive
fold to the point where the middle class is being wiped out.
I do wish that they had curbed more spending personally,
and I don't think this is a victory for the American people.
I know that McCarthy's going around saying that this is a victory for the
American's first time cut in history, but this is the thing.
The unfortunate thing is I see them sneaking back all these quote-unquote cuts,
which I don't think that's much of a cut, back in elsewhere and other bills.
Like, do you see even within this bill there's skims of fat that you can catch within it,
that stuff is being like slipped in and being done.
Well, one good thing that was slipped in, in my opinion, was the gnat gas.
pipeline. But I think that it's a very interesting situation here that you brought up is talking about how it's actually going to affect the American people because a lot of folks are just discussing about who's winning this left or the right. And we're not talking about the actual people that are being affected. You're average American. So I just want to say thank you for bringing up that point. I want to echo your point because I found it very important.
You know, it's interesting because there is the other side.
Sorry, Solomon, were you about to jump in?
Yeah, you know, I was just going to basically do a bit more drama about the point
because I think it needs to be highlighted.
Like, when you look at this budget, and as you said, when you look at the position of the Democrats,
like, what world are we in when it's the Republicans who do not want increase in military spend?
and the Democrats won it, and you've essentially got a 3% increase when people in the United States are struggling.
Like, this is Bangaub order.
You can make excuses about the proxy war in Ukraine and Russia.
You can make excuses about various other wars and incursions throughout the world.
But essentially, you're basically forgetting the priority and the priority is always your own people.
Can I just to take the other side of that, not that the priorities, people, or we have to make sure that this doesn't hit the middle and class and those people hurting.
But let's just take a harder look at this.
The social safety net was protected, and so was prescription drugs.
I mean, a lot of things that went on.
during the last two years of bipartisan legislation,
the PACT Act, which is giving more for veterans.
All of these things got protected.
So, yes, they increased military budget,
and they kept the level for the most part at 2023 levels,
which is like a $6 trillion increase during the COVID time.
So it's not as if they hit anybody.
They just didn't give more.
And going forward, we're going to have a PAYGO environment, which is if we want to increase more than 1%, you have to find ways to pay for it.
That was done actually during the Obama administration.
That's the deal he cut with Bainer, which was PAYGO.
For the most part, we should have a pay go where we pay for increases in our budget and we find it.
And maybe they will find it from the military.
If the Ukraine war ends in a month and there's other things that come up, maybe they'll find it from military.
It's unlikely, isn't it, Robert?
No, but my only, yeah, no, I'm in agreement with you.
They should have, we can't have it both ways.
We can't say we want to make sure we cut the debt, we cut the deficit.
but then we don't have this pay go clause.
I think we should applaud that paygo clause.
So, Robert, just to like push back slightly on that.
So you've got a scenario within the budget.
They've got spending caps for 2024 and 2025.
So they've implemented the spending cap whilst ensuring that the military budget
So essentially what's going to happen is we know things get more expensive.
There's going to be a cap.
But at the same time, you're going to get a 3% increase in the military budget.
Again, it shows even from a percentage proportion perspective, more money is being allocated to these areas as opposed to where people should.
Yeah, but wait, you have to look at the numbers.
You're talking, let's say military is $850 billion.
You're talking $25 billion.
We're talking about passing a $1.6 trillion.
debt ceiling. I mean, let's look at the numbers. Remember, discretionary, non-discretionary,
discretionary is only 15%, and military's 15%. So we're talking about not that much money
on an annual basis of 24 billion when we're looking at everything else is for the most part,
non-military non-defense.
I mean, that's just an example.
You've got basically, you know, you've got basically, and this is why I...
No, no, no, that's the math.
Yes, for Robert, right now, the other math is that for the first time,
we have more debt than we have GDP, first time in a long time.
Yeah, no, I'm in agreement with you guys.
I've been more fiscally conservative the last decade than probably most people on this vocal.
I know, but, you know, as we declare victory, we being...
I didn't, wait, let's not say victory.
I said that getting the debt ceiling passed and not defaulting is a win.
there's no winning on the on the other side right what i said i told you from my perspective it
seems like biden got more than he wanted more than what the g lp got those were the two things right
there was a biden budget and there was a gop budget those are the two things those are the two
bookends and just before we continue this discussion guys
Put in the comments below in the bottom right inside, do you agree with Rob that we need to be spending this extra money on, for example, issues like the military, on issues like climate control?
Or do you think that money would have been much more suited being given to the average American or used elsewhere?
Bottom right inside, put your comments in and we will put it.
By the way, if I was negotiating, I would have put it elsewhere too.
That's true. I was going to say that, you know.
That's a bullshit. By the way, that's a bullshit bull.
Okay. How do you want to? Robert, I'll let you ask. I'll let you frame it for the people.
No, no. How about this? Do we think, how about this? Do we think every member of Congress should get in damn line and have an up and down vote on every line item?
You won't get one person in the Congress.
No, no, Robert, I want you to tell the people what to comment on the bottom right inside in terms of what discussion we've had just now.
I let you frame the question to the people and let them comment.
See, it's a lot harder than you think.
Yeah, no, I don't do poll.
Listen, I don't do polls.
So I wanted to read a response from one of our listeners.
Kevin, thank you for putting in a comment.
And again, we'll do this periodically throughout, you know,
Suleiman and I run our spaces a little bit differently.
As Suleiman says, he's a man of the people.
And so Kevin, thank you for putting in a comment.
I wanted to say it out loud because it kind of touched me a little.
He said that he agrees with what was said about the middle class
and poor struggling with high inflation.
People struggle and we still send billions overseas.
Politicians don't care about those two classes.
They just drive to divide us.
Politicians will still make millions for themselves this year.
You know, it's interesting.
If they really wanted to go after all of these...
all of these real issues,
you know what they could have put into this bill?
If they really cared about being fiscally conservative
you know what I would have loved for them to sneak in?
A provision that said that people in Congress can't actively invest in startups or in companies or in equities that they directly influenced, that would have been a great freaking thing to put in there so that American people can finally start trusting their policy politicians again.
And Robert, I agree with you that that poll was definitely leading.
And I would make a really bad bolster, I promise.
But it does make it provocative.
Donish, one thing that I wanted to hit on, so I'm looking at some numbers.
Robert, I don't know you.
So it was great to meet you, first off.
One thing that I, this is one, again, I'm looking at two key numbers from this bill that bothers me, right?
over, we still have $59 billion of new funding for the IRS, right?
And these are to go after people who spend,
who transfer more than $600 in transactions,
which is one of the newest,
most ridiculous laws in my opinion that starts this year.
ridiculous. How does that help the average American? It doesn't, right? That money can be put to you much better use elsewhere for the American people. The other thing is they want the Republican.
Ryan, didn't they claw back? Sorry, just a quick question. Did they not claw back? Is it 1.4 billion of that?
No, so solely, they wanted to, the Republicans asked for a recent of 80 billion of that. The deal cuts only 21 billion of that.
So that's, I can put a graphic up in the nest if that's cool with you guys.
It's like a little cheat sheet that I found.
And the other thing that I found that really confused me was there's 50,
the Republicans asked for a $50 billion reclaim of unspent COVID funds,
but they're only able to reclaim 30 billion.
So I'm confused as to where does the other 20 billion go and why is it still needed
when you have all these world organizations saying that COVID is over,
the pandemic is over by their standards.
bringing that discussion into it,
but if they're saying that all of this is over and done with,
where does that extra 20 billion go?
So we're talking about $59, 69,
$79 of spending that could have been cut slash
reclaim, that could have been reclaimed, right?
It's money that was set to come out and be done.
but it's still out there in the ether, right?
So to me, I don't think this is a victory by any means
because the American is still getting screwed,
especially by this ridiculous new law for the $600 transactions
and these new IRS soldiers.
I don't like to call them agents.
They're soldiers to be able to hunt down the average American
because they claim to say,
we're going after the rich to be able to get their money back,
but you could have one IRS agent per 1% person in this country
and you still have way more IRS agents versus this budget.
I like to push back on everybody.
That is like my entire M.O. Ryan, but to be fair, we do actually need more IRS agents
I mean, we literally have people primarily in the upper class and corporations, they're walking
with millions, with all these different loopholes,
many of which are not actually legal loopholes.
They're using shell companies.
The average American is going on turbo tax and putting in their taxes.
They're not the ones that IRS even cares about.
If you were the IRS and you had a mandate to get to enforce,
you would go after the largest dollars first.
I actually don't know what their actions are.
No, I agree with you 100%.
Like there's no proof one way or the other.
You need, you definitely, you probably need,
you probably need more agents, right?
I'm just going to take your argument and accept it.
Okay, let's accept it for this notion here.
But the thing that that bothers me here is because...
This is the new law that they've enacted, right?
And usually in government spending, right, even if it's local, state government or federal government,
usually you put in what's called this new need based off a new thing that's happening.
Like, hey, for example, we're trying to run this new XYZ program and we're going to need this much money and this many people.
And I feel like, and I hope I'm wrong, that these new agents are just going to be hunting down people who are doing Venmo transactions.
It's not going to be going after...
the quote unquote rich and wealthy, which again, I'm not advocating to do that. It's none of my
business in this form to discuss that. But I'm just talking about I feel like this is more
geared toward the average middle class person of, hey, let's squeeze a few extra tax dollars
out of them, which in most cases for the average person, let's give them back less of the
money that we've taxed them on to be able to get more tax dollars out of them to fund this
ridiculous spending that we're doing.
And, Michael, I want to pass that over to you because what Ryan is essentially framing is that the Republicans have basically lost in this negotiation.
He's given a couple of examples.
Let me read also a comment, which I think you'll be able to answer as well, which is from Truth Align who says, what happens if we never find a solution and we just continue to raise the debt ceiling time and time again?
how many times can we do this before there's extreme consequences?
So if you can answer the Ryan question and then that'd be marvelous.
Yeah, I mean, I was talking with someone about this today and one of my disappointments
And I'll be frank. I do support the speaker. I'm a little biased here. I mean, I'm hosting a fundraiser in a week for House Republican leadership for 2024. So I want to be transparent. I think that's important for the audience's sake as it pertains to my statements here. So put those things into context in regards to how partisan or bias you may think I am.
With all of those things aside, as I mentioned to someone earlier today, one of my disappointments is that we're not
talking about our fiscal or monetary policy.
I mean, one of the ways that the United States is able to continue to spend more than we bring in outside of deficit spending and printing more money usually according to an inflation is by issuing treasury bonds and notes and bills.
And my question has been, and there's been some soft talks about this in Europe and other places globally.
But at what point do foreign investors say, you know, we're just not interested?
and purchasing new treasury notes, bills, or bonds for the United States anymore.
And granted, they do so because they trust in our government.
They trust in our system.
They trust in our ability to function properly.
That, in my opinion, isn't necessarily guaranteed to be the case 20 years down the line.
So we're at $31 trillion.
What happens when we're at $80 trillion?
What happens when we're at $80 trillion?
If you're Japan or you're South Korea or health China or any other country, at some point you're going to start looking at this and ask, do we want to continue to buy these notes, these bills, these bonds? Can we really trust in the full faith and quote unquote credit of the United States government? I
I think at some point other countries and maybe the voters in those countries are going to say, you know, we don't want to take this liability with a country that's $80 trillion in debt if we unfortunately get to that point.
So to answer the question, I'm not exactly sure what would happen, but I am concerned that some countries that purchase a significant amount of our debt may say we don't want to do this anymore.
You guys need to get your spending under control.
Craig, I saw you raise your hand.
Yeah, just a couple of quick points.
But first off, just on this deal and on taxes specifically, I know taxes were not a part of this negotiation.
I really think that was a missed opportunity.
For the Democrats to try to push that, I know Republicans pushed back and said, well, you know, tax revenues to GDP are about as high as we've seen in quite some time.
And the issue with that statement is that they're looking at stale fiscal 22 numbers, which were based on outsized capital gains that hit from 21.
So if you look at fiscal 23 tax revenues, we're running down double digits year on year.
So, you know, all this talk about, you know, we can only have deficit spending in order to cut the deficit in order to cut spending in order to cut the deficit.
It's a missed opportunity.
I know Republicans weren't for it, but I didn't want to mention that.
And I think that Democrats really should have pushed it.
more aggressively, whether it's taxing billionaires, taxing corporations, you know, on the like,
in order to really get, you know, some true deficit spending, you know, done.
And then the second point I'd like to make is just on on interest rates and on, you know, where, you know, where we are now.
And as far as, you know, versus previous debt ceiling discussions, you know,
interest rates now are 5% and growing.
And so the interest expense of the U.S. government, and this is to the prior gentleman's point about who's going to buy the debt, but 5% plus interest and rising on T-bills is becoming a problem for the government.
Interest expense is running up materially year-on-year, which also is increasing the deficit, which necessitates more U.S. Treasury selling.
And so one of the things from a,
I know we started out to call just,
thinking about the market's implication or how the markets we're going to,
we're going to think about this.
part of what the market has been so,
fortunate this year has been the fact that the Treasury's general account has been run down as
aggressively as it has been. I mean, the Treasury has put close to $500 billion from its account
into the markets, into bank reserves, which allows for increased risk taking, speculation,
etc. And that's really helped markets, particularly stock market, do incredibly well this year. But
once we get to the other side of this,
Treasury is going to issue close to a trillion dollars
of net new money over the course of the next six months.
And it's going to get done at interest rates that are at 5%,
5 and a half percent or more.
And so this is not a panacea by any stretch of the imagination.
And as deficits continue to expand and as interest expense continues to grow and as tax receipts come in light and if we have a recession, they're going to come in even lighter.
We are getting closer to that point where the U.S. government is going to, if not already, has a balance of payments issue.
I mean, if you think about interest expense, Social Security expense, and healthcare expense,
kind of the interest plus, you know, mandatory spending, we're already operating in north
And this is not a recession, right?
Right now, the economy is doing fine.
Imagine what will happen when we move into a recession.
So, yeah, sorry, go ahead.
And when we have, you know, 7, 8% unemployment, right?
Like, I mean, exactly what you're saying.
I think the interesting thing that Craig said,
he used the dirty T word that no one shall speak in Washington.
Nobody likes talking about taxes,
but when I think about balancing my books at home,
I don't just think about savings.
And I think that ultimately,
perhaps it's time to start having that conversation
to Robert and others, saying, hey, no, no, we don't want to cut these things.
We don't want to do that.
But Robert and them have also been saying, sorry, Robert, I'm using as an example,
that maybe we should be taxing the rich.
Yeah, you want to save the poor from inflation?
And let's make sure, and I know that that sounds like wealth transfer and I'm going to get
But, you know, Biden has been talking about, you know, raising taxes and
and maybe taking back some of the Trump tax cuts,
which, by the way, also were responsible for putting us in this position.
If you don't want to agree with that, I'm sorry. I don't know what to tell you.
So, you know, I think we all have to agree that a lot of these things have been affecting us.
I know it's difficult to talk about. I'm about to get completely killed by Jim.
Jim, go ahead. Why don't you tell me the other side?
Yeah, so just to kind of correct a little bit, or let's put better clarification on what Craig was saying.
In actual dollars, we're at the highest point of tax revenues in the nation's history.
It might also be in real dollars, but I haven't looked at that closely.
In terms of the revenue to GDP, we are somewhere near 17% right now.
We've been as high as 19% in recent years.
Our revenue is not a problem. And we've got to remember our discretionary baseline is up since 2018 over $300 billion from about $1.32 to $1.74 trillion.
So, you know, the reality is here, the COVID uptick in spending is crazy. I mean, remember, we're spending about $4.3 trillion dollars.
in the federal budget in 2018, and we're over $6.3 trillion this last in 2020, I think it was.
So we really have bloated the government. And what happens in Washington, D.C., is spending gets laid out there, and it never gets...
pull back. And then like in this deal, when we have a $28 billion rescission from the previous budget,
we put $22 billion of that into the Commerce Department. So really, we only have a net $6 billion cut.
This is really a crazy plan that McCarthy put together with Biden because he had the upper hand
when they passed the bill in April. And he could have just led it to Biden and the Democrats to figure out how to pass it.
It might not have been everything that Republicans wanted, but it wouldn't have been this bad.
This puts us in a worse path than just having a clean debt ceiling.
Yeah, but I have to say, if you actually take into account the tax cuts, both the Bush tax cuts and the Trump tax cuts, some estimates, depending on who you listen to, right?
Because all of this is like sort of made up.
It resulted in nearly $4.5 trillion over the last 10 years.
So you do understand, Dnish, that.
George W. Bush had a massive uptick in government spending when you take in the Iraq and Afghanistan
wars and some of the extended programs that he put into the bank. And he also did tax cuts. Taxes, taxes do,
tax cuts do not. I mean, it might cause a downturn a little bit at this or that time. It usually doesn't in the long run a modest tax
that the long term it does.
we're not going to argue.
The obvious part that when your income goes down, the income to debt changes, man.
Well, we can talk to Laffer Curve all night long, but let me just say this.
In the Clinton administration, which prior to now and before that,
even maybe better in some ways in the Reagan administration,
was the most fiscally sound...
policies in the world because Republicans and Democrats work together to get stuff done.
You had a decent tax base.
that was not outrageous and spending was getting in line as revenues were going up in a good economy.
So we threw that economy away in the Bush administration.
We did it again and doubled down on that in the Obama administration, that Trump did it for four years.
The taxes is not the issue here.
We're just not very good on restraining our spending
because we're always trying to find political advantage,
both parties, in whatever they spend,
and they never pull back.
Robert, I'll let you weigh in here.
Well, there's a lot of, a lot to think about.
I mean, first, listen, I think we,
many of us would agree whether we're Republicans
or Democrats that, yes, taxes, you know,
could easily be debated whether we should have
put it on the table or whether tax revenues are growing fast or not fast.
Irrespective of that, it wasn't on the table.
It was never going to be on the table in an election year.
So we shouldn't speak idealistic of what we want.
We should start talking about what could get done.
Number two, on the whole budget aspect,
I mean, for the most part, since Graham Leach Bliley in the 80s under Clinton, I mean, the 90s,
we haven't had a balanced budget since then because we've been in a 20-year war.
So it's been a lot defense-driven and a lot because we have an aging population,
and thus there's been a lot on health care.
So we're asking to put the genies back in the bottle and it's just not happening.
The one thing I would say is if we could get GDP growing,
I would care less about how much debt we have if GDP went to $40 trillion.
You know, we have to look at debt to GDP, not necessarily absolute debt.
The problem is our growth has been slow as shit.
Okay, let's be real here.
During the Trump tax cuts, they were calling for 5% GDP growth.
They came in at under 3%.
So if we could figure out how to get growth going again, then we would be much better off.
Unfortunately, we had COVID that stymied everything.
So, I mean, we are where we are.
And I want to be clear. I don't think anyone was victorious or not victorious. I was only saying that the two bookends was the Biden budget and the McCarthy budget and Biden's legislative victories and what the GOP wanted. And just in my opinion, Biden's legislative victories, I'm talking that things that actually happened were all protected.
That's just a fact. And so I think the GOP, in my opinion, I think what they put on the docket and passed it unanimously was something that was just unrealistic to get past in any which way.
And therefore, I think McCarthy, who I believe acted incredibly professional, I think did a really good job.
He's going to get, you know, literally his knees cut on this from his own party.
I mean, this was like a Boehner moment for him.
You know, I have to say not to put too many parallels there,
since they're so different in so many special ways.
You know, but this really does push back against his authority in that,
you know, he did a lot of different things.
In the Rules Committee, I believe, and I don't know how real this rule is,
this was in the agreement,
but I believe the agreement between him and the Freedom Caucus was that...
everybody had to unanimously vote for something and go forward.
I just want to make sure I, yes, that's correct.
Then on top of that, he sort of went across party lines and did the one thing that they didn't want him to do, which was compromise, right?
And so now Hakeem Jeffries has made some very interesting comments over the course of the last couple of hours saying, hey, I guess he was reliant on us.
He needed us to get this done.
Lots and lots of commentary around that.
Jim, I don't think the Freedom Caucus likes that.
And I think that ultimately, they only need one person to come out and do a vote of no confidence.
It's essentially an inevitability.
Isn't it just inevitable that it's going to come out and that he's going to be, you know, that there will at least be a motion?
I don't think that's the case.
And maybe Jim may be closer to the Freedom Caucus side of things than I am.
But I'm not certain that that's a guarantee thing, Dinesh.
I mean, we're in the middle of a major election right now.
McCarthy is trying to raise a shitload of money for the members that are in office
and to elect Republicans in purple districts across the country where we may see some possibilities to regain seats.
The last thing we need right now is disruption with the speaker.
That would be the worst political idea in the world.
Again, Jim, I don't know what your thoughts are on this, but I'm not confident that that will happen.
I think we've got to move on past this and focus on gaining more seats in the House.
Well, there's no movement of foot right now.
And for those who aren't familiar, I'm as deeply involved in everything that led up to the House Freedom Caucus.
And I put meetings together and I was the only Capitol Hill staffer there when those guys were meeting privately before it all came together.
I know most of these guys pretty well.
I have discussions with folks in D.C. even still right now.
talk that I hear about it and people are asking if someone's going to do it. At the moment,
there is no move that I'm aware of. And, you know, admittedly, if anyone is specifically thinking
about it, then they're kind of holding back right now to see how this plays out. We'll find that
out probably more next week if something...
comes across but it it is kind of on the edge i mean i think it's a possibility i don't know what
i put in jim can i add something to that because i remember when when when leagues were happening
that there was going to be a handshake deal when dr danish broke the story about the specific
specifics of it first time on twitter spaces i remember you saying that you thought there was
going to be chaos in the gop i mean
I mean, what, I mean, has that come to fruition?
Is there chaos or do you think it's a lot more calmer than you thought, initially thought?
Well, what, what, what it's maybe seems calm to a lot of people, but there, there is chaos developing.
Like right now, the pushback, what's happening right at this present moment?
And this is so typical on the two debt ceiling debates that I was dealing with when I was on the Hill in 2011 and 13.
You know, this is just playing out.
and people are allowing this to go forth because the focus right now is the bill getting voted on tonight and everything around that.
People will take a breath afterwards, see what they think. I believe there's definite potential for chaos. I mean, you have got,
a real frustration. But the interesting thing is that with Thomas Massey and Jim Jordan being on the side of the deal,
then there's going to be a lot of heart to heart on that more conservative side of things because everyone respects Thomas and Jim.
and I worked for Thomas for those who don't know.
And I disagree with his vote, by the way.
But this is going to play out.
People are going to think through it.
And I'm getting the discussion all the time on this.
So it's kind of simmering underneath.
I still think it can be chaos.
And I think it may be heading in that direction.
I mean, but Jim, Jim, what is to be gained by doing this?
I mean, they call this vote to oust a speaker.
It's likely not going to happen.
But what is to be gained by members of the Freedom Caucus by doing this when we need to focus on the election in 2024?
Well, so Sherman, so don't take the, I know you're trying to think through this, so don't take what I'm about to say is some pushback against you individually. But actually the question that should be asked is what was to gain by not having passed the bill, which nobody even in the Freedom Caucus liked a lot.
but they voted for because McCarthy put together a plan that was a great starting point.
And no one was realistically thinking you were going to end up at the bill that passed in April.
But McCarthy went so far away from that that it's causing chaos.
So when people, and having dealt with those kinds of questions, because I'm on the House Freedom Caucus wing of things, so to speak,
I get those questions for the last 12, 13 years.
I'm always asked that question.
And my answer back is, well, that may be an issue.
But why is it that leadership always pulls the rug out from them if a deal's been made?
Now, this was an opportunity from what happened in January to be able to change that construct.
Know that there would be disagreements.
and then just come together.
So as I've said before, McCarthy should have just said,
if Biden wasn't going to talk to him,
if Schumer wasn't going to do anything,
then just take a recess in all of May.
It's not like we need the government to be passing bills real badly
other than the appropriation stuff
and then make them have to bring their amended bill
and then you could deal with it from their...
That could have been pandemonium.
That could have been pandemonium.
The market's going to react really poorly to that.
Why would that be, Denish?
What if we got a downgrade in rating?
You're saying, I'm talking about the end of April to May.
Like January 1st was the day.
And by the way, let's just be honest here, guys.
January 1st wasn't the date.
Like, Yellen moved the date to the 5th.
Not because some things changed.
She moved it because of the deal.
She did not move it because.
So if we waited until May...
To bring, and without any conversations till the end of May, this would have been pandemonium. I guess I'm not understanding.
No, no, no. I'm saying when conversations were not happening, McCarthy was reaching out to the president. He wasn't talking to McCarthy. And so after that played out for a week or two, you say, okay, we're going to go and go meet with constituents. And you've got our bill. Go ahead, think through it. Give us your retort.
Yeah, but they would look terrible to their constituents
if they did something. Just, what do you, they can't just give up
and walk away because the other side doesn't want to play ball. You can't do that
because you throw the whole markets into disarray. All these people,
a lot of folks have retirement accounts that could just go up in flames if they
just say, all right, you know what? I'm going to take my ball.
I'm going to take my ball and go home. I don't want to play anymore.
I don't think that would work.
Well, listen, that was that. I am not talking about take my ball and not play, but I am talking about a little bit of hard ball.
Folks, let's understand something. We're going to pay the debts. Like it's going to happen. And I will tell you this, what's worse, that we didn't pay bills when Moody's and Fitches and all the organizations can't figure out how to rate a dang thing at all. They don't know this. They're wrong every time. I did a lot of tweeting on this.
because I remember all the stuff that they were saying back in 2011 and 13.
Tell me, even, I'm not saying it would come to this, but even if for a day or two, we didn't make payments,
you think that that's a worse scenario than 32 now going quickly to $36 trillion of the debt all the way to $50 trillion and no plan.
to change anything. When we are at level so high in our government spending, when you look at
a 2019 baseline, we have so blown that out of the water. We've grown 40% in the federal government
since COVID. Now, I don't care who you are, Republican or Democrat. By the way, Republicans are
just bad at all this stuff, but because they voted for it. We grew 40%. There's no reason you can't
pair back 40%. And I would say if we went to the,
discretionary spending baseline of 2019, we wouldn't even be talking about needing a debt ceiling change
because we'd be okay all the way through the rest of the year with revenues and the new baseline.
We would be just fine and we'd be at stasis in 2019.
That's the way people need to think and we're not thinking that way.
Yeah, Jim, I think you're right in that regard.
How do you get that past the Senate?
No, I'm not saying it would pass the Senate. I'm saying the Senate needed to make it smart. They needed to take the bill and amend it the way that they thought would work. And that's how we, that's how we should be negotiating in Washington. I mean, just to chime in, Ryan, you had me about 75% of the way, which is lots considering where in opposite sides are most things. But
Here's what I think McCarthy made a bunch of mistakes.
And like I said, I thought he was a gentleman.
And I've been clear where I think things have come out.
I think the couple of the big mistakes he made is he could have had the Senate gone first.
See what they could have gotten done.
Because, you know, my guess is in the Senate.
It's going to be closer to 50-50 on the vote.
You know, we'll probably be, you know,
30 to 40 of each or something. Where as in the House, you know, it was, what's it,
three to one Republican to Dems on the vote? Because in some ways, they're protecting McCarthy.
I mean, I think they made a big mistake because the first thing that they should have debated,
and I think to Ryan's point is what's the best, what's the right starting baseline?
The idea that they went to a post-COVID baseline, in my opinion, I'm surprised that the GOP, I'm surprised the GOP voted anywhere near they did today.
Yeah, why did they, Robert?
It made no, can I tell you something?
It did not make sense to me.
I thought it was going to be 125 and 125 to get to like 250.
I was surprised that McCarthy God, God bless how much they...
you know, went to town and asked for, you know,
They're at a post-COVID baseline.
You know, if you look at the working, you know,
and staff requirements, CBO came out that it will be a larger number.
It just seemed to me that a couple of the things they really wanted,
they didn't get anywhere near it.
And that's why I think that the post-mortem,
I actually, once again, I think, you know, with Jim on the line, I think McCarthy kind of probably didn't have much of a hint that he was dealt to get this past.
And I think under no scenario, where they're going to have a default.
So I think he was, you know, I think he had two deuses, a three, a Jack and a queen.
I mean, so Robert, I have to say it.
But I'm shocked that they didn't try to cut a deal that put less pressure on the Republicans.
I'm, I'm shocked that they had 250 votes.
I mean, I don't want to say it, but is it possible that the president that everybody keeps calling senile and calling out of touch,
kind of knows how deals get made.
Name, I'll let you jump in on that.
I know that you disagree.
But it is possible that Biden kind of got this done.
I mean, I don't want to give him too much credit here.
Will you reading my morning tweet?
Did you actually say that?
Do you think Biden won again?
Well, yeah, for sure it was a Democrat win.
And I think what we saw today was, and I think what we've been seeing for the last few weeks, in my opinion, has been a complete facade where in public, McCarthy will talk tough.
Biden will talk tough or whoever the White House spokesman will say, well, we're here and
this, what the Republicans have proposed is dead on arrival.
It's all, this is all a ruse what you're seeing.
Well, in the background, when they're meeting and supposedly,
negotiating, what you have to remember is you have both sides that want to continue funding
this war in Ukraine, and they have a lot of aligned interest in spending.
So there's no way there was not going to be a deal.
And even if there say there wasn't, there was no way we're going to default on the debt
because they have enough money to pay the principal and interest on the debt.
But back to this facade that we saw, just like you saw on this vote today, which was a joke,
you basically had a pack of i don't remember how many democrats ended up voting for it
52 did you did you just say they have enough money to pay the interest and the principal on the
debt is that i heard well yeah that's what's what's if they if they ran past the so-called where's the principal
If they ran past the called X-Date, they would never default on treasuries, is what I'm saying.
What they wouldn't be paying is like the government salaries and all the other things.
They'd never default on debt.
We're about Social Security, Medicare.
Yeah, you know, they would keep making those.
Anyway, just to finish my point is that the way you saw that this vote take place today was it was...
sort of on party lines because the Democrats aren't going to rush in and all vote for the deal.
So they had a pack of like 40, 50, whatever they were, wait into the last minute to see how many of the actual no, the nays from the Republican side were.
And if you watch that live, they all rushed in and cast their vote yes and pushed it through for tonight's final vote.
It's all the whole things of facade.
In the background, they're not actually dealing.
They're sitting there laughing and trying to find a way to sell it to each of their side, their constituencies, to make each side think that they got a good deal.
So you see the talking points from McCarthy and the talking points from the White House.
This is a terrible deal because they suspended the debt ceiling.
They can't just go fortunately and more in debt.
And by the way, if they have another financial crisis and they start passing stimulus, there's no deal of debt limit.
It can go infinite for two years.
Hey, name, your audio is not great.
Social Security and Medicare are less than 40% of our entire federal budget, roughly.
And, you know, it changed because this new baseline had come out.
When you're talking about paying bills,
What name said is right. The treasuries will never default. That should be. And of course, the ratings agencies may not consider it that way. But that should be what the ratings agencies are concerned with. And the other bills, even though consideration, obviously, is not the main driving factor. We're going to pay the dang treasuries down. So the point that we need to keep in mind here.
is that all the numbers that Janet Yellen were giving were, and I'm using air quotes here, wrong.
Like, you know, June 1st, June 5th is an issue because you've got some sparse revenue coming until the quarterly's come out in June 15th.
And then you have that big...
Social Security payment on the 14th.
But I got to tell you, these guys have so much ability to figure out what to prioritize.
We really had until August 15th.
Like there was a lot of time to deal with this.
We ran these numbers when I was in, and I'm repeating from the earlier space today,
but when I was working for Tim Heelskamp back in 2011 and 13,
we were putting out press releases because we were tracking the numbers.
But Tim kept putting the message out.
We were right on the numbers every single time.
And I'm telling you, we had until August 15th.
These things can't get worked out.
Ryan, you know, you know a prioritization plan is picking winners and losers.
You know as a conservative Republican.
You guys would get smoked in the elections by using prioritization.
That's not going to be on the table for the Republican Party.
Most of the Republican economists are the ones who smoke on is smoke it and think it sucks.
Michael Stratt, you talk to all those guys, the AEI guys, the heritage guys.
No one's for prioritization.
You know, what's interesting, Jim, you said something that, again,
kind of bothered me a little, not because of what you said,
but because of the realities of what's going on.
You know, just wanted to remind everybody what Jim was saying,
which is Medicare and Social Security for the poor and for the elderly.
It represents such a small portion of our budget.
And yet, I've heard many, many people call it a Ponzi scheme.
And yet, you know, I do wonder if the real Ponzi scheme is the military industrial complex like name was mentioning, since we just keep throwing money at it and we keep fighting wars that we shouldn't be in anyway.
Tara, wanted to go to you.
Yeah, I just wanted to. I'm actually asking this, but is it actually clear that that 189 figure of Republican yeses on the actual?
the motion before to actually, you know, discuss the issue and then vote on the debt ceiling.
Is that going to be the same number we're going to see tonight?
Because I have a feeling it's going to be significantly lower and they will need many more Democratic votes.
The Democratic votes were 52 in the afternoon, but I think they're going to have to bump that up.
So I guess Robert was saying, somebody was saying something about that.
But Hakeem Jeffries has the votes.
I understand that he will fill in the interstices, so to speak.
But what I'm saying is I don't think it's going to be that many Republicans.
So you're not going to see that.
that level of support for the actual bill.
Can we just be honest at how disgusting that is that we're saying in this way?
That, oh, Hakeem Jeffries will just get more people to vote in one direction.
But I know that's how politics works.
Danish, I would just say, so if you thought you saw breakouts in the vote today, it's going to be bigger breakout.
So here's the deal, the way it's working out.
And this is, I guess, a little insider information because I'm whipping people as well as others that I talk to in D.C.,
You're going to get 60 to 100 no votes.
Like there were yes votes.
When you're saying you're whipping votes, are you whipping no votes?
But yeah, mostly know because there's going to be less.
You're whipping all votes.
So, um, that you're against.
How do you whip for both sides?
Well, it's a combination of talking to people and talking to people who are talking to people.
And, you know, it's not an exact science.
By the way, I always tell people in legislative work that whipping votes is not one, two, three.
You know, it's when someone says yes, you know, it's a yes.
Or if you ask they're going to vote and they say, sure, then that's a maybe.
You know, it's complicated, obviously.
You just kind of blew me away there because...
I thought you were against this, Bill.
You've done a lot of Twitter spaces.
Yeah, but then how are you ethically able to be whipping votes on the other side?
No, I don't mean whipping. I'm not talking about whipping. I'm not talking about whipping to encourage people to go one way or the other so much. Maybe not. No, I'm talking about whipping seeing what votes do we have? Where are we at? And also, you know, I've been through these. I've seen my numbers are typically pretty close on something I can't pin down. But I'm talking to a lot of people and this is the this is the situation.
So McCarthy, and you've heard Hakeem Jeffries say this.
McCarthy apparently made a deal with Jeffries that he would get 150 yes votes.
Now, if that doesn't happen, I don't know what Jeffries is going to do.
I don't know if he's going to bolt.
And he might very well bolt.
This deal is going through, man.
Are you really still in the camp that it may not go through?
Why would he go against Biden?
And the deal that the president wants, what would be in it for him?
Really, Jim, what would be in it for Hakeem Jeffries to bolt?
The death's the dream drama.
Is the bullhop and right?
If you guys have heard me in spaces long enough to know, I don't talk wishful thinking.
I try to talk objectively about what's going on.
Hakeem Jeffries is the one that said that he was promised 150 votes and we'll see if they can deliver.
Now, that's an implied threat.
I don't know how deep or wide or broad, but the point is that that statement was made.
I'm talking about what Jeffries made, not what I'm saying or predicting.
if he can't deliver 150 votes.
And right now, from my best estimate, we're talking 60 plus no votes right now.
So that's going to happen.
So the question is, how does that play out?
Now, I predict the thing's going to pass.
I don't think it's going to pass.
I'm just telling you what Jeffrey said.
But that's the state of play right here because what you'll see is most of the Democrats are not going to be voting initially.
Some will, because some of them have already decided what they're going to do.
But they're voting right now, by the way.
So there is a vote going on, Jim.
Is this for the actual bill?
Because it says on passage on top.
So you'll notice that only about 40 Democrats have voted and you've got 100 Republicans.
So what's happening here?
is you've probably got back and forth, you're going to have McCarthy talking to Jeffries
because they're waiting for Jeffries to release his votes.
And that will happen when McCarthy gets his votes going out.
So that's what you see here.
That's why they always extend it.
I wanted to give the numbers, Jim, if that's okay, what we're seeing right now.
And this is a few seconds outdated.
Actually, Suleiman, do you have it open in front of you?
Yeah, yeah. We've got 77, right now we've got 77 yes Republican votes and 36 Democrat votes, which is a yes.
Actually, I'm seeing 78 30, 79, 38. I'm watching it.
Yeah, sorry, I'm in the UK, so we might be a few minutes behind. But yeah, it's 78, 27.
In the UK, they had to cut their cable bill.
I'm sorry, go ahead, Ryan.
I was saying I got these live right now.
We have to have to be in the military wars in Ukraine and Russia.
And you guys increase the military budget by 3% more.
So I guess we're going to be struggling even more.
I'll be five minutes ago.
Well, the internet works slower in the UK.
No, I was just saying if you guys want the numbers,
I got them live here from CNBC.
Whenever you guys want, just let me know.
I'll be happy to share it.
Can you repeat them again?
Right now, Republicans are 80-e-e-day,
Democrats are 30-A-EA, 6-N-A.
Total numbers are 118-yes, yes, 34-No.
And whenever you need 218 votes to pass this.
Interesting. Jim, your future that you just painted seems less and less likely.
But the game is not done yet. The game is just beginning.
No, there are 113 Republican votes outstanding. I'm telling you, my prediction would be 50 to 60, but they're likely to 60 or more.
Did you? Listen, they're all. Jim, didn't you say that you expected between, was it 70 to 100?
No votes from a. I said 60 to 100. Yeah, yeah. Did you not sit 60 to 100.
60 to 100, no votes for Republicans is what you said, isn't it?
And again, no one's precise on this.
That's just my best estimate from talking around.
What I'm saying, I mean, you already got 30.
Sorry, I'm just repeating.
I've never heard Tara be so spicy.
Yeah, well, we're, we're friends even though we just grew up.
I think the reason for that I thought the reason for Tyra advice is because.
having the Republicans given Democrats a huge victory with this bill.
Anyway, sorry, Robert, you were going to say, no, I was just saying, I said early on a couple
days ago, I thought it was going to be, you know, 125 Republicans and 100 Dems.
I was surprised by the rules vote today.
That being said, I guess what we're saying is, you know, 30% of them just approved it
so the rules vote would pass.
Ryan's saying is he thinks that they're going to lose a third of those at least.
well, and Robert, the dynamic there is, sorry, Ryan, just real quick.
Robert, and by the way, I thoroughly respect you, man, even though we'll disagree in a lot,
but I really like your take.
What I want to say is that the dynamic on the rules vote is the speaker will be more pissed off
at members who vote against his rule.
then he will be at people that vote no on certain bills.
And this kind of fluctuates.
But on something like this, the reason you had so many voting for it is because they're giving deference to the speaker.
I already know they're, and we're already starting to see it.
I know there are going to be a whole bunch.
They're going to be voting.
And look, we're at stasis right now.
Everyone's kind of talking to one another.
The Republicans aren't breaking yet.
The Democrats are, all the people who have decided on the Democrat side, they're hanging, they're waiting.
There'll be a couple throw in here and there.
But the Republican movement is what's going to happen first, and then we get to the Democrat stuff, and we'll see what happens.
Listen, I hope the Democrats have north of 100, but that's just my opinion.
Right now, it's 97 Republican yes, says 33 knows, by the way.
I made the prediction on vote numbers.
I wasn't speaking about that.
Do you guys want to take the numbers?
Because we got a nice spike here.
Yeah, let me an update, Ryan.
So total right now is 143, yes, 44, no.
Republicans are split 97 yes, 34 no.
Democrats are 46 yes, 10 no.
So totals right now stand at 144, yeah, 145 yes, 44 no.
So we're getting very close.
A couple things here, by the way.
Mike Lee is on the floor.
Senator Mike Lee's on the floor right now talking to, uh,
looks like Rosendale and Sparks and Andy Biggs.
And so they're trying to figure out what's going on too.
Members have privileges in each of the houses to go on the floor.
But, you know, right now is where all the deals are being made.
This is why I did say earlier, it's not precise.
There's things that are talked about on the floor.
People might move on this or that thing and get a promise.
And then a group of them might go a certain way.
But I still predict you're already seeing the nose rise on Republicans 101 to 35.
You know, Steril, I really think you're going to see about 50, 60 no votes would be my guess.
Where do you see this going in the Senate on the Republican side?
I know Senator Paul stated today that he wants the option to offer amendments.
Do you think he could potentially attempt to filibuster this?
That's going to depend somewhat also on the strategy that Mike, Lee, and Ray and Paul take,
because they've both become very good at offering amendments on the floor.
Ted Cruz may chime in on that as well.
And so that kind of goes in flux because individual members of the Senate have a whole lot more flexibility to shape how things end up at the end.
So we're going to find that out after this passes.
And in fact, I can guarantee you that Mike Lee is talking to these guys about what he's thinking.
And that's why he was with the group I told you about.
So, you know, they're trying to figure that.
Guys, Democrats at the end voting, we had a nice little spike there of about 20 Democrat
Yays come in, so a split right now is 168 yes, 50 no.
So we're about 50 votes away from the pass.
There you go. It'll get done.
It was interesting that Tim Scott came out very quickly as a no.
So the presidential candidates on the Republican side seem to be pissing on this nicely.
It's interesting also because I wonder how this is going to affect elections, whether constituents are going to come back and they're going to say, hey, I put you in there to
to fix these issues and all you did was getting this t-shirt that that's what i think is going to
happen people are going to be quite upset at their local constituents i think i think across both
party lines but definitely across the republican party line you know they talked a lot of smack and
and they just didn't back it up i mean in real talk i and jim you know i respect you and not
you know obviously sure michael as well but they talked a lot of smack
Oh, we're going to make them pay.
Oh, this is going to be great.
Biden, who walked in, hobbled in, whatever you want to say,
you guys were making tons of jokes about that kind of stuff.
And he just, you know, he just took it.
I have to say he took it.
And this has got to be a big...
big, big black spot on McCarthy.
I mean, McCarthy is going to pay for this.
There's no way that they...
But Danish, can I ask you a question?
Because yes, there are going to be someone
who's going to raise a motion against McCarthy.
But who would they possibly vote for?
I heard Ken Buck say there's really no one...
to replace him at this point.
So what is the point of doing it?
Well, there are names, but there aren't the boats right now.
But even if there aren't the votes right now, to be completely honest, there might still be a motion to vacate and then they would go through the whole process again.
And remember, it took 15 times to get McCarthy even across the finish line.
No, I understand what you're saying, but what I'm saying is what is the point for the Republican?
Donald Trump just, sorry, I do apologize.
I'm going to straight here.
But yeah, Donald Trump just posted and he was asked about the debt ceiling about to be passed and he said,
It has passed, and I guess I knew it was going to be passed,
but we'll get it properly fixed in two years.
That was even less important than his town hall comment.
Well, that's, that's very important.
By the way, the most important thing that came from that.
He's shown that he's one of the only Republicans with a backbone.
How is that a backbone, Silemon?
The flow once it's going to happen.
He's like, oh, I guess I knew it.
Yeah, like, Solomon, how is that showing a back hole?
What kind of weird comment is that?
Bro, you just need McCarthy.
Go ahead, Ryan, not an answer.
Just wanted to update you guys.
No, that 27 votes away from a pass.
And the Democrats have already begun voting yet.
There's 129 of them who haven't voted.
Well, we'll keep in mind here, guys.
There are 129 Democrats to have to vote because they're waiting for Akeem Jeffries.
Sorry, Jim, say that again?
All the guess votes come early?
I said, no, what I said was those votes have not come yet because Akeem Jeffries hasn't
He's waiting for his 150.
But even if he doesn't get his 150, he'll just increase the number and get it passed.
I mean, I don't understand.
The 150, I think, was, you know, is not like a red line that he can't cross.
I would like to be able to blame Republicans for a potential...
No, he would love to cause chaos for Republicans.
I have to say, no offense, Jim,
but this is like an incredibly narcissistic party then,
because if they think that the party that is currently in the center,
you know, runs the Senate and the White House
is going to be willing to be, to ruin the country...
just so that they can have talking points going into an election.
I mean, this is, you know what works better?
You know what really works better?
And what Democrats actually want to hear?
Democrats want to hear, hey, you know what?
They can say what they want, but I win.
How much does that hurt, Jim?
Don't let him talk to you like that.
He's basically saying, you guys are losers.
Janish, I love you, man, but I got to tell you this.
You just described politics.
And I don't know why you can.
Obviously, every one of us on here is sitting back and saying which part the fact that Republicans keep losing.
Every one of us on here, every one of us in this room is speaker right now, are saying,
guys, don't you know what would work?
And some of us had different opinions.
But we're all sitting back and saying, what are you guys thinking?
politicians think differently.
And self-aggrandizement is a, I mean, a trait of most politicians.
There are some good people up there, by the way, on both sides of the aisle, so they're not all like that.
But the reality is this, I'm not predicting that's what's going to happen.
I'm saying if Hakeem Jeffries gets it in his mind,
that that would be a good strategy to take into 2024.
He'll take it right now at whatever risk
because they're still going to pay all the money.
Janet Yellow's going to back them up, guys.
I'm telling you, if they were to do that right now,
she would announce tomorrow.
We're seven votes in 55 seconds.
Remember, this does run around a timer, so just keep on.
And Jim's prediction is quite close
because they're already on 52 no votes
in terms of the Republicans.
And Jeffries is still waiting for his 150 and McCarthy's trying to talk people into it.
So I keep hearing that this is a huge win for Democrats.
And, you know, I have to disagree, Dr. Daniels.
I really don't think it is.
I think that passing this debt ceiling is actually going to hurt the Democrats in the 2024 elections because we gave up so much.
Guys, hold on one second.
Okay, but the game being playing Ryan right now is what the final vote is.
I'm just going to get you guys in the numbers.
I don't have a dog in this way right now.
If anything, I think Ryan was not a super fan of this bill.
He's going to explain to us how the Democrats lost.
Yeah, Dan, walk us through how the Democrats got everything that they wanted and they still lost.
But we didn't get everything that we wanted.
We're restarting student loan repayments.
There was no change to student loan forgiveness.
So we're allowing more fossil fuel drilling at a time when we're experiencing the biggest existential crisis to ever face humankind.
And at the same time, we're going to be penalizing people on social safety nets because 15% of the people on these social safety nets are freeloaders.
That's living 85% of the people who really need these benefits getting harmed because of this, you know, bill going through.
There were a lot of gives from the Democratic Party in order to get this bipartisan.
The bill has passed. You don't have to lie anymore.
It's done. You got it. It's a win. I mean, how can we even sit here and try to act like that that's not? Come on, man. Like, can we give some, some we give some kudos to Jim? Basically, right now, there are 60 no votes that are Republicans. So he's going to be right.
in terms of it's 60 to 100.
So I would like to give credit to Jim.
Robert gets his flowers once a week.
I'm going to be close on that.
Robert, why do you need your flowers so often?
Because you gave it to, you gave it to the McCarthy's guy.
You got to give one to Biden's guy to make it bipartisan, just like the bill.
Well, I would hardly call myself McCartner, but I will tell you this.
Robert is one of those people who, I'm going to, I'm going to praise him.
He's one of those people who's run an amazing business and understands things well,
has worked with politicians and I think is the least...
rancidly political person.
In fact, he's not at all near there.
And that's what I appreciate about you,
even though we might disagree.
And so that's why you can do it as well.
You guys want to get back.
By the way, just look at, by the way,
this is going to be, you're getting close to 300.
Yeah, you're 282 yes, 100 and 2 no right now.
So far, more Democrats, more Democrats than Republicans.
147 Democrats, yes, 140 Republican, yes.
By the way, if there's more Democrats than Republicans,
trust me, someone will be spiking the ball tomorrow.
Yeah, I think the Senate vote is going to be much more difficult than this one.
That's the uphill battle that is here is the Senate vote.
The House vote, I think, was the layup.
The Senate's going to be the bigger battle, because you have infighting within the battle.
I think it's going to be like 30.
It's going to be like even.
McConnell will get his group.
Schumer will get his group.
It will be, you know, 30-30 or 35-35-5.
Here's something interesting developing.
So right now it's 140 yes, 149, no, Democrats 149.
I think you're going to see some movement up on the Republican side to even it out.
So it is not, because that was one of the goals, I guarantee you, in McCarthy's buying.
But you only have, well, you only have like 12, though.
No, that's true. That's true. But he's working on them to get as many of them over as he can because he knows how bad it is to get more Democrats than Republicans.
Like, we've dealt with this so much. And this is the one thing that is potentially going to cause chaos in the Republican caucus that beyond what was already there.
Because if there was a majority Democrat.
That's going to hurt McCarthy is what you're saying.
Absolutely, because that's kind of an unwritten rule in both caucuses, you know,
that you don't move legislation that your people can't carry.
So for people that are joining us, a lot of people just, I just saw a spike in people joining us.
I think people are hearing about the news.
I just wanted to confirm the news that the vote did pass.
This debt ceiling issue has now been resolved.
at least in the House, it now goes to the Senate.
Ryan, what is the most recent numbers?
One second, just before Ryan goes.
Basically, Jim, is guaranteed that there's going to be more Democrat votes than Republicans now in terms of yes,
because you've got 159 Democrat, only 142 Republican.
So right now, chaos is...
Numbers split right now is 302.
And Democrat versus Republicans?
Sure. Republicans are 142 yes, 69 no.
Democrats are 161 yes, 42 no.
And still outstanding votes for Republicans or 11.
Oh man, Hakeem Jeffries played this really well. I've got to say that, you know, I know that this is exactly the narrative that's going to come out. It's going to be that they play politics more than we do. We were trying to save the country. I can already see the talking points that everybody's going to be putting in the background. But man, when you're talking about political chess, Robert, this is pretty good.
A good bait and switch there.
Do you think this might have an impact in the Senate because this is not what the Republicans would have preferred to have happened or the way it would have happened?
You know what I'm trying to say?
I mean, you've had a bunch of the Republicans already say no to it, right?
You had Rick Scott, you had Tim Scott, you had Ram Paul, you had Mike Lee.
Listen, McConnell's supportive of it.
So you're going to get that whole group, you know, of, you know, that group of Joni Ernst and Thune and Corn.
And, I mean, my, and, you know, I think you're going to get the progressive Democrats to say no because either of what they did with the climate action or what they did with the workers.
um hours so you know i think bernie sanders came out no today warren said no i mean i think it will be
like i said i think it will be closer to even on the on that side but i it seems like the dems
you know if this is a foreshadowing it seems like the dems really like the bill
I mean, and that's what I was saying to Dan who joined us.
So they're almost up to your 150.
Sorry, go ahead, David DeGis.
It is 150, FYI, just FYI.
And so when you saw Democrat votes moving suddenly for yes,
I think that what that means is that McCarthy said,
yeah, we got our final whip count.
I got my 150, they're coming.
And then he took his word, and then he released him.
I'm just telling you, that's the type of stuff that happens there.
But Jim, this still does make McCarthy look bad, doesn't it?
It makes them look horrible.
Listen, the reality is this.
to set the marker from April.
Everybody, including Chip Roy and everyone that was negative on the,
even Lauren Bobbard, I think I had a quick text exchange of Lauren Boehbert on this.
They all knew that they were probably going to get something back,
that they'd have to vote no on, and it would be touchy.
And McCarthy may have said, ah, well, I don't want to go through that.
Well, the thing is, he could have gone through it,
and he probably would have been okay,
because the Senate, if they had made their,
if they'd have pitched in on this and sent something back,
then they would have had a deal.
We wouldn't be going through all this rancor.
The legislative process would work.
We don't do regular order in the House.
It's crazy the way we do this because we play this game
with the leadership in the two houses and the White House.
And this needs to be a member thing.
I mean, I disagree with Jim.
Jim, 30 members of the Freedom Caucus of 40 members should not be able to hold the speaker hostage.
I mean, that is an absurdity to me.
How can you get anything done when, again, one member can say, you know, I don't like this particular deal you've made in a bipartisan way.
Therefore, I'm going to disrupt the entire house.
Well, let me ask you how that makes any sense.
Yeah, with respect, Sherman, let me ask you this.
So then, therefore, what you're saying is...
that they should capitulate when they disagree with leadership.
And the point I'm making in saying that is this.
We have a two-party system,
but all that our two-party system is is coalitions by other means,
like they do in parliamentary systems.
And so they do have a right to say what they want.
To be candid, I'm going to tell you this, guys,
having spent eight years in Washington, D.C.,
and thank God I'm not doing it now,
have so screwed up the system. And there were clean changes that took place in January. Kevin McCarthy could be considered one of the best speakers ever if he had worked this deal with their interest in mind. And they were willing to understand they weren't going to necessarily come along on what came back.
But this went so far, and it's so John Boehner-esque, and I had some respect for John Boehner, but, you know, I also had big problems.
My boss helped kick him out.
I mean, you know, I was on the fighting end of this.
But I can tell you that these people had a chance to really make the Republican Party strong by even when you went through this, the honest part of the process, which is the legislative part of the process.
and came to a deal that way,
rather than a deal getting worked out over at the White House,
it doesn't work, that's where you undermine this process,
and it's really sad and unfortunate.
So, Michael, I wanted to get your thoughts on this.
But why I did that only the Freedom Caucus every single time,
Jim, let's say McCarthy would have capitulated and said,
okay, I'm going to listen to the members of the Freedom Caucus,
I'm going to hold my ground on this thing.
What if he would have lost moderate Republicans
in districts where they could potentially lose...
considered in an election year.
is really only a marginally
And I'm going to tell you this,
I want to push back a little bit on this commentary
because the moderates losing
that the Speaker of the House should have
because he's not going to lose in districts
where they're going to always vote Republican
you could you could throw
you know a monkey in a hat
and it would win if it said R
next to the name so you know what the
do you know what the turnover percentages
It's about 5% on average.
Seats don't radically change except when big things happen.
We just had one of those big things happened two years before that.
We had another big thing happen.
But that is not the worst concern.
And the position where we are adding to the debt, where we, I mean, Democrat, Republican voters, independent voters right now are saying $32 trillion, are you kidding me?
We're on a way to $50 trillion because that's what's being reported.
And they're concerned about that.
And they like adults in the room, whoever that might be.
An adult in the room doesn't mean we compromise everything and just keep the status quo.
Yeah, but I disagree. Jim, Jim, you're saying independent voters, swing voters, I presume is what you're talking about.
I mean, the Freedom Caucus members represent the hardest red, red plus 50 seats, right? District-wise.
There is no way in the world independent voters would agree with the majority of the positions taken by the Freedom Caucus.
Well, Chairman, I got to disagree.
Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, Jim.
Jim, wait a minute. If I am consulting for candidates who are running in tight districts, I am telling you those positions will not move swing voters.
Chairman, I do consult with candidates in tight districts, and I'm telling you that, yeah, there are sometimes problems. There's no doubt about that. You have to think through it. But this...
This is why, you know, I'm not saying Donald Trump's going to just walk in or anything.
But with 2016, it didn't prove so much about Donald Trump as it proved a whole lot about
They're getting sick and tired of the way Washington runs, which by the way is also why
they kicked him out in 2020.
They're tired of Washington chaos, and you are wrong about independent voters.
They believe in fiscal responsibility.
They're not as concerned about the social issues, although that can affect them.
But they really care about their pocketbooks.
and when their pocketbooks were at risk in 2020,
their pocketbooks were at risk in 2018
because we're still coming out of,
or trying to build up into some things.
And their pocketbooks were at risk last year as well.
So when the pocketbook issues are there,
independent voters are looking for adults in the room.
And they don't see this move by McCarthy as adults in the room.
They could have done that.
And they don't see Democrats necessarily any better than that either.
I'm not trying to be one-sided on this.
No, I would disagree with you.
Independent voters will listen to reason, and it happens all the time.
The American people are slow on the uptake, but they're very smart in how they look at things.
No, Jim, I'm not disagreeing with you about the concerns of the voting populace, generally speaking,
specifically those in the middle who ultimately determine races, especially tight ones.
What I'm simply arguing is that your position that the arguments made by the Freedom Caucus are mainstream positions by the general public.
There is no data, focus group data, polling data that I have ever seen that showcases that that is the truth.
Truth is just the top three issues right now.
What are the top three issues right now in American minds?
Economics, crime, and immigration.
Right, but that bingo, crime works against, well, with respect, Sherman, crime works against Democrats right now.
The economy is working against Democrats.
I don't think the economy.
I've worked on three presidential campaigns and countless of other Republican campaigns across the country.
What I'm arguing, however, is the positions of many of those in a freedom caucus.
Those are not mainstream positions.
All I know is that I work with candidates like that because that's my proclivity.
I've worked with candidates like that for years.
I've been doing this as well for 30 years, running campaigns, consulting on campaigns, working on issues.
Now that the, Jim, I'd love for you guys to take your pissing match offline.
I think, you know, obviously, I don't think neither one of you guys need to prove that you guys are very good at this.
I think you just have differing views and that is allowed.
I know it's hard to do in the Republican Party.
But I was going to say that, you know, we do want to move forward.
I wanted to kind of take a step back.
I wanted to let everybody know, you know, at this point, we have tons of people in the room,
wanted to let everybody know that the debt ceiling vote has passed.
The numbers were, you know, McCarthy did hit 150 on his end,
but there was a little bit of a bait and switch.
And ultimately, there were more democratic yays.
And that was a very interesting move.
I am not sure what this means moving forward.
I want to focus on the future, not just what happens to the current.
Look, at the end of the day, it's going to be what is going to be, you know, I think
You know, what Biden's going to run on obviously is going to be, hey, we have a lot of legislative wins.
There's no doubt about that, right?
He's going to talk about abortion, abortion, abortion.
And if it's Trump, and I'm really hoping it's not Trump, but if it's Trump, it's going to be the same all stump speech.
The good thing is Biden doesn't need to memorize the whole new speech.
It's the same speech all over again, which makes it easier for that.
Biden has a host of other issues, Danish, that you can't overlook.
I agree. So for Michael, tell me how, we'll talk about Biden in a little bit, but I did want to now talk about how do we go from here to being passed through the Senate.
We talked a little bit about that. I want to go into the nuances of it. So right now, I mean, Robert was mentioning that it's going to be a 50-50 thing. The Democrats are going to bring their votes. The Republicans are going to bring their votes.
Do we expect any changes to the bill in the Senate?
That is my first question.
Sure, Michael, what do you expect?
Do you expect that the bill will have any changes in the Senate?
I mean, I agree with Jim, with the Jim 100%.
I really want to see what Rand Paul is going to potential attempt to offer up here in regards to amendments.
Jim is right. He, in my opinion, is probably one of the most effective members of the Senate in regards to getting in things that he deeply cares about and that a sizable percent of Republican voters care about. So I think there are absolutely going to be some changes to this. I don't know how extensive those changes will be, but I do not expect this bill as it currently is to pass the Senate. I just think they're going to have to make alterations.
And I wanted to read, I know we read what Trump said, let's hear what Biden just said via Twitter two minutes ago.
Tonight the House took a critical step forward, or, you know, Biden steamed it.
Tonight, the House took a critical step forward to prevent a first ever default and protect our country's hard-earned and historic economic recovery.
I've been clear that the only path forward is a bipartisan compromise that can earn the support of both.
parties. This agreement meets that test. I urge the Senate to pass it as quickly as possible
so that I can sign it into law and our country can continue building the strongest
economy in the world. You know, I don't want to say that's a victory lap, but it kind of sounds
like it. Troy, thank you for joining us. What do you think? Is this a victory lap for Biden?
Troy, you can unmute on the left, bottom left.
I don't know if it's a victory lap.
Honestly, I think it's a victory for everyone.
Easy for me to say, as a Democrat, I know.
But the alternative here is so incomprehensibly bad.
And there were concessions made.
And if, I don't know, if Biden wanted to be a dick about it,
he could have, you know, really hung him out to dry and put us in a bad situation.
He's got to be responsible.
I don't know the intricacies of, you know, the Republican Party, but I think McCarthy could have done it, played it better.
But, you know, it is what it is.
And we have, you know, unhappy Democrats.
If it's any consolation, politics-wise, you know, Marianne Williamson will waste no time.
jumping on Biden about the pipeline, which I personally think is a good thing, but the progressives tend to hate anything oil and gas, but it's an essential part of our economy.
So, I mean, there were concessions, but bottom line, you know, it's his job to keep the country running, and that's what he did today.
And I just hope it goes through the Senate just as well.
And it is a problem that needs to be solved at some point, and I know it's not...
I know it gets frustrating kicking the can down the road forever, but we just, frankly, you know, we got to stop waiting until the ceiling crisis to hammer this kind of stuff out.
And I don't know what that looks like, but we got to start working our way there.
Yeah, Troy, do you think Biden is going to go and address that?
I'm sorry, I'm just kidding.
He's not going to touch it.
They only touch it when the ceiling debate occurs.
Sorry, I had to say that.
But, you know, I wanted people to know you heard the way Troy talked about it.
You know, it's not a victory lap, but it is a sigh of relief.
I can't hear anybody, but.
O'Hare, we're going to have to send you down.
Can other people hear me speaking?
It does not address any of the issues that both parties are struggling with.
Yeah, yeah, okay, he used.
Yeah, I think O'Hare just has to leave and come back.
But what I was going to say was that, you know, ultimately, it sounds like,
You heard the way Troy spoke about it.
That sounds very different than the way Jim and Sharmichael
and other Republican people are talking about it.
So, Amman, do you think, is it becoming obvious
that this was a win for the Democrats?
I mean, it was obvious before the Bill even went to the House.
But essentially, yeah, this is a massive, massive victory for the Democrats.
A huge loss to the Republicans.
And the issue is with McCarthy, I mean, I agree with your point before,
I mean, even if there is no confidence vote,
let's say that that does happen.
That's just going to show that there's more disarray.
And this is not a good look for Republicans.
And I just can't believe, like, you know, you've got leverage.
Why not use that leverage to essentially get what you want?
I remember, O'Hare, you were on the space,
I think it was a few weeks ago maybe,
and you said, this is definitely going to go all the way.
And you said it, I presume,
because logically it made sense that they're going to basically...
for things in the bill that is going to be beneficial and the bill hardly any of the bill went
their way even they could even minor concessions like climate control didn't even go their way
like oh hey i want to go to you like what you made the prediction and your prediction didn't
come out right but i understood the logical reasoning for your prediction and i agreed with at that
point so do you want to explain like what happened
Well, you know, this is just half the story, right, guys?
I mean, this is going to go to the Senate.
And, you know, it did pass.
It was, you know, bound to pass the House.
I was surprised how easily it passed, to be quite honest.
But, you know, the bill as it's written right now doesn't address any of the issues that both sides of the aisle are struggling with, right?
Rising debt, rising inequality, rising interest rates.
you know, there's so many issues here.
You know, we're just kicking this can, you know,
this proverbial can down the road every single time this comes up.
We don't address the key issues here, which is suspending taxes, big government.
I mean, you know, it's kind of laughable because we're going to be right back here in a year
and a half dealing with the same thing.
So, you know, when this goes to the Senate next, I'm not sure it's going to,
it's going to be as easy.
they're going to have a much harder time
in the Senate getting this passed
the way it's written currently.
So we'll have to see, you know.
I don't think that's over.
Because you thought it was going to be hard
that it passed through the House.
One assumes that through the Senate,
it's going to be a lot easier to pass, isn't it?
Well, I think the Republicans,
I was surprised, actually,
how quickly they kind of folded,
You know, I was really kind of shocked.
I mean, like I said, I think if you look at the bill, I mean, what are the Republicans getting here, right?
What are they going to go home to their constituents with?
I mean, I think a lot of heads are going to roll here.
I think a lot of people are going to be very disappointed.
I mean, how, but how, I mean, I know you use the terminology heads are going to roll, but in reality, like, nothing's going to happen, is it?
They took the beating and they just, like, carry on walking.
Yeah, like I said, I mean, we're going to see what happens here in the Senate.
I just don't think it's going to...
Quite frankly, I think it's going to be a much, much harder road.
McConnell's probably going to, you know, get in the way here.
I mean, I just don't, I don't understand how the Republicans just can lay down here
and pass it the way it's written.
I mean, it's really, I got to say, the Democrats really, kudos to them.
They're getting a lot out of this, you know?
Yeah, and I just can't see how...
anything is going to change in the Senate.
And Benjamin, let me come to you because you got your hand up.
But also, I want to ask you the question as well,
because I know this is your view.
But, I mean, this is terrible for the Republicans.
Like, you expected, like, we all expected the bill to pass in some form.
Like, we're not, like, ridiculous in our thought process.
But the level of concessions that occurred, the level of victory that happened from the Dem side, the level of loss that happened in the Republican side.
I mean, I know you weren't expecting this, but just try and articulate your thoughts on this.
I mean, I just, I don't know how else to phrase that.
I was talking about this with Jim the other night, with, like I'll say again, with Mike Lee in the space, Senator Lee.
And I asked him, you know, so is this basically, for example, a blank check to Ukraine?
And he said, yes, it is, because it's going through, it's coming out of discretionary spending where there's no cap.
McCarthy caved, right? I mean, it is, pardon the language, but it's piss poor negotiation, my God.
I mean, I don't even know if there were any negotiations, right?
I mean, it looks like he just said, okay, we'll just, I'll give you whatever you'd like.
What I wanted to ask is, in the Senate, could anyone possibly see Joe Manchin maybe causing doing a little bit of grandstanding?
Because I think he's probably got presidential aspirations and he's always tried to paint himself as the fiscal conservative.
He's got the pipeline. He's got his pipeline.
That was put in there specifically for him. So no way.
He may care about the deficit. He may care about that, but he loves, loves pipelines way more.
But he got his pipeline in, the West Virginia.
Okay, in the last minute.
He put that in the agreement, which is why Tim Kane is going to actually put up an amendment taking it out.
No, Mansion got what he wants.
He's going to walk in very happy.
I mean, guys, we need a Republican on here who's going to push back and say, guys,
We didn't get smashed so badly.
Like, there is something we got from this.
Like, we are not total losers.
Is Marjorie Taylor Green available?
Maybe we can get her in here.
I probably say that they got smashed.
I mean, that's the funniest part.
The thing that's interesting, and I'm just playing the narrative for folks,
because I don't even know if this is what they're going to say,
but if the conversation is going to be, sure, Biden's old.
Sure, he's not like the sexiest candidate.
Biden, the midterms were better for the Democrats than expected.
So Biden won again in 2022.
Biden won on the debt ceiling issue.
And now, and Biden, by the way, has won over and over and over again on these legislative.
He got the Inflation Reduction Act out.
He got infrastructure out.
I mean, there's all of these wins.
And do you really, you know, it really solidifies Biden's position as not only the candidate for the Democratic Party, which, by the way, I'm not sure I'm super happy about.
Because, you know, like, Jesus, he's going to be 86 at the end of the next term.
But come on, so I'm like, this is.
You know, I'll, like, in terms of the current candidates, my preference is Trump.
And I am shocked, like, the way this is coming across in, and the way you phrased it is quite
What is coming across is Republicans are good at making videos of showing Biden, like,
tumbling across the stairs and, you know, missteps or whatever it may be, or being senile
or whatever it may be, while he's basically smashing it up and getting every single thing
Like, you're getting your memes and he's got the country.
Why don't you whip these guys in order?
Well, I wish I had that much poll with the president.
You know, the guys at Politico would be saying right now, you know, but...
Biden's winning, so he's going to win nationally. And that's not, this is all horse race stuff to the American people.
They're looking at, they know that, you know, they'll see some Biden successes. But really, honestly, what they're looking at is what's on their dinner table every night.
That's the thing that's driving most Americans, unless they're already bought into Republicans or Democrats.
So that's the first thing. The second thing.
Oh, and by the way, this is all going to be over.
Like, we're not going to be talking about this during primary season for the presidency.
But now what it does do, y'all really made a good point about it solidifies Biden's position with the party in terms of getting the nomination and not pulling out of it.
I think that they're going to feel happy with him and they're going to want him to be their standard bearer now because they're going to feel like they've got a winner for the things that matter to them.
That's the way I look at it.
Just of curiosity, so where, first of all, so where's people like Lauren Bobard, Marjorie, Taylor Green, and so forth, the people who said, we're going to reign in Biden, not another penny for Ukraine and so forth and so forth, where are their statements condemning this, right?
And it's a serious question, right? Because, Jim, so correct me if I was wrong in my assessment that basically, if they wanted Ukraine, has a blank check, right?
I mean, it's not subject to a cap. Is that correct or is that incorrect?
Well, it's all got to be appropriated. So there is a cap that exists. But yes, it's going to be, I mean, they're, they're, Republicans and Democrats. There's enough of a contingent of Republicans and of Democrats who are willing to help out Ukraine that that effort's probably going to continue forward unless something really changes radically that I can't anticipate right now.
Yeah. And I guess my bottom line is this, I'm a conservative myself, but it just seems to.
I'm not quite sure what it is the Republicans are doing at this point in time, right?
I mean, on multiple fronts, right?
Like all these whistleblowers, well, where are they?
Where's, you know, this whole thing, well, we're going to hold the FBI director in contempt of Congress.
Well, that's not going to happen.
I mean, there's been reporting on that now.
So can someone explain to me what exactly the Republicans in the House are doing aside from caving to an 80-something-year-old or however old Joe Biden is, man who they claim has...
dementia in his senile, right?
It's a legitimate concern.
So let me, let me, one second, Jim,
Anne, I mean, I'm hoping,
I'm pleading that you've got a different perspective.
Please go ahead and explain to what your thoughts are.
And you need to just unmute on the bottom left-hand side.
I have a completely different perspective on this 100% different perspective.
And I look at historically what's happened in this country.
I mean, this dog and pony show, Republican versus Democrat, it is such an old...
playbook and it's boring and frankly the only people that voted know are the only ones that
really care about this country everybody else that just went along with this that they're just
part of the r and d uniparties to just set them aside that story is road hard and put up wet if you
really want to play the game that the rs are different than the d's that's fine but let's let's move on
let's talk about the real issues here first of all we have just uncovered that the Biden regime
every single person in his cabinet including Kamala Harris doesn't have a legitimate
oath of office signed and notarized on file which makes them an illegitimate poser
they're fraudulently posing as a public service why is congress on investigating that
that story has been put out there it was presented with a petition for a writ of
quo warranto to the u.s attorney in washington dc guess what when it went on answer we
looked up his oath of office we did the freedom of information request
And he does not have a true oath of office on file,
nor does the judge that signed off on it.
So we have a real crisis in D.C. right now.
This back and forth is spending money.
We're paying the Federal Reserve interest on money.
They're just printing like crazy.
And our budget is out of control.
I mean, is a $31.4 trillion dollar kicked account?
I'm sorry, this is insanity here.
She seemed to disagree with you.
Rina, what's your thoughts on what Andrew said?
Yeah, I think it's a bunch of misinformation, so I'm just going to go ahead and put it that way.
I think I'm the only one in this space who's actually physically sitting on Capitol Hill right now.
I've served two Republican members of Congress.
I'm just telling you a lot of what I'm hearing tonight.
It's a lack of knowledge.
Look, this is good for the Republicans.
It's been years since there's been something bipartisan done.
And I was not a big fan of Speaker McCarthy after 15 ballots.
spine, but what he got done is pretty historic for Republicans. Republicans have a lot to love
in what passed tonight. And look, I'm a fan of people like... Like what? Rina, can you be specific?
What, what should they love? I mean, extension of work requirements for SNAP benefits. I mean,
they've been screaming about work requirements and welfare reform for so long.
and it's getting I mean look read the bill text has anybody read the bill text
let's talk about snap benefits and what the recipients of these benefits are now
going to have to do under this bill and when it gets kicked over to the Senate
side I agree with my friend Shermichael there's going to be some changes big time
because the guys like Kentucky Senator Rand Paul but what I'm saying to you is I don't
think Speaker McCarthy caved here I think he listened I think he learned and
If you look back even just two weeks ago, read Senator McConnell.
He did not want defaulting on our debt to fall on the Republicans.
If you're looking at the political playbook, Republicans wised up and understood that if they continued the partisan games of trying to make this about 2024, that they were going to look like the party.
And this is my party. I'm a Republican.
Republicans were going to look like the reason that we default on our debt,
and McConnell would never let that happen.
I was a senior aide to two Republicans and members of Congress
at the height of the financial crisis in 2008,
and I'll tell you, if you don't know how to read McConnell and McCarthy by now,
I mean, you don't know why they got this done.
They got this done so Republicans wouldn't look like fools.
And the extremists in Congress on the far right and on the far left are the only ones who are upset with this because they don't get their talking points.
This is good for the country.
And we need to pay our debts as a country.
We can have a talk about future spending and all that.
But those of you who are squawking about McCarthy looking weak and caving and all that, read the text.
Jim, let me go to Jim because Jim, you read the text and you had a different perspective.
I mean, do you agree with Rina?
She made a very good pushback on.
Well, I mean, what I would start with is $28 billion of rescissions, $22 billion of which went into the Commerce Department, into Joe Biden's Commerce Department.
I read, and really, the only cut that happened, I mean, I guess you can say it's the first cut and whatever.
That's not precisely true, but you can say that, but it's $6 billion total, and so that we can give away $4 trillion, which will be spent.
So we're going to go through a process.
that my former boss Thomas Massey got in this bill to be able to go through 12 appropriations bills.
Now, that will be a relief, except that on the back end of that, if they fail, you only go 99% of the current baseline, which is well above the 2019 baseline, which is...
the relative starting point of any place we should be in the budget right now, not everything
that's happened since COVID.
And Joe Biden put out his own message.
He said very clearly he got to keep every, he made this very clear the day that the deal
came out that he was able to keep every program that he put in to the so-called inflation
So no, it's a loss for Republicans.
Rina, I let you push back.
I mean, what's your thought about Jim said?
With all due respect, we'd be here all night if I wanted to push back on that.
Guys like your former boss, again, with all due respect, Jim,
he's the reason why we're out, we're red.
Massey wanted us to default on our debt.
He's been waiting for that, salivating at the mouth,
so he can push this back on Democrats.
I'm not, I was a fan of Biden.
I would not vote for Biden again.
Biden was the first ever Democrat.
And I'll just say, I mean, what?
Representative Massey is just not somebody I respect because he wants to blow it all up.
He's part of a faction of Republicans that want to blow it all up.
Really? He just voted for the deal, Rina.
Well, I mean, I'm glad he did because he came to his census, but all this verbiage, like, throwing it our way, like, oh, it's just tit for tat on the numbers.
I get it. I get the frustration, guys. I get it. But we need real systemic reforms, and we don't keep getting here, and we don't get to 11th hour governing.
But part of why we're here is also because of the tit for tat that people like Congressman Massey have,
have played. And I'll tell you he voted yesterday because he came to his census. And there's a lot
of backroom deals being made. Congressman McHenry has been a huge part of this from North Carolina.
I respect him, but he's had to deal with a lot of nonsensical dudes. They couldn't get them all
in order. I understand. There's serious concerns, but we got to look at what happened here
spending-wise. This was good. There's still millions of dollars of COVID-era spending
that is getting clawed back.
We need to look at the wins for whatever they are and not play tip for tap for the numbers.
Well, so, Rina, we are more than $300 billion up from the discretionary baseline in 2019.
And we only clawed back $28 billion that we gave right back $22 billion to the Commerce Department.
So tell me how that's a win for calling back COVID-B.
We have to start somewhere.
It's not going to be perfect.
The Democrats we're dealing with right now are super progressive.
We've got to start somewhere.
At least we got somewhere in terms of talking about it.
It feels like all these months have gone by.
Here we sit in the middle of 2023 almost,
and we've not even had a responsible conversation in Congress about it.
At least whatever part of this bill,
when we talk about COVID-era funding and rolling back some of it,
look, I'm not fully read the text myself,
even though I'm screaming it.
so I'm probably going to cut out here a little bit, but I,
I'm willing to take whatever he is here to start the conversation.
I just cannot believe we're as close to...
I mean, here we are as close to June 1st as we could be.
And it's just elect our governing, Jim.
Like, you've got to, I'm on your team on this.
I don't like all this federal spending.
But we've got to start the conversation somewhere.
This feels like a beginning.
Like I said, let's go for the numbers.
And that's what I'm trying to say to people.
We can't be all in our debts.
Arena, just want to push back a little here.
I mean, Democrats are super progressive.
This was McCarthy's bill that had 165 Democrats vote for it, more than Republicans.
Number two, the largest legislative deals done in the last two years.
was the infrastructure bill, the Chips Act, the Veterans Pact Act, the Climate Act.
I mean, we're talking about bipartisan deals here.
I think what you'll see is, and the midterms told you, that Biden's been running this like a moderate.
Yeah, yeah, what that's why I mean, and that's how the votes are coming in.
Yeah, Robert, with all of that, though, Biden's approvals and enthusiasm with Democrats, people, and your party is incredibly low.
Everything you've listed.
We're not talking about the campaign.
We have plenty of time to talk the campaign.
I'm wholly responding to the facts of legislative victories.
And what I'm saying, Robert, is those facts have not translated to voters within your own party.
That's what I'm simply saying.
We'll see right now. He's against no one. I guess if you, anyone versus the field, most people take the field. Let's see when it's mono, mono, Biden versus somebody after you guys go through or whoever goes through their six month of the land of misfit toys primary that we went through a few years ago.
God bless you guys when you're all on stage hitting each other.
I'm glad we have an incumbent.
We don't know what it's going to end up.
You should have primaries as well,
you've got a very good challenger,
but you're not going to give them a chance,
We don't have any challenger that's relevant.
you have a challenge that's more relevant than DeSantis, technically.
We don't have a challenger that's relevant.
We don't have a challenger that's relevant.
And you don't put someone against an incumbent who's at 15 to 20%.
I know you guys want to have to bring.
He's on a, according to the polls, he's got more, he's got more stronger base votes than even dissenters.
Okay, then you should run as a Republican.
No, maybe the Demp should find me.
Maybe the Demp should find me.
Guys, you can argue all you want.
They're not going to have a primary challenge with an incumbent.
It's going to be a hard to scream all you want.
Democratic Party after that, Robert.
Yeah, but it would be hard to call yourself a Democratic Party if you can't have primaries.
To Robert's defense, let me just say.
Republicans wouldn't do that either.
I had a grand guy at 26%.
There was no one in hell.
The RNC would give that person an opportunity to challenge the leader of the party.
That's not even realistic.
No, no, but it's not because essentially what's different now is.
I understand the argument that in the past we've never done it, but sometimes...
And generally, when you come to the future, things need to change.
The entirety of the most of the country doesn't have trust in Biden, but then they don't have a alternative.
And we know in 2016, 2020, they basically worked against the challenges.
We know what they did to Bernie.
So we know the Democrats, what they do to ensure that their man's in place.
Okay, I mean, you heard my point that we're going...
Yeah, no, I understand Robert.
Ben, come on. I wanted to get back in, because I know that Reno was responding to you.
Well, yeah, so I was actually speaking in more of a broad context.
Okay, I can take her points that this bill is somehow a win.
I will give her that. I don't agree with it, but we can leave it at that.
But like, for example, today, yes, I realize that people like Marjorie, Taylor Green are far right.
Okay, but today she sent out an interesting tweet.
In a reference the speaker, right?
McCarthy is releasing the January 6 footage
to third-party vetted journalists.
Okay, so regardless of what you think about January 6th,
do you think it's just coincidental that she chose today to announce that?
That's deflection, right?
Because she knew people were going to be angry about this bill.
She says, well, we'll just throw them a table scrap to make them happy.
So aside from this bill and maybe a couple other things, what can, and I am a Republican, what can we say,
uh... that we've accomplished right because it
one thing about democrats they would we might disagree with them
but they do what they say they're going to do for the most part and they get things
so where the investigations into uh... yeah it and again i i don't want to pass
judgment when my personal opinion as to whether i think people should be
where's the investigations into the origins of coven where's the investigation the
real investigations into the biden family
where's the investigations into
uh... uh... hunter biden and and so forth january six so
where are all the promises that were made?
And I understand politicians, that's what they do to get elected,
but where is the meat on the bones of what they promised
a decent portion of their base?
It's as if reality TV doesn't translate over
and perhaps knowing how to govern really helps.
I agree. You're proving my point.
I agree with you completely.
That's exactly. And I'm sorry, I have to interrupt here. This is Ann, because you're talking about representation of the people. And 1929, we lost that when they did the, when they changed the apportionment, which was part of the 14th Amendment. They stopped and capped the number of representatives. We don't even really have a government representing us right now.
So really, what are we talking about here?
Kicking the can down the road,
spitting trillions of dollars,
it's like, yep, another day business in the swamp.
We're not really affecting the problem,
and you can go back and forth about,
we did, you know, McCarthy is great, not great,
at the end of the day, we don't really have representation.
That's the real crux of the problem here.
kicking this canop back and forth on what we spent money on or didn't spend money on is a waste of time.
We have to go right to the root of the problem.
It's a few people talking.
So guys, just thank you so much for joining in.
We appreciate everybody's thoughts and comments.
We did go through the bill live and we got the votes counted and so and so forth.
We really appreciate everybody joining in.
Dr. Dan, it's just to give everybody a summary of your thoughts before.
Yeah, you know, I think when we look at what's occurred, you know, we were talking about
this narrative around Biden and people keep seeing, you know, at least people on the right,
keep saying that Biden can't, you know, can't climb the stairs, can't finish a sentence,
can't do this, can't do that.
He can get deals done for Democrats.
And, you know, that is the big, big,
the final thing I have to say here,
which is that what we're seeing right now
is that the Democrats had a huge win, a huge win.
And this is going to, you know, again,
has to go through the Senate.
We don't know how that process is going to go.
There is no one that is a bigger winner than Biden and the Democrats.
They were able to do an incredible feat, get away from this debt ceiling issue, avoid default, and walk away with the prize.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but perhaps Biden is getting things done.
And that is an insane thing to say out loud.
On that note, thank you everybody for joining us.
We will see you tomorrow.
Same time, same place, 6 p.m. Eastern on Twitter spaces.