Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
🚨LIVE: DEBT CEILING VOTE COVERAGE
Recorded: May 31, 2023 Duration: 0:46:30Space Recording
Short Summary
The transcript primarily revolves around a political discussion concerning a vote on a bill, with no significant crypto-related content to summarize.
Full Transcription
Sully, can you...
Oh, there he is.
Let me get him up.
And then we'll kick off the space.
Oh shit, Skaramucci is joining us.
Fuck.
It's a sick panel we have today.
We have Anthony Scaramucci.
We have Robert Wolfe.
We have a bunch of finance guys coming in.
Yeah, yeah.
We've got two segments.
Sure, Michael coming in.
Mike Benz.
That's incredible Dan White.
Dan Witt.
That's an incredible panel.
Tom Fittin.
That's a beautiful panel.
I'm so impressed by the team.
Let me co-host you guys.
Where is Donish?
Donish, you got to come up, man.
Yeah, yeah.
By the way, Mike Pence is about to announce next week.
It's up in a plea.
We tweeted about it, yeah.
Oh, crap.
All right, fine.
Yeah, we're you're slow.
I've sent your co-host now.
All right, let me start sending out the invoice, but let me see.
Yeah, so...
No way, hold on, hold on, hold on.
No way, no way.
So we've got, we've got basically only 48 votes left, and there's 200, no, 187 yes.
So...
Yeah, but it's not...
How many votes does they need to pass?
They need 218 votes to pass.
Right, so they need 18, sorry, they need 218 votes to pass, so they need another 25 yes votes from the remaining 4.
Yeah, well, most of them are Democrat votes and up to now the Democrats of all voted no.
For fuck's sake.
So there's six.
So basically the votes are.
Hold on, hold on, hold on, exactly.
The Mr. Misinformation ease up.
Bro, I've got in front of me, but okay, you've been rude.
Soleiman is not incorrect.
Solomon is, oh my God.
Holy shit.
I just changed the title, by the way.
I just said poised to fail.
I did not say it's going to fail.
I said, is it poised to fail?
Yeah, so anyway, let me read out what the, what the situation is right now, as soon as though we're live.
There has been, so there up to now, there's been 387 votes.
There's been 187 Republicans vote, yes.
Yes.
29 Republicans vote no,
and six have not voted at this point.
In terms of the Democrats, zero have voted yes.
173 have voted no.
And 40 have not, sorry, now 39.
So we have our first few Democrats are voting yes now.
But anyway, in total, we're 191.
Oh, now there are lots of Democrats are voting yes now.
Okay, so we've now got...
I'm going to do a little bit of work on the back.
All right.
Yeah, yeah, switching now.
So they may not fail because lots of Democrats are now voting yes to the bill.
So how many total votes do we have from the Democrat side?
So total we have 188 and 15 a vote yes.
But then 15 is monumental because now there is more yes votes to no votes.
It's going to be a nail biter, that's for sure, which is obviously good for us up here, but really awful for the country.
So they only need 11 more yes votes.
And we're good.
But they only need plus more no votes.
Shit.
16 more, yeah.
Oh, 16 more, sorry.
Oh, my God.
All right.
I'm watching it live too.
So, well, so, you know, to give people context,
yesterday there was a pretty big day with the Republicans
that they came out and they said, hey,
do not vote for this.
And they pretty much, I would say,
Byron Donald actually threatened his fellow Republicans
that they're going to look at you a certain kind of way.
They're going to talk about it a certain kind of way.
And I think, I mean, considering 29 of them said no,
I'm not surprised that it worked.
But what I'm more surprised by is how many Democrats said no?
uh this that clearly we're 200 we're 210 yes 201 no i was just by nick now yeah let me
211 to 200 Carlos so why is it changing so 211 to 201 I guess but you can't you can't go down
no no it's Carlos is right it's 211 to too also nick missed the number did he
I'm not sure.
Okay, yeah, 211 to 200 then.
211 to 200.
So, 211, yes.
213 to 200 now.
213.
So just five more votes needed.
Oh, we're passed pretty much, yeah?
Yeah.
I'd say, just four more needed to pass the bill.
Looking much better for yes now, yeah, I think we're good
We got excited first, but I thought the bill was right
When we got excited, you got excited, bro, I got fucking terrified
I don't know why you're getting excited, you're like a little kid
I remember when I was a kid, whenever there's bad news, I get excited
because either I don't have to go to school or everyone for example.
It's bad news that this bill is going to go through, what you're talking about?
Yeah, I don't think you know what happens if the debt ceiling doesn't get lifted, bro.
I don't think anything.
You'd use this as an opportunity and basically the Republicans have done a lot of issues, right?
It's about what, they just need one more vote now.
Not sure anything would have happened, right?
They got 218, that's it.
All right, it's done. It's done.
Thank God.
There we go.
Yeah, their whip counts are pretty good on something like this.
They don't bring a vote up unless they got the votes.
What happened in 2011?
Did it go through multiple votes?
It did.
No, it didn't.
Immediately got accepted.
Yeah, so people keep thinking about 2011, in my opinion incorrectly.
I think 2011 was that we got a downgrade.
That is actually what happened that was catastrophic,
that the AAA credit for the United States was downgraded.
That's what actually was the issue.
So ultimately, like imagine you get a lower credit score.
It's one thing for Mario to get a lower credit score.
It's another for the United States government to get a lower credit score.
that that's kind of how to think about it and everything becomes more expensive uh getting access
to liquidity gets more expensive all of these bad things happen so uh so yeah there you go uh somebody
changed the title thank god because i now was feeling bad but it's you know it's uh it was a very
very close uh close vote and kind of speaks to how people are looking at this current
situation. I will say, I wanted to hear from Doc first, actually, and I don't find myself
saying that often, so I'm happy that I do have that question. Doc, how disappointed are you
and your Republican colleagues that...
first of all, this was not a very favorable bill.
Now we can gloat, right?
We were told not to gloat.
Now we can all gloat.
Just kidding.
There was word on the street that people that lean left should not be gloating about how good this bill is
because we don't want Republicans to notice, I guess.
But clearly, Republicans were not happy with this, were they?
No, clearly not.
But I don't run with that crowd in the way that you might think.
I happen to think that Biden was committed to letting the currency default.
I think that works in the interest of China.
I think that works in the interest of Biden.
I say that because most people that I know, at least who aren't informed economically and fiscally like this group is,
they sort of equate what's happening now with the budget impasses that have shut down the federal government in the past.
And that's always worked to the Democrats' advantage.
And eventually the Republicans have had to capitulate, in part because the media so strongly tends to favor the democratic narrative, the liberal narrative.
And I think that's what I expected going forward.
So now that the debt ceiling has been increased, the omnibus budget of 2022 was sort of locked in.
But in my mind, that was the case anyway.
Future budgets starting in November,
and probably the number of continuing resolutions
will have to go through before we get through to...
Hold on. Hold on. I'm so sorry.
This was not the actual vote.
No, this passes the bill.
That's what I wanted to mention, right?
That's what I wanted to mention.
This is a vote to see if they will vote.
Exactly.
This was...
Sorry.
That's why I was like, this makes no sense.
This was just the vote on the rule to actually bring this vote to the floor.
This is not the vote on the bill.
Thanks, Katie, for sending that.
And how do these results compare to 2011 then, Donish?
Well, Mario, first of all, we don't even have these results yet.
So that ceiling vote live is, we've got to change the final.
I already did.
I already did.
It's very, that ceiling coverage.
Oh, perfect.
Oh, perfect. Thank you. I changed it to vote. Sorry, I got, like, freaked out. So this was, so, you know, the...
They have to have a rules vote first, and so I am not tracking this.
Exactly.
as you guys are, and it's an easy mistake to make.
I wouldn't expect the final vote to differ very much, if at all.
Someone who's going to pass the rules that's going to lead to a vote on the underlying bill
isn't likely to vote for the rules package and then not vote for the underlying bill.
So I think you can expect that vote coming up shortly.
And my analysis would be the same is that Biden wanted to shut down the country.
He thought that that would accrue to his political benefit.
It also, I think, helps in terms of if you think he's controlled by China, it probably is in China's interest to have this default.
It's in Brickson.
I mean, Doc, how can you think that Biden would want to be the first president?
to default on the U.S. debt.
I mean, like, I just can't understand why that would be able to.
He would blame it on the Congress,
and he blamed on the Republicans, and the media would go right along with it.
That's why I think that.
I mean, I feel like that is a definitely not the common,
I mean, I don't know who is even saying.
You're the first person I've ever heard say that Biden,
right before an election year,
would want the country and the economy to collapse.
That just seems very antithetical to what...
Doc, Doc, hold on. Chief, you agree with Doc here?
Let me get Chief up.
Let me see if Chief agrees.
He gave a thumb up.
I don't know if he's giving it to Danish or Doc.
But Doc, you can hate Biden.
He could be the worst president we have.
But to say any president wants to destroy the currency of the country, let's say they're an evil president.
Let's say they're completely evil.
Even an evil president wants to get reelected.
For a president to destroy the currency, that's guaranteeing they're not going to get reelected.
Do you agree with that, Doc?
Well, I don't think Biden will be standing for re-election.
I'm with Hillary Clinton.
Clinton came out a week or so ago and say Biden's age is certainly consideration.
There are Democrats now, hardcore Democrats who are mad at the DNC because they're stating that there will be no debates.
And I think as Robert Kennedy becomes more popular,
that's going to be an increasingly untenable position.
I happen to think that Biden is intentionally trying to destroy our country right now.
The open border is one way precipitating.
Oh, doctor, come on.
Precipitating the war with China.
Why would the president of the United States want to destroy the country?
He could be.
I don't think he would be destroyed.
I think our currency would certainly take a hit.
But I think cooler heads would eventually prevail and we would get a debt ceiling.
We're talking about why this vote here happened the way it did.
Right.
So that's my analysis.
And people are going to make fun of me if they like, but that's just...
Oh, no, no, no.
I was just laughing at certain points of it.
I actually think it's quite interesting.
It's a different point of view, and we love those.
Tara, how are you?
Walk us through why Doc is wrong.
Why, Doc?
Well, first of all, the only president I know who wanted to destroy the economy was Donald
Trump, right, who said, right, recently, let's go into default.
No biggie, right?
So, you know, just to be clear, and we want to be balanced here, he didn't say that
he would want to do that when he was president.
Oh, but he certainly, as a candidate, has been very clear that we should just go ahead and let us go into default.
No, it's not what he said.
He actually said that we might as well default now because it's going to happen eventually.
And he's not necessarily wrong there either.
But let's be clear exactly what the quote was.
Fine, fine, Doc.
But he's the guy who you should be more worried about, frankly, because when he was out of office running for office, he's been okay with this.
Now, listen.
I don't agree with anything, Doc saying.
Joe Biden has no interest in this would.
And in fact, we are not even still out of this
because I believe one of the credit...
authorities has basically not yet said they won't do a downgrade, correct?
No, no, it was Fitch.
So Fitch came out and they said that they were, they put us on warning, our AAA credit
rating on warning.
Right.
So we're not, but we're not a hundred percent sure.
We're not going to get a downgrade though.
Probably not, but we're not 100 percent sure even of that.
This would be a disaster, Doc.
And I don't understand.
We have a very closely, we have a very close electorate.
Republicans actually, uh,
have made the case that they are the responsible prudent fiscal ones
because they're trying to balance the budget, et cetera, et cetera.
I think that's a real gamble to sort of put the country into this total tailspins
and hope that you can win what it will essentially be a PR war at that.
Tara, you know where my politics are.
And so I'm going to say this as somebody who sits in the middle
and tends to lean left, right?
I think it's more of a gamble if we do nothing.
I think right now our balance sheet, this is the first time that our debt is greater than our GDP and it's rising fast.
Interest rates are crazy high.
This is the first year that the interest that we're paying on our debt is bigger than our budget for the defense of this country.
This is unreal.
And I think that, you know, to me, this is super important.
And I think that, you know, doing nothing would be worse.
And I don't think we did enough.
But sorry, I want to let you respond.
Well, we may not have done enough.
But on the other hand, is the debt ceiling?
Should we not, in fact,
just sort of do the debt ceiling separately and then work on budgeting, which nobody actually
ever seems to want to really do Republicans and Democrats alike, correct?
Yeah, you're right.
So we should just get rid of this phony debt ceiling stuff.
I'm not even sure why we have it at this point.
It seems fairly vestigial to me.
For the exact reason that you just said.
that nobody does anything until this comes up.
You know, this is, it's like you have to have, this is the problem.
The problem is, and I will tell you,
that the Democrats need to be the party that's thinking about poor people.
Who does inflation hurt the most?
It is the most regressive tax you can put on the common man and woman.
And I think that there's something really big here
where I think what we're seeing is a rotation amongst Democrats.
We're saying one second,
We are crazy in debt.
We're supposed to be the party that believes in common sense.
And yet, look at what's going on.
They want more entitlements.
It's getting out of control.
And in the end, by the way, who lost the most?
You know, they barely cut anything in this stupid budget negotiation for the debt ceiling.
And you know who lost the most?
The poorest among us.
Like, we literally made the, this is the worst deal for poor people in
inflation is only going to go up and now snap benefits are getting screwed.
And by the way, the only people that lose are the American people.
This is the hard part.
Dan, I'll let you jump in because I don't know if you agree.
I know you're a Democrat, but I do want to get a different point of view about why this issue needs to be figured out.
Well, I think what we really need to be acknowledging is that the United States of America right now is the wealthiest nation in the history of the world. And at the same time, we're experiencing the greatest wealth inequality in the world. And rather than using this opportunity to help the working class, to help the people who are struggling the most, we're using this as a way to hurt those people and...
Like you, you know, I agree with what you were saying, Dr. Danish, what you said.
This isn't, this shouldn't be the goal of what we're doing right now.
Let me bring in Benjamin, Benjamin.
I mean, we saw a scenario where there was a number of Republicans,
Matt Gays being one of them who came on our space
and mentioned the issues he had with this bill.
Obviously, he seems like he's going to be one of the no votes.
But essentially, Ben, was this a massive missed opportunity
if this does go ahead by the Republicans to essentially get what they needed?
Yeah, actually, I do think so, right?
So yesterday on another space, I spoke with Senator Mike Lee, and I point-blank asked him, right?
So two questions, right?
So is the fact that basically McCarthy caved, is that not, because I'll recapiave you up that.
Mike Leeson-W. tweet saying, I believe that McCarthy was misled but not malicious.
So first of all, does that not speak to the credibility of the Speaker of the House?
I mean, the buck does stop with him, right? That's number one.
Number two is, yeah, the bill itself, in my mind, there's just, there's a couple things I really don't like, right?
So funding for Ukraine, for example, well, now it's going to be through a supplement, it's going to be through discretionary spending.
So there's no real cap on that.
And I asked him point blank, is this a blank check for Ukraine? And he said, yes.
I think that he, you know, McCarthy probably could have gotten a better deal.
Other people, Jim Paff is here, I was speaking with him.
He seems to think that the real default date would have been mid-August.
He's much more versed in politics than I am.
So I think there could have been a little bit more back-and-forth negotiation to gotten a better deal, but
Yeah, I don't know how this is going to reflect on a Republican leadership, right, going into next year.
Maybe people will forget about it, but I do.
I actually, I agree with the, I agree with the Republican side on this.
Well, what about the other side of the equation?
This budget was all locked in, and the points that McCarthy was trying to negotiate were givebacks,
were clawbacks on the already authorized budget in return for the expansion of the debt ceiling.
And we got basically none of that.
So how do you blame McCarthy when he has no leverage?
That money only comes back if Biden agrees to do it.
What if you're in the room and Biden said,
screw it?
I'm not giving it back.
That's the position I think the Republicans were in.
So let me bring Jim into this. Jim, I mean, I do want your thoughts on this because essentially this was an opportunity to basically claw back significant issues that Republicans had problems with.
What in your mind was the specifically one of the specific worst issues that they should have?
basically made,
made them claw back and they didn't, Jim.
Well, the biggest problem out there,
one of the elephants in the room,
there are a couple of them,
is the fact that discretionary spending
was at $1.34 trillion in 2019.
After COVID, when it went up to $1.5 to $1.6,
and now we're at $1.74 trillion in,
of discretionary spending. That's the spending that we're not required to do. Social Security,
Medicare, Medicaid, and all those are over in non-discretionary spending because they're
programs that are permanent. But discretionary spending has gone up $300 billion. So that was the
biggest thing in the room. I mean, the deal is that Republicans should have fought to
pull back the so-called inflation reduction act. Now,
The interesting thing is they had all the leverage.
McCarthy, Doc, with all due respect, you're wrong.
They had all the leverage because they passed a debt ceiling bill at the end of April.
And all that McCarthy had to do was say, there's your bill.
You know, we're waiting for you in the Senate to go ahead and vote on it.
And you can amend it how you want.
And then we'll have our negotiations.
He should have just said, we'll be gone all May until you guys decide that you want to vote on that.
That's what he should have done.
I mean, we don't need Congress in session to pass a bunch of crap.
So he had everything was going his way and he totally caved into Biden.
That was the outcome here.
There are lots of, lots more to discuss on that.
But just to directly answer the question.
I think the ultimately, and I put it up in there,
and by the way, please do comment in the bottom right.
When you comment, we usually do take some of the best comments
and put them up on the nest and often bring you up
to kind of share your thoughts.
This is something that we do have to address,
which is who is politically was in the best position here.
Obviously, I think personally that the, that,
that McCarthy was in the best position.
Sounds like Doc thinks that Biden was in the best position
or was in the,
then you had the most leverage.
I don't know how that's possible, Doc.
There's no way that Biden,
who by the way may not make it in the next term,
would want his last legacy...
to be a go you know uh the god uh the u s government defaulting it just doesn't make much sense uh you know
but well he's an imbecile though dr danish he's an imbecile so i got a you got a you got a
an imbecile who sort of won this negotiation right yeah i guess i guess what does that say about micarthy then
Well, it says that McCarthy didn't have the leverage.
I would agree with Jim.
Jim's much more experienced in terms of Congress.
Jim said the opposite.
He said McCarthy had all the leverage.
No, I'm saying we disagree, and I respect Jim for that disagreement.
That's just my position.
I've been in hundreds of negotiations and mediations, and...
There's always one party with disproportionate amount of power.
And that's Biden because he had his money locked in.
And what did the Republicans really, what were they really demanding of Speaker McCarthy?
They wanted the IRS agent funding pulled back.
They wanted the FBI building canceled.
There was a laundry list.
And Congressman Luna said her first, their first priority, and she was part of the negotiating team,
was that we retract that 80-step funding for the IRS agents.
and they pulled back what?
3% of it?
That reflects the fact that there was no leverage there.
They pulled back 20 of the 80 billion.
But the thing is that there was no way they were going to process all 80 billion.
The 87,000 IRS agents are coming.
You have to retrench all the money.
Now, the other...
portion of this is what was really at risk in terms of default. And as a basic principle,
I argue that default on not paying some bills is at this stage, is far less problematic than the
long-term structural problems that we are under. We're already approaching a trillion dollars
in debt service. That's going to be happening in the next few years.
There's a lot at stake here, and you have to change the trajectory.
And Jim, I also thought, sorry, it was interesting that Janet Yellen kept pushing the big date back, right?
Yeah, it's crazy.
Yeah, I was going to get to that.
So I've calculated these numbers.
Listen, in 2011 and 13, when I was working for Tim Huleskamp, we had John Boehner angry with us because we figured out exactly...
what the measures the Treasury Department could take.
And you never get all the tiny minuscule detail numbers
because that's in the basement of the Treasury Department.
But there's a lot of plenty of information out there.
You can calculate this.
I did it again this time.
So we were putting out press releases back then saying,
no, they can wait till here.
They can wait until there.
We were right every time.
Well, the guy who worked for me then,
who's now chief of staff or one of the members of Congress,
we calculated it again together this time.
You could have gone all the way to August 15th.
Absolutely.
In fact, Janet Yellen, when she moved the date from the first to the fifth,
she just pulled that out of the air.
There was no real, nothing changed.
She was holding things back.
I know for a fact.
So here's the facts on where we were in that process with Treasury.
June 14th was a Social Security payment, a big one.
June 15th was the revenue coming in from corporate quarterlies, which was going to be a huge jump.
So all she had to do was bridge that 24 hours, and then she was all the way to August 15th, and we calculated all this.
And maybe August, the end of August.
So that was the game that was being played.
McCarthy knew this, by the way, too.
Everyone knows this that thinks about it on California.
And why would McCarthy put his entire...
By the way, there's going to, Jim, we both know there's going to be a vote of no confidence on next month, right?
I mean, how is that not possible after this?
This is embarrassing.
I put a poll in the comment section for people that are, that go into our comments sections, and thank you so much for commenting.
We literally nearly doubled comments in five minutes.
Keep commenting because we will bring those up.
But I put a poll out there.
30% of the people, we've already had 60 votes, 30% of people think Republicans lost, and 70% of people think that the American people lost.
So pretty much no one thinks that the Democrats lost in this negotiation.
And that tells you that McCarthy is in real trouble.
Justin, what are your thoughts?
I think this is really an issue of timing. Neither party was really going to let this thing default.
The question this time around is, was it a benefit to either party to let it go a few days into the technical default date, right?
At that point, you could shut down parts of the federal government, which the Republicans have before and gotten some ground on.
At that point, the Democrats could say,
and go to the media and and criteria about the government shutting down.
There are benefits for letting this bleed into it,
but I don't think there was any seriousness about that.
It is an election cycle, but it is not an election year.
That is to say, I think they both realized that there was no necessarily good cause to have to let it bleed any more days.
And so I think this was extended for two years,
but based on what I understand about sort of the financial dynamics of what's happening,
there is going to be some massive turmoil in the next nine months plus.
So once you get into February of next year,
it's going to be chaos all over again.
And that's where it really benefits people to push the envelope on there.
As far as McCarthy goes, this is a black eye for him.
He came in.
He said the first act we will have.
is to roll back those 87,000 IRS jobs, right?
There was a big fight, I mean,
the craziest midnight scene to try to get him elected.
President Trump had to pull him across the finish line.
And that was Trump's exit, you know,
he said basically, McCarthy is my guy,
I'm gonna put him in there.
And I think it's a real black guy, both on McCarthy.
And I think in the end, Trump that he backed this guy
again and again, it's another example
of Donald Trump backing the wrong horse.
So let me throw some perspective out here.
And that's all good points, Justin.
I think it's relevant.
Now, let's think about this for a second.
I just want to go back up just a little bit to is McCarthy herner?
And what is Mark McCarthy's motivations?
Now, I want you to understand.
I'm going to repeat something I said, just to give clarification.
June 14th was a massive Social Security benefits payment.
Between now and June 14th in federal budget terms is ticky-tack dollar amounts going out.
Nothing's going out that matters until June 14th.
We've got revenue coming in along the way.
There are various revenue sources.
We are at, in dollar terms, the highest revenue cycle in American history in terms of actual dollars coming into the Treasury.
Right.
Between now and June 14th is nothing.
All that was all the way to the 14th was entire subterfuge.
There's no, she could move that number all the way to the 14th anyone she wants,
and I believe beyond that.
So let's keep that in mind as we're thinking about this.
So why would McCarthy put himself at risk?
Well, I'm going to tell you why.
It was reported, and I have this from folks who were actually in the meeting, too, that I've talked to, members,
that when McCarthy walked into the House conference meeting last night,
that there was a cadre of members who were cheering him.
Way to go! Great deal.
Woo-hoo!
And they were given this to him.
Like they're going to convince Chip Roy that McCarthy did anything.
Well, why were they doing that?
Because that's the constituency that McCarthy's playing to.
He has to have these moderate Republicans to Rino Republicans, many of them defense hawks who want defense spending, who would bolt on him otherwise, FYI.
That's the crowd he has to please, Donish, and that's what he's got to take a risk on with them.
But that's the dynamic.
He's made a crazy deal.
By the way, breaking, did you have some breaking news?
I just want to make sure.
It's just a scheduling update on what we're expecting for the rest of the day to play out.
So at 7.15, this is according to Punch Bowl news, just moments ago.
715, there will be an hour each for both Republicans and Democrats to debate this bill.
And then following that debate, there will be the vote itself.
So that's just a scheduling update so people are aware of when we can expect a vote on this bill in the House.
Then, of course, by procedure, it'll go into the Senate.
And then if it passes there, the president will sign it.
How long will the debate go on for?
So an hour?
One hour each party is going to have an hour.
So that's according to...
815.
Each party will have an hour.
Two hours.
No, no, each party, yes, okay.
One hour total.
Okay.
And then that will be, that means 815, there'll be the vote?
No, 9.
It'll be at least 9.15.
I'm assuming you'll go a little over, plus there'll be recess in between and some discussion.
So we could expect to vote possibly, I'd say, around the 10 o'clock hour.
So here's how that's going to work.
So what's going to happen is they're going to end debate...
And McCarthy is going to have been whipping these.
I've gone through this over and over again.
I'm just telling you guys.
McCarthy is going to have been whipping those votes.
And if he has promised Hakeem Jeffries that he will deliver 150 votes, I'm not yet convinced that he has that.
I predict that there may be.
How is that possible, Jim?
The rules vote just went out.
It's done.
No, no, no, no, I'm talking about, I'm talking about for the final passage.
Because, see, he has to have Democrat votes to get this.
And I know this for a fact.
So there were many yes, no votes.
There were yes on the rule, no on the bill votes.
That's why you only saw 52, that's why you had to have 52 Democrats vote yes on this.
And I think it was 39 Republicans voted no.
There are going to be a hundred, potentially up to 100 no votes.
in the Republican caucus.
McCarthy's going to release moderate members to vote no
because he would require them to vote for him
because that's his constituency otherwise.
So he's going to be talking with them
and then we're going to see this vote
maybe get a little bit delayed after debate
depending on what he's whipped up to that point.
But when the vote happens itself,
it's going to once again go past the typical five minutes
because he's going to be
talking to be standing near
Hakeem Jeffries
talking to his people
figuring out who's going to vote yes
and who's going to vote no
this is the constant thing
on votes like this.
So he has a big defeat
in his caucus
and he knows it
and he has to have Hakeem Jeffries coming to them.
They've made a deal.
I'm already talking about this with people
that it likely includes massive earmarks in the appropriations process
that Michael, Bob, Thomas Massey put together.
Jim, let me ask you a few questions
because I think this is a bit about a lot of people are interested in,
especially the average viewer.
So in your view, you said there's going to be about 100 Republicans
who are going to vote in your mind, no.
Is that right?
Is that what you said?
I'm predicting it could be as much as that.
It may be a little more.
I don't know for certain yet, but yeah, it's going to be 60 to 100.
Okay.
And I presume that you believe no Democrat is going to vote no.
No, I don't presume that. There are going to be many of Democrats voting no.
Yeah, but I think you're expecting 150 to say yes.
No, Republicans. What McCarthy promised Jeffries is 150 Republican yes votes.
Okay. And so, okay, so how many no votes are you, how many yes votes are you expecting from the Democrat side?
however many it takes.
I mean, that's really,
that's the best I can tell you,
Silemon,
because that's how it's working.
That's how the deal works.
That's how,
that's how these things happen on the floor.
When they need Democrat votes,
then he just talks to Hakeem Jeffries.
And they,
and Hakeem Jeffries and his,
side are watching to see how many Republican votes are there.
And Hakeem Jeffries will release people whom he's decided will vote one way or the other at that moment when they know that he's got his deal met.
If the deal doesn't come through, then he pulls them all and everything goes to the side.
Yeah, because Hakeem Jeffries has more control over his caucus.
than McCarthy does.
Jim, you're essentially saying those words.
I'm going to say it more explicitly.
I don't want to misrepresent your point.
No, you're 100% true, Donish, right now.
And to the point where he's going to give massive...
Speaker of the House right now.
Go ahead, Jim, sorry.
Yeah, he...
To the point where I already know this...
He's gotten something like a bunch of earmarks for Democrats in the appropriations process later in the year or some other deal that's going to be happening.
Some of the people I'm talking to are wondering, speculating, because I don't have this confirmed, you know, are they going to get funding for DEI or LGBTQ initiatives?
Like that's the kind of stuff Jeffries is going to ask.
There's no way.
There is no way, Jim.
Oh, yeah.
Oh, no, no, no.
No, there is way.
Absolutely.
Guarantee it.
Again, this is the common pattern.
Michael, could I close a question to Jim?
Before you do, Michael.
Before you do, Michael.
Before you do, let me just give an update.
So 7.15 p.m. is the hour long, that's based on sources from congressional reporters.
7.15 p.m. EST.
E.T. hour long debate on the debt bill. 8.30 p.m. votes are expected at 9.15 p.m. McCarthy will be doing his news conference. So that's the timing that I just got now from the team. Yeah. So I just wanted to pose a question to Jim or whoever else might have some insight. First, just an unrelated point, but
I don't think it really is so much that Kevin McCarthy has less control, per se, over his caucus than Hakeem Jeffries.
So much as it is that there's just more ideological homogeneity among Democrats than there is Republicans.
So it's not really a matter of leadership's control.
It's a matter of kind of the ideological character of the respective coalitions at this point.
Although it is the case, I would wager that McCarthy has less...
control over the caucus, I guess, to whatever extent that matters.
But at the same time, you know, there's no way, I don't think,
that Hakeem Jeffries could exert anywhere near the same control
as Nancy Pelosi did, who had a historical...
amount of it and you know she's still around maybe hanging in the in the background michael i was
going to listen to the to people it's as if nancy pelosi's spirit is still uh running the show
obviously she's still alive so she's probably his well she's still in the house which is amazing i mean
i don't even know what the most recent precedent is for a house speaker to remain in office as
this weird speaker emeritus where you know clearly they have this
It's the ceremonial role where they're supposed.
That's the most academic thing they could ever have done.
Go ahead, Jim.
It's about 50-50, Michael, on that.
It all depends on the circumstance.
But yeah, usually they've left.
But let me tell you this.
She's helping him with votes because the reason she stuck around is she's trying to help him lay his foundation for the future.
But as in terms of control.
In terms of control of his caucus.
The vote that just happened on rules proves he has supreme control over his policy.
Can I just say-
The subsequent question, though, that I wanted to ask was-
Before Michael, before you do that, can I just sit tag on to your point?
Is it necessarily a good thing that McCarthy or Jeffries can control, quote-unquote, their caucus?
Speaking about admiration for Pelosi and Akeem-Jeffrey's control of people who are supposed to represent us,
individually in their district,
So I respect the Republicans for not being controlled by the Speaker more than I do respect Jeffries for his control of his caucus.
Thank you.
I think McCarthy might be a bit underrated in the amount of control he does exert, even if it's lesser than Jeffries.
I mean, he's managed to, and this I think probably requires a bit of political skill and aptitude.
You know, he has Thomas Massey and.
Marjorie Taylor Green and people who you might think could be in a position where they're rebelling against the whip.
He has them basically acting as de facto whips on his behalf, which is no small thing.
It might not have been expected back in January when he took eight votes or however many it was to get the speakership election.
Yeah, well, that fidelity he got from Jim and...
and from Thomas came because of things that he gave them, the chairmanship of the judiciary, and Thomas a seat on Rules Committee.
Now, one other thing, though, to point out here, in American politics, we do, we have two major parties, but we do coalitions by other means.
So even the Democrats...
have they've had nancy pelosi was struggling even though she brought it back together she was
always struggling with her folks being together with her the squad would pull away on civil
rights issues with civil rights uh folks when do policy struggle with when do guys sorry sorry
one guys okay uh so guys just a quick announce actually a couple of announcements um so the first
announcement is that um that um
You've got an opportunity to subscribe to Mario
because what we will be doing is
we will be bringing in major guests
for subscriber-only spaces.
So if you go to the top of his page
and subscribe, it's only $1, and he's going to give it to charity.
But the most important aspect is,
there's two aspects to it.
First is we're going to have special guests for subscribers only.
But the second thing is we've done a few subscriber-only spaces,
and they've been amazing because people get to come up,
ask us any questions they want.
It's not recorded, so it's really chilled out,
and it's a lot more fun than you get to know,
get to know me and get to know how much of a nerd Mario is.
Separate to that, guys.
What charity is that, the Musk Foundation?
Yeah.
No, the World Economic Forum support foundation.
No, no.
Slaman, Slaman, Slaman, Slaman.
Slaman.
I would never promote it then.
Sauros Incorporated?
No, it would not be promoted.
I don't promote evil.
The Military Industrial Complex, Inc.
Even worse.
Actually, I don't know what's worse.
Hemasaurus or W.EF.
It's hard.
We'll talk about that later.
But, guys.
Sisters of Lockheed Martin.
Even worse.
But guys, separate to that, right?
We are going to be closing this space to give everybody an opportunity to listen to the debate.
And then we're going to come back half an hour before the vote.
So we are going to be back at 8pm Eastern Time.
So tune in because we're going to talk about – we've got some major guests coming in.
We've got Scaramucci coming in.
We've got Robert Wolf coming in.
We've got Brian Riddle coming in.
We've got –
we've got
some of our
regulars like Tom Fitton
coming in
we've got
Kyle Bakker
Michael Green
the list goes on
Michael Green
all of these guys
they're coming in
so it's going to be
major
and we got
and we got
the main girl
tier as well
possibly
coming to smash
all the Republicans
So check it out.
I am actually a woman,
Suleiman,
not a girl,
but thank you for that compliment.
You are a woman.
You are a woman,
but when I call you a man,
I'm giving you a huge level of compliment.
You don't understand the level of compliment.
You didn't call her,
you called her a girl.
But continue,
continue the speech.
Do we have time to pose the subsequent
to the one to pose her?
no, we'll end it,
we'll end it,
Michael.
Because,
Because we need to all rest.
We just finished it.
So we did a morning show.
Danish did a morning show.
And then we did the crypto show, a massive crypto show that we were doing every day that we announced with two other big names.
And then we did a big interview.
And now we're doing this.
So we'll take a bit of a break.
Actually, let's do a subscriber space after this to let me shoot the shits for like 15 minutes.
I don't know if Danish was so sure.
They'll never be 15, yeah, that's fine, but they never be 15.
No, we'll try to keep it 15 this and I'll keep it very short and none, none.
People come up and they just love me crashing you so they like the right.
Cool, cool.
I'll let you finish off.
Yeah, I let Donald Danish do some final thoughts before we go.
Dr. Darnish.
Sorry, I was just doing, I was just subscribing to Mario.
Yeah, I know.
You know, Danish, he had one subscription on his profile and I was looking at him like, oh, he's only subscribed to one person.
He's like, Salaim, man.
I'm like, oh, he's only subscribed to one person.
This is some bullshit.
He knows.
This is bullshit.
He knows who to subscribe to.
And Sully, Sully charges five times more than me and doesn't donate a cent to charity.
This is true.
I charge 400% more than you, and that demonstrates my worth compared to your worth.
Did it also figure out the debt applications of enriched uranium?
Oh, hey, I could probably speak.
I'm not getting that to bat.
We're going to get my blood rolling.
Nope.
Mario closed.
We're going to close.
Now that all those opinions are.
Danish guys.
One dollar.
Really quickly, it's going to be more important to watch.
We know that this deal is going to go through.
I think it's going to be very important to watch how people posture here.
And my big prediction is going to be that in the next two weeks,
there's going to be a vote of no confidence on McCarthy.
So McCarthy is in, you know, it's the end times.
So it'll be very interesting.
When we leaked this, hey, hey, when we leaked this four or five days ago now,
and got all that love and hate.
Well, we said in that leak, if everyone goes to it, let me pin it, let me retweet it.
Now, we did get community noted and people are like,
Maria, aren't you annoyed?
No, I'm actually, like, this is what community notes does.
Community notes bases their notes on publicly available knowledge.
So if someone has something that's leaked or from an inside source, like we do, others as well,
you can't expect community notes to know that
and be able to verify those sources.
They're relying on the, basically,
yeah, but they're relying on mainstream media.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, but they still do more good than bad,
just to be clear.
Anyway.
Can you show me the data and evidence of that, please, Mario?
All right.
So we did say in the second tweet in there,
let me, I've just retweeted it,
let me pin it above as well for everyone to have a look
and just to say exactly what we leaked
and we verified with multiple sources,
let me pin it above.
So more breaking news.
Sources with direct contact with the Speaker's Office
confirmed that some information will be public, blah, blah, blah.
Early rumblings from members about making a motion against the speaker.
So that was on May 26th and today at June 1st.
So not sure how much Danes she could share about the impact that this tweet and this leak had as for you to do,
but it was one of the most epic moments we've had in the show.
So I've pinned it above, and I like how I pinned it.
The only thing that shows is the community notes.
Look at the pin messages.
The only thing that shows is the community note.
Love it.
Yeah, but that's it.
We'll see you all very shortly.
Thanks, everybody.
See you.
Thanks, everyone.
