We discuss with senior contributor Dave Zanotti why a Clinton supporting, Soros-funded Scott Bessent got into a Trump cabinet… and how he has forced out Musk??
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Previously on Your Morning Show with Michael Del Choano.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Our senior contributor David Sanati is joining us. Good morning, David,
Good morning, Michael.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
So I would set it up this way.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
First of all, it's called your Morning Show, not Trump's
Morning Show, not anybody Else's your morning show. You the listener.
So we're here to serve you. That's number one. And
while we love the president, support the president, agree with
a lot of things he does, there are some things
we question, not the least of which is why is
a Clinton supported.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Sorrow's funded.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
The scent Secretary of Treasury And why do you get
in a big fight with Elon Musk and now it
looks like Musk is missing and he's still present.
Speaker 4 (00:45):
I mean, these are questions we should be able to ask.
Michael for asking them, and I'm with you on this.
This isn't about trying to support someone other than the
President of the United States. This is about what's happening
to our country. You know, you did a great interview
with Nut Gingrich and Nut Gingrish talked about American optimism
(01:07):
and looking forward to the future.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
And I know he's not here to defend himself.
Speaker 4 (01:10):
He'd be able to answer to this question, I think
I already know how we would answer the question. But
you know, for all the optimism and all of the
interesting connecting the dots of the progress of conservatism in America,
two things. One is, grown up as kids, you and
I had the image in cartoons, in films and everything
(01:32):
else that the richer person became, the more conservative they became.
It was just kind of in the air, right. I mean,
you could start with Scrooge McDuck. It just no matter
what the Daddy Warbucks. If you know today that the
wealth of our country is not at all in the
hands of conservatism, it is in the hand of the
most radical liberal, matrix driven, technological and Wall Street people. Today,
(01:56):
the wealthiest people in the world are the most radical
anti America. Right even in our own country.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
Now, we saw during this whole Trump triumph, to quote
the name of his book, people like Elon Musk, Google leaders,
Facebook leaders.
Speaker 3 (02:11):
All they're at the inauguration.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
But is that really a trump Ism or a opportunistic
moment or a new occupant of victory for conservativism and Republicans.
And I think the answer is we don't know yet, but.
Speaker 4 (02:27):
Not likely, right, and probably most likely A and B
because all those guys sitting on that stage and this.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
Takes us, well, this will take us back to scot percent.
By the way, this is what we're going around here,
all right.
Speaker 4 (02:37):
The key is that the people sitting on that stage
all need massive government help.
Speaker 3 (02:43):
That's why they're there.
Speaker 4 (02:45):
They need nuclear power plants to be able to produce
AI and we don't have them, and the government's got
to get them or they want to go to Mars. Right,
They've got all kinds of plans that make them trillionaires
going forward now.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
In the in the case of Rfk Junior and Telsea
Gabbard and Klan Musk, they were on board before, but
the rest or after.
Speaker 4 (03:09):
And by the way, i am also not wanting to
act like the older brother in the Prodigal Sun's story.
I'm happy for all these people to come closer to
the light.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
I mean, because I'm not the light. I'm just a
lucky guy. Should you should say lucky.
Speaker 4 (03:24):
I'm just a guy who, by the grace of God,
sees a little bit of it.
Speaker 3 (03:28):
I mean, you all come.
Speaker 4 (03:29):
It's one of those things where it's one bigger telling
another bigger where to find a piece of bread? That's
what we're talking about. But there's questions that don't make sense.
And here's what doesn't make sense. If all of this
conservatism is so effective, why are we thirty five.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Trillion dollars in debt?
Speaker 4 (03:45):
And why are we in a position in no matter
who runs Congress, we can't stop spending more money next
year than we did this year.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
I had sent a note to David just to share
with the class. You know, for all my love and
support for the president, I'm struggling to balance this, you know,
continued prioritized debt stabilization, let alone reduction that is absolutely
(04:15):
paramount and necessary with this big, beautiful deal to which
you were already looking into the bessent elon Musk fight
and how one's now missing and the other isn't and
what don't we know about that one? And who a
president surrounds himself with And suddenly we realized we're both
concerned with the same thing, and really everyone that loves
(04:35):
and supports the president like us listening, You shouldn't be
afraid to be concerned with the same thing.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
So what can we learn and who am I am?
Speaker 2 (04:44):
I Besent or Musk in terms of because that's the
very revealing thing that makes it more healed.
Speaker 3 (04:52):
Let's let's call it. Let's call it Linn A. Mcmahonnon.
I mean maybe maybe maybe he needs to take over treasury.
But so I think we'll bring it.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
First of all, I think you know we talk about
how or I do. You haven't, but I think you
would agree that somehow Reagan Revolution meets Tea Party movement
meets MAGA and trump Ism is what this this movement is. Well,
but where's the Tea Party in that? Because the Tea
(05:20):
Party was formed to address debt.
Speaker 4 (05:22):
And now it's silent. Listen, I don't have to learn it.
That's what te stood for tax enough already.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
Why why?
Speaker 2 (05:29):
I mean, I can love Donald Trump and still focus
on reducing this debt and pronto.
Speaker 4 (05:34):
So to be fair, and I think that this, say,
having this conversation about Pscent and Musk in the context
of Gingrich is really smart because you can see the
philosophies and where they're going. We're sure Musk comes into
this game and it falls into the silly, stupid trap
of picking up the chainsaw. That was a big mistake. Okay,
(05:55):
so from a pr perspective, Musk didn't do himself any favors.
But Elon else gets it. He understands that unless you
stop spending more every year, you will never get out
of this mess. The growth will never catch up.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
You know.
Speaker 3 (06:11):
The Republican answer to everything is growth. Oh, I love
that answer. That's a really good answer.
Speaker 4 (06:16):
Okay, But the fact is you can't grow your way
out of a situation. If the hole is still in
the bucket, you can't get there. And the get there
is really simple, Michael. We just have to say, look,
we only take in four trillion dollars. We spend six trillion.
Now the answer is if you and I had to
do this would make more spend less. With David Amsey
(06:38):
and all the other Christians out there who talk about
this go integrity, they would say, Michael, you have to
live on four trillion. That's the end that you are
a poor person. You are a broke person. You can't
go on vacation. You can't do this.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
But beans, baby and beads, Bryson beans.
Speaker 4 (06:54):
And if you don't, Michael, not only are you going
to go bankrupt, you maybe go to jail. You don't
if you're in busines and you're doing it, you're going
to jail. If you're an individual doing it, you're going bankrupt.
But if it's the government, we have no answer for that.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
How can that be moral?
Speaker 4 (07:09):
And then we turn around when somebody like DOAG comes
in and must comes in and says we're going to
bust up USA AID and people go, oh my god,
you took money for poor people. Well wait a second,
how do you give money that you don't have to
a poor person? I mean, if the bank robbers decided
to give all their money to charity, would that mean
they were innocent.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
Oh, by the way, David, I just knuck into your
bank account and gave ten thousand dollars to the Nashville
Rescue Mission.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
Are godly? Yes? Godley?
Speaker 4 (07:36):
Except thank you point paid better than mine. You're exactly right.
So the key is we're not even telling the government
that you've got to live on four trillion. We're telling
the government you're in trouble. You're spending six trillion. Okay,
you can't spend any more, and that becomes a world war.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
Why is the term zero based balanced budget? None of
this has even come up. It's not even a big
beautiful statement that's being made. All right, So can I
just want to do this on behalf of the listeners.
So Elon Musk and Doge gets it. We have a
(08:21):
spending problem and they were busy cutting it. Maybe not
with the greatest eloquence or finesse, but they were cutting it.
Does Bissett not agree with that?
Speaker 4 (08:30):
I think all we can know is this Bescent comes
from the world of George Soros.
Speaker 3 (08:37):
He worked for him twice, very profitably. He made joy.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
Many people know that by the way that our secretary
of Treasury that Donald Trump chose, and it is clearly
giving a strong ear to his ties to sorrows. How'd
that end up in a Trump administration? That's the unanswerable question.
Speaker 4 (08:52):
Now, look, maybe Bisons had a change of mind and
heart and Trump knows it.
Speaker 3 (08:56):
So therefore, thank you very much. And you don't even
know me the answer. I'll all withhold judgment. I just
have a question.
Speaker 4 (09:02):
And what it comes back to is, Lookscent made sorrows
a billion dollars in a day twice when they shorted
the British currency and they shorted the end.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
He's legendary on Wall Street.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
And so a lot of people who are pretty reckless
on Wall Street think very highly of Bescent. Okay, maybe
that's a human shield that Trump is using to have
more influence in Wall Street.
Speaker 3 (09:28):
I don't know.
Speaker 4 (09:28):
But the fact is I don't know that Bescent, if
he got fired today, wouldn't go back to work for
sorrows tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (09:34):
We don't know, And we.
Speaker 4 (09:35):
Can't simply say it doesn't matter on the resume because
George Soros runs the machine that runs the money that
runs the Democrat Party, and as recent as in the
twenty fifteen era, becents giving money to the Clintons.
Speaker 2 (09:53):
By definition, that's a strange Bedfellow senior contributor Dividgenon Zinati
joining us.
Speaker 3 (09:57):
Let's ust out this fight with Elon Musk. What do
we know? Vicious shouting match for sure?
Speaker 4 (10:01):
Right, Well, and here's the thing that's fascinating is The
Atlantic not only covered it, they covered it in a
major story that started with three gigantic f bombs that.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
They attribute to Scott percent.
Speaker 4 (10:12):
But even more significant than that is the fact that
they acknowledged that there were fourteen people who leaked to
them to tell them the story.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
Wait a minute, we haven't cut off the leaks to
the Atlantic yet, we would have achieved.
Speaker 4 (10:25):
That after that we haven't cut off the leaks at all,
and the leaks are between Musk and Descent, and so
which one has the more concern for fiscal integrity and
for reducing See, you can't get there unless you listen
to what Musk was saying. Now, you don't have to
have Musk around, but if you're throwing them out with
the f US, then at that stage in the game,
(10:47):
you got to ask yourself. Does the percent want us
to stop overspending? Does he want us to reach fiscal integrity?
Or is he just playing along for four years?
Speaker 3 (10:59):
I don't know. We talked about how important.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Now it's called big Beautiful Bill, but basically it was
just making permanent to remove the uncertainty of the Trump
tax cuts. It's grown much bigger than that, and with
it a five trillion dollar debt tag over ten years.
Speaker 4 (11:19):
Yeah, I've heard three, I've heard five. Now let's listen.
What's running out for just a second?
Speaker 3 (11:23):
Listen. That means that's probably eight.
Speaker 2 (11:24):
But sorry, so I'm getting everybody mad at me instead
of you, they David for bringing up this inconvenient truth.
Speaker 4 (11:33):
Okay, five trillion over ten years would mean that we're
still overspending two trillion a year. So in essence, if
that's the case, then what they've done is they've said
what I just said, we take in four, we spend six,
and that's two a year, and it's a yearly budget,
so five years would add ten. So in essence, they're
(11:54):
saying they're going to freeze the budget at its current
two trillion dollar deficit rate for the next five years.
Speaker 2 (12:00):
That's fine, and that's redirected, reprioritize, but it hasn't affected
the trajectory of the amount of our budget that goes
to interest and the dangers of debt and how we're
all paying for it now in inflation and it'll destroy.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
Our life very soon.
Speaker 4 (12:19):
And so what they're in essence saying is I'll watch
my language here. We'll just say what they're saying is
blank doge. In other words, what Elon was saying is
we can save a trillion in fraud, waste, mismanagement, et cetera.
Forget it. We're just going to say we're two trillion over.
(12:41):
We're going to stay two trillion over. We're going to
stay two trillion over for the next five years. And
of course, here's the big thing about that. Congress can't
spend money but one.
Speaker 3 (12:52):
Year at a time.
Speaker 4 (12:54):
In other words, not only does this budget only last
for one year, they can change it next year, but
every two years it's a new Congress. So whatever they
agreed to on what the budget was going to be
over the next ten years could be completely revised in
two years because Congress can't pass fiscal laws going forward
in perpetuity. They can only pass them for the duration
of the session that they're in. So did they really
(13:17):
change anything? Maybe maybe that's one piece of the puzzle.
But without the doze work, without the actual evaluation of
the size of this government, you can't get there. And
it looks like Scott Pissent is a part of the
team that just threw elon Musk overboard, overboard, all.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
Right, So in closing moments with David Sinauti, your senior contributor,
and we'll talk more about this and we'll follow more forward.
We should understand that these are questions that must be asked.
And they don't mean you don't support the president and
doesn't mean you don't love the president.
Speaker 3 (13:53):
But I don't have to tell you there's a lot
of people that's all they're going.
Speaker 4 (13:55):
To hear Michael, this is a task that's going to
take us at least ten years to fix, and so
going to we're going to get their step at the time.
This is going to go way, way, way past Donald Trump,
and it precedes Donald Trump by far more than ten years.
It goes forty years. The fiscal numbers haven't changed. As
long as the federal government is the bank, then they
(14:17):
can continue to outspend because all they got to do
is go print more money somewhere. We've got to get
to zero.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
And you would think at some point, if this is
on the older end Reagan Revolution, in the middle Tea
Party movement and the very young end MAGA and trump Ism,
maybe that middle part Tea Party movement and bringing the
debt and the threat of the debt and the importance
of producing the debt to the front burner should be
(14:45):
a part of whatever this new Americanism is.
Speaker 4 (14:48):
Yeah, and it's you know, I'll tell you something else, Michael,
it's new Americanism. It's got nothing to do with being
a Democrat or Republican or an independent as to the
fact that it is immoral to spend what you don't have,
particularly if you're the bank.
Speaker 1 (15:01):
Miss A little, miss a lot, miss a lot, and
we'll miss you. It's your morning show with Michael del
Churno
Previously on Your Morning Show with Michael Del Choano.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Our senior contributor David Sanati is joining us. Good morning, David,
Good morning, Michael.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
So I would set it up this way.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
First of all, it's called your Morning Show, not Trump's
Morning Show, not anybody Else's your morning show. You the listener.
So we're here to serve you. That's number one. And
while we love the president, support the president, agree with
a lot of things he does, there are some things
we question, not the least of which is why is
a Clinton supported.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Sorrow's funded.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
The scent Secretary of Treasury And why do you get
in a big fight with Elon Musk and now it
looks like Musk is missing and he's still present.
Speaker 4 (00:45):
I mean, these are questions we should be able to ask.
Michael for asking them, and I'm with you on this.
This isn't about trying to support someone other than the
President of the United States. This is about what's happening
to our country. You know, you did a great interview
with Nut Gingrich and Nut Gingrish talked about American optimism
(01:07):
and looking forward to the future.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
And I know he's not here to defend himself.
Speaker 4 (01:10):
He'd be able to answer to this question, I think
I already know how we would answer the question. But
you know, for all the optimism and all of the
interesting connecting the dots of the progress of conservatism in America,
two things. One is, grown up as kids, you and
I had the image in cartoons, in films and everything
(01:32):
else that the richer person became, the more conservative they became.
It was just kind of in the air, right. I mean,
you could start with Scrooge McDuck. It just no matter
what the Daddy Warbucks. If you know today that the
wealth of our country is not at all in the
hands of conservatism, it is in the hand of the
most radical liberal, matrix driven, technological and Wall Street people. Today,
(01:56):
the wealthiest people in the world are the most radical
anti America. Right even in our own country.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
Now, we saw during this whole Trump triumph, to quote
the name of his book, people like Elon Musk, Google leaders,
Facebook leaders.
Speaker 3 (02:11):
All they're at the inauguration.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
But is that really a trump Ism or a opportunistic
moment or a new occupant of victory for conservativism and Republicans.
And I think the answer is we don't know yet, but.
Speaker 4 (02:27):
Not likely, right, and probably most likely A and B
because all those guys sitting on that stage and this.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
Takes us, well, this will take us back to scot percent.
By the way, this is what we're going around here,
all right.
Speaker 4 (02:37):
The key is that the people sitting on that stage
all need massive government help.
Speaker 3 (02:43):
That's why they're there.
Speaker 4 (02:45):
They need nuclear power plants to be able to produce
AI and we don't have them, and the government's got
to get them or they want to go to Mars. Right,
They've got all kinds of plans that make them trillionaires
going forward now.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
In the in the case of Rfk Junior and Telsea
Gabbard and Klan Musk, they were on board before, but
the rest or after.
Speaker 4 (03:09):
And by the way, i am also not wanting to
act like the older brother in the Prodigal Sun's story.
I'm happy for all these people to come closer to
the light.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
I mean, because I'm not the light. I'm just a
lucky guy. Should you should say lucky.
Speaker 4 (03:24):
I'm just a guy who, by the grace of God,
sees a little bit of it.
Speaker 3 (03:28):
I mean, you all come.
Speaker 4 (03:29):
It's one of those things where it's one bigger telling
another bigger where to find a piece of bread? That's
what we're talking about. But there's questions that don't make sense.
And here's what doesn't make sense. If all of this
conservatism is so effective, why are we thirty five.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Trillion dollars in debt?
Speaker 4 (03:45):
And why are we in a position in no matter
who runs Congress, we can't stop spending more money next
year than we did this year.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
I had sent a note to David just to share
with the class. You know, for all my love and
support for the president, I'm struggling to balance this, you know,
continued prioritized debt stabilization, let alone reduction that is absolutely
(04:15):
paramount and necessary with this big, beautiful deal to which
you were already looking into the bessent elon Musk fight
and how one's now missing and the other isn't and
what don't we know about that one? And who a
president surrounds himself with And suddenly we realized we're both
concerned with the same thing, and really everyone that loves
(04:35):
and supports the president like us listening, You shouldn't be
afraid to be concerned with the same thing.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
So what can we learn and who am I am?
Speaker 2 (04:44):
I Besent or Musk in terms of because that's the
very revealing thing that makes it more healed.
Speaker 3 (04:52):
Let's let's call it. Let's call it Linn A. Mcmahonnon.
I mean maybe maybe maybe he needs to take over treasury.
But so I think we'll bring it.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
First of all, I think you know we talk about
how or I do. You haven't, but I think you
would agree that somehow Reagan Revolution meets Tea Party movement
meets MAGA and trump Ism is what this this movement is. Well,
but where's the Tea Party in that? Because the Tea
(05:20):
Party was formed to address debt.
Speaker 4 (05:22):
And now it's silent. Listen, I don't have to learn it.
That's what te stood for tax enough already.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
Why why?
Speaker 2 (05:29):
I mean, I can love Donald Trump and still focus
on reducing this debt and pronto.
Speaker 4 (05:34):
So to be fair, and I think that this, say,
having this conversation about Pscent and Musk in the context
of Gingrich is really smart because you can see the
philosophies and where they're going. We're sure Musk comes into
this game and it falls into the silly, stupid trap
of picking up the chainsaw. That was a big mistake. Okay,
(05:55):
so from a pr perspective, Musk didn't do himself any favors.
But Elon else gets it. He understands that unless you
stop spending more every year, you will never get out
of this mess. The growth will never catch up.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
You know.
Speaker 3 (06:11):
The Republican answer to everything is growth. Oh, I love
that answer. That's a really good answer.
Speaker 4 (06:16):
Okay, But the fact is you can't grow your way
out of a situation. If the hole is still in
the bucket, you can't get there. And the get there
is really simple, Michael. We just have to say, look,
we only take in four trillion dollars. We spend six trillion.
Now the answer is if you and I had to
do this would make more spend less. With David Amsey
(06:38):
and all the other Christians out there who talk about
this go integrity, they would say, Michael, you have to
live on four trillion. That's the end that you are
a poor person. You are a broke person. You can't
go on vacation. You can't do this.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
But beans, baby and beads, Bryson beans.
Speaker 4 (06:54):
And if you don't, Michael, not only are you going
to go bankrupt, you maybe go to jail. You don't
if you're in busines and you're doing it, you're going
to jail. If you're an individual doing it, you're going bankrupt.
But if it's the government, we have no answer for that.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
How can that be moral?
Speaker 4 (07:09):
And then we turn around when somebody like DOAG comes
in and must comes in and says we're going to
bust up USA AID and people go, oh my god,
you took money for poor people. Well wait a second,
how do you give money that you don't have to
a poor person? I mean, if the bank robbers decided
to give all their money to charity, would that mean
they were innocent.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
Oh, by the way, David, I just knuck into your
bank account and gave ten thousand dollars to the Nashville
Rescue Mission.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
Are godly? Yes? Godley?
Speaker 4 (07:36):
Except thank you point paid better than mine. You're exactly right.
So the key is we're not even telling the government
that you've got to live on four trillion. We're telling
the government you're in trouble. You're spending six trillion. Okay,
you can't spend any more, and that becomes a world war.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
Why is the term zero based balanced budget? None of
this has even come up. It's not even a big
beautiful statement that's being made. All right, So can I
just want to do this on behalf of the listeners.
So Elon Musk and Doge gets it. We have a
(08:21):
spending problem and they were busy cutting it. Maybe not
with the greatest eloquence or finesse, but they were cutting it.
Does Bissett not agree with that?
Speaker 4 (08:30):
I think all we can know is this Bescent comes
from the world of George Soros.
Speaker 3 (08:37):
He worked for him twice, very profitably. He made joy.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
Many people know that by the way that our secretary
of Treasury that Donald Trump chose, and it is clearly
giving a strong ear to his ties to sorrows. How'd
that end up in a Trump administration? That's the unanswerable question.
Speaker 4 (08:52):
Now, look, maybe Bisons had a change of mind and
heart and Trump knows it.
Speaker 3 (08:56):
So therefore, thank you very much. And you don't even
know me the answer. I'll all withhold judgment. I just
have a question.
Speaker 4 (09:02):
And what it comes back to is, Lookscent made sorrows
a billion dollars in a day twice when they shorted
the British currency and they shorted the end.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
He's legendary on Wall Street.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
And so a lot of people who are pretty reckless
on Wall Street think very highly of Bescent. Okay, maybe
that's a human shield that Trump is using to have
more influence in Wall Street.
Speaker 3 (09:28):
I don't know.
Speaker 4 (09:28):
But the fact is I don't know that Bescent, if
he got fired today, wouldn't go back to work for
sorrows tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (09:34):
We don't know, And we.
Speaker 4 (09:35):
Can't simply say it doesn't matter on the resume because
George Soros runs the machine that runs the money that
runs the Democrat Party, and as recent as in the
twenty fifteen era, becents giving money to the Clintons.
Speaker 2 (09:53):
By definition, that's a strange Bedfellow senior contributor Dividgenon Zinati
joining us.
Speaker 3 (09:57):
Let's ust out this fight with Elon Musk. What do
we know? Vicious shouting match for sure?
Speaker 4 (10:01):
Right, Well, and here's the thing that's fascinating is The
Atlantic not only covered it, they covered it in a
major story that started with three gigantic f bombs that.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
They attribute to Scott percent.
Speaker 4 (10:12):
But even more significant than that is the fact that
they acknowledged that there were fourteen people who leaked to
them to tell them the story.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
Wait a minute, we haven't cut off the leaks to
the Atlantic yet, we would have achieved.
Speaker 4 (10:25):
That after that we haven't cut off the leaks at all,
and the leaks are between Musk and Descent, and so
which one has the more concern for fiscal integrity and
for reducing See, you can't get there unless you listen
to what Musk was saying. Now, you don't have to
have Musk around, but if you're throwing them out with
the f US, then at that stage in the game,
(10:47):
you got to ask yourself. Does the percent want us
to stop overspending? Does he want us to reach fiscal integrity?
Or is he just playing along for four years?
Speaker 3 (10:59):
I don't know. We talked about how important.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Now it's called big Beautiful Bill, but basically it was
just making permanent to remove the uncertainty of the Trump
tax cuts. It's grown much bigger than that, and with
it a five trillion dollar debt tag over ten years.
Speaker 4 (11:19):
Yeah, I've heard three, I've heard five. Now let's listen.
What's running out for just a second?
Speaker 3 (11:23):
Listen. That means that's probably eight.
Speaker 2 (11:24):
But sorry, so I'm getting everybody mad at me instead
of you, they David for bringing up this inconvenient truth.
Speaker 4 (11:33):
Okay, five trillion over ten years would mean that we're
still overspending two trillion a year. So in essence, if
that's the case, then what they've done is they've said
what I just said, we take in four, we spend six,
and that's two a year, and it's a yearly budget,
so five years would add ten. So in essence, they're
(11:54):
saying they're going to freeze the budget at its current
two trillion dollar deficit rate for the next five years.
Speaker 2 (12:00):
That's fine, and that's redirected, reprioritize, but it hasn't affected
the trajectory of the amount of our budget that goes
to interest and the dangers of debt and how we're
all paying for it now in inflation and it'll destroy.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
Our life very soon.
Speaker 4 (12:19):
And so what they're in essence saying is I'll watch
my language here. We'll just say what they're saying is
blank doge. In other words, what Elon was saying is
we can save a trillion in fraud, waste, mismanagement, et cetera.
Forget it. We're just going to say we're two trillion over.
(12:41):
We're going to stay two trillion over. We're going to
stay two trillion over for the next five years. And
of course, here's the big thing about that. Congress can't
spend money but one.
Speaker 3 (12:52):
Year at a time.
Speaker 4 (12:54):
In other words, not only does this budget only last
for one year, they can change it next year, but
every two years it's a new Congress. So whatever they
agreed to on what the budget was going to be
over the next ten years could be completely revised in
two years because Congress can't pass fiscal laws going forward
in perpetuity. They can only pass them for the duration
of the session that they're in. So did they really
(13:17):
change anything? Maybe maybe that's one piece of the puzzle.
But without the doze work, without the actual evaluation of
the size of this government, you can't get there. And
it looks like Scott Pissent is a part of the
team that just threw elon Musk overboard, overboard, all.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
Right, So in closing moments with David Sinauti, your senior contributor,
and we'll talk more about this and we'll follow more forward.
We should understand that these are questions that must be asked.
And they don't mean you don't support the president and
doesn't mean you don't love the president.
Speaker 3 (13:53):
But I don't have to tell you there's a lot
of people that's all they're going.
Speaker 4 (13:55):
To hear Michael, this is a task that's going to
take us at least ten years to fix, and so
going to we're going to get their step at the time.
This is going to go way, way, way past Donald Trump,
and it precedes Donald Trump by far more than ten years.
It goes forty years. The fiscal numbers haven't changed. As
long as the federal government is the bank, then they
(14:17):
can continue to outspend because all they got to do
is go print more money somewhere. We've got to get
to zero.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
And you would think at some point, if this is
on the older end Reagan Revolution, in the middle Tea
Party movement and the very young end MAGA and trump Ism,
maybe that middle part Tea Party movement and bringing the
debt and the threat of the debt and the importance
of producing the debt to the front burner should be
(14:45):
a part of whatever this new Americanism is.
Speaker 4 (14:48):
Yeah, and it's you know, I'll tell you something else, Michael,
it's new Americanism. It's got nothing to do with being
a Democrat or Republican or an independent as to the
fact that it is immoral to spend what you don't have,
particularly if you're the bank.
Speaker 1 (15:01):
Miss A little, miss a lot, miss a lot, and
we'll miss you. It's your morning show with Michael del
Churno
Popular Podcasts
Boysober
Have you ever wondered what life might be like if you stopped worrying about being wanted, and focused on understanding what you actually want? That was the question Hope Woodard asked herself after a string of situationships inspired her to take a break from sex and dating. She went "boysober," a personal concept that sparked a global movement among women looking to prioritize themselves over men. Now, Hope is looking to expand the ways we explore our relationship to relationships. Taking a bold, unfiltered look into modern love, romance, and self-discovery, Boysober will dive into messy stories about dating, sex, love, friendship, and breaking generational patterns—all with humor, vulnerability, and a fresh perspective.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com