Episode 198: The Changing Political Landscape of New Mexico and America's Security Crisis

🗳️ First up: Will Gregg Hull Run for Governor?

Rio Rancho Mayor Gregg Hull just pushed back his announcement about jumping into the 2026 governor’s race—and we break down why this is such a tough decision for him. Mark and Krysty share their own experience from the campaign trail and talk honestly about what it really takes to run for governor (spoiler alert: it’s not for the faint of heart).

📊 Surprising New Voter Numbers in New Mexico

Could a Republican red wave be building in a historically blue state? We dive into fresh voter registration data that might surprise you—and explain what it could mean for 2026 and beyond.

🧠 Also in This Episode:

🇺🇸 Attacks on Jews in the U.S. are rising—and national security experts are warning it could get even worse. Why isn’t more being done?

💰 The “Big Beautiful” Budget Battle Continues
The Trump Administration is still working to pass a budget that reduces the deficit—but there’s a long road ahead. We explain the stakes and why this matters for working families.

👣 Bigfoot in Colorado?!
A new video from Colorado has the internet buzzing. Mark is all in—Krysty says “not a chance.”
You be the judge: is it proof or prank?

Website: https://www.nodoubtaboutitpodcast.com/
Twitter: @nodoubtpodcast
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NoDoubtAboutItPod/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/markronchettinm/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D

Episode Transcript

Speaker 2 (00:11):
all right, let's dance let's do it let's get
right to it today, oh my gosh,I'm trying to run, I'm running
again I know you're back in theuh, the production side of
things today I am and uh,because our kids are still gone
yeah, slackers or on missiontrips, one or the other uh, they
could be out.
They could be out, you know,doing worse things, like
gambling and, uh, horse racesand, uh, I don't know, drinking.

Speaker 3 (00:35):
I don't know they're not doing that, they're on
mission trips, and so I think weshould give them some slack,
guy all right, fine, some slack,but uh, you know I I think to
me it sounds like a big oldvacation, if you ask me.

Speaker 2 (00:45):
Oh, I don't think Ava would tell you right now she's
in vacation land.
It took her over 25 hours toget to Africa.
Yeah, she was wiped out.
Yeah.
She said she landed, it wasdumping rain and she was pretty
scared in the traffic.
The hour-long bus ride to getto the village that she's
working in, oh yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:00):
I believe that.
So, oh, yeah, I believe that.

Speaker 2 (01:01):
So she was a little freaked out.
I don't think she'd be like hey, this is a vacation, dad.
I don't think that's whatyou're going to hear from her.

Speaker 3 (01:05):
She might not say that, but I kind of view it that
way.
I got to be honest with you,all right, so let's get into
what's going on.
We're going to talk some localpolitics first.
Governor's race continues tokind of go up and down who's in,
who get into new mexico voterregistration, which I think a
lot of people think.
Oh my gosh.
You know they think oh, mexicois always going to be the way it

(01:29):
is that there are changes goingon in the electorate in new
mexico and you want to see thosenumbers.
It's interesting.
It's interesting thing to watchand it should matter to, to
whatever party you're from,whether you're not the party at
all, whether you're just anindependent.
It's just kind of interestingstuff to see where the numbers
are going.
We're going to take a look atsome politics stuff.
Kareem Jean-Pierre is back.

Speaker 2 (01:48):
She's with a book Everybody.
Oh my gosh, are we not shockedthat she's going to have a book?

Speaker 3 (01:53):
coming out in October .
It's going to be fantastic and,by the way, the Boulder suspect
who lit eight Jewish protesterson fire, uh that that continues
to reverberate.
It's an unbelievable story, onethat is incredibly sad, and
then the media's response is,yet again, not going to meet the
moment.

Speaker 2 (02:13):
Right?
No, not shocking at all.

Speaker 3 (02:15):
No, it really is not.
And then we're going to getinto what's going on with the
budget.
It matters.
I mean, I'm telling you you'regoing to see some stuff going on
with the budget ugly stuff andElon Musk comes out and freaks
out, says thinks it's terrible,so we'll see what happened there
.
And then we're going to getinto the three worst drinks that
you can have and you're nottelling me what those are that

(02:38):
are supposed to be healthy, andthey're not interesting and
christy consumes one of themregularly.
Oh what?
And then we finish, calm itdown, we finish, calm it down.
We finish with the latest andgreatest Yeti video.
Okay, I know, bigfoot, this islegitimate.

(03:00):
Bigfoot video.

Speaker 2 (03:01):
Oh, I can't wait to show people this Bigfoot video
we have.
It's definitely worth stayingtuned in, people.
I just I can't wait to showpeople this bigfoot video we
have.
It's definitely worth stayingtuned in, people.
I just I can't wait to show itto you, so then we can all have
a conversation about it.
I can't wait okay, it's incolorado.
So I, and if you, if you werehint, if you were hearing a
little sense of sarcasm, becauseI am actually laying on pretty
thick- yeah, you should belaying on, because that's what's
going on you and the big.

(03:21):
I can't wait to get the.

Speaker 3 (03:22):
Bigfoot expert on our show.
I'm trying, I'm working on it.

Speaker 2 (03:25):
I know you and Ava have been trying to get this
Bigfoot expert on for over ayear.

Speaker 3 (03:28):
I know he's out of Canada.
His name is Todd Standing.
We're working on it.
The guy has put together someincredible videos.

Speaker 2 (03:34):
Is there not another Bigfoot expert we could have
come on?
You know it want the ones thatare spiciest and scott or or
todd, rather.

Speaker 3 (03:47):
Maybe that's why he won't come on.
That's a good point.
I don't know his name.
That's a problem?
Uh, no, no, I, I do know hisname and he's.
We're gonna get him on.

Speaker 2 (03:51):
We're gonna get him on okay, okay, all right, all
right you ready to roll.

Speaker 3 (03:53):
Here here we go.
So this came out a couple daysago and I have to tell you, uh,
it's a little bit of surprise,but in some ways that maybe not
Greg Hull, who came out guns ablazing about six months ago
saying he planned to announcethat he was running for governor
.
He did, like tried to do thedouble barrel announcement, like
have one announcement and thensay I'm going to announce later
too, which again at the time, wesaid was a bad idea, don't do

(04:17):
that, it's not helpful, it's not, it doesn't work.
And so right now he ispostponing his gubernatorial
campaign announcement.
Ok, so here's some of what wassaid.

Speaker 2 (04:30):
This is from the Rio Rancho Observer, OK a whole,
previously issued a news releaseApril 15th in which he stated I
will be speaking directly toNew Mexicans on June 2nd about
our vision for the land ofenchantment, so stay tuned.
That release came shortly afterthe he filed a biannual report
of his campaign expenditures andcontributions totaling over
$206,000.
But on Monday the campaignissued a news release stating it

(04:51):
is still in a strategic growthphase to expand its operation
before making an officialannouncement.
The release said informationabout an announcement will be
shared, but did not give anofficial date or estimate and
you know.
So a couple of things here.
I mean, obviously we like GregHall a lot.
He's a great guy, he's a greatmayor.
He's got a lot of enthusiasm.

(05:11):
I think we've said this on theshow, We'll say it again.
He really, really enjoys theprocess of being mayor, Like the
guy loves doing his job.

Speaker 3 (05:20):
He lives it, he lives it.

Speaker 2 (05:21):
He's a process guy and loves the process Right now,
but here's the thing he couldpotentially rerun for mayor of
Rio Rancho, and that election'salso in 26.
Is that correct?

Speaker 3 (05:34):
but it's it's somewhere in the next, next
little bit, so you kind of haveto make a decision.

Speaker 2 (05:47):
Um, if he's going to run for mayor, for reelection of
mayor, which people think hewould get it right, cause he's
well-liked there, yeah it doesgreat job.
Or does he risk it all and tryto run for governor and
basically that's trying to.
What he's trying to fill out Isthat.
Is that a good assessment?

Speaker 3 (06:02):
Yeah, I think it's a very fair assessment and I think
here's what happens and this isjust the God's honest truth.
Running for governor isincredibly difficult and being
successful at any level forgeteven getting through the primary
to the general and winning thegeneral.
Forget even winning an actualelection, whether it be a
primary or the whole shebang.

(06:23):
It's very difficult, it's soulcrushing.
It really is.
You have to constantly go outthere, raise an unbelievable
amount of money, get enthusiasm,get people behind you, get an
actual movement going, and it'sreally, really hard.
It's never what people think itis.
Most days are spent grindingand sometimes it's just phone
calls, donor after donor afterdonor, convincing them that

(06:46):
you've got a chance to win.
And right now there's a.
There's a fair amount of fatigue, I think, with some people in
the state thinking we can't everwin with, when the problem is
that a lot of them don't knowand aren't looking behind the
numbers.
They don't know that we wereahead by three points before
Dobbs right?
They don't know that.
They don't know the numberswe're about to share with you
that the electorate is gettingcloser in the state of New

(07:07):
Mexico.
So if you're the out party,like Republicans are, and you
think, oh my gosh, we're nevergoing to win.
So you go in and talk to allthese people and Greg Hull gets
into the middle of this thingand thinks, oh yeah, I'm going't
get there, it's just difficult.
And so I think what he's havingto face is a real simple

(07:28):
question Do you take the chancethat you can raise more money,
create that momentum, or do you,as a guy who loves to govern,
keep doing a job you love?
That's my guess.
I have not talked to Greg aboutthis at all.
Right, I've talked to him, butnot about this, and not recently
.
Okay, and, and I think my guessis he's having to truly look in

(07:50):
the mirror and be like can I dothis?
Can I cause a lot of people sitaround a table and talk to
their friends.

Speaker 2 (07:57):
I know you can listen to the tunnel and have
everybody say, I mean, how manypeople have have we talked to
personally that have been likeoh yeah.
Well, you know a lot of peoplethink I should run for governor,
meaning like them you knowRight right.
And.
I'm just sitting there going,huh, okay, Like your wife and
your friends and a couple ofbusiness associates and some
people that are, they're goingto write you a $100 check.
Like those people Like it.

(08:17):
Just you need, like a, you needan entire movement of people to
get behind you.
You need an army, and thattakes real strategic thinking.
It takes especially for astatewide election.
It's very different than acitywide election and it's very
different than you know.
Focusing on-.

Speaker 3 (08:35):
Oh, a congressional seat even.

Speaker 2 (08:37):
I've never.
I will say honestly, I had noidea how much goes into it until
we went through two campaignsand even the difference between
a Senate campaign and agovernor's campaign was day and
night, and it is.
I mean, I watched you.
I've never.
I mean you worked hard as aweatherman, as a meteorologist,
you worked really hard.
I have never seen you work ashard as you did when you ran for

(08:59):
office.
It was up before sign up.
I rarely saw you.
You traveled the state.
You put more mileage on ourcars than I could ever imagine.
You were on the phone all thetime.
There was no dinner time, therewas no family time.
There was nothing for almost ayear and a half, both times
right.
And so watching that andknowing that this is what it

(09:21):
takes and it's not like all thisglory and glam, it's not like
oh, we're going in and they'rehosting dinners for you and all
this.
No, you're on the phone, havingto talk to people constantly.
All those things do happen.

Speaker 3 (09:31):
I mean you do have you meet great people and, yes,
you have the huge rallies.
Not as a Senate candidate,honest to be honest.
I mean you do somewhat as aSenate candidate, but nothing
like governor, like when you areyour party's nominee for
governor and you're in a closerace, the, the, that's true.
The last month to two months ofthe governor's races are
exhilarating.
There's no question thatstuff's cool because you've

(09:53):
raised all the money.
Really, the hay is in the barn.
You know pretty much the lastmonth.
So you, you know all this,you're, you're spending every
dime that you that you raise,because you're doing everything
you can to win and it's, but itis.
It is a long process wherewhere it is just everything.
So I'm just going to go aspeople on board.
It just doesn't work that way,and the problem is that you have

(10:13):
to have the fortitude to justkeep going, and so I don't know
what Greg's doing.
I don't know what he's dealingwith, but but I can tell you
this that he's he's a good mayorand does really well.
So I wonder if he's notthinking to himself.
You know, I'm really good atbeing mayor.
This governor thing is tough.
It's a tough thing to do, andso I'm not sure I can get across
the line.
That would be my guess, I don'tknow.

(10:35):
Again, I say this not knowingit's at some point we'll get
Greg to come on, because he's heis a great guy and a great
mayor.
So we'll see, you never know,he could announce soon and just
take off and let this thing go.
And again, this stuff can bedone, though it's not like it
can't be done.
You know, when Susana Martinezran in 2010, she, she was not
well-known, she, and over time,she built her name and she did
it right.

(10:56):
So this can be done.
You know, we were able to comeout and never having been in
politics, and win two primariesand get close to the general
elections.
No, we didn't win, and so,ultimately, though, what you
realize, though, is this is notsomething that is taken lightly.
It's very difficult to do, andso I think that's why you're
seeing some people and you saywhy hasn't so-and-so announced?

(11:17):
Because I think, if they'resmart, you're contemplating this
and you're thinking howdifficult is this going to be
for me?

Speaker 2 (11:27):
And so I think that's going to be a challenge Right,
and I think people that haveactually ran in races or have
worked on campaigns I mean,cause there's people out there
that I know are contemplatingrunning to that have worked with
others or been on part of ateam or something of that degree
.
I think they know when you'vedone this, you know what it
takes and you know how muchmoney it is that you need to
raise.
You also know the stakes thatare against you and you also
know how long this is.
So like this is a long haul,and while the last month of the

(11:50):
governor's race will probably godown in history as some of my
favorite memories of all timefor our family of meeting the
people of the state and trulygetting to know people and
talking to them and feeling likewe're going to move the needle
in this state, and we were sofired up to do it that took
months of planning to even getthere and hard work by you to

(12:11):
even get to that and your teamto even get to that point.
So I think people kind of seethat part of it or maybe feel
that part of it and think, oh,I'm in, I'm in, this is what I
want to do and you like.
You have to look back at the 15months of hell that took you to
get there the backstabbing, thename calling the giving up
every day the press that don'tlike you and they put out
whatever they feel like sayingthat day.

Speaker 3 (12:33):
You know what bothers you the most is that.
What bothers you the most inyour own party is they shred you
is, they absolutely shred you.
It's, your is, your own party isand I think Democrats would say
the same thing that that you,you end up in these rooms and
and it's not that they don'tmean well, but they all of a
sudden think that that you, youknow, either you don't care or
you don't get it, or what I mean.
Meanwhile, you have taken yourwhole entire life and blown it

(12:56):
up to try to make a difference.
If you can't right, and youhave and all, and you don't want
their adoration, you just wantthem to understand what you're
going through.

Speaker 2 (13:04):
You just don't need the, the fighting like the well,
you don't understand and youdon't get this, and you know
that kind of attitude, I think,or you don't care.

Speaker 3 (13:13):
Right, you don't care .
I mean you're getting money,but no, nobody gets money.
If you're doing it right moneyout of your account you would be
crazy.
You leave it in the account,you spend it every way you can,
and then you find another way tolive off, another stream of
income.

Speaker 2 (13:31):
We didn't take a dime out of our account.
Yeah, you didn't spend a dimeon a burger out of your donation
money, let alone anything else.
But you know, I think it's justhard because, people, there's
no such thing as a perfectcandidate, you know.
And at your election night, theprimary night before we knew
the results, I did read part ofthe poem.
You know the arena, because Ifeel like it's valuable for

(13:52):
people to realize that unlessyou step into the arena, unless
you get in there, you can haveall the opinions in the world on
policy and differences ofpolicy.
And that's what we like to talkabout on this show is like, are
these people going to reallymove the needle for the people
of the state?
But when it becomes like apersonal thing and they think,
they think they know you, whenthey don't, those kind of things
, that's what bothers me.

(14:12):
I'm like, have you been in thearena?
And number two, there is nosuch thing as a perfect
candidate.
You're not going to findsomebody that checks every
single box for you.
You're just not going to findthat.
And so, if that's, what you'rewaiting on is to find the
perfect candidate for mayor orfor governor or Senate or
whatever it has to be, thisperfect mayor that does
everything exactly the way youwant.
You're going to be sitting backand we're never going to make

(14:33):
any changes, so that would be mything too is to say, as voters
out there, take a breathsometimes and recognize these
people are human.
They're just normal people thatare trying to do things that
are better for the state.

Speaker 3 (14:44):
No, no, that's a good point, it's a very good point.
And, by the way, one otherquick thing Hearing some is an
article in the Santa Fe NewMexican on Wednesday Howie
Morales is considering gettingin for the Democrats.
Howie, if you've ever met Howie, very nice guy and so would be
an interesting candidate, Ithink he's the current
lieutenant governor.

Speaker 2 (15:02):
He's a current lieutenant governor.

Speaker 3 (15:03):
Right, right, so that that that may hurt him.
It may not.
I mean, who knows Right?
I don't know, but he is.
He is not someone who isinsignificant in any way, so
he'd be an interesting candidate.

Speaker 2 (15:13):
Do you think he could win the primary against Deb
Haaland and Sam?

Speaker 3 (15:17):
Bregman.
So I think that he wouldprobably come in to the right of
of Holland, to the left ofBregman would be.
My guess is how he'd run If Iwas him.
That's what I would do and Ithink that he could take, he
could hurt showboat Sam a littlebit, you know, I mean, cause
showboat Sam's going to have, Imean he's going to have to find

(15:38):
enough votes on the democraticside, which again he acts like
he's running in a, in a primaryfor, for you know, the
independent party.
He's not right, okay, and sohe's creating this again.
We've got into this and we willagain, but but overall I think
he's he could be someone ofconsequence.
So we'll see, we'll see.
But he is a likable guy, likeif you're around him, he's a
likable guy, other than when hestood on women.

(15:58):
Other than that I don't havegreat, I don't have great
feelings about the guy.
Okay, okay, we don't need to getit.
We don't need to get into it.

Speaker 2 (16:07):
Okay, I mean but, but it was uh yeah yeah I know
we'll leave it at that, becauseI know that he I'm not voting
for howie.
I'll just go.
Well, neither am I but but?

Speaker 3 (16:17):
but that's okay, that who cares who we're voting for?
So right, okay, so here we go.
So I want to show you something, though in a reason for
optimism in the state, and Iwould argue this is a reason for
optimism no matter what partyyou're in.
You should want this to be thecase, and I'll tell you why.
Look at the numbers in thestate of New Mexico and what's
happening here Now I want toshow you.
Here is a total partyregistration.

(16:39):
Okay.
So you look and you say thereare 434,000 roughly Republicans,
435,000 or so Republicans,570,000 Democrats, 339,000
declined to states.
By the way, this is thunder ifyou're hearing it.
We got some storms here.

Speaker 2 (16:52):
I'm hoping we don't lose power, actually, oh, we're
not going to lose power.

Speaker 3 (16:55):
We're good we're going to be fine, but what I
want to show you about this istake a look down at November of
2016.
Ok, there were 399,000Republicans and there were
599,000 Democrats.
A 200,000 voter difference inthe state of New Mexico.
That's again 2016.

(17:15):
Go up to 2024.
That difference is down to154,000.
Okay, that's significant.
That is a significant erosion.
And the reason I say it's goodfor everybody is because I think
you want a state where bothsides are very competitive and
are forced to fight it out witheach other, Because if there is

(17:36):
one party that is in control andthey are, they are in control
and perpetuity and they know itthen they become less responsive
to the people which theysupposedly serve.
And I think we've seen it inthe state.
When you get one party ruleconstantly you see it in
California, you see it in allkinds of states, new York, you
see it all the time and againyou could argue you see it in

(17:57):
Mississippi, you see it inAlabama you don't see the kind
of competitiveness that you want.
That forces the parties to stayadherent to the people of the
state.
I just think it's important.
So, overall, I would say this so, if you're running and you're
thinking about running in one ofthese elections and you see
that you know what.
It's getting tighter Now it'sstill a 12 point advantage.

(18:18):
If you do these numbers and dothe math, it's a 12 point
advantage for Democrats, okay.
Some have said it's as low as10.
I just did simple math here.
It's 12th, okay, so, but stillthat's getting closer than 15
was right, and so, anyway, justone of those things that we're
seeing at this point and we'llsee how it ends up shaking out.

Speaker 2 (18:37):
Well, I also want to point out, though, that it the
independent or the other party,is also growing Okay.

Speaker 3 (18:44):
So whether they're libertarian, or independent
let's go to it, yeah.

Speaker 2 (18:47):
So that also has climbed up since 2016.

Speaker 3 (18:50):
Well, so their numbers are up roughly, babe,
about 60,000, from 16 to 24.
If you look at those numbersRight, so if we go over here to
this, they're up from 289 to 351.

Speaker 2 (19:00):
Yeah, Right, yep, I mean, I think that's significant
.

Speaker 3 (19:03):
That's worth mentioning is the fact that
You're exactly right it's thehighest growth number.

Speaker 2 (19:07):
Right, and it's interesting to see our people
just removing themselves fromeither party.
Yep, you know.
They are, and is that the routethat we're going?
Yeah, okay.
So, according to this wave,it's not just here in New Mexico
, though this is kind of more ofa national trend, right, with
more Republicans now registeringto vote, or with the party

(19:29):
growing, I guess.

Speaker 3 (19:30):
Well, the popularity is a problem for Democrats right
now, right.
So they're struggling right nowtrying to figure out how they
lost and everything else.
And Harry Enten went on CNN andhe's looking at some numbers
and he brought up some stuffthat is is not promising right
now for the party as they try tocome out of the 2024 election.

Speaker 9 (19:47):
Trump presidency, that you expect that Democrats
are at this massive lead on theeconomy.
It ain't so.
It ain't so.
The party that is closest toyour economic views in November
of 2023, it was the Republicansby 11 points.
Now it's still within thatrange, still within that margin
of error, plus eight pointadvantage for the Republican
Party.
How is that possible, democrats?
How is that possible Democrats?
How is that possible after allthe recession, after the stock

(20:10):
market's been doing all of this,after all the terrorists that
Americans are against, andRepublicans still hold an eight
point lead on the economy?
Are you kidding me?

Speaker 2 (20:18):
This is a CNN.
This is new CNN polling.
How is that?

Speaker 5 (20:21):
when we look for trends.
How is that trending with otherdata that you're pulling in?

Speaker 9 (20:24):
Yeah, if it was just this one CNN poll, that would be
one thing, but take a look atReuters, ipsos.
What do we see here?
Party with a better economicplan.
Well, in May of 2024, justbefore Donald Trump was
reelected president, republicanshad a nine point advantage.
Look at where we are now.
In May of 2025.
The advantage actually went upby three points.

(20:47):
Now Republicans have a 12-pointadvantage when it comes to the
party with a better economicplan.
And again, this is after monthsof supposed economic
uncertainty, in which the stockmarket's been going bonkers, in
which the tariff wars thatAmericans are against have been
going on, and yet, despite allof that, the Democrats are down
by 12 points on the economy.
This speaks to Democraticproblems on the economy better
than basically anything that youcould possibly look at.

(21:08):
The Republicans still hold anadvantage on the all important
key issue of the day, and thatis the reason why, even if
Donald Trump's approval ratingsare a little bit lower than they
used to be, republicans are notout of the ballgame, because
they still have a clearadvantage on the economy,
whether you look at CNN's pollsor whether you look at the Ipsos
poll right here, in which theyhave a 12 point advantage on the
economy, whether you look atCNN's polls or whether you look
at the Ipsos poll right here, inwhich they have a 12 point

(21:29):
advantage on the economy andalso in the sea.

Speaker 3 (21:31):
OK, interesting.

Speaker 2 (21:32):
Yeah, I mean I think you know you see the trend.
You kind of I feel like we'vefelt this, though I feel like
this is obvious when you watchany sort of media coverage.
I think when you start to hearthe other side really kind of
panicking, and they say thingsthat just feel panicking, like
they're not talking about theissue, they talk more about how
we hate Trump, I still feel likethat still happens.

(21:55):
And when, when you start to see, I don't know, I just think
that when that's all they cantalk about is that they hate
Trump versus a policy issue,that's always a red flag for me.
I'm like man, you guys arelosing, that you can't win on
the policies.

Speaker 3 (22:07):
So well, and they do have to figure that out, because
you're right, I mean, that's athat's a huge issue in the
respect that you know.
When you talk about the economyand say what, what, where are
the where's democratic partygoing on months or whatever, it
is right, let's.
Let's let this kind of playitself out and plus a lot of the

(22:33):
things that have been talkedabout, all social security is
going to get cut, Medicare isgoing to get cut, Medicaid is
going to get cut.
Well, none of that has happened, and so what you got to wait
and see is how does it all playout?
And we'll get into that on thebudget bill.
But you can't just press thepanic button now with the media
and think it's going to get youwhere you want to go, because
you've already played that gameand it didn't work and all of a
sudden, the things that you saidwere happening were not

(22:54):
happening, or the things yousaid that weren't happening were
actually happening, Right andso.
So there's a lot of thesedifferent issues right now, and
trust with the voters is hard.
It's one thing to look at theparty in power and to say we
don't think they're doing a goodjob.
It's another thing to say, butI think their opponents are.
In other words, we used to seethis as Republicans.

(23:14):
You'd say oh man, oh man, we'reDemocrats are screwing up, Go
with us.
And the voters would be liketell me why.
It's not as simple as they'rescrewing up.
Go with me.
That's that's.
It's not that simple, andoftentimes it doesn't work that
way.

Speaker 2 (23:27):
Right.
But you're saying it'sinteresting that there's been
some pushback, a little bit ofpushback in the media on
Medicaid, medicare and socialsecurity cuts.
However, our state reps areback here right now from DC
doing town hall meetings,absolutely trying to scare
voters by saying, hey, they'regoing to cut Medicaid, they're

(23:48):
cutting Medicare and they'regoing to take away your SNAP
benefits for your kids and yourfamilies.
And I'm like I'm hearing aboutthis, I'm reading the press
releases and I'm saying isanybody calling these guys out
and saying what are you doing?
None of this has happened.
Like you're out here drivingfear through town hall meetings
that you're going to fight backagainst these cuts, and I'm like
what?

Speaker 3 (24:07):
And the Republicans do should be careful here,
though, too.
They have to be clear on whereare these cuts?
They're part of waste, fraudand abuse.
They're not part of people thatare duly receiving their, their
benefits.
Those are not going to be cut.
However, if you are in theRepublicans have said this, and
I think it's a decent place tobe if you're receiving benefits
and you're able to work, youshould Right and so so let's you

(24:27):
know, let's have that out.
So that's one of those policythings, but that's not going to
swing the economy one way oranother toward the Democrats.
So that's one of the thingsthey're going to have to deal
with.
But then the hangover, I thinkfrom what happened with the
Biden administration, isactually going to get worse,
because I can't believe this.
Like we thought Jake Tapperwriting a book was crazy and a

(24:49):
little bit nuts because of therole he played in not wanting to
address a lot of the issueswith Biden.

Speaker 2 (24:51):
Well, this one's over the top.
Yeah, Corrine Jean-Pierre,she's now claiming I'm no longer
a Democrat people.
She's going to hype up a memoircalled broken.
I believe it's called broken,or it's at least a book about
the broken administration thatshe served under Biden.
I think this is really richcoming from her.
It says White House PressSecretary Karine Jean-Pierre
announced Wednesday she has leftthe Democratic Party and is
writing a tell-all book aboutthe broken administration she

(25:13):
served.
She's worked as Biden's topspokesperson for two years and
eight months and stunned fellowWhite House alums by announcing
her book.
Oh sorry, her book is calledIndependent a look inside a
broken White House outside theparty lines.
It's expected to come out onOctober 21st.

Speaker 3 (25:30):
The quote, though listen to the quote.
By the way, Hatchet Book isdoing this.

Speaker 2 (25:35):
Hatchet Book Group said in a promotional release,
Jean-Pierre didn't come to herdecision to be an independent
lately.

Speaker 3 (25:41):
This is, I mean, honestly, you thought Jake
Tapper was over the top andyou're like, oh, come on, jake,
this is, I mean, the stuffKareem Jean-Pierre said about
President Biden.
I mean, he runs circles aroundall of us.
Oh yeah, keep up with them.
The fact that you're sayingthese things is totally
inappropriate, I mean, and nowyou see this happen and wanting
to write a book to make somecash, she wants to make money.

Speaker 2 (26:07):
I mean, I said.
I said this exactly after theelection.
What is she going to do now?
Who does she go work for?
Once all of this came out, hercredibility is in the tank.
Right, it's in the toilet.
I mean, I don't know how yourebuild herself and how anybody
would take her at face value.

Speaker 3 (26:21):
Like oh, the goal is staggering.

Speaker 2 (26:22):
She can't be a brand ambassador, she can't be a
public spokesperson for anybody,because now we know all she can
do is get up there and justfunnel out the lies and the
mistruths.
And you know she's trying toclaim.
I guarantee you she's going tobe like I didn't know about this
.
I was snowed as well as youListen to the thunder.
Now I know more and I'm justhere to tell everybody about it.

(26:44):
Just be truthful andtransparent and make some cash.
That is what she's doing.

Speaker 3 (26:48):
She's just making cash now Like it's, it's, it is
all going to be a bunch of whowe.

Speaker 2 (26:52):
I'm not buying her book.

Speaker 3 (26:53):
You're going.
Who we, who we?

Speaker 2 (26:56):
I am and I will not.

Speaker 3 (26:57):
Please try to keep the language under control.

Speaker 2 (26:59):
I will try to keep the language under control, but
here's the thing I'm not goingto buy her.
I'm not buying.

Speaker 3 (27:02):
I bet you're not, and I don't know who does, because
here's one of the things thatyou'd have to ask yourself If
you're her publisher, you sayokay, who buys this book?
Do conservatives buy it?
No Cause, conservatives seethis and go.
Come on, we saw what you didGive me a break, Right right.
So they have your reaction.
If you're on the left of this,you're like I don't want to read
all this nightmare, I want tomove on from this.
It's the last thing I want tobe dealing with.

Speaker 2 (27:24):
Plus, it's coming out in October, by the way.
So you she's delaying this.
I mean you got Tapper's bookout in May.
Her buck doesn't come out tillOctober.
That tells me that she's likehuh.

Speaker 3 (27:34):
Well, if Tapper's doing okay, I guess there's some
money in here for me, Unlessnow, if she comes out and lights
it on fire, if she comes outand says you know stuff that
actually really happened like,versus a sanitized version of it
.

Speaker 2 (27:52):
Oh, you may have something here, I don't know.
Well, I just don't know how you.
Okay, I don't know how she doesboth sides of this story.
Then I don't know how you say Iwas in the dark and I didn't
know.
I don't know what she's goingto try to say.
Maybe she said no, no hold on.

Speaker 3 (27:59):
Maybe she says wait a minute, I knew and I I was part
of it and I'm sorry for that.
I made a mistake.

Speaker 2 (28:05):
No, no way but here's everything that happened.
If she does that, if she comesout, oh man that could be crazy,
Babe, you don't understand.
If she comes out and she's likeI knew about all this and I was
just knowing the Americanpublic.
Yes, the woman will never havea job again.
I'm sorry what I have no idea,but she was a spokesperson.
Was she not for Obama as well?

Speaker 3 (28:27):
Like isn't this like yeah, I think she worked for him
.

Speaker 2 (28:29):
Yeah, she worked for him.
I think this is kind of herwheelhouse marketing and public
spokespeople and being a brandambassador, that kind of thing
Come on after what she's done.

Speaker 3 (28:36):
Look, I don't know what opportunity she has.
I'm just saying this If she'sgoing for what's going on here
with the Boulder attack.
The Boulder attack and againthat was Mohammed Suleiman, all
right, solomon, who goes andlights people on fire in Pearl
Street in Boulder Horrendous.

Speaker 2 (28:58):
Right Anti-Semitic attack Right Peaceful protest.

Speaker 3 (29:00):
Yes, I mean all the people asked for is they were
pro-Israeli demonstrators whosaid release the hostages, I
mean, and the fact there'sanother attack on Jews in this
country is over.
The it's ridiculous right.

Speaker 2 (29:15):
Yeah, we had the couple that were gunned down a
couple weeks ago.
Oh, absolutely in DC.

Speaker 3 (29:28):
I mean, this is the anti-Semitic corner of the
political spectrum here is to mean embarrassment, quite frankly
.

Speaker 2 (29:35):
Well, I hope that these I really do the hope.
I know that the charges theysay are still pending for this
guy, that right now it's a it'sa hate crime and he's got some.
You know he's got other countsagainst him for federal, he's
going to get hammered but hebetter get a terrorist type.

Speaker 3 (29:50):
He will he better feds, though I mean the Trump
administration is not going tolet him off the hook.
Okay.

Speaker 5 (29:55):
That's not yeah this is not a local charge.

Speaker 2 (29:57):
This isn't like the Boulder DA comes in and goes you
see the police in Boulder,originally not wanting to call
it a terrorist attack, and I hada problem with that?

Speaker 3 (30:06):
no, I can understand your point.
I was like give me a break.
This was super obvious what itwas and you're too scared to
even mention that yeah, theseare the feds, though they're not
going to let trumpadministration's not going to
let them get away with this.
So one thing we want to talkabout is is whip this around to
the fact that another attackright here on our soil, and we
talked about sarah adams, whowas a former CIA agent, talking
about the fact that there are anunbelievable amount of

(30:28):
terrorists in this country, andshe went on Glenn Beck's show
and said, basically, you know,this is just the beginning.
I mean, it is worse.
And when you listen to her talkabout some of the numbers and
the fact that we may well haveyears worth of concern on our
hands for what's happenedbecause of an open border, and
now you see people you know justnot vetted, and now they're in
here.
So listen to what Sarah Adamshad to say about that.

Speaker 1 (30:51):
Talking about both the assassinations in Washington
DC and the firebombing inColorado, and you said quote
it's going to get a lot worse.
Coming from you, that carries alittle more weight than it
would coming from me.
What?
What does it mean?
Why do you believe the attacksare about to escalate?

Speaker 8 (31:12):
Well, there's two pieces to it, right?
One is just the fact that we'veallowed kind of like this
radicalization around thispro-Hamas movement and, as you
know, if you don't nip that inthe bud, it becomes militant at
some point.
Right, that's how thosemovements work.
But the other thing is, youknow, because of how we left
Afghanistan and it's this largeterrorist infrastructure, bin

(31:33):
Laden's sons are planninganother 9-11 on US soil and if
we don't get ahead of that, youknow, we have something much
bigger than, obviously, what wesaw in those two places, which
were still horrific events.

Speaker 1 (31:48):
So do you believe that people are already here?
I mean, we've left our bordersopen.
How many terrorists do youthink have come in in the last
four years, and are they alreadyhere?

Speaker 8 (31:56):
Yeah, so I think the majority of them are already
here.
Obviously, every group hasdifferent numbers.
So according to Al-Qaeda, theysent a thousand people here to
participate in that one event.
According to ISIS, they have2,500 terrorists in the United
States who are not here on alegal status, so that doesn't
even account any ISIS memberswho are US citizens, green card

(32:18):
holders or US visa holders.
According to the former head ofAfghans Intelligence Services,
1,000 Afghans here who arelinked to a designated terrorist
organization.
So when you start putting thesenumbers together, we know other
terrorist groups have come in,especially from the fans.
A lot of the Pakistaniterrorist groups have come in.
You know the numbers, probablyin the last four years are

(32:40):
easily over 8000 terrorists havecome in.
Oh my gosh.

Speaker 3 (32:45):
I mean unbelievable, yeah, 8,000.
I mean, this is terrifying whenyou think about the impact and
again you see these smallerevents and you think, well, okay
, not that many people die, it'slike no wrong answer.

(33:10):
Are looking at a an incrediblyscary scenario here, when our
government took the eye off theball and and and willingly just
let people flood in, right andbeing getting desynthesized to
it is not the right answer.

Speaker 2 (33:18):
Being like you know, this is.
Oh, this wasn't that bad, thisis.
You know, there's been worse,those kind of things.
What's it going to Some majorevent like a 9-11 for people to
wake up Like I hope not.

Speaker 3 (33:29):
The way she says it.
It could be far worse than 9-11, right?
Okay?
So then Tom Homan comes out,and he had these comments on
what he has seen on the groundand what his concerns are.

Speaker 10 (33:39):
What concerned me the most was they created the
biggest national securityvulnerability this country's
ever seen.
Not only did two million knowngotaways, two million people
crossed the border.
We don't know who they are,where they came from.
We don't know where they arenow.
On top of that, even throughthe legal process, the Biden
administration were bringingpeople unvetted, handing out

(34:01):
work fees like they're candy,while they sat here and planned
something bad.
We are going to be dealing withthis for the next 10 years
because of the chaos theycreated.
In four years.
We're out there kicking butt.
We're arresting a lot ofcriminal aliens.
We're out there looking for thebad guy and when we're out
there doing that, Sean, we gotprotesters assaulting ICE

(34:22):
officers.
We got members of Congress allover the country going to ICE
facilities raising hell, sayingthis is your oversight
responsibility.
Where was the oversightresponsibility when 10.5 million
illegal aliens came across theborder?
Where is the oversightresponsibility?
I'm releasing over 8 millionillegal aliens to this country.
Where is the oversightresponsibility then?
This is an attack on ICE.

(34:42):
This is an attack on the Trumpadministration.
We're trying to fix the damagedone by Biden.

Speaker 3 (34:48):
So and, by the way, so the latest on this
information and the latest onthe Boulder suspect right, they
have taken tried to take hisfamily and deport them right.
All right.
So, and of course this is theUSA Today, take on this.

Speaker 2 (35:05):
Right Boulder suspect's daughter dreamed of
studying medicine.
Now she faces deportation.

Speaker 3 (35:10):
Yeah, okay, so give me a break, right?
I mean, it's unbelievable.

Speaker 2 (35:14):
Well then, maybe your dad shouldn't have tried to
light people on fire withMolotov cocktails.

Speaker 3 (35:18):
And again, you don't have a right in this.
By the way, they all came inillegally.
But even if they had a visa,you don't have a right to these
visas.
You don't.
You don't get a right to it.
You the pleasure of theAmerican people.
And so, of course, MichaelLoria, you know, misses the
concept completely.
And then Jonathan Lemire todayon Morning Joe talking about

(35:43):
this, as if the Trumpadministration is being heavy
handed with trying to remove thefamily.

Speaker 4 (35:47):
Making an example is understating it really.
You know the White House almostgloating at Victory Lab, a
number of tweets last nightabout you know about this
suspect's family rushing themout.
You know, and I was told by aWhite House advisor late
yesterday that you know this issort of the plan here.
We know from covering DonaldTrump for a long time.

(36:09):
His reflex is always to comeback to immigration.
He believes that's a signatureissue, he believes that's what
got him elected, and thenAmericans want to see things
like this now in this.

Speaker 3 (36:18):
Yeah, you're right, they do.
Americans want to see the factthat if you have a terrorist in
the country, he and his familynumber one.
He should pay the price and hisfamily should be gone.
I'm sorry, but give me a breakand not talking about the
victim's families at all.

Speaker 2 (36:30):
Like, how about talking about that today on
Morning Joe instead of oh, thispoor guy who lit these people on
fire in a hate crime, in aterrorist attack, His poor
family's going to have to bedeported.
Who are here illegally?
Give me a break on all of that,and I'm sorry.

Speaker 3 (36:43):
I was looking this up as you're talking.

Speaker 2 (36:45):
Yeah, we're filming you looking things up.
I know I'm sorry about that.
That was not great.

Speaker 3 (36:50):
Admittedly, my producing is leave something to
be desired.
Headline deportation of Boulderterror suspect Mohammed
Suleiman's wife and fivechildren, blocked by a Biden
appointed judge.
Oh, of course so the judge isyet again, another district
court judge decides oh, I'mgoing to become president now
and I'm going to stop them frombeing shipped out.

(37:10):
It says the family of aColorado terror suspect won't be
tossed from the United Statesfor now.
After a Biden appointed judgeslammed the brakes on their
imminent deportation onWednesday, solomon's wife and
let's see here their daughterand two more minor daughters and
two more minor sons were alldetained and faced swift
deportation before Judge GordonGallagher stepped in.

(37:32):
Defendants shall not remove thefamily from the United States
unless and until the court orthe court of appeals for the
10th circuit vacates this order.

Speaker 2 (37:41):
He said so again, yet again, we know where this judge
is from.
Is it in Colorado or is it adifferent?

Speaker 3 (37:46):
I don't know, not sure.
Okay, I know this just came out, but just what?
It don't ask me quiz questions,you know, and a breaking news
situation.

Speaker 2 (37:54):
Okay.

Speaker 3 (37:55):
It's breaking news.
How long has he?

Speaker 2 (37:56):
been on the bench.
Seriously, who is this cat?
Let's talk about this.
No, we do need to have somebodycome in and talk about these
judges overreaching and I don'tunderstand where they suddenly,
you know, I love that the judgeslike there was some sort of
comic drawing about the judgescalling Trump like this, you
know this overreacher and thisman of, like the tyrannical

(38:16):
power, and then meanwhile, thejudges are the actual tyrannical
powers that are trying to likeoverstep their domain.

Speaker 3 (38:23):
No, it's like Trump.
No, what was the Babylon Bheadline Trump?
In an effort to gain more power, trump becomes a district court
judge.
You know, it's just like.
It's ridiculous, okay, so we'llsee.
It's just like, come on, it'sridiculous, okay, so we'll see.
But yet another situationbreaking news right now.
Sorry that you had to watch melook it up, but okay, let's talk
economy.

Speaker 2 (38:40):
Yeah, and Elon Musk not happy today or not happy
yesterday.
Here's his tweet talking aboutthe big, beautiful bill.
He says I'm sorry, I just can'tstand it anymore.
This massive, outrageous,pork-filled congressional
spending bill is a disgustingabomination.
Shame on those who voted for it.
You know you did wrong and youknow it Okay.

Speaker 3 (38:58):
Okay, so why did he do this?

Speaker 2 (39:00):
Well, according to Axios, it says, the sources
familiar with the Trump-Muskrelationship say there appear to
be four inflection points thatled to basically Elon coming out
against Trump's bill.
First, the legislation cuts theelectric vehicle tax credit
that helps car makers like Tesla.
As of late April, his companyhas spent at least $240,000
lobbying on behalf of the creditand other company matters

(39:23):
Behind the scenes.
Sources say Musk also advocatedfor the measure in legislation,
but to no avail.
Number two Musk was working atthe White House as what's being
called a special governmentemployee and he had discussed
trying to stay in that rolebeyond the 130-day time limit
set by the statute for theunpaid advisory position, but
ultimately White House officialssaid he couldn't keep serving

(39:45):
in that capacity.

Speaker 3 (39:45):
They sort of you know maybe muscled him out a little
bit.

Speaker 2 (39:48):
Maybe so?
Number three Musk also wantedthe Federal Aviation
Administration to use hisStarlink satellite system for
national air traffic control,the sources said.
But the administration balkedat it because of the appearance
of a conflict of interest andfor technological, technological
reasons, I can't say that word.
You can't have air trafficcontrol just run off of
satellites, the second sourcesaid.

(40:09):
And finally, the fourth pointthe final straw for Musk
appeared to come Saturday night,when Trump abruptly announced
he was withdrawing thenomination of Jared Isaacman, a
Musk ally, to be the NASAadministrator.

Speaker 3 (40:21):
Okay, yeah, and again , it's Axios who knows if any of
that stuff is true, but thereality of the situation is what
we're looking at now is thisbill is a huge deal.
You can't break the bill downinto separate bills, okay, or
else with a lot of it, you'dneed 60 votes.
They want to do 51 votes.
They want the reconciliationpackage.
They want to not have to go andget 60 votes, which you would

(40:44):
have to get in the Senate inmost cases if you broke a bunch
of this bill out.
So it's a big, onerous billthat you got to get a ton of
people on board with.
And right now, I think part ofthe objection that we've had
when you have people like BenRay and Melanie Stansbury
showing up in New Mexico sayingyou're all going to lose
coverage, everything they haveno idea why, because there
hasn't been a bill passed yet.

Speaker 2 (41:03):
Right, they have no clue that they have no clue.

Speaker 3 (41:05):
So.
So in the Senate they're goingto have to tweak the bill.
There's no doubt it's going tolook different coming out of the
Senate, going back to the House.
And then they're going to do,they're going to have to
conference again and figure outwhat to do with the bill, right,
I mean?
And then eventually it'll bevoted on in both chambers again.
So we're a ways away from theprocess.
But just one quick soundbitefrom Scott Jennings on what's

(41:26):
happening with this and whythere's there's a long way still
to go on all this.

Speaker 11 (41:30):
I wasn't surprised because I had spoken to him
about what was motivating hisservice in Washington a few
weeks ago and he told me he'shere to try to make America not
go bankrupt.
I mean this is on his mind.
We have a $36 trillion debt andit should be on all of our
minds.
So that's number one.
Number two I don't think thatwe're done with the bill yet.
I mean, as you know and as thereporting says, lots of changes

(41:53):
are going to have to be made inthe Senate to get it out of the
Senate and then those will haveto be reconciled.
The reconciliation will have tobe reconciled with the House
and more changes still may come.
So you know, I guess I wantmultiple things.
I want the president to get hisagenda and the agenda, the core
part of this and the thing thatis not negotiable is the
extension and making permanentthe tax cuts, investment in

(42:14):
border security, energyderegulation, the biggest
welfare reform in recent history.
I mean these are non-negotiable.
I think to the president,because it's what he ran on, but
the Republicans should listenhere to Elon when it comes to
the national debt.
We have work to do on this, wehave governing responsibility
and maybe it doesn't come inthis bill but the rescissions

(42:35):
packages to come and our otherwork to come here Getting a
handle on a $36 trillion debt isnot going to be easy, but it is
necessary because this is notsustainable.

Speaker 2 (42:51):
Well, yeah, I think it's interesting to see, like,
what is Elon really upset about?
Like was Axios right, or isthis really like there wasn't
enough cuts and this was justgoing to be too much more spend
and it's not getting our debtunder control, which is what he
was kind of in charge of withdoge?
So is he kind of feeling likeall this work we did for doge is
for nothing?
It maybe, maybe there'ssomething to that in this yeah,
I can understand you you know,and who knows?

Speaker 3 (43:10):
I mean he's very, though, so it's not like we
won't know, but yeah, and I alsothink but I think Scott's point
too that I thought wasimportant as well in addition to
what you're saying is that thewhole debt thing is a massive
cliff.
It's a massive cliff Like we'vetalked about it multiple times
on the show.
It's scary, like we cannotcontinue to look at a debt of

(43:31):
$37 trillion and think we canjust keep kicking the can down
the road.
You can't do that.
In fact, you're seeing more andmore that even in the Wall
Street Journal this article inthe Wall Street Journal here
Wall Street is sounding thealarm on the US debt and you
start listening to what they'resaying about it.
We cannot ignore this anymoreand we've said this it can't
continue and you have to beginat least getting the spending

(43:54):
under control here, and I thinkthere may be some you know, weak
need Republicans who don'tnecessarily want to do this.
Well, guess what?
You do have to do it now.
You may have to do it the rightway, of course, and make sure
you're not hurting people whoneed things.
But but again, if you don't dothis now, everyone will be hurt
when you finally takeresponsibility for it, and you
can see some people on wallstreet getting nervous right.

Speaker 2 (44:14):
So here's a little bit of that story.
It says so.
Why are several suddenlyworried?
Because the math is gettingdaunting, with interest on the
debt blowing past 1 trillionannually and Washington acting
recklessly.
Even people who have issuedpast warnings deserve a second
hearing.
A hedge fund manager, ray Dalio, does have something to say to
sell sorry his book howCountries Go Broke, which came

(44:36):
out Tuesday.
It's hardly staking hisreputation on royalties and his
arguments are compelling.
Dalio told Bloomberg he givesAmerica three years give or take
a year to avert an economicheart attack.
Let me read that again he'sgiving, I mean Dalio's told
Bloomberg.
It gives America three yearsgive or take to avert an

(44:58):
economic heart attack.
Peter Orszag, chief executiveof investment bank Lazard and a
former budget director, wrotelast week that quote those who
bemoaned the instability ofdeficient spending and debt
levels back during his time ingovernment seemed to cry wolf a
lot.
Well, now he's worried too,because the wolf is lurking much

(45:18):
closer to our door.

Speaker 3 (45:19):
Oh geez.
So now he cares about thedeficit, now that he's in the
debt, that he's out ofgovernment, now, yeah, it's kind
of crazy.
No, exactly, so I, this stuff isnot.
So then Scott Beston has comeout, and so he's really been
very, very good at sort oflaying out what are we really
trying to do here, so that itmakes sense.
And for someone who's as smartas Besson is, he doesn't talk

(45:41):
over people's heads.
He tends to say things thatmake sense.
So here's what he said on Facethe Nation just a couple of days
ago.

Speaker 5 (45:48):
Morgan's Diamond also predicted a debt market crisis.
Cracks in the bond market, waswhat he said.
You are considering easing someregulations, you've said, for
the big banks.
How do you avoid that bondmarket crisis, he's predicting
spreading and really causingconcern, particularly with all
of the worries about Americandebt right now.

Speaker 7 (46:10):
So again, I've known Jamie a long time and for his
entire career he's madepredictions like this.
Fortunately, none of them havecome true.
That's why he's a banker, agreat banker.
He tries to look around thecorner.
One of the reasons I'm sittinghere talking to you today and
not at home watching your showis that I was concerned about
the level of debt.
So the deficit last year and intwo years it will be lower

(46:33):
again.
We are going to bring thedeficit down slowly.
We didn't get here in one year.
We didn't get here in one year,and this has been a long
process.
So the goal is to bring it downover the next four years, leave
the country in great shape in2028.

Speaker 5 (46:49):
You know that the Speaker of the House estimates
that this is going to add $4 to$5 trillion over the next 10
years.
This is key here, what he sayshere.

Speaker 7 (46:56):
Well, again, Margaret , that's CBO scoring.

Speaker 5 (47:00):
That's the Speaker of the House.

Speaker 7 (47:01):
No, no, no.

Speaker 5 (47:02):
He said it last Sunday on this program.

Speaker 7 (47:05):
He said that's the CBO scoring.

Speaker 5 (47:07):
No, he said, that sounds right.

Speaker 7 (47:08):
Let me tell you what's not included in there,
what can't be scored.
So we're taking in substantialtariff income right now.
So there are estimates thatthat could be another $2
trillion, that we are pushingthrough savings.
So my estimate is that could beup to another $100 billion a
year.
So over the 10-year window thatcould be a trillion.

(47:30):
President has a prescriptiondrug plan with the
pharmaceutical companies thatcould substantially push down
costs for prescription drugs andthat could be another trillion.
So there's the four.

Speaker 3 (47:44):
Okay, so interesting stuff, and it's stuff we've
talked about before, which isit's going to be a combination
of savings.
It's going to be a combinationof tariff income.
It's going to be a combinationof savings.
It's going to be a combinationof tariff income.
It's going to be a combinationof expanding the overall
economic pie to generate morerevenue.
Like all those things have tohappen, and so he's a very
interesting carrier.
The message does a really goodjob in many cases, just to make

(48:05):
sure that it makes some sense.
So we'll see.
But the reason we talk aboutthis is because this is going to
be a huge issue.
It's a massive issue across theboard, and this, this bill, has
to come through, because thereason you have to have
something come through is, ifyou don't, 82 percent of
Americans will see their taxesincrease significantly.
That Trump tax cut in 2017,anyone who tells you that it was

(48:26):
a tax cut for the rich doesn'tknow what they're talking about,
and so it was one of the mosteffective tax cuts for middle
income and lower incomeAmericans, and it has to be
continued.
If you go and start to ratchetup taxes on low income and
middle income Americans, it willbe absolutely devastating.

Speaker 2 (48:44):
Well, I just think again, we need to get all the
information about the bigbeautiful bill and what's
actually going to happen, and wehave no idea what that is right
now.
So we still have a lot ofwaiting it out, basically to see
what the Senate does, and Ijust think it's kind of crazy to
see our house I mean our repsin this state coming already to
do these tours to scare peopleabout cuts that may or may not

(49:05):
happen.
And again we're talking aboutcuts.
That are people that should beable to work, that should be
able to go back, apply for a joband get work and get off of
assistance or as much ofassistance, yeah.

Speaker 3 (49:16):
That's what's talking about.
Nobody's proposing cuttingbenefits for those who need it?

Speaker 2 (49:20):
No well, but that is what the fear driving mongers
are that's politics, right?

Speaker 3 (49:25):
I mean, you're going to get out there and you're
going to start.

Speaker 2 (49:27):
I would like to make sure that voters and just
residents of New Mexico aresmarter than that and are not
falling for stuff that's nottrue.

Speaker 3 (49:35):
But I think also, what you'll find over time is
the whole oh my gosh, yourSocial Security check's going
away and it doesn't happen.
There's a cost to that.
There's a cost to saying allthese things are going to happen
and when they don't, you looklike you don't know what you're
talking about you look like acrying wolf, well, right and
again, but that this happens inpolitics all the time.
so the so the question is what?

(49:55):
You know where?
Where does this policy go?
What impact does it have onmain street?
And if it has the impact ofwell, there's really no impact
at all, then then you're goingto see those numbers which
harriet was talking about earlyin the show not changing or
continuing to slide to the right.
So that's just just a fact,right?

Speaker 6 (50:11):
So that's where it goes.
All right, now, here we go Igot bad news for you.

Speaker 10 (50:15):
All right so here we go.

Speaker 3 (50:16):
So last two stories here unhealthiest bottled drinks
on the planet this isfascinating.
Okay, there's a bunch of them,but I grabbed the top three.

Speaker 5 (50:26):
Okay.

Speaker 3 (50:26):
Okay, so one.
Well, all three of them arepretty well known, and number
three on the list is theFrappuccino.

Speaker 9 (50:32):
Okay, I mean these are delicious.

Speaker 3 (50:33):
If you've ever had one they are delicious, there's
no doubt, they're 270 caloriessaturated fat three grams.

Speaker 2 (50:40):
You got to just think of it like a dessert.
Yeah, you have to think of,these are like no, you're right,
you're right.

Speaker 3 (50:44):
And if you're having one every morning, it's like
yeah, it's not probably right.
And so they talk about what thedeal is, and basically she says
it's a sugar laden dessertdisguised as a coffee beverage.
So I totally get that right.
46 grams of sugar that's a ton,right?
That's a ton of sugar, Allright.
Number two our girls like thisstuff.
Yes, Arizona green tea withginseng and honey.
You think oh my gosh ginseng,is this healthy Look?

(51:07):
At it, it's all marketed.
Oh, it looks beautiful.
And the issue here well, partof the issue is the fact that
you look at it and you say, oh,it has 130 calories, but that's
half the bottle.
So you drink the whole bottleand you're at 260 calories and
68 grams of sugar.

Speaker 2 (51:27):
Right, and it's also with high fructose corn syrup
which I'm anti you know I'm veryanti that yes.

Speaker 3 (51:33):
So all right, so not great.
And then the last one this bumsme out.
This is Christy's go-tobreakfast.
It is my go-to.

Speaker 2 (51:40):
Maybe the chocolate one isn't as bad as the vanilla?

Speaker 3 (51:43):
No, it's every bit as bad.
What is wrong with it?
So go ahead and read.
Go ahead.

Speaker 2 (51:46):
Okay, so this is my Core Power Fair Fair Life
protein shake, which I lovethese I love Fair Life.
actually, we drink Fair Lifemilk because it's great and it's
easy to digest and all thesethings I'm really upset about
that.
Core Power protein shakes mayseem like a convenient
post-workout drink, but a closerlook at the ingredients reveals
several health concerns.
They use non-organic,conventional dairy, which often

(52:09):
comes with GMO corn and soy andmay contain residues of hormones
and antibiotics.
Okay, and then the addition ofcarrageenan, a thickening agent
linked to gut inflammation andirritation.

Speaker 3 (52:21):
Yeah, there it is.
So, I don't know.
I don't know what to tell you,but it just is, it's an issue.

Speaker 2 (52:26):
It's an issue and listen, fairlife, I love your
drink.
So whatever that thickeningagent is, get that thing out of
there, because I love your drink, so whatever that.

Speaker 3 (52:38):
That thickening agent is.
Get that thing out of there,Cause I love this protein shake
and it's so much easier to grabone and drink it than make my
own every day.
I agree Fair life's great stuff.
So, by the way, also on thelist was fair life chocolate
milk.
That was on the list too.
It was not top five, but it wastop 10.

Speaker 2 (52:48):
Just because they're not, because it's not organic.

Speaker 3 (52:50):
Yeah, there were yes.

Speaker 2 (52:51):
I mean that's kind of the issue, that it's not
organic.

Speaker 3 (52:53):
Yeah, there's a bunch in the filtering and all this
other jazz I don't know, anyway,so that's that.

Speaker 2 (52:57):
Okay, now, here you go.
Here's what you've been waitingfor, people.
Yep, this is it.
Viral video of Bigfoot.

Speaker 3 (53:08):
Yes, sir, it's true, it was of this eye is a bison it
has nothing to do with Bigfoot.
But anyway, you want to see thevideo.

Speaker 2 (53:16):
Oh, we cannot wait.
I'm sure it's going to be closeup, it's going to be in focus.

Speaker 3 (53:20):
Well, here we go.
Because, with today's cameraequipment, Right, yeah, so here
we go.
I'll turn down the volume on it, but okay, see him right there
in the middle, right, rightthere, barely.
Look at him, right there,barely.
Okay, all right, he looks likeChaka from Land of the Lost a
little bit.
Okay, look at him, though.
Look at him kind of peeringaround.
Look at this.
Do you think he's in a?
I don't know, this could belegit right here.

(53:42):
Okay, here's okay, look at him.
You think it's somebody in asuit.

Speaker 2 (53:47):
Well, here's the thing there's a very popular
restaurant in Denver called CasaBonita Gross, and they have a
guy that dresses up in a gorillasuit, or they used to anyway.
Okay, and so they could havegot this gorilla suit from Casa
Bonita.

Speaker 7 (54:00):
Right.

Speaker 2 (54:01):
And gone up into hills of color.

Speaker 3 (54:03):
They might.
Is that what color is the suit?
Oh, it's black.
It's super cheesy.
Yeah, see, this is brown.

Speaker 2 (54:07):
This is legit, I'm just being funny, because I'm
from Colorado and everybodythat's been from Colorado grew
up going to Casa Bonita andseeing the guy in the gorilla
suit Like it's kind of a thing.

Speaker 3 (54:16):
All right, that's good to know.

Speaker 2 (54:18):
So you see the he's the gorilla.
That's the gorilla.
That is not Bigfoot, that lookslike a gorilla out there.

Speaker 3 (54:23):
It looks like a Bigfoot.
I mean that.

Speaker 2 (54:25):
Okay, and here's my issue, though, again, mark, is
why do we only a lot like howare cameras only able to get
just?
I mean, what is this guy like amile away?
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (54:38):
Yeah Well, these again they go through wormholes
in time, guy, they're just thisis not.
They don't just live in somecave, somewhere.
They're in another dimensionand then they're coming in.

Speaker 2 (54:48):
It's hard to get them zoomed in with our iphones
because they're coming from adifferent dimension well, that's
why you don't see, that's whyyou never see any carcass or
anything like that.
You know, you know, we don'tsee any.

Speaker 3 (54:59):
What carcass that's more than one carcass, uh, so I
don't know if it's really calledcarcass, but you want to say
carcasses what are you, what areyou listening to?
No, I'm not listening toanything, I'm just telling you
bigfoot is coming from awormhole in time yes, I mean,
they're time travelers okay,that's the thought now with
bigfoot.

Speaker 2 (55:17):
By the way, that's the prevailing thought on
bigfoot well, that's theprevailing thought, on ufos too,
which we've talked about.
But again, here's my concern isthat at least the ufo videos
have gotten better over time, atleast the things that people
are saying hey, I think this isa UFO.
Yeah, They've gotten sharperand clearer and you know they've
held it for a long time.
Right, Um, Bigfoot remainsalways super duper far away.

(55:40):
Yeah, we can't get any closer.
I mean our camera equipment.
I mean we can find galaxies outof our light.

Speaker 3 (55:47):
Have you seen a snow leopard walking around?

Speaker 2 (55:49):
No, Does it mean they don't exist?
No, it means they're very, veryOkay.
But I'll tell you this I knowwhat a snow leopard actually
looks like because somebodyactually zoomed in and got a
really clear photo of a snowleopard.
I have yet to see somebody zoomin and get a really close
capture of Bigfoot.

Speaker 3 (56:05):
Again, because they're time travelers.
The fact that you don'tunderstand this is ridiculous.
All right, all right, so thanksfor joining us.
I you know I don't know what tosay about Christy.
I apologize for her attitude,but we will be back with you.

Speaker 2 (56:16):
We'll come back with a time traveler Bigfoot expert
at some point, If you guys knowone, I mean please write in.
Is there one in New Mexico sowe can hurt our credibility even
more and just have them come onand talk about it.

Speaker 3 (56:29):
That's not true.
We're not going to hurtanything.
We're going to give you thedetails on this and I'll tell
you what.
When we find out that they aretime travelers and Christy's
wrong we're going to have toapologize.

Speaker 2 (56:38):
Planet of the apes yes that's exactly right, all
right.

Speaker 3 (56:41):
Well, thanks for joining us and we'll see you
back here coming up on Sunday.

Speaker 6 (56:45):
You've been listening to the no doubt about it
podcast.
We hope you've enjoyed the show.
We know we had a blast.
Make sure to like, rate andreview.
We'll be back soon, but in themeantime you can find us on
Instagram and Facebook at noDoubt About it Podcast.

Speaker 9 (57:03):
No doubt about it.

Speaker 6 (57:06):
The no Doubt About it Podcast is a Choose Adventure
Media production.
See you next time on no DoubtAbout it.

Speaker 3 (57:14):
There is no doubt about it.