3-28-25 - 7am - DOGE Changing The Culture

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Good morning Dragon, Good morning Mathousa.

Speaker 2 (00:04):
Mike.

Speaker 1 (00:04):
You almost sound giddy over all that Trump and Doze
and Elon are getting accomplished. Seems like it's a new
day in America. I doubt we could have gotten all
this done with any other presidential nominee. I'm sure that
demon rants will find some way to throw over and.

Speaker 2 (00:26):
Tune it well.

Speaker 3 (00:28):
You know, I guess I have to disagree with you
a little bit because I think the only thing that
we could have done a little differently was we could
elect elected Kamala Harris because I think when you when
you think about the the brilliance of an Elon Musk
and all the other members of this team that were
interviewed last night, Uh, what they really need is they

(00:49):
need someone supporting them that has the intelligence, the ability
to articulate the thoughts in her head and to be
a leader. I think Kamala Harris maybe could have gotten
them to the next level of mediocrity. They would have
been like it had been so mediocre that you would

(01:13):
have been, you know, make make American mediocre again. Make
America mediocre. Main, Make Mamus.

Speaker 2 (01:23):
Main.

Speaker 4 (01:23):
It's a m a.

Speaker 3 (01:24):
I mean, we're gonna make a y make American mediocre
again or main make American. Mama, Mama, that's it, Mama mama.
I want to fast forward through some of this. They're
changing the culture, which is one of the most difficult.

Speaker 2 (01:46):
Things to do in any organization.

Speaker 3 (01:50):
If you understand, if if you study organizations as organisms
at all, you understand that there there's a there's a culture,
that there's a culture in this building. And man, if
you ever want to, you know, give me a few
shots at tequila or some good margarita's and get me
on air and let me talk about the culture in

(02:10):
this building. And well it'll be my last program. But
the culture is endemic, and it's just it saturates everything
and what they're really trying to do. And I think
I don't have that this particular part. But one of
these gentlemen at some point points out that there are

(02:32):
a lot of and I've always said this too, that
there are a lot of civil servants that really want
to do the right thing, but they're so boxed in
by rules and regulations, and they're so boxed in by
this culture of this is the way we've always done it,
attitude and a culture of let's get by with the
least amount of effort that those who really want to

(02:53):
try to make a difference, those who really want to
do the right thing, find it incredibly difficult to do so.
And so they're changing the culture. Now, how are they
doing that? Because if you've got mh Yeah, if I

(03:16):
had someone that I absolutely thought was expert, that was
that I admired, respected that I you know, let's put
it this way. If if Rush Limbaugh was still alive

(03:39):
and Rush law Rush Limbaugh heard this program and Rush said,
you know what, I'm going to fly out to Denver
and I'm gonna sit down with Michael Brown and I'm
going to uh, you know, doing do an air check,
you know where they He's going to play some sound
bites like I'm doing right now. And he said, you know,

(04:01):
I think that you could be more excerpt y or
whatever the you know, the scriptor might be if you
did this, or have you thought about trying this, or
I'm here to empower you to be yourself even more.
You know, I really do think I am myself. I
pride myself on what you hear on this program.

Speaker 2 (04:25):
Is me not scripted?

Speaker 5 (04:28):
Not?

Speaker 6 (04:30):
I really don't.

Speaker 3 (04:32):
I'm gonna say something that if they're listening. I'll probably
get my asked you out for but i'd call somebody
that cares.

Speaker 2 (04:39):
I really don't care.

Speaker 3 (04:40):
I used to have a program it's not my current
program director, but I used to have a program director
that once a week but call me into his office
and say and he'd have little fifteen second snippet to
something I said, and he would he would criticize the
use of a word or the speed of by which

(05:04):
I was transmitting words, or he'd have but but in
everything positive, just always a criticism of you need to
change this, you need to do that, blah blah blah.
And I'd walk out of that office just down this
hallway every single time, and I would just ignore everything

(05:24):
that he said, literally everything that he said, because I thought, one,
you're not me. Two, my sponsors and my audience and
my metrics seemed to be all pretty good. So you're
just trying to be uh, you're you're trying to justify

(05:46):
your job. He said, exactly what the person was doing,
and they were trying to show corporate.

Speaker 2 (05:51):
Oh yeah.

Speaker 3 (05:52):
I brought the talent in and I sat down with
the talent and we had a conversation about how he
can prove blah blah. It was a bysal bull crab,
total bull, you know what. So I just totally ignored it.
Nice guy. I didn't respect him as a boss, just
did not. If Limbaugh came in here, someone who I

(06:14):
adored and respected and gave me some constructive advice, I'd
probably take it. I'd probably listen. That's what these guys
are doing. These guys, these titans of industry, these successful
and I don't mean successful in terms of what their
bank account looks like. I'm talking about They've created organizations

(06:36):
and they've empowered their the members of that organization, their
employees to do the best they can, and they reward
them and they and they they thrive on merit. And
now they're coming into an organization that is devoid of
all of that and saying.

Speaker 2 (06:53):
Look, we want to show you. Look you.

Speaker 3 (06:55):
We know you've been struggling with an out of dated,
outdated IT system them that's a piece of crap. That
and we know you've been banging your head trying to
get it changed. And for ten years you've you know,
you've been here for twenty years. You've been trying to
change it for ten years, and you can't get it done.
We're coming here from the outside and we're going to
help you get it done. Well, you know what that does.

(07:16):
That changes the culture. That gives those bureaucrats who want
to do the right thing hope that they can actually
accomplish and make their job more efficient and better. Now,
that's not all bureaucrats, because, as I'm telling you from
personal experience, I would say, just in general terms, half

(07:40):
of them are really good and half of them are
really bad. And that's being generous. So they're changing the culture.
And here's an example of what I mean by that.

Speaker 2 (07:53):
Fine, we're changing the culture.

Speaker 7 (07:54):
The culture is been not a lot of caring and
not a lot of commitment to doing what's right. Relative
to financial operations, there's a five hundred million dollars a
fraud every year. There's one hundreds of million dollars in
improper payments, and we can't pass it on it. The
Consolidated Financial Report is produced by Treasury, and we cannot

(08:15):
pass it on. We have material weaknesses. What that means
is that if I was a public company CFO, I
would effectively be removed. I couldn't file financial statements, I
couldn't issue securities.

Speaker 8 (08:26):
Can't pass it on the federal cannot pass it, can
orta it's impossible. Impact. In order to pass over quote,
you need the information messtery and pass ordage. You need
to have the payment codes, you need to have the
payment explanation, and you need to have a person you
can contact to understand why that payment was made.

Speaker 4 (08:45):
None of those things were.

Speaker 8 (08:45):
Mandatory until until just recently, just a few weeks ago, fact,
maybe last week.

Speaker 7 (08:50):
We're serving five hundred and eighty plus agencies, and up
until very recently, effectively they could say make the payment
and Treasury just sent it out as pass as possib
no verification. And so what we're doing is what any
household would do. But imagine you're a household. Do you
have a bank account. Everyone has an ATM card connect
to that account, Everyone has a checkbook of that account.

(09:12):
It's not just your children, it's not just your parents
and your in lass, it's your extended family, and they
all can go to the account and disperse funds, no
questions asked, no justification, no verification.

Speaker 2 (09:24):
Can you imagine that? Now?

Speaker 3 (09:26):
That's what they meant when they discovered at the Treasury
Department that we have a air quote here a bank account.
In fact, at one point in the interview they said,
we found on one particular day there was eight hundred
billion dollars in this one bank account, one account, eight
hundred billion dollars in it, and everyone had access to it.

(09:49):
And so what they would do it Treasury is as
all these five hundred plus different departments and agencies, the cabinet,
the sub cabinet and everybody else, you know, like you
take AHHS. At one point they talked about how in
HHS there were dozens and dozens of CIOs, like I
have seventy or something. I forget what the number was.

(10:10):
It was an it was an absurd number. Well, imagine
that all of these people having access to the account
and you just you just withdraw the money, no paper trail, nothing,
You just withdraw the money. That does nothing but create
the opportunity for waste, fraud.

Speaker 2 (10:30):
And abuse.

Speaker 3 (10:32):
The founder of or the co founder of Airbnb, is
working with DOGE to digitize this antiquated retirement process, which
is literally housed in twenty two thousand filing cabinets in
that iron mountain cave in Pennsylvania.

Speaker 2 (10:51):
And when he.

Speaker 9 (10:51):
Described one probably back in February, and he told me
something about a mine that is dealt with retirement, and
they said it needs somebody to help out to fix
retirement in the government. I love the challenge, so I
jumped on board. And it turns out there is actually
a mine in Pennsylvania that houses every paper document for

(11:12):
the retirement process in the government.

Speaker 6 (11:14):
Now picture this.

Speaker 9 (11:15):
This giant cave has twenty two thousand filing cabinets stacked
ten high to house four hundred million pieces of paper.
It's a process that started in the nineteen fifties and
largely hasn't changed in the last seventy years.

Speaker 4 (11:29):
And so as he dug into it, we.

Speaker 9 (11:30):
Found a retirement cases that had so much paper they
had to fit it on a shipping palate.

Speaker 6 (11:37):
So the process takes many months, and we're.

Speaker 4 (11:39):
Going to make it just many days.

Speaker 9 (11:41):
Well be digitized or absolutely so this will be an
online digital process that will take just a few days
at most. I really think, you know, it's an injustice
to civil servants who are subjected to these processes that
are older than the age of half the people watching
your show tonight. So we really belie believe that the
government can have an Apple Store like experience if we

(12:04):
designed crazier experience modern systems.

Speaker 3 (12:08):
He went on to describe how you would have to
you want to retire from the federal government, you have
to take a training course. Now, Dragon and I laugh
about some of the dumbass, duplicative, stupid training courses that
we take, same one year after year after year after year.

(12:29):
So it never changes, always the same thing. Why because
somebody corporate is too lazy to actually care about the training.
It's just, oh, they need to do training on you know,
emergency alert systems, so eas So we've got it. We've
got a module that does that, and we'll just we'll
just do it until the FCC or somebody really cares

(12:51):
and changes it and really makes it, you know, worthwhile.
So we know what the questions are, we know what
the answers are, and we just go through it every
single year. You'd have to go through a training process
like that that everybody else does. It would take months
just so you could retire, and then the retirement would
all be handwritten documents, literally, hand filling out documents. It's absurd,

(13:16):
utterly absurd, But that's the kind of thing they've got,
they've they've got going on. At one point they're asked,
and Tyler Hassen says that he left.

Speaker 2 (13:27):
This is the eye that left the five businesses.

Speaker 10 (13:29):
He says that do you guys all see this as
a patriotic duty?

Speaker 4 (13:33):
Is that really what this is about? It's a central sock.

Speaker 5 (13:37):
I I was running five businesses in Houston and I
left that. I left great people to do this, and
my wonderful wife said go for it, and here I am.
But I feel like this is me giving back to
the country.

Speaker 8 (13:52):
If we don't do this or song, the ship unless
unless it's exercise and successful, the ship of them cool sink.

Speaker 2 (14:01):
That's why they're doing now.

Speaker 3 (14:05):
I love the altruism and I love the idea that
they're they're sacrificing to do this. Now, let's be realistic.
They're in positions where they can do this. You know,
if you ask me to step away from this, I
could do it for a while, but I you know,

(14:25):
would I have any guarantee that I heart would take
me back if I said, hey, I'm going to go
to DC to help doge for six months or even
one hundred and thirty days. They're in a position to
do it. And while they're in a position to do it.
We ought to recognize that those who attack the millionaires

(14:47):
and billionaires in this country can just shut up and
go to hell as far as I'm concerned, because I
don't care how much money they have have, I don't
care how successful they've been. They are themselves sacrificing in

(15:08):
order to do this, and we ought to recognize that
there is a dragon. Won't let me play it because
there's too many f moms in it. But I think
I've got Let's see, I thought we had. Yes, I
want to tell you what this woman says. I can't
play it, but I'll tell you what she says. I

(15:31):
just want to tell all U mforts to know that
the only reason there isn't enough to go around for everybody,
and I mean everybody, the plants, the animals, the people,
the trumping, the let me back it up.

Speaker 2 (15:43):
She's going too fast.

Speaker 3 (15:44):
The trumping, starving children in Africa, Gauzi, Ukraine. There's a
reason there's not enough for everybody to go around is
because billionaires exist. Billionaires didn't exist, there'd be plenty and
more to go around. I feel like I'm losing my
efing mind. That's the mindset of an uneducated illiterate, publicly educated,

(16:13):
either public schools or public higher education. Useful idiot that
believes that these men who are there trying to literally
fiscally save the country because they're billionaires, you have less.
That's the Bernie Sanders socialism Marxism attitude that says that

(16:36):
the more money I make, the less money you're gonna make.
Because I make X number of dollars per year. If
I look at last year's tax return, that money that's
on that as my adjusted gross income is money that
somebody else did not get a basic, fatally flawed understanding

(16:57):
of an ever growing economic pie. So I salute these
people who have worked their way into these positions where
they're able to go do this. We ought to salute them,
We ought to thank them for doing it, but idiot's
like that person.

Speaker 2 (17:17):
Don't get it whatsoever. And you know who's to blame
for that?

Speaker 6 (17:21):
We are.

Speaker 3 (17:23):
We're to blame for that because we've allowed public and
for that matter, private education, both at the elementary, secondary
and higher ed to completely fail educating a generation.

Speaker 11 (17:38):
I've been through many corporate transformations, and the saying that
always sticks in my mind is culture eats strategy for
breakfast Oh.

Speaker 3 (17:50):
That's brilliant. I'd not heard that one before. That's very
good and very very true. So one of the other
topics that they discussed was Social Security. Democrats keep screaming, yelling,
bleeding like stuck pigs about how doge is one trying

(18:13):
to get your personal information which I have yet to understand.
One why they would want it? Two what do you care?
I mean, these are all special government employees, and government
employees already have your information, they have access to that.

(18:36):
What they're trying to do is get access to the
IT systems. Listen to what and I forget which person
it is that did this points out that, well, just
take a listen their security.

Speaker 12 (18:55):
One of the first things we learned into that they
get phone calls every day of people trying to change
direct positive information. So when you want to change your
bank account, you can call sercial Security. We learned forty
percent of the phone calls that they get are from fraudsterers.

Speaker 3 (19:11):
Forty percent of the phone calls that are an intake
system at the Social Security Administration are fraud forty percent.

Speaker 2 (19:25):
Almost half of the phone calls.

Speaker 3 (19:27):
Into Social Security are fraud. Now, when half your calls
are fraudulent there is just based on pure statistical probabilities,
some of those are going to get through the system.
And when those get through the system, that means that
somebody's not going to get paid that should have gotten paid,

(19:49):
and somebody that should not have gotten paid is going
to get paid. And all of that then has to
be eventually recouped. But there's no guarantee that you're going
to be able to recoup it because if they're you know,
operating overseas, or they've got so many accounts everywhere that
it's going to take some sort of forensic analysis to
eventually get to it. And what are you trying to do.

(20:11):
You're trying to claw back Let's just say, you know,
someone's average payment of fifteen hundred dollars a month or
whatever it is for Social Security, but times, you know,
a million times a year, you're talking real money. Well
what does that do? That makes Social Security even more insolvent.

Speaker 2 (20:34):
So the more that.

Speaker 3 (20:34):
They can reduce fraud, then you reduce the timeline of insolvency,
if not actually reducing the probability of insolvency, which means
you're going to save people on Social Security. Now, it
doesn't solve the underlying fundamental problem with social security, but

(20:56):
at least staves off immediate insolvency, and it solves the
problem of Grandma doesn't give her social Security check because
a fraudster did want.

Speaker 12 (21:07):
One example is that social Security one of the first
things we learned into that they get phone calls every
day of people trying to change direct positive information. So
when you want to change your bank account, you can
call social Security. We learned forty percent of the phone
calls that they get are from fraudsters.

Speaker 4 (21:26):
That's right, almost half.

Speaker 8 (21:29):
Yes, and they steal people's social security is what happens
is they call in, they say they claim to be
a retire Then they and they convinced the post the
social Security posts on the phone to change the where.

Speaker 4 (21:43):
The money is flowing. It actually goes to some paster.
Does this happening all day every day?

Speaker 8 (21:49):
And then and then somebody doesn't receive their social Security
is because of all the fraud loopholes in the social
security system.

Speaker 10 (21:56):
How do you reassure people that what you all are
doing is going to affect their benefits?

Speaker 4 (22:02):
No, in fact, what we're doing will help their benefits.

Speaker 8 (22:05):
Legitimate people as a result of the work of doage
will receive more social Security, not less, when f size
that as a result of the work of doage, legitimate
recipients of social security.

Speaker 3 (22:17):
This is the only problem I had with well, I
had a couple of problems, but this is one of
the problems I have with the interview. I think what
must means here is what I just said earlier. They're
staving off for a longer period of time, the ultimate
question of how do we make social security solvent?

Speaker 2 (22:37):
And for someone who has lost.

Speaker 3 (22:40):
Their benefit to a fraudster, they're eliminating the likelihood of
that happening so that you won't have to fight to
get that money back, in which case, you know, many
people don't have the ability to do that. In fact,
they rely upon the very people who were the victim

(23:00):
of the fraud, the social Security intake people, and now
they're relying on those same people who got snookered one
time to now listen to, oh, but I'm really the
person that should have gotten it, And now, okay, eventually
we will get you reimbursed for what you should have done.
But the other money that was stolen is still gone,

(23:22):
which leads to the problem of the insolvency, and they're
trying to get that money back, which means that people
will continue to get their benefits for even longer than
what we normally would have otherwise. I think it was
poorly worded, but nonetheless I understand what they were trying

(23:42):
to do here.

Speaker 6 (23:46):
Example is that Social Security.

Speaker 12 (23:49):
One of the first things we learned is that they
get phone calls every day of people trying to change
direct positive information. So when you want to change your
bank account, you can call Social Security. We learned forty
percent of the phone calls that they get are from fraudsters.

Speaker 4 (24:05):
That's right, almost half.

Speaker 8 (24:07):
Yes, and they steal people's social security is what happens
is they call in they say they claim to be
a retiree. Then and they convinced the post the Social
Security posts on the phone to change where the money
is flowing, it actually goes to some proaster. Is this
happening all day every day and then and then somebody

(24:28):
doesn't receive their social security is because of all the
fraudly poles in the social security system.

Speaker 10 (24:34):
How do you reassure people that what you all are
doing is not going to affect their benefits?

Speaker 8 (24:40):
No, In fact, what we're doing will help with their benefits.
Legitimate people, as a result of the work of DOGE
will receive more social Security, not less.

Speaker 4 (24:49):
When to f size that as a result.

Speaker 8 (24:51):
Of the work of doage, legitimate recipients of Social Security
will receive more money, not less money.

Speaker 4 (24:58):
All right, at that.

Speaker 8 (25:00):
Point, and let the record show that I said this
and it will be proven out to be true.

Speaker 4 (25:06):
Let's let's check back on this in the future.

Speaker 3 (25:09):
Okay, Now, again, I think the wording was a little
I get what he's trying to say, but I think
people will misinterpret it, and that that does concern me.

Speaker 13 (25:23):
So he's trying to say that without paying out all
the fraud claims, is that.

Speaker 2 (25:28):
There's more money to go to legitimate.

Speaker 13 (25:31):
Recipin So instead of you normally getting five hundred dollars
a month, and those fraud payments are getting sent out,
So now there's no more fraud than you could possibly
get five point fifty or six hundred.

Speaker 3 (25:44):
Or if the date of solvency is tomorrow, by eliminating
the fraud, we can put off solvency until a week
from tomorrow, and which means you could stay on Social
Security longer. I really do believe that's what he means,
but I think it was poorly worded. One more I
want you to hear this one. This is Brad Smith

(26:08):
and he's talking about the National Institutes of Hell. Take
a listen, and I'll explain why this is so mind
boggling to me.

Speaker 14 (26:17):
I'd say, there's a couple of things we're really committed
to in our work at AHHS. Number one, making sure
we continue to have the best biomedical research in the world.
And number two making sure, which President Trump has said
over and over again, that we one hundred percent protect
Medicare and Medicaid.

Speaker 6 (26:30):
But there's a lot of opportunity.

Speaker 14 (26:32):
So if I take INIH as an example today, if
you're an NIH researcher and you get one hundred dollars
grant at your university today, you get to spend sixty
of that and your university spends forty of that. The
policy that we're proposing to make is that you get
to spend eighty five of that and your university spends fifteen.

Speaker 2 (26:48):
I talked to my son about this.

Speaker 3 (26:51):
And he says it's absolutely Now he is a recipient
of INIH grants for his research programs, so he gets
a million dollar program he gets a million dollar grant,
which would be tiny for him. He gets a million
dollar grant, some in his case, some forty percent gets

(27:15):
stripped away, so he only really gets a six hundred
thousand dollars grant and four hundred thousand dollars, some of
which does go to pay for the overhead of his
lab for you know, for the the mice or whatever
he might be using to help pay some of the
costs of operating the lab. But aside from that, he

(27:40):
goes to the university, So the university ends up relying
on him getting grants to cover their expenses, including things
like say a dean or you know other administrators. Well,
those just say, wait a minute, that's money that's not
going to actual research. We want to change that so

(28:01):
that if you get a million dollar grant, eight hundred
and fifty thousand dollars of that stays for you to
do research, and universities only get fifteen percent. He also
told me that there are some universities around the country
that they will issue a grant for a million dollars
and another million dollars goes to a university one hundred percent,

(28:23):
So instead of getting two million dollars you only get
one million dollars. They're trying to change that. That would
make a huge difference.

Speaker 14 (28:31):
I say, there's a couple of things we're really committed
to in our work at AHHS. Number one making sure
we continue to have the best biomedical.

Speaker 6 (28:38):
Research in the world.

Speaker 14 (28:39):
And number two making sure, which President Trump has said
over and over again, that we one hundred percent protect
Medicare and Medicaid.

Speaker 6 (28:45):
But there's a lot of opportunity. So if I take.

Speaker 14 (28:47):
NIH as an example today, if you're an NIH researcher
and you get one hundred dollars grant at your university today,
you get to spend sixty of that and your university
spends forty of that. The policy that we're proposing to
make is that you get this eighty five of that
and your university spends fifteen. So that's more money going
directly to the scientists who are discovering new cures. Another
example at NIH is today they have twenty seven different centers.

(29:10):
They got created over time by Congress, and they're typically
by disease state or body system. There's seven hundred different
IT systems today at NIH.

Speaker 6 (29:17):
Seven hundred different ITS software systems.

Speaker 2 (29:21):
Came seven hundred different IT systems.

Speaker 4 (29:24):
Speak to each other, so they don't talk to them.

Speaker 14 (29:26):
They have twenty seven different CIOs, and so when you
think about making great medical discoveries, you have to connect the.

Speaker 10 (29:33):
Data time time, twenty seven different chief information.

Speaker 8 (29:37):
Officers correct, correct, and most of them are non technical.

Speaker 6 (29:40):
There's a lot, there's there's a lot of opportunity. It
will make science better, not worse.

Speaker 3 (29:45):
Absolutely it will. The same is true, you know that's
in IH. The same is still true. Twenty some years
post creation of Department of Homeland Security March third, two
thousand and three, DHS became operational. They still have, for
all twenty two different departments and agencies, twenty two separate

(30:09):
IT systems, and they don't talk to each other.

Speaker 15 (30:13):
Ronnie, I got twenty seven girlfriends, and I sure hope
they use the same IT system as the Department of
Homeland Security, because if they ever talked to each other,
I'm in big trouble.

Speaker 3 (30:28):
Well, you need to be doged anyway. We need to
make doze a verb, not just a noun, but a verb.
But you need to get doged. And and here's why
I know you're lying to me. You know why he's
lying to me to a dragon. There's no way in
hell he can handle twenty seven girlfriends. That's that's in
his freaking imagination twenty six. First of all, find me

(30:51):
twenty seven women that would want him as a boyfriend.

Speaker 16 (30:55):
Truck stops. Oh the oh, I'm sorry. We should have
set forth the definitions first, right, okay, all right, never
never mind. Now he needs a doge to figure out
how much money he's wasting on.

Speaker 2 (31:13):
Twenty seven of the of those so called air quote
girl friends.

Speaker 3 (31:18):
Yeah, and are you setting any aside any you know,
contingency money for penicillin healthcare tests. I just you know,
a public service announcement would be, maybe you want to
get checked, just say it. It's kind of like eating,

(31:42):
you know, convenience store sushi. I'd be I'd be a.

Speaker 2 (31:46):
Little leary, little leary.

Speaker 3 (31:52):
One of the places that I think they're going to
have that doge will have the most impact is on
our national security, the Department of Defense.

Speaker 8 (32:02):
These databases don't talk to each other, and that's really
the source of that's the biggest vulnerability for fraud is
the fact that these databases don't talk to each other.

Speaker 4 (32:11):
So when you reconcile the databases It's.

Speaker 8 (32:14):
A frankly painful homework, but it has to be done
and we'll greatly improve the efficiency of the government systems.

Speaker 10 (32:22):
We didn't talk about any plans to approach cuts at
the Pentagon.

Speaker 2 (32:26):
Here and there.

Speaker 8 (32:27):
The Pagon has not passing orders in a very long time.
I mean, as crazy as it sounds, they will lose
twenty to thirty billion dollars a year and they don't
know where.

Speaker 4 (32:37):
They literally don't know where it went.

Speaker 8 (32:41):
I mean, Senator Collins was telling me about how she
gave the Navy twelve billion dollars for extra submarines, got
zero extra submarines. And then when she held the hearings,
where the twelve billion dollars go? They didn't know that,
you did? You get it sounds they will lose twenty

(33:01):
to thirty billion dollars a year and they don't know where.

Speaker 4 (33:04):
They literally don't know where it went. I mean, Senator
Collins was telling me about how.

Speaker 8 (33:10):
She came the Navy twelve billion dollars for extra submarines,
we got zero extra submarines.

Speaker 4 (33:16):
And then when she held the hearings, went the twelve
billion dollars a go?

Speaker 3 (33:20):
They didn't know, They didn't know we're twelve million dollars
where extra submarines went, and they didn't get any submarines either.
But nothing to see here. Democrats, I cannot believe that
you are not one thousand percent supporting this, except, as
he pointed out earlier in the when brettbar asked him,

(33:43):
you know what about all these people complaining about what
you're doing? You know what must response was, I would
say that, generally speaking, those are the frauds. So when
you hear a Democrat bitching about Doge, maybe they got
their finger in the two