06-26-25 - *FULL SHOW* Mick Mulvaney; No DougCo Home Rule; NYC Suicide; Iran Leak

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
I've got a lot of stuff talk about today.

Speaker 2 (00:01):
The Colorado Rockies just put out a press release. They
announced that they're the president and chief Operating Officer of
the team, Greg Fiesl. I hope I'm pronouncing that name right.
I don't know him, who has been with the Rockies,
I think since the team was founded, right nineteen ninety
five something like that, is going to step down at

(00:22):
the end.

Speaker 1 (00:23):
Of this year.

Speaker 2 (00:24):
And the former vice president of Corporate Partnerships, Walker Montfort.

Speaker 1 (00:31):
Is that name sound familiar?

Speaker 2 (00:32):
That is Dick Montfort's son will move into the role
of executive vice president of the Rockies, effective immediately. I'm
quoting from the Rockies press release. He will lead the
club alongside Feesel through the transition and will officially assume
his responsibilities in January of next year.

Speaker 1 (00:53):
So it's a little bit unclear to.

Speaker 2 (00:55):
Me what this means for So it sounds like they're saying,
all right, so the president.

Speaker 1 (01:00):
CEO is stepping down the and Dick Montfort's son is.

Speaker 2 (01:05):
Going to move into a job of executive VP of
the Rockies. But this doesn't say to me how they
are filling the role of president.

Speaker 1 (01:17):
And maybe this.

Speaker 2 (01:18):
Ties in with something I that I talked about sort
of coincidentally, just a couple of days ago. I don't
talk about the Rockies all that often, but I shared
with you this piece from the Denver Post interviewing Charlie Montfort,
who said the Rockies need a new set of eyeballs
on him and Dick Montfort in the article seemed to
grudgingly agree, And what Charlie Montfort meant by that was

(01:41):
this team is doing so badly. We need to get
somebody from outside, not promote from the inside, which is
normally what the Rockies do. They normally promote you some
manager to a higher level of management. And Charlie was saying,
we need to bring somebody from outside this organization to
put a whole new a whole new I'll get a
whole new look at this thing.

Speaker 1 (02:03):
So maybe that's what it'll be coming next.

Speaker 2 (02:05):
When I read this press release, at first, I thought
they were replacing the current president with Walker with Walker Montfort,
which wouldn't really be doing what Charlie said, right, That
would be promoting from within again. But as I read
this more carefully, and I look, I'm just I'm reading
it now. Okay, it just came out a minute or
two ago, So it's not like I've had a lot

(02:26):
of time to think about it, and it's not like
I'm expert about baseball, but as I as, and I'm
going to try to get Jack Corrigan on the show
in a little bit to give us his thoughts on this.
But it seems to me what they're actually saying is, well,
Walker Montfort is getting a promotion, but not a promotion
into the job of president and cooh. So it looks
like they're saying that job that the guy who's there

(02:47):
now is leaving that job, and I guess, I guess
it remains to be told to us, and maybe they
don't know yet who's going to get that very important job.

Speaker 1 (03:00):
Let me tell you a quick story.

Speaker 2 (03:02):
So on Tuesday night, I took my older kid to
see Weird Al at Red Rocks and a Rod was
there with his dad.

Speaker 1 (03:12):
Nice to see them.

Speaker 2 (03:14):
And that is not why I was off off yesterday.
I had some things I had to do yesterday that
could only be done during the time I was that
I would normally be on the air, So I didn't
take a day off because I was going to a concert.
Just to be clear about that, although it worked out
well that I happened to have the day off because

(03:34):
we got a flat tire apparently just as we were
arriving into the parking lot at Red Rocks.

Speaker 1 (03:39):
How do I know?

Speaker 2 (03:39):
We didn't have the flat tire for very long, even
though we really couldn't feel it. Well, we really couldn't
feel it, So that was one thing. So it probably
happened when we were driving kind of slowly, But also.

Speaker 1 (03:52):
What was the other thing? Anyway, Anyway, it doesn't matter.

Speaker 2 (03:54):
So I'm like, all right, we got to fix this,
but we're gonna go.

Speaker 1 (03:56):
To the concert first.

Speaker 2 (03:58):
So we come out flat tires still flat, and I
do have a thing to put air in the tire,
like a little Actually, everybody should.

Speaker 1 (04:06):
Buy one of these.

Speaker 2 (04:08):
It's like a twenty or thirty dollars rechargeable thing that's
about the size of it's like two inches by four
inches by an inch. It's a small device and you
just recharge it and then it can pump up a
tire and it's so cool.

Speaker 1 (04:22):
But we attached this.

Speaker 2 (04:24):
Thing to the tire, and I could hear the air
wushing out of a hole in the tire just at
the same speed that I was pumping it into the tire.
So I realized this is We took my kid's car,
and my kid didn't realize that this particular piece that
adapts the standard lug wrench to be able to take
off these locking lug nuts. Didn't realize that that was

(04:45):
a part that needed to be with car.

Speaker 1 (04:47):
So we had the jack.

Speaker 2 (04:48):
We have everything, but we don't have that, so I
can't take the lug nuts off.

Speaker 1 (04:52):
So now I'm stuck.

Speaker 2 (04:53):
So I do have roadside assistance included in my auto insurance,
so I called the auto insurance. They dispatch a roadside
assistance guys like forty five minutes away or something like that.
And it gets close to you know, it gets to
maybe thirty five or forty minutes. I haven't heard from
the from the guy. I heard from him once, but
then I haven't heard from him again, Like, hm, what's

(05:16):
going on here? I would have expected to hear from
him by now. And so I give him a call
because I have, you know, They give me his number
and I'm like, all right, where are you are? You
almost here? And he said, well, in a sense, I'm
almost there. I'm only about ten minutes away, but my
truck is broken down, and I'm on the side of
the highway, so I won't be getting to you. And
I'm like, why didn't you call me if you broke

(05:37):
down on this side? Why didn't you call me to
tell me this? So then so then he says, I'm
going to send a group text out to my friends
and we'll see if we can get someone else to
help you. And in the meantime, I'm thinking, I don't
know where the next person is. They could be far
away as well. So what I did was I got
in touch with my kids. So now it's one in

(05:58):
the morning. It's one in the morning. I know that
my younger kid, who's constantly playing video games during the
summer and stays up late, he will stay up till
four in the morning, five in the morning, playing video games.

Speaker 1 (06:10):
So I call him, no answer, Call again, no answer.

Speaker 2 (06:16):
But then he calls me back, like, dude, I think
I know where this piece is, this adapter, the lug
nut adapter. Go check in this box that's sitting right
over here. Sure enough, it's there. So my kid drives
that piece out to me at Red Rocks, waits around
while I change the tire, and then we.

Speaker 3 (06:37):
All go home.

Speaker 2 (06:38):
And I ended up I ended up getting to bed
at about three in the morning. So I'm very glad
I had the day off yesterday. It was I didn't
take the day off because of the concert, but it
worked out well cause if I had gone to bed
at three or I probably would have just stayed up,
but I would have been.

Speaker 1 (06:53):
Kind of a mess.

Speaker 2 (06:55):
So how about that though, for a bit of bad
lot like just happen to not have the part. And
then the roadside assist dudes truck breaks down on the
way to meet. Now, actually, I have a question for you.
I know this is not the most important story of
the day. Don't worry, we'll get to that stuff. I
have a very quick question for you. Is okay?

Speaker 1 (07:15):
So the insurance company called me and asked, how was
your experience?

Speaker 2 (07:21):
And it turns out that the roadside assistance company had
told the insurance company that pays them for this that
their job was completed and that assistance was provided. And
I told the insurance company no, And I said, look
these guys. Because the other guy that the first guy

(07:42):
called was very nice, but he was in Thornton and
I was at Red Rocks, and he said, if you
need me to come out.

Speaker 1 (07:51):
I'll come out.

Speaker 3 (07:51):
Just let me know.

Speaker 1 (07:53):
Everyone was very nice. They're like, oh man, I'm so
sorry you're going through this.

Speaker 2 (07:56):
I want to help. The one dude, I'm really sorry.
Maybe my wife can bring me up to you. If
they were they wanted to help, but they didn't tell
And I thought it wasn't cool that they build the
insurance company as if the service had been provided. So
I did tell the insurance company, No, you shouldn't pay them,
the service wasn't provided.

Speaker 1 (08:17):
I'm not angry at them.

Speaker 2 (08:18):
They were very nice and they wanted to help, but
they didn't and so you shouldn't pay them. And it's
really not cool that they marked it as if the
service had been provided.

Speaker 1 (08:28):
So here's my.

Speaker 2 (08:28):
Question for you. I want you to text me at
five six six nine zero. Did I do the right
thing by telling the insurance company that the service wasn't provided?

Speaker 1 (08:37):
Or should I have just let them get paid?

Speaker 2 (08:38):
After all, the guy drove almost all the way to
me and then his truck broke down.

Speaker 1 (08:42):
And it wasn't his fault. So what do you think?

Speaker 2 (08:44):
Five six six nine zero. Tell me your thoughts. Oh
my gosh, we have a lot to do today. Keep
it here on KOA that also might not be true.
You can decide for yourself. But part of the reason
you're hearing the Metallica is that sometime during today's show,
I am actually going to give away a pair of
tickets to see Metallica tomorrow night, Tomorrow night at in Powerfield.

(09:07):
I'm a little jealous. Actually, I wouldn't mind going to
that show, but I don't think I don't think I
can get tickets.

Speaker 1 (09:12):
But I think you can from me.

Speaker 2 (09:14):
And then also, if you go to Koa's X page
formerly Twitter but x dot com slash Koa Colorado, a
Rod has pinned a post right at the top that
has instructions for how you can enter to try to
win a pair of tickets that way if you don't
win them in my during the show giveaway, and the
same on our Instagram page Instagram.

Speaker 1 (09:36):
Dot com slash Koa Colorado. So go follow us there
and you.

Speaker 2 (09:40):
Got a shot at winning a pair of tickets to
Metallica this Friday night. And that's in addition to the
pair of tickets I will be giving away at some
point during the show.

Speaker 1 (09:49):
Almost everybody who texted.

Speaker 2 (09:51):
In said I did the right thing by telling the
insurance company that the roadside assistance was not in fact completed,
which would mean that the that the company that was
supposed to help me but didn't help me. I mean
they tried, but they didn't help, they didn't get there.
It means they won't get paid. It doesn't mean they're
going to get in trouble. It just means they won't

(10:12):
get paid. One or two people said, you know, he
should still get paid for his time and pay them.

Speaker 1 (10:20):
What's it to you? Well, what is it to me?
So I'll run that by you, Okay.

Speaker 2 (10:24):
So what is imagine the situation in which every time
someone called for roadside assistance that ended up not helping,
not getting there whatever, still got paid. That means that
every other person within my insurance company, at least who
wants to have this roadside stuff in their insurance policies,
will end up paying more for it. So I so

(10:45):
that that's what it is to me. It's you know,
it's at the margin, but it's a real thing. All right,
let me do something else. I'm gonna I'm gonna cover
over the course of today's show, one thing I got
right on Tuesday and one thing I got wrong on Tuesday.
So I'll and the two things are Douglas County Home
rule and the New York City Democratic primary. The first
one I got right, the second one I got wrong.

(11:07):
I'm going to talk about the first one first now,
So Douglas County, I should say the one I got right.
I specified on the air, I have high confidence that
Douglas County home rule is going to lose in the
New York City's mayor's race.

Speaker 1 (11:21):
I said I have low confidence.

Speaker 2 (11:23):
I would only bet a dollar on my guests because
I have very low confidence in it. And this part
of the reason that I think it's important to assign
a level of confidence too. So that's why I do
tell you like I'm highly confident in this, or I
don't have much confidence. Usually the low confidence stuff, I
usually word it as saying, yeah, I'd probably only bet
a dollar on this, or two dollars or.

Speaker 1 (11:43):
Something to give you a sense of it.

Speaker 2 (11:45):
This ties in, by the way, to something we're going
to get into a little bit later in the show,
which is this ridiculous stuff yesterday with CNN breathlessly parroting
ELITD preliminary investigator not an investigation analysis of whether our
bombs dropped on the Iranian nuclear sites, did significant damage.

(12:05):
It was just an insane thing for CNN to run with,
and it was a low confidence report which should never
ever be in the news. But they were so anxious
to kind of subtly try to attack or criticize Donald
Trump that they ran with this thing. It was absolute
journalistic malpractice. Anyway, let me just do the Douglas County

(12:26):
thing for literally ninety seconds here.

Speaker 1 (12:28):
So I said that, first of all, I waited a.

Speaker 2 (12:32):
Long time to come out with an opinion on this,
and I basically waited until near the end. And I
don't really think that I have too much influence anyway,
But I said I would vote no if I lived
in Douglas County, and I gave a variety of reasons.
The primary one be well, the primary two. The primary two.
Everybody understood that the people who were supporting home rule

(12:53):
were lying about the benefits and overstating the benefits. They
said stuff like, well, if we're home rule, then you
won't have to abide by the state's gun loss. That
is just not true. People figured it out really early,
and it meant that people turn to not trusting the
yes side at all. The other thing is the Yes
side seemed to kind of hide the ball here, kind
of roll it out in a rushed and secretive way

(13:15):
that seemed designed to not inform the public very well.
But the public in Colorado almost always votes know on
ballot measures that they don't understand, and they didn't understand this.
So Douglas County home rule lost seventy one No.

Speaker 1 (13:32):
Twenty nine.

Speaker 2 (13:33):
Yes, they just got absolutely thrashed two and a half
to one, give or take. And so the question now,
and I don't know the answer to this, is will
they try again? Will they try again? Certainly George Teal,
who's been the primary mover on this, is suggesting that
he will try again. I would suggest to George, you
probably shouldn't. I will have more to say about it

(13:56):
later in the show when we come back. We are
going to stick with some states. You're going to get
introduced to State Senator Cleve Simpson c l E.

Speaker 1 (14:05):
A Ve Cleave Simpson.

Speaker 2 (14:08):
He was the newly named Colorado Senate Minority leader, in
other words, the leader of Republicans in the Colorado State Senate.
A very interesting guy, a farmer, a rancher, a graduate
of the Colorado School of minds, and we're going to
talk with him about his goals as minority leader here
in the state of Colorado.

Speaker 1 (14:25):
That's next on KOA.

Speaker 2 (14:27):
But that is Metallica, Ride the Lightning, And we're playing
a little Metallica with you over the course of the show,
partly because they're a huge band, and partly because later
on in today's show, I'm actually going to give away
a pair of tickets to see Metallica tomorrow night at
empower Field at Mile High.

Speaker 1 (14:43):
Can you believe that? And if you don't win them
with me, there's.

Speaker 2 (14:45):
Other ways to win these tickets, and you would start
by going to either our X page or our Instagram
page either one x dot com slash Koa Colorado, Instagram
dot com slash Koa Colorado, and you will see pinned
posts right at the top of both of those pages
that explain how you can enter to win a pair
of tickets to see Metallica tomorrow night. All right, let's

(15:08):
do something completely different. I'm very pleased to welcome to
the show for the first time, at least first time
as Senate Minority Leader Cleave Simpson. So Cleave represents Colorado's
Senate District six. I know Nobody really pays attention to
the Senate district numbers, but it is a massive in
terms of physical dimension. Massive senate district covering most of

(15:33):
south central and southwest Colorado, Alamosa, Dolores, Laplata, Mineral. I'm
not going to name all San Juan, San Miguel, There's more,
but just a very very big state senate district, as
often happens with rural districts because Senate districts and because
legislative districts are defined based on population, not based.

Speaker 1 (15:52):
On square miles.

Speaker 2 (15:53):
So if you are representing an area with relatively low
population density, then you get an enormous in order to
get the same population as for example, a state senator
that covers part of Denver. Cleve Simpson is a farmer
and a rancher, as his family has been for a
long time. He's also a graduate of the Colorado School
of Mines, and as I said, he is the newly

(16:15):
named leader of the Republicans in the Colorado State Senate.

Speaker 1 (16:18):
Cleeve, welcome back to the show. It's good to talk
to you.

Speaker 4 (16:21):
Okay, good morning, Ross a great being with you this morning.

Speaker 2 (16:24):
Did I did I say anything wrong in that introduction
or was that about right?

Speaker 5 (16:29):
Now?

Speaker 4 (16:29):
That was about right to your point. There are fourteen
counties in Senate District six, so not necessary to name
them all, but it is a big district Native Colorado,
though I don't know if that was mentioned. I was
born and raised in Alamosa, so this is home, and
I would just take a minute to high yesterday. We
were going to do this yesterday and it didn't work

(16:49):
out quite right. But yesterday I married my high school
sweetheart and yesterday was our forty second wedding anniversary.

Speaker 1 (16:56):
So well, happy anniversary, Thank you.

Speaker 4 (17:00):
Ross.

Speaker 1 (17:00):
How many kids, grandkids? Dogs?

Speaker 4 (17:05):
Yeah, we have one grown son together who now lives
in Tomball, a suburb of Houston, Texas, and they have
two grandkids, a four year old and a two year
old who happened to be here at my house now
most of this week. So enjoying some and they are
enjoying some time away from Houston and the milder, cooler
climate here in the land of cool sunshine in the

(17:27):
sand Lois Valley.

Speaker 2 (17:28):
I bet they are. Wait, you didn't answer the dog question.
That's important. What do we got going for dogs?

Speaker 4 (17:33):
Yeah? Just one? A Jack Russell terrorist is how we
like this? Right? I lived a couple of years in
Australia working at a coal mine, and while we were there,
my wife locked this Jack Russell terrorist and brought him
home with us, so he's are.

Speaker 1 (17:50):
All right, wait before we get to the local stuff.

Speaker 2 (17:52):
I lived in Australia too, but I'm sure I wasn't
near where you were because a lot of the mining
stuff is in the center or the west, and I
was in the east.

Speaker 1 (17:59):
But where were you?

Speaker 4 (18:01):
No, I was in the east oun Queensland.

Speaker 1 (18:03):
Really for what kind of mine? Did you say? Coal mine?

Speaker 4 (18:07):
Yeah? Surface coal mine. We were mining metallurgical grade coals,
so it would have been coal shipped overseas for coking
purposes for steel production.

Speaker 1 (18:15):
Wow. What was the nearest city to you when you
were there?

Speaker 4 (18:19):
Well, I lived in a little community called Diceart. There
was a community on the on the beach on the
coast on the east side called Mackay that was really
the closest one of any size. Emerald was the one
within about an hour and alfter it was pretty remote.
Emerald was the closest one of any size. It had

(18:40):
like an equivalent of a safeway or a target or
a place to go shop.

Speaker 1 (18:44):
So WOWT pretty.

Speaker 4 (18:47):
Remote and isolated. I loved it. My wife wasn't this
crazy about it, but I enjoyed the heck out of it.

Speaker 1 (18:52):
Love it.

Speaker 2 (18:52):
Mackay is is spelled like like if you saw it,
you might say, McKay is that the same place? Yeah, yeah, okay,
I think I've been there, but.

Speaker 4 (19:02):
It's about size of Pueblo roughly, it was, you know there,
you got a thousand people.

Speaker 2 (19:06):
Very cool. All right, we have that in common. We
lived in Australia. All right, let's talk about your job
a little bit. So first, uh So, I want to
kind of split this conversation up between policy and politics,
and let's start with Let's start with policy, because when
I asked you, you know, one of the things you
want or what are some things you're going to focus on.
The first thing you said was making Colorado more affordable.

(19:27):
And I guess maybe a subset of that is reducing
the size of government.

Speaker 1 (19:31):
But tell us a little about your goals there.

Speaker 4 (19:34):
Yeah, I just again being the native Colorado and I've
just watched how how it's changed and really over the
last seven sessions. Now, life is just continues to be
less affordable in Colorado, and I argue that that didn't
just happen organically. This is a result of policies, and
I'll say well intentioned my Democratic colleagues, but really we've

(19:59):
we've added close to probably two hundred new offices and
programs in state government over the last decade, and I've
just reached a point. And look, last session, we finally
were challenged with some real budgetary restrictions and trying to
force us the legislature into identifying where our priorities are.

(20:23):
And I just find it challenging to sit back and
think about. In a very short term, we've created things
like the Office of Rail Safety, the Office of Saving
people money on healthcare, the Office of Sustainability. Is just
a barrage of those that I wish we would take
a moment in time and stop and reevaluate and go

(20:43):
which one of these actually Of the two hundred, close
to two hundred new programs and offices, which ones are
really bringing value to Colorado's and which ones are just
burdensome and creating and making life less affordable in Colorado.

Speaker 2 (21:00):
All Right, I want to tie this into politics a
little bit now, so obviously I share all those goals
with you. Colorado government has grown in terms of in
terms of number of employees, in terms of cost, in
terms of any metric you want to measure by much
more on a percentage basis than the population. And we

(21:22):
can all feel it. We are over taxed, Well, we're overfeed.
We're not so much over taxed. We're overfeed because they
hide the taxes as fees, and we're overregulated and we're overburdened.
But I shouldn't say, but it's all And I would
like to know, just turning towards politics a little bit,

(21:42):
given the state of the Republican Party right now in Colorado,
what can you do to try to give your party
a little more influence? Right it's not that we're not
going to have a Republican governor anytime soon, and we're
probably not going to have a Republican majority in the
state House of Representatives anytime but the Senate's not impossible,
and you've got to get a majority to make any

(22:04):
difference or an important difference.

Speaker 1 (22:06):
So how are you going to do that?

Speaker 4 (22:09):
Well, I mean that's the part of the challenge I'm
tasked with us and others a state party, which it
feels rough like there's a bit of a momentum change
now where Look, I represent kind.

Speaker 3 (22:24):
Of the wing of the party that.

Speaker 4 (22:28):
I'm on all the Rhino watch lists you could think of.
But I'm just trying to be very engaged and thoughtful
and demonstrate Republicans, particularly when it comes to economic positions
and policies. And I think pulling demonstrates this that people
trust us, that understand to your point, how many enterprises

(22:49):
have we created over the last ten years that circumvent
the intention of the taxpayer Bill of Rights and just
layer on more burdensome financial burdens on Colorada constituents across
the state. So I think if we can come together
the Republican Party, have great relationship with Minority Leader Piglici

(23:11):
in the House, have started to build a relationship with
the new party chair and Britt of Horn, and come
together and create, you know, a very thoughtful strategic messaging
path going forward. And it's not just about messaging, but
it is a reflection that people are filling this financial
burden more and more year after year after year, and

(23:33):
trying to help create, you know, a path forward that
says there is an alternative and you can still have
a good quality of life in Colorado Republicans care about
the environment. We also care about trying to make people
make life affordable here again, and I think if we
can focus on those economic issues, I think we can.
I think we actually can. To your point, there's there's

(23:55):
room to have conversation about gaining some seats in the
in the Korida Senate. It would be a stretch in
one election cycle to flip it. But stranger things that
have happened in the past.

Speaker 2 (24:08):
Yeah, oh okay, So I am. I have the distinct
honor of being the Mike A. Loprino Free Enterprise Fellow
at the Common Sense Institute, and in that role, I recently,
I'm not saying I did most of the work, but
the team and I released a report about the many,
many assaults on Tabor coming from the legislature in recent

(24:31):
years and all these bills the Democrats have passed and
Governor Polis primarily there's some that predate him, but primary
primarily police have signed that kind of steal Tabor refunds
and designed to spend away the Tabor refunds. And then
of course we saw this thing where there was you know,
there was rumor or just it didn't I guess they

(24:54):
didn't get it done, but a ballot measure to essentially
destroy tabor. So what can you do and what do
you want to do to protect one of the few
things that is keeping Colorado from fully turning into California.

Speaker 4 (25:09):
Well, I guess we just keep pounding the message ross
and highlight again. Proposition HH from a couple of years ago,
I think really demonstrated that people value the taxpayer Bill
of Rights and limiting the growth of government.

Speaker 3 (25:24):
Part of me worries a little bit.

Speaker 4 (25:25):
About it's been so long since the Bill of Rights
was crafted and adopted. I think people have lost connection
to what the not broadly, but there's this, you know,
growing sector that lost connection to what taxpayer Bill of
Rights means more than just oh I get a check,

(25:47):
I get a refund check in the mail every year.
And really trying to focus in again this is about
responsible limited growth of government. You can still you can
still provide the necessary services that the public entity should
be providing, but you really got to focus on all

(26:07):
the extra stuff that's been added on and to your point,
thinking about all the enterprises that were created that circumvented
what the intentive taper was. For me, Ross. It's about
making sure we continue to highlight that message and reinforce
the outcomes from Proposition HH ballot initiative a few years ago,
and I could almost assure you. I think I text

(26:30):
you a note about that. You know, there was a
House Joint resolution this session that was going to ask
a require legislature hire an attorney to file suit against
the State of Colorado about the constitutionality of our textpayer
Bill of Rights. I would be willing to go out
on a limb and say, be prepared that or something

(26:51):
similar to that will come back again in the General
Assembly and or at the ballot.

Speaker 2 (26:56):
I agree for sure it will. They're not going to
give up. The Left wants all of your money. And
you know, you guys in the in the State Senate
are as close to a bulwarks as we have because
you know, you're not the majority in the State Senate,
but you're not an almost meaningless minority like it is
in the House right now, unfortunately, So you got your

(27:17):
work cut out for you, and you have a lot
of responsibility. There's a there's a real burden there, but
I'm sure it's it's one you're glad to take on
and I'm glad you're there to do it.

Speaker 1 (27:27):
Cleve Simpson represents.

Speaker 2 (27:28):
Colorado's sixth Congressional District, which is basically sixth Senate District,
I'm sorry, sixth Senate District, which represents much of south
central Colorado and almost all of southwest Colorado, and he
is the newly minted Colorado State Senate Minority Leader.

Speaker 1 (27:48):
Cleve, I'm sure we're gonna have you on a lot.

Speaker 2 (27:51):
In fact, I should just ask you this now because normally,
you know, I've had lundin and I've had Grantham and
all of you guys on for like a monthly legislative
update during the session.

Speaker 1 (28:03):
Can we arrange to do that with you?

Speaker 4 (28:07):
Absolutely? Yeah, I look forward to that, all right.

Speaker 1 (28:09):
So we'll keep in touch for that.

Speaker 2 (28:11):
It's good to get to get to know you a
little more and get my listeners to know you a
little more as you head into this important job. Thanks Cleve,
Thanks Ross right, good talking to you everybody. Yeah, joy,
there you go. All right, Yeah, good to get to
know the guy. We're still some months away, and mercifully
we're some months away from the next legislative session, but

(28:31):
I thought it would be good to introduce you to
the next minority leader.

Speaker 1 (28:36):
So there we go. So I want to just take a.

Speaker 2 (28:39):
Couple of minutes here and talk about something that was
a big part of the news yesterday while I was out,
and it was very, very frustrating to me.

Speaker 1 (28:47):
And it was this report.

Speaker 2 (28:49):
CNN was breathlessly reporting their exclusive and they were still
defending it yesterday while I was listening to them.

Speaker 1 (28:55):
And it was pathetic.

Speaker 2 (28:57):
It was pathetic, It was disgusting. It was why nobody
trust CNN or so much of the mainstream media. Somebody
leaked to them a so called preliminary report from the DiiA,
the Defense Intelligence Agency, that within the agency itself was
listed as low confidence.

Speaker 1 (29:13):
Low confidence might as well be no confidence.

Speaker 2 (29:16):
You should never ever run a news story about a
low confidence report. What does a low confidence report even mean?
It means that it is an analysis that is based
on information that has a very high likelihood of being wrong.
So what basically what you're saying is, if all this
stuff is true, then here's what we would say. But

(29:38):
we think there's a very high chance that all this
stuff isn't true, that some of them and there are
as Pete Heigsith mentioned in a press conference this morning.
There are a lot of what are called lynch assumptions
in the report, meaning meaning we will continue our report
on the basis of this thing, but if this thing

(29:59):
is wrong, then everything afterwards falls apart, like pulling out
the lynch pin.

Speaker 3 (30:04):
Right.

Speaker 1 (30:05):
It should never have been in the news.

Speaker 2 (30:07):
Why was it in the news because somebody in the
intelligence community. We think that's where the leak was. There's
a small chance that it came from somewhere related to Congress,
because they were trying to I guess share this thing
with Congress, but it probably came from someone in the
intelligence community wanted to embarrass President Trump by putting out
a public claim with the apparent and premature of an

(30:29):
intelligence agency saying that our strikes on the Iranian nuclear
sites did not do much damage and only set them
back by a few months. It was an insane thing
to run with as news because it's almost certainly wrong.

Speaker 1 (30:45):
Now, I want to be clear about something.

Speaker 2 (30:47):
Donald Trump's claims that these sites were totally obliterated might
not be right either, but he has a better likelihood
of being correct than this report. Those are some very
serious bombs designed just for this, and it is much
more so. Trump said the stuff was totally destroyed. He
didn't know that when he said it. It's Trump being Trump.

(31:08):
He's exaggerating. It's very political, but it's got more of
a chance of being right than this ridiculous thing that
CNN ran with only to try to embarrass the president.
And CNN themselves should be ashamed, absolutely ashamed. Now I
want to share with you this is a longer audio

(31:30):
clip than I normally share. It's a little over two
minutes long, and I'm gonna play the whole thing because
you probably didn't hear it this morning. This was part
of a press conference given by Pete hag Seth and
General kin Raising Cain, the chairman of the Joint Chief
of Staff. And this is talking about a guy, and

(31:52):
then later it became two guys whose only job was
to figure out how to attack the Iranian nuclear sited
fod oh.

Speaker 1 (32:01):
Have a listen to this.

Speaker 6 (32:03):
For more than fifteen years, this officer and his teammate
lived and breathed this single target four dough, a critical
element of Iran's covert nuclear weapons program. He studied the geology,
He watched the Iranians dig it out. He watched the construction,
the weather, the discard material, the geology, the construction materials,

(32:26):
where the materials came from. He looked at the vent shaft,
the exhaust shaft, the electrical systems, the environmental control systems,
every nook, every crater, every piece of equipment going in
and every piece of equipment going out. They literally dreamed
about this target at night when they slept, They thought
about it driving back and forth to work. And they

(32:49):
knew from the very first days what this was for.
You do not build a multi layered underground bunker complex
with centrifuges and other equipment in a mountain for any
peaceful purpose. They weren't able to discuss this with their family,
their wives, their kids, their friends, but they just kept

(33:10):
grinding it out, and along the way they realized we
did not have a weapon that could adequately strike and
kill this target. So they began a journey to work
with industry and other tacticians to develop the g WU
fifty seven. They tested it over and over again, tried
different options, tried more. After that, they accomplished hundreds of

(33:33):
test shots and dropped many full scale weapons against extremely
realistic targets for a single purpose kill this target. At
the time and place of our nation's choosing. And then,
on a day in June of twenty twenty five, more
than fifteen years after they started their life's work, the

(33:55):
phone rang and the President of the United States ordered
the B two force that you've supported to go strike
and kill this target. Yesterday, I had the incredible honor
and privilege of spending time with these two Defense Threat
Reduction Agency officers who've given so much. One of them said, quote,
I can't even get my head around this. My heart

(34:17):
is so filled with the pride of being a part
of this team. I am so honored to be a
part of this. To you both, thank you, and thank
you to your families.

Speaker 2 (34:29):
Can you imagine that here's your job, look at this
one place in Iran, figure out everything about it and
figure out how to destroy it. And we have no
idea how long you're going to be on this. And
then it turns out fifteen years later all of your work.

(34:50):
And remember this started as one guy, then another guy
was added.

Speaker 1 (34:54):
Only two people figured this out.

Speaker 2 (34:58):
Imagine the SATUS faction for them, and imagine, well, don't imagine.
I want you to actually feel even if we can't
speak to these people. The gratitude that the nation owes
somebody who took on a mission like that.

Speaker 6 (35:15):
For more than fifteen years, this officer and his teammate
lived and breathed this single target four doe, a critical
element of Iran's covert nuclear weapons program.

Speaker 2 (35:28):
And when you listen to Rockies games, you hear two voices,
one of them being my guest right now, Jerry Shemel,
along with his partner in crime, Jack Corrigan. But we
got Jerry today, and first of all, Jerry, I haven't
talked to you in a little bit, so Hello.

Speaker 1 (35:41):
Good to have you back.

Speaker 5 (35:42):
Thank you, Ross.

Speaker 1 (35:43):
How are you doing it really good?

Speaker 2 (35:44):
I was hoping you could help me understand a particular
part of the Rockies announcement today. And so I see
that the current president and CEO, Greg Feiesl I hope
I'm pronouncing his name right, is going to be stepping
down at the end of the year. And then I'm
just going to read this as part of the transition,
former vice president of Corporate Partnerships, Walker Montfort, who is

(36:07):
Dick Montfort's son, I guess, has moved into the role
of executive VP of the Rockies, effective immediately. He will
lead the club alongside Feesl through the transition and will
officially assume his responsibilities in January of twenty twenty five. So, Jerry,
there's a bit of a so where it says will
officially assume his responsibilities in January twenty twenty six, I

(36:29):
think I said twenty twenty five January twenty twenty six.
When it says assume his responsibilities, does that mean Walker
is going to assume Walker's responsibilities or does it mean
Walker is going to assume Greg Feesl's responsibilities and basically
do the job of President COEO, even though maybe he
won't have the title.

Speaker 5 (36:47):
Yeah, it's the latter, not the former. He's going to
take over Greg Feesle's responsibilities, so he becomes a point man.
Now he'll take over. He'll he'll continue to oversee the
marketing department what he's done for the last I think
fourteen years, twenty years a long time as Dick Montford's
kind of right hand man and son obviously, but yeah,
he's gonna take over those duties. He's gonna be the

(37:08):
CEO of the President eventually. I think he'll probably gain
over those titles ross and he'll be the number one
decision maker. He'll be the point man for all the
major decisions I think moving forward, certainly starting which January
won twenty twenty six.

Speaker 1 (37:21):
So do you.

Speaker 2 (37:22):
Do you know Walker Montfort and you know to the
extent that you either know him or know about him?

Speaker 1 (37:28):
What can you tell us?

Speaker 5 (37:29):
Yeah? I do. I've been here fourteen years, so this
is my fourteenth and so've I worked along with Walker
all these fourteen years. And I can tell you this
in all honesty. I've always been super impressed with him
because he is Dick Montford's son, but doesn't act like it.
He's a humble guy, He's a hard working guy. We've

(37:49):
always got along very very well to me, and we
haven't spent a lot of time together ross, but to me,
he's always been incredibly I would tell him somebody this
this morning. Incredibly respectful, incredibly friendly to me, knows my
name and knows everybody's name that works here. I've always
had a great deal of respect for him, So I
think he is a really good guy. I think he
is in a position where it might be tough for

(38:11):
him because he's the owner's son, but I think going
forward he'd be a good dude.

Speaker 2 (38:16):
I saw a piece I actually, you know, I don't
talk about the Rockies a ton on my show, but
I did a couple of days ago because there was
a very interesting piece that you probably saw also in
the Denver Post where they interviewed Charlie Montfort and it
was talking about how he's sober and he'd kind of
liked to get back involved with the team a little more.
But one of the things that Charlie Montfort said in
that article was we need a new set of eyeballs,

(38:38):
a fresh set of eyeballs on this team. And he
was kind of pointing at how the Rockies have historically
promoted from within rather than hiring someone from outside. And
Charlie was, you know, saying, we probably need to hire
some very high level of management who's not already with

(38:58):
the Rockies. And I had an inkling this morning that
some news was coming from the Rockies, but I didn't.

Speaker 1 (39:04):
Know what it was going to be. But I thought maybe.

Speaker 2 (39:07):
They would hire someone from outside, but they didn't. So
what do you think of that comment from Charlie Montfort
implying like it's going to be hard for this team
to get better if we just keep having people who
are inside already trying to make the changes.

Speaker 5 (39:21):
Yeah, Ross, I really believe that he was talking about
baseball operations. I think he was talking about getting a
new set of eyes on baseball, not necessarily business, and
I think that's probably everybody sentiment. And in that same
piece that Patrick Honders wrote, Dick Montford, his brother agreed
with that, Yes, that maybe there needs to be some
new blood coming in, and I think that's going to happen.

(39:44):
I can't see it not happening. I don't know if
it's going to be sooner or later. It might be
during the season, but I think you'll see a new
baseball front office. I think you'll see new ideas, new faces,
new names, and get a fresh start what this team needs.
There's no question about that. So I think Charlie was
talking about baseball. He wasn't talking He was talking about
personnel and decisions and salaries and draft and all that.

(40:08):
You don't think he was talking about business necessarily. I
have heard that Charlie and Walkermont forget along very well.
They're very close and they have a lot of respect
for each other. So I think Charlie's talking about baseball operations,
which I think everybody agrees needs to change.

Speaker 2 (40:23):
Okay, so I've got time for one more question with you.
So your answer suggests, and I don't mean you intended
it in a negative way, and I don't take it
in a negative way, your answer suggests that there's something
I don't understand about baseball management. And obviously you're right
because what you just said, which I didn't understand, but

(40:44):
I just want to clarify, so I do understand. What
I think you just said is that the job that
Walker Montfort is going to move into is not really
the kind of job where you're necessarily deciding who draft
and how to play baseball. But it sounds like you're
saying this job is more about the business side of

(41:04):
the team. Can you elaborate a little bit on that.

Speaker 5 (41:08):
That's exactly what it is. You have to separate the two,
and I think a lot of people have trouble doing that.
They think, oh, it's a president of the team, he's
all about baseball decisions. It's not that way. I don't
think it's really that way. In most professional sports, you've
got a business side, you've got a baseball side. In
Major League Baseball, and Walker Montfort's going to lead this
team going forward on the business side of things. Will

(41:29):
he be involved in decision making on who the regime
the next regime might be with the next general manager,
assistant scouts and all that will be Yes, He'll be
the point man there, I believe going forward. But he
is not going to make baseball decisions. I think you
probably make a baseball operations budget decision and then turn
that over to somebody else. But no, he's not going

(41:50):
to make personnel decisions. He's not going to hire scouts.
He's going to get in on if there's a new
general manager hired here, He'll be in as the lead
man on that decision. But you're not gonna make it.
And I can tell you this, knowing Walker I could do.
He doesn't want to do that. Don't want to make
baseball decisions. Lead that up to the professionals that have
been in that sport and make those decisions their whole lives.

Speaker 1 (42:12):
That's a great answer. I learned a lot there.

Speaker 2 (42:14):
I'm really glad I had you on the show because
you taught me some things. Jerry Shemel is the color
man for the Rockies. You hear him along with his
partner Jack cor again broadcasting every Rockies home and away game.
We're very fortunate to have such talented guys here as
part of the Kawa family, and thanks for making time
for us this morning, Jerry, I really did learn a

(42:36):
lot that was I really appreciate that conversation.

Speaker 5 (42:39):
You got it. Ross to have a great rest of
your day and weekend.

Speaker 2 (42:42):
Okay, you two will take a quick break. We'll be
right back on kaway. You know, I am a massive
Metallica fan, one of the biggest in the world. Or
I might not be, but but Dragon's a pretty big
Metallica fan.

Speaker 3 (42:56):
Dragon.

Speaker 1 (42:57):
Are you Are you going to the show?

Speaker 4 (42:58):
Yes?

Speaker 5 (42:59):
I am?

Speaker 1 (42:59):
Are you real?

Speaker 3 (43:00):
I am?

Speaker 1 (43:01):
Wow? I you and I are sitting next to each other.

Speaker 2 (43:04):
You've got tickets for both shows? Uh huh yeah, uh so, folks.
The reason we're mentioning Metallica and I'm demonstrating my remarkable
knowledge of Metallica's discography is that at some point during
the show today, I'm going to give away a pair
of tickets to see Metallica tomorrow night at empower Field.
And if you don't win that, or you don't have
to wait till I do that, you could right now

(43:26):
go to our X page or our Instagram page, x
dot com slash Kowa Colorado, Instagram dot com slash Kowa Colorado.
And you will see a pinned post at the top
of each of those things that tells you how to
enter to win a pair of tickets to see Metallica
tomorrow night. That is, that's a different pair of tickets
from the one I'm going to be giving away a
little bit later on the show.

Speaker 1 (43:48):
All Right, gosh, there is still so much, you know.

Speaker 2 (43:50):
Okay, let me take just a couple of minutes here.
That's all I've got actually, So so let me take
a couple minutes here and talk about the mayoral election
in New York City. So a guy named Zoram Mom
won the Democratic primary to be the mayor. Now I
said I would bet a dollar, but not more than that.
I thought Cuomo would win. But Cuomo is a very
very weak candidate, right, Andrew Cuomo very hard to like.

(44:15):
Lots of Democrats don't like him, especially people on the left,
because he was perceived as something of a moderate. But
he also required nursing homes in New York State to
accept people with COVID.

Speaker 1 (44:28):
COVID patients into the nursing homes, and so.

Speaker 2 (44:31):
A lot of people think that he killed a bunch
of elderly folks by importing COVID into nursing homes, which
of course is a very vulnerable population.

Speaker 1 (44:40):
And then he had to resign.

Speaker 2 (44:43):
For various accusations of sexual harassment. And the guy is
just he's hard to like. He's an old white guy
who's been in office forever. And this is not the
mood of the country and definitely not the mood of
the Democratic.

Speaker 1 (44:54):
Party right now.

Speaker 2 (44:56):
Cuomo did have a lot of money and a lot
of name id but in the last couple of weeks,
Cuomo just seemed to take it for granted, like he
was gonna get a coronation rather than running an election.
And Mamdani just worked it and worked it and worked
it and was talking about issues that people care about. Now,
just to be clear, Mam Donnie's so called solutions are terrible,
like really bad. The guy is a socialist. He calls

(45:17):
himself that I'm not calling him a socialist. Well, I
am calling him a socialist, but he calls himself one.
He's also, as far as I can tell, an anti Semite.
He's Muslim. Not all Muslims are anti Semite, but he is.
He's Muslim. He was born in Uganda in Africa, but
he is an American citizen now. And so now what

(45:40):
he's not the mayor, he's the Democratic nominee for mayor.
Now he's the Democratic nominee in a city all that
always in recent years elects the Democrat.

Speaker 1 (45:48):
Can he be stopped? Unclear.

Speaker 2 (45:51):
We don't know if Andrew Cuomo is gonna run again,
but I kind of don't think he should. He just
showed that he was a weak candidate. There is a
Republican candidate, a guy who named Curtis Sliwa, who founded
a group you might have heard of twenty thirty years
ago called Guardian Angels. I don't think he's very credible
as a candidate in New York.

Speaker 1 (46:08):
And then you've got the current mayor, Eric.

Speaker 2 (46:11):
Adams, who's going to run as an independent rather than
as a Democrat.

Speaker 1 (46:14):
And it's hard to tell with Adams.

Speaker 2 (46:16):
Does he have a little bit to offer everybody or
does he have a little bit to offend everybody?

Speaker 1 (46:20):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (46:21):
It does seem very likely that Mamdannie is going to
be the mayor of New York. Now, this is a
guy who would take New York in a direction that
San Francisco.

Speaker 1 (46:29):
Went ten, fifteen, twenty thirty years ago.

Speaker 2 (46:32):
San Francisco just elected a relative moderate, a guy named
Daniel Lurie, who's like a trust fund baby guy who
is running to straighten out San Francisco and to move
away for all the from the insane leftist nonsense.

Speaker 1 (46:49):
In New York.

Speaker 2 (46:50):
It doesn't seem to be learning those lessons. So we
will see one other quick thing. Donald Trump has been
blasting this mom Donnie guy on social media, calling him
a one hundred percent communist, lunatic and some other stuff
like that. And what I would say is two things.
Trump is right, but he should shut up. This is
New York he's talking about. Every time Trump criticizes a

(47:13):
Democrat in New York, that Democrat in New York gets
more popular, not less. And if Trump sets that guy
up as a foil to Trump and a foil to
whatever Trump believes he's going to ensure that that guy
gets elected, he's probably gonna get elected anyway.

Speaker 1 (47:33):
I feel kind of bad for New York.

Speaker 2 (47:35):
But on the other hand, I think people deserve to
get the government they vote for, and in this case,
they deserve to get it good and hard. I'll give
away some tickets to see Metallica tomorrow night. That was
sort of a dangling modifier. I didn't mean that tomorrow night,
I'm gonna be giving away the tickets. I mean later
in the show. I'll be giving away tickets to see
the show that is tomorrow night.

Speaker 1 (47:53):
Okay.

Speaker 2 (47:54):
Actually, speaking of Metallica, let me share.

Speaker 1 (47:57):
This with you. This from the Denver Post. This is
kind of fun.

Speaker 2 (48:00):
A blood drive linked to Metallica's upcoming Denver concerts set
a state record ahead of the July fourth usual dip
in supply. The drive, held Monday and Tuesday, collected a
record two hundred and forty units of blood, set of
spokesman for the Red Cross. The band also had held

(48:20):
blood drives linked to concerts in ten other cities, which
brought in about two thousand units of blood combined. He said,
one unit of blood can save up to three lives,
according to the Red Cross. In other cases, one person
who is in a severe accident may need as many
as one hundred units of blood. Blood donations typically drop

(48:41):
in the summer as school based drives and and regular
donors go on vacation. Demand for blood increases at the
same time because accidents and violent injuries peak during the
warmer months. So good job Metallica, A good job partnering
with the Red Cross and getting that excellent that X
work done. I appreciate that seriously, a great thing. So

(49:04):
I mentioned to you earlier earlier this week that the
National Forests were going to eliminate what's called the roadless rule.
The National Forest Service it's going to eliminate what's called
the roadless rule.

Speaker 1 (49:21):
The roadless rule is a thing that sets aside.

Speaker 2 (49:23):
I think it's thirty percent of national forests to be
areas where no roads can be built, can be made.

Speaker 1 (49:31):
And it was.

Speaker 2 (49:32):
Announced by the Agriculture Secretary Brook Rollins on Monday at
the Western Governors Association meeting which was down in Santa
Fe this week. She announced that they are moving to
rescind the roadless rule nationally. And there are a couple
main reasons they want to do that. One is for wildfire,

(49:53):
both prevention and fighting, so to the extent that you
can make some kind of fire break in the forest
and I realize it won't last indefinitely, and the fire
can go from tree canopy to tree canopy and all
that stuff. But still, if you had a ten fifteen
twenty foot gap, you may be able to stop a
fire there, right, because that will slow the fire. And

(50:16):
then potentially you could use that road to get fire
fighting stuff in there. And so maybe with a few
more roads you would have fires that don't get as
big and don't get as destructive. The other thing is
you can harvest some timber there, make a little money
and that sort of thing. And of course we talked
the other day, so I'm not going to get into
it again about how many of the environmentalist types are

(50:37):
a little bit upset about that. But so I shared
that with you the other day, and I saw an
update on the story that I wanted to bring to
you because.

Speaker 1 (50:46):
This is actually kind of interesting. Check this out.

Speaker 2 (50:49):
About and this is from the Colorado Sound. It's from
the same reporter who did the first story, Michael Booth.
About four point two million roadless acres of national forest
land in Colorado will remain protected, despite the Trump administration's
announcement Monday that fifty nine million acres of roadless set
asides in western.

Speaker 1 (51:05):
States would be open to development.

Speaker 2 (51:08):
According to assurances given to Governor Jared polus by the
US Secretary of Agriculture now why Colorado negotiated a separate
roadless rule agreement with the Forest Service.

Speaker 1 (51:21):
In the early two thousands, and.

Speaker 2 (51:24):
The state's petition to have unique state rules was approved
by federal authorities in twenty twelve. The Agriculture Secretary, again
I mentioned to you, said on Monday.

Speaker 1 (51:38):
That she's going to open this up.

Speaker 2 (51:40):
But a spokesperson for Governor Polus said, and I'm quoting
at the Western Governors Association this week, Governor Polus confirmed
with Secretary Rollins directly that the USDA Secretary's announcement will
not impact the Colorado Roadless Rule and that the Colorado

(52:01):
Roadless Rule will remain intact. A USDA spokesperson in DC
confirmed that assessment to the Colorado Sun just this morning.

Speaker 1 (52:13):
The USDA said.

Speaker 2 (52:14):
The Colorado state specific roadless Rule was part of the
Administrative Procedures Act petitions and will not be affected by
rescinding the two thousand and one Roadless Rule.

Speaker 1 (52:24):
So there you go. I'm not going to add a
lot more to it.

Speaker 2 (52:26):
There's actually quite a bit more in the article, but
I'm gonna leave it there. I'll just say that to
the extent that eliminating the roadless rule is done because
of some particular benefits for let's say, wildfire prevention. Then
if we're not going to do that here, one wonders
whether we are going to.

Speaker 1 (52:44):
Miss out on some of those benefits.

Speaker 2 (52:46):
I suppose we will see when some other states add
a few roads.

Speaker 1 (52:50):
I mean, the environmentalists talk about this. I said this yesterday.

Speaker 2 (52:53):
They talk about this as if suddenly the National Forest
is going to look like the mousetrap right in central
Denver and it's not right. So we'll see what happens
in other states and whether maybe having a road that
kind of functions as a fire break and a path
for fire fighting and all this stuff. If maybe there's
some evidence that in other states that are prone to

(53:14):
forest fires, maybe these roads are making a positive difference,
then Colorado could potentially look at it and decide, well,
we would like to do something a little bit different.

Speaker 1 (53:24):
All right, Gosh, I have so so many things I
want to get to you get to with you today.

Speaker 2 (53:28):
What do I want to do here? All right, let's
do this one. It's a Trump story. So Trump's been
a little bit distracted. He've been a little busy with
a war going on right now. But in terms of
domestic politics, by far, the most important thing going on
right now is this so called big Beautiful bill.

Speaker 1 (53:46):
By the way, that's its official.

Speaker 2 (53:47):
Name, right it's the Something Big Beautiful, one Big Beautiful
Bill Act. Oh bbb A, that's its official name anyway. Anyway,
So recent polling suggests that the bill is not very popular.

Speaker 1 (54:06):
And what this reminded me.

Speaker 2 (54:08):
And it has problems, and I bashed some aspects.

Speaker 1 (54:11):
Of the bill on the show, and I actually said before.

Speaker 2 (54:14):
The initial Senate amendments that we heard about, I said
I might not vote for it. The senator of the
initial Senate amendments and we don't know what the final
ones will be, were good enough that I probably would
vote for it if I were in Congress.

Speaker 1 (54:28):
But here's what this reminds me of.

Speaker 2 (54:30):
Here's the headline from USA today, GOP senators negotiate Trump
budget bill in hopes of improving its polling. So two
separate things I want to say on that. First, when
you talk about Republicans negotiating to improve something's polling, what
you're talking about is Republicans negotiating to spend more money
or have fewer spending cuts. It's Republicans acting more like

(54:54):
democrats because so many Americans want other people's money. They
want free, but it's never free, it's giving you something
paid for by somebody else. So in that sense, it's
basically a form of theft. And an immense amount of Americans,
an immense number of Americans, are recipients of stolen property,
and they like it that way because they've got this

(55:16):
racket going on. They're receiving stolen property, but they're being
given the stolen property by the same government that normally
has the responsibility to prosecute people who are stealing stuff
and then selling it or giving it to other people.
So the government should, like if somebody came and stole
my bicycle, and then whoever that, whoever stole it, gave

(55:36):
it to Dragon, right, So first of all, Dragon would
be in trouble if he knew it was stolen, even
if he didn't steal it, and the person who stole
it would be in trouble. And so the government would
certainly go after the person who stole my bike, and
might go after Dragon too for receiving stolen property. But
the way our Ponzi system of a nation works is

(55:56):
the government steals your stuff, meaning steal the.

Speaker 1 (56:00):
Fruits of your hard earned labor.

Speaker 2 (56:01):
They steal your income, and they redistribute it to other
people who want the stolen bicycle, who want your money,
and somehow believe they have a claim to it. So
when you hear that Republicans are negotiating to make something
pull a little bit better, you know, hold on to
your wallets. I don't know if you even have a
wallet left after what government has been doing to us

(56:22):
over the last however many years, but hold on.

Speaker 1 (56:25):
To your wallets when you hear that.

Speaker 2 (56:26):
So that's one side of what that makes me think
of is, you know, the the first Senate amendments were
pretty good, not perfect, but pretty good, good enough to
get me to vote for it. Now we'll see because
they're negotiating.

Speaker 1 (56:41):
But here's the other thing that I want to say.

Speaker 2 (56:43):
And I will bet you that this ends up being
a prediction and not just a desire on my part,
because I think what I'm going to say next is
actually going to happen. So I often say on the
show and it's one of my favorite lines in politics,
and I did not come up with it, but I
don't know where I heard it. Leaders don't follow polls,

(57:05):
they change them. Leaders don't follow polls, they change them.
Few people have been better at that than Donald Trump.
And I know it's hard to think back this far.
I'm not being sarcastic when I say that, because there's
just so much news all the time, and so much
political news, and so much Trump news and all this
stuff we've been through. But if you think back to

(57:29):
late twenty fifteen and then twenty sixteen, going up until
the election, what did Donald Trump do to win that election?
He won that election, not entirely, but significantly, really significantly
on the issue of immigration, on the issue of illegal immigration,
on the issue of too many illegals coming in. And

(57:50):
of course he won another election seven months ago, eight
months ago on that same issue.

Speaker 1 (57:59):
Plus on some economic stuff.

Speaker 2 (58:01):
But I really want to talk about the first time,
because the last time, in twenty twenty four immigration was
on everybody's mind already. I want you to think back
to twenty fifteen, twenty sixteen.

Speaker 1 (58:13):
If you had prior to.

Speaker 2 (58:15):
Donald Trump's presidential campaign, ask people and lots of polls,
did what are your top issues? Economies always add or
near the top right, economy, inflation, jobs, You know that
kind of thing. Usually near the bottom is climate change,
and usually middle to bottom is immigration. Again, I'm talking

(58:38):
about twenty fifteen. In earlier it was never a big thing.
People cared about it a little, very few people actually
voted on that issue. Trump changed all that. Trump campaigned relentlessly,
day after day, week after week, invasion, open border. If
you don't have a border, do you have a country?

(59:01):
And I'm not here to debate with you the merits
of anything that Trump said, although I think he was
mostly right on that, and certainly everything he said about
it was right after Joe Biden opened the border for
three and a half years.

Speaker 1 (59:17):
But my point isn't whether what he said was right.

Speaker 2 (59:20):
My point is he took immigration from being an issue
that not many people ranked highly as an issue they
care about a lot. It was kind of on the radar,
but not very much, and he turned it into the
number one or number two issue in that election, and
then he won, even.

Speaker 1 (59:40):
Though very few people thought he would.

Speaker 2 (59:42):
In fact, Donald Trump himself, despite all his brave talk,
almost certainly didn't think he was going to win that election,
and the betting odds, even though the betting odds were
better than the polls, also had Hillary winning that election,
although the odds were fairly close. Like I said, we
talked about this in the past, the betting odds got
closer to the actual outcome than the polling did for

(01:00:04):
a variety of reasons. Still, Donald Trump didn't follow the
polls of people not caring very much about immigration.

Speaker 1 (01:00:13):
He changed them.

Speaker 2 (01:00:17):
Donald Trump needs to do the same thing right now
with this big, beautiful bill if he wants it to.

Speaker 1 (01:00:25):
Pass, and he does, he does not have much.

Speaker 2 (01:00:28):
Time left to have any significant impact on domestic policy,
on things that have to go through Congress. Right A
lame duck president can do quite a bit in foreign
policy because a president has an immense amount of authority
and foreign policy, but on domestic stuff that you've got
to get through Congress.

Speaker 1 (01:00:44):
And I know that there's a lot of.

Speaker 2 (01:00:45):
Governing by executive order now and with Biden as well.

Speaker 1 (01:00:49):
I get it.

Speaker 2 (01:00:49):
But there are a lot of things you simply have
to do through Congress. And there's a better than fifty
to fifty chance, probably more like two to one probability
somewhere in that neighborhood that Democrats take back the House
and that Donald Trump will not get another substantive bill
through the House of Representatives the entire time he's president.
He's got to do this now. This bill is his

(01:01:10):
legacy on domestic policy. He needs to stand up. He
needs he needs to get out there. He needs to
talk to the whole country, and he needs to explain
to anybody who is on the fence about this.

Speaker 1 (01:01:28):
Why they need to vote for it.

Speaker 3 (01:01:30):
Now.

Speaker 1 (01:01:30):
I want to make one other thing very clear.

Speaker 2 (01:01:31):
I'm not standing here cheering, jumping up and down in
favor of the bill. I'm saying, if he wants it
to pass, he needs to do this. I'm at this point.
I think I'm modestly in favor of the bill. I
would vote for it unenthusiastically, but I would vote for
it based on Senate amendments. But it's unpopular because the

(01:01:52):
Democrats keep talking about it as if it's a giveaway
to the rich, when all it is primarily is a
continuation of the current tax rates plus some additional benefits
to people who definitely are not rich, which is to say,
most people who earn income by tips and most people
who earn overtime pay. Most people who earn either of
those are not rich. Rich people do not get paid

(01:02:15):
overtime all right, rich people do not get paid tips
most often, So you got those things in there, and
those things are popular. But the Democrats have sold the
big provision of the bill, which is maintaining the current
tax rates, as if it's a giveaway to the rich.

Speaker 1 (01:02:30):
Now that was a lie. The first time.

Speaker 2 (01:02:32):
When Trump passed this in twenty seventeen, something like two
thirds of the country got a tax cut, and they
are rich. Are only one percent of the country or so,
depending on where you want to set the line for rich.
Even if you want to say the top five percent.

Speaker 1 (01:02:45):
Is rich, I wouldn't say that.

Speaker 2 (01:02:47):
But even if you did, two thirds of Americans got
a tax cut, it means almost everybody who got a
tax cut is not rich. And the people who didn't
get a tax cut are upper middle class and and
upper class rich people in high tax states who could
not deduct as much of their state and local income
tax and property tax and that sort of thing and

(01:03:08):
dump that on the federal government to subsidize their high
taxes in their states. Those are the people who didn't
get a tax cut. But it wasn't because their federal
taxes went up. It was just because it limited their
ability to saddle you and me with their New York
State property taxes. Trump needs to get out there and
explain this, Explain it to the people, Explain it not

(01:03:33):
just in private, but in public to the senators, and
get the senators to have a little bit of spine
for client out loud. There are a few different polls
that show this bill pulling it thirty percent thirty. But
remember we talked about this on Tuesday, at least among

(01:03:55):
Republicans when they were asked before President Trump launched the
attacks against Iran, do you support American involvement in the
war against Iran? And of course some people might have
thought of that as boots on the ground or whatever,
but the question was worded broadly, do you support American involvement.

Speaker 1 (01:04:16):
Only? What was the number?

Speaker 2 (01:04:18):
Twenty twenty three percent of Republicans said yes, And then
they were asked shortly after the attacks and this and
before we knew that the attacks. I think the attacks
were likely very successful. And also so they were asked
after the attacks, but before the.

Speaker 1 (01:04:36):
Ceasefire, do you support what Trump did?

Speaker 2 (01:04:41):
And Republicans are like sixty eight percent yes, It was
twenty three percent yes two days earlier. Now he took
an action. Republicans at least saw the action. Democrats didn't move.
They were against it, they're still against it. Independents moved
up a lot, Republicans moved up a lot more. And
it's not a exactly the same thing, but it is
a way that a president can change polling. And he did,

(01:05:09):
and he should do it again if he wants this
thing to pass. And I will also tell you if
it doesn't pass, it is we're gonna have a very
very interesting situation in this country because it I think
if the bill doesn't pass, I think you see not
quite a crash, but a massive sell off in the
stock market because there will be such huge tax hikes

(01:05:31):
across the whole country. And then you will have Democrats
having to defend why they opposed a bill where the
opposition meant that a significant majority of Americans, and certainly
most middle income Americans, will end up with a tax
hike if Democrats get their way.

Speaker 1 (01:05:52):
There's a lot of room here, but it's going to
take some leadership.

Speaker 2 (01:05:55):
And so it's not just that I think that I
think Trump should do this as a hypothetical thing. I
think he will. I think they know everything. I just said,
so we'll see give it here on Kowa.

Speaker 7 (01:06:09):
Yeah, I thought they might be a little bit too
difficult for you are a pro at naming Metallica songs.
But at the top of the arcs we have the
infro music. I want to blend it over and get
you too confused, all right, you know.

Speaker 2 (01:06:21):
I mean there's never there's no such thing as too
much Metallica. It'd be like too much chocolate, too much garlic.
It just does not a thing, right, although I wouldn't
put chocolate and garlic together, but you probably could put
You probably could put chocolate and metallica together.

Speaker 7 (01:06:35):
Fine, that you see on a recipe and you go.
You just measure with your heart, does not matter what
they say.

Speaker 1 (01:06:41):
Did you make up that line? No, make measure with your.

Speaker 3 (01:06:44):
Heart, your heart.

Speaker 1 (01:06:44):
Yeah.

Speaker 7 (01:06:45):
So when it says you know a you know, clove
of garlic, No, no, no, you measure with your heart?

Speaker 4 (01:06:50):
You do?

Speaker 1 (01:06:51):
Five?

Speaker 3 (01:06:52):
Or eight?

Speaker 2 (01:06:53):
Yeah, well it's not prime, but somewhere something around there.

Speaker 7 (01:06:57):
Seven would be fine. Onions really cheese and bell peppers?

Speaker 1 (01:07:01):
No, stop it? All right? How about this? All right,
let's you know you've been away a while, yeah, and there's.

Speaker 2 (01:07:07):
Been like, what's this thing that was going on that
took a lot of tension.

Speaker 1 (01:07:12):
A war.

Speaker 2 (01:07:13):
There was a war, right, and so we haven't been
wasting people's time as much as we should have been.

Speaker 1 (01:07:21):
In fact, during war.

Speaker 2 (01:07:22):
Times probably when you should do most of it, most
of that really.

Speaker 7 (01:07:25):
If we want to waste a little bit of people's time.
I don't know if you've talked about it yet. Okay,
what happened yesterday with why you were out?

Speaker 3 (01:07:33):
No?

Speaker 7 (01:07:33):
I didn't it was your Yeah, I don't want to.

Speaker 1 (01:07:37):
I wasn't sure I wanted this public. All right, we're
all friends here, go ahead.

Speaker 7 (01:07:41):
How did your BUI annual leg washing go? I know
it takes a whole day, but I just want to
make sure you're you're good.

Speaker 1 (01:07:48):
Yeah, I'm good.

Speaker 2 (01:07:50):
I did have to go over to Walmart and buy
a second box of Brillo pads. They just you just
try it just don't last that long. Yeah, Yeah, it was, well,
it wasn't. Look, don't be rude. A box for each leg?
Come on, it wasn't even three quarters of a box

(01:08:12):
for each Legay, be nice.

Speaker 7 (01:08:17):
Gosh, Okay, did you put your trash up?

Speaker 4 (01:08:20):
No?

Speaker 1 (01:08:21):
My wife did.

Speaker 2 (01:08:24):
I went out this morning and the trash was already
out and the recycling too.

Speaker 1 (01:08:28):
Yeah, I don't know why. No, usually she tells me
to do it. Maybe she's being nice. I don't know.
She seemed you're in trouble. No, she seemed happy with
me this morning.

Speaker 2 (01:08:38):
I'm always a little concerned when I get up in
the morning, like, am I in trouble yet? And if
you're not married, If you're not married, you probably think
I'm kidding. But if you are married, you know I'm
absolutely serious.

Speaker 1 (01:08:53):
Am I in trouble?

Speaker 2 (01:08:57):
That's happened, That has absolutely happened, That.

Speaker 1 (01:08:59):
I'll get in trouble for one of her dreams? Yes,
Oh my gosh, that is so true.

Speaker 2 (01:09:05):
All right, But as long as we're just goofing around
a little bit here and we are gonna get a
little more serious. And by the way, in like twenty
five minutes or so, I've got.

Speaker 1 (01:09:14):
Mick Mulvaney on the show.

Speaker 2 (01:09:16):
So he used to be head of Office of Management
Budget for Trump, and he was also chief of staff
for Trump, and he was also in Congress for eight years.

Speaker 1 (01:09:23):
And I really liked Mick Mulvaney.

Speaker 2 (01:09:25):
He's a fascinating guy, a straight shooter and very experienced
and lots of insights. And so we're gonna talk with
him about a bunch of things. So we'll get back
to the serious stuff. But Dragon, you just said something.
You were talking about measuring with your heart, and then
you said onions. Now, I don't hate onions. I don't
love one.

Speaker 1 (01:09:42):
Yah.

Speaker 2 (01:09:42):
All right, depends on the context. But here's here's what
occurred to me. If my wife and I go to
a burger place, and especially a little more of an
upscale burger place, right, not McDonald's so much, but let's
say Bad Daddy's their place like that where you can
really kind of customize pretty well, I will, in fact,

(01:10:06):
with some frequency, get onions on my burger and she
will get onions on her burger.

Speaker 1 (01:10:12):
Here's the difference. I get raw onions and she.

Speaker 2 (01:10:16):
Gets cooked or sauteed or caramelized or whatever onions.

Speaker 1 (01:10:21):
And so my question both for you, Dragon and for.

Speaker 2 (01:10:26):
Everybody else listening, who wants to waste some time with us?
And I would like you to text us at five
six six nine zero and tell me your answer when
it comes to onions on burgers. And these are your choices, Dragon,
You're ready. No onions, raw onions cooked in some way onions.

(01:10:47):
What's the best choice for onions on a burgers? And
for listeners again, five six six nine zero is the
text line, no onions, raw onions or cooked onions on
a burger?

Speaker 1 (01:10:57):
What is your answer? Dragon?

Speaker 7 (01:10:58):
You got to have a qualifiers to what type of
burger because if we're just doing like a regular cheeseburger, yeah,
then regular regular cheeseburger braw is perfect, okay. But if
we're talking, you know, like like a mushroom Swiss, then they.

Speaker 3 (01:11:12):
Gotta be grew.

Speaker 1 (01:11:12):
I see where you're going with that. I do see
where you're going a little bit of qualify.

Speaker 2 (01:11:17):
But if we're talking just regular, regular cheeseburger, yeah regular,
let's do that raw, okay, and I I do.

Speaker 1 (01:11:23):
I do take your point.

Speaker 2 (01:11:25):
I think there are other possible ingredients on a burger
that might guide you toward toward grilled or caramelized onions.
I can I can see that. I definitely my wife likes.
If we're cooking a steak at home, my wife wife
likes me to grill or caramelize some onions and then
put those on her stage. Yep, I don't really I
don't really dig that flavor, so I don't I don't

(01:11:45):
hate it, but I don't do it. But anyway, all right,
regular cheeseburger people, no onions, raw onions, cooked onions text
us at five six six nine zero. And then just
I just want to be just want to be very
clear about something as well. Okay, there's there's no such
thing as a wrong answer to this question. There is

(01:12:06):
such a thing as a right answer, but there's no
such thing as a wrong answer.

Speaker 7 (01:12:09):
People are kind of asking to do yes, are they yellow?

Speaker 1 (01:12:13):
White? Or red?

Speaker 3 (01:12:15):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (01:12:15):
So see, I was wondering if if people would get
this nitpicky about it, and I'm going to say something
that probably, especially to such an onion fan as yourself, Dragon,
might seem a bit heretical, but especially when we're talking
about onions on.

Speaker 1 (01:12:32):
A burger, to me, there's no important difference in mind.

Speaker 7 (01:12:37):
Don't taste the difference with burgers. Oh, we're still on
the same page.

Speaker 1 (01:12:40):
We agree on that one. Yeah, we agree on that one.

Speaker 2 (01:12:41):
Is maybe in a salad there's a difference, and certainly,
you know, like I think the white onions are maybe
a stronger flavor than the yellow or the red. But
to me, it's all it's all the same. So just
just assume, for the purposes of this question that you
could choose any of the onions that you like. So
the question is just no onions. Uh, raw onions or
cooked onions. Now, you just laughed at something dragon, So

(01:13:02):
what are you seeing there?

Speaker 7 (01:13:03):
Onion rings are the only choice.

Speaker 2 (01:13:05):
Oh, I have had that onion rings, and oft times
that burger comes with barbecue sauce on it. Right, yep,
with onion rings. Onion rings frustrate me a little bit, yes,
because it's if you don't bite all the way through
the onion and then you start pulling it out of
your mouth.

Speaker 1 (01:13:23):
Yeah, you get the slurp.

Speaker 2 (01:13:25):
You get the slurp, and then also you pull the
breading off the rest of the onion, and then you're
just holding this semi circular piece of breading and you
got this long gloopy And I'll tell you the onions
in the onion rings are. They're in that worst no
man's land between raw and cooked. They're too cooked to

(01:13:48):
be good as a raw onion, and they're not cooked
enough to be good as a cooked onion.

Speaker 1 (01:13:52):
That's just me.

Speaker 2 (01:13:53):
Do you have a quick opinion on that? That's very
true and it's very very hard to get a good
onion ring there, really is it really is. That was
a lot of fun, don't forget coming up at some
point during today's show. And there isn't that much of
today's show left, so that's probably a clue. I'm gonna
be giving away a pair of tickets to see Metallica
tomorrow night at empower Field. Keep it here on Kowa.

(01:14:16):
All right, speaking of Metallica, and I guess we just were.
Of course we were speaking of Onions too, and I'm
not giving away tickets to see Onions. So just because
I speak of something doesn't mean I have free tickets
for it. But I do, in fact have free tickets
to give away. Maybe now, maybe now, for.

Speaker 1 (01:14:34):
Somebody, get a pair of tickets to.

Speaker 2 (01:14:35):
See Metallica and empower Field tomorrow night.

Speaker 1 (01:14:39):
I will know one other thing.

Speaker 2 (01:14:41):
If you win these tickets, and if also in the past,
you one name that tune where the prize is a
hearty handshake or a high five from Dragon, then look
for Dragon at the Metallica show.

Speaker 7 (01:14:58):
And yeah, I'm sure it'll be pretty easy to spot.
He'll go bald bearded guy.

Speaker 1 (01:15:01):
Yeah, bald bearded guy. There will be hardly any of those.

Speaker 2 (01:15:03):
At a Metallica show and give him.

Speaker 1 (01:15:06):
A high five.

Speaker 2 (01:15:07):
Or if you really want to mess with people, just
find any bald, bearded guy walk up to women and
say hey, Dragon, high five.

Speaker 8 (01:15:16):
And just see what happened, probably wearing a black shirt
as well. Right, right, so you want to do that. Now,
here's how we're going to do this. Texture number? What Dragon?

Speaker 1 (01:15:27):
Four?

Speaker 3 (01:15:27):
Texture?

Speaker 1 (01:15:29):
Okay?

Speaker 7 (01:15:29):
Five?

Speaker 3 (01:15:30):
Thank you?

Speaker 4 (01:15:30):
Five?

Speaker 2 (01:15:33):
Did you hear that pregnant pause when Dragon announced to
obviously non prime?

Speaker 1 (01:15:39):
Your eyes?

Speaker 8 (01:15:40):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (01:15:40):
He heard my eyes roll when he when he gave
a number that wasn't a prime number? Okay, text, okay,
not yet? Now people hang on a second. As I speak,
it's eleven twenty two and change. So let's go with
Let's go with eleven twenty six on the nose, okay,
eleven and which is not prime?

Speaker 1 (01:15:56):
Eleven twenty six?

Speaker 2 (01:15:57):
Hold on eleven eleven twenty six oh one, eleven twenty
six and one second texter number five at eleven twenty
six oh one at five six, six nine zero. Who
has the right answer to this question will win a
pair of tickets to see Metallica tomorrow night in power Field.
Here's the question, and you either know the answer, just

(01:16:19):
because you know it, or you know it because you
were listening earlier in the show when I talked about it.

Speaker 1 (01:16:23):
There is some benefit to listening for much of the show,
and that is this.

Speaker 2 (01:16:27):
The band Metallica partnered with a nonprofit organization to do
some real good and they have done a lot of
good with this partnership just over the course of this tour.
What is it that Metallica is getting done in partnership
with one of the best known nonprofit organizations.

Speaker 1 (01:16:50):
Is that a fine enough question? Yeah, that's pretty good.

Speaker 2 (01:16:52):
Okay, all right, So texter number five at five, six, six,
nine zero at eleven twenty six and one second. The
fifth person with the right answer to that question will
win a pair of Metallica tickets to see them tomorrow. Yeah,
tomorrow night, tomorrow night. How many times have you seen
Metallica before? I'm not sure if I've asked you this,
at least three, at least three?

Speaker 1 (01:17:13):
And what year if you recall, was the first.

Speaker 7 (01:17:16):
Time Summer Sanitarium tour in two thousand?

Speaker 2 (01:17:20):
Okay, so you didn't see him in the eighties? All right,
all right, I gotta say I'm not being sarcastic. I
sort of wish I were going to that show. I mean,
obviously I know every song, but anyway, all right, we'll
see who wins Dragon to be prepared to give me
the first the winner's first name when we come back,

(01:17:41):
and I also let you know so when we come back.
Joining us on the show is going to be Mick mulvaney,
who's the former White House Chief of Staff, former Director
of Office of Management and Budget, eight years in Congress.
He's at News Nation now among other things, and it's
just one of my favorite commentators on politics and the
intersection of politics and economics because he knows his econ

(01:18:03):
pretty well. We'll talk with Mick mulvaney right after this.
My next guest, second time on the show with me,
also a huge Metallica fan. Actually is very not well
known about Mick mulvaney. McK mulvaney that he has seen
Metallica somewhere around seventeen times.

Speaker 1 (01:18:20):
Mick is the former.

Speaker 2 (01:18:21):
White House Chief of Staff, former Director of the Office
of Management and Budget, served I think it was eight
years in Congress. He is currently among other things, he
is a political and economic contributor at News Nation and
really seriously one of my favorite people who I enjoy
hearing seeing his commentary on NewsNation. A part of the

(01:18:44):
reason that I watch NewsNation more than any other cable
news network now because Micks just he's got all the experience,
and he's a straight shooter, and he's an econ nerd
and I love all that. So Mick, welcome back to
the show. It's good to have you here.

Speaker 9 (01:19:00):
I'm all of those things except the Metallica fan. So
the only group, the only group I think I've seen
seventeen times was Dire Straits and Markinoffler, So.

Speaker 3 (01:19:09):
That's a not as good as I go.

Speaker 9 (01:19:10):
In fact, I think the only time I've ever seen
Metallica was when they made a cameo appearance on.

Speaker 3 (01:19:14):
What was that show on Netflix? Good Straight? One about
Wall Street?

Speaker 1 (01:19:21):
Oh one about I don't know, Have Yourill?

Speaker 3 (01:19:24):
Billions? Billions. They did a cameo on Billions one time.

Speaker 9 (01:19:27):
Really, is that That's about as close as I got. So, No,
I'm not a metallic again. Was never a hair metal
kind of guy?

Speaker 2 (01:19:33):
Yeah me neither me neither and I and Dire Straits
is one of my favorite bands of all time. Is
it true that you've seen Dire Straits a lot of times?

Speaker 1 (01:19:39):
Are you making that up.

Speaker 3 (01:19:41):
Oh no, that's absolutely true.

Speaker 9 (01:19:43):
I saw them for the first time in July eighty
five at the Fox the Year in Atlanta, and I've
seen them probably a dozen times since then. Hey' not damn,
because they disbanded in ninety one. But I've seen Offler
a dozen times.

Speaker 1 (01:19:56):
Wow, that's cool.

Speaker 2 (01:19:57):
I've only seen them once and it it might have
been the very same tour as the first time you
saw them, because I think it was around nineteen eighty five,
and it was a It was at Madison Square Garden
in New York City when I was in college, and
it was it was a great show.

Speaker 1 (01:20:11):
Oh I love that band.

Speaker 3 (01:20:12):
That's a great place to see a show.

Speaker 1 (01:20:13):
Absolutely.

Speaker 3 (01:20:14):
Okay, what do you talk about this? Not much going
on in Washington, so we can figure out a way
to fill some time.

Speaker 2 (01:20:18):
No, as I as I mentioned earlier, there was a
thing going on recently that that attracted a lot of attention.

Speaker 1 (01:20:24):
And I keep forgetting what it was.

Speaker 2 (01:20:25):
Because out of the news already it was it's like
a war or something like that.

Speaker 1 (01:20:32):
Uh, which one, yeah, right right, which way?

Speaker 2 (01:20:34):
And you know what you and I will get to
some foreign policy and war stuff in a minute. But
the news now is turning to back to this big,
beautiful bill. So I want to talk to you about
BBB or obbb A anyway as both a matter of
politics and a matter of policy. Why don't we start
with policy and we'll do a little nerdy stuff first.
So what are the main things in this bill that

(01:20:55):
you think are important and good? And maybe you can
name a couple of things at the bill you don't
like as much.

Speaker 9 (01:21:02):
Yeah, well, I mean the big thing is that and
this this goes into the sort of the the geeky
part about how Washington works is that it's not really
a tax cut as much as it is the prevention
of a tax increase. And if those things sound similar,
they are, but they're not the same, you know, aside
from the additional you know, the new stuff about maybe
no tax on tips, no tax on social Security, whatever,

(01:21:23):
no tax in overtime.

Speaker 3 (01:21:24):
I don't know what's going to make it in the
final bill.

Speaker 9 (01:21:27):
Most people won't see a dramatic change because what the
Congress is trying to do is prevent the twenty seventeen
pump tax cuts from expiring. That's the biggest part of
what this is all about. There's a bunch of other
stuff in there in immigration, a bunch of us. You
know that the administration policies, don't get me wrong, But
as the former manager, the director of the Office of

(01:21:48):
Management Budget, I care about the numbers and the dat
and the spending and the big the big piece here
on that is this extension of the twenty seventeen t
Trump tax cuts.

Speaker 2 (01:22:00):
I was talking with listeners about this earlier in the show,
and I noted a piece. Gosh, I got to see
if I can find it anyway. The short version of
the piece was BBB is polling badly, and it was
a piece about how Republican senators are negotiating on some
of the provisions because it's polling badly. And what I
said was, when you hear about you, when you hear

(01:22:21):
sort of like that, Republicans negotiating because something is polling badly,
it means Republicans are looking for ways to spend more
or heay right, or.

Speaker 3 (01:22:30):
Hey, yeah that's about right. That's how you get thirty
six trillion dollars in debt.

Speaker 9 (01:22:33):
Look, it's polling badly because the Republicans are trying to,
you know, reduce spending. Now, generally most people think that
means if you spent one hundred dollars last year, you're
going to spend ninety six this year.

Speaker 3 (01:22:45):
That's not how Washington works here.

Speaker 9 (01:22:47):
A reduction is spending one hundred dollars this year at
one hundred and three dollars next year. That's a reduction
in spending because they're supposed to spend one hundred and
four or one hundred and five dollars. So most of
it's certain exceptions to this, but most of the discussions
about reducing spending in Washington are always reducing the rate
of growth of spending, not actually reducing from fewer dollars

(01:23:10):
one year than the year before. So there's a poll
bad sure, because all the press loves to talk about,
you know, defunding, you know, the healthcare for the poor,
defunding Big Bird, defunding.

Speaker 3 (01:23:22):
All that kind of stuff.

Speaker 9 (01:23:23):
No one ever comes in and says, oh, my goodness, gracious,
the Republicans are actually trying.

Speaker 3 (01:23:26):
To do something about the deficit.

Speaker 9 (01:23:27):
That doesn't that doesn't sell advertising, So you know the
Republicans as the Grinch does. And so it's just it's
what most media networks talk about, which is why most
people who know nothing about the bill still think they
don't like it.

Speaker 1 (01:23:41):
Right, Okay.

Speaker 2 (01:23:41):
So one of my favorite lines about politics, and I
didn't make it up and I don't know where I
heard it, is that listeners don't fuck I'm sorry.

Speaker 1 (01:23:50):
Leaders don't follow polls. They change them.

Speaker 2 (01:23:54):
And the example that I like to give on this
is how Donald Trump won his first election.

Speaker 1 (01:24:02):
Largely, not entirely, on the.

Speaker 2 (01:24:04):
Issue of immigration, and of course he did on the
later one when the later election as well, but people
will already think about him. My point back in twenty
fifteen twenty sixteen is if you ask people what were
their top issues, very few people would have said immigration
until Trump made it their top issue. And I wish,
and it wouldn't surprise me if this happens, that Trump
starts getting out there and promoting BBB in public and

(01:24:29):
not just in you know, formerly smoke filled rooms with senators.

Speaker 1 (01:24:34):
That's fair.

Speaker 9 (01:24:35):
I mean, I wish you'd get out and talk more
about spending less.

Speaker 3 (01:24:37):
But he's not going to do that, I don't think.
But you're right.

Speaker 9 (01:24:40):
The man has a tremendous ability to drive a narrative.
Right now, most of his efforts ross are are focused.

Speaker 3 (01:24:47):
On Washington, D C.

Speaker 9 (01:24:49):
Why is that Because he's trying to whip votes, He's
trying to get support for the bill. There's between five
and twelve Republican senators, depending on what list you look at,
who have said they've got problems with different pieces of
this one big beautiful bill. By the way, I'm sure
Clinton is just loving this bill. Clinton is just loving
this one big, beautiful build thing. He probably thinks it's
about him anyway. And then there's probably, you know, two

(01:25:12):
dozen House members who have expressed concern over voting for it,
and so Trump's energies have been focused on those folks.

Speaker 3 (01:25:19):
But you're right.

Speaker 9 (01:25:19):
I mean, if one man can change a narrative nationwide,
it's Donald Trump.

Speaker 3 (01:25:23):
And sooner or later, I think you'll get around to that.

Speaker 2 (01:25:26):
I'm somewhere between frustrated and infuriated with the conversation about
the salt deduction. The salt deduction is a is a
giveaway to the upper middle class or the upper class
who live in high tax states, and it's just a
way for them to dump some of their tax burden
on the rest of us. And you know, tying into

(01:25:48):
what you just mentioned about a couple dozen House members,
do you think now This is more of a political.

Speaker 1 (01:25:54):
Question than an economic tax question.

Speaker 2 (01:25:57):
Do you think that Trump has enough poll with Mike
Lawler and people like him that the Senate could get
away with keeping the salt deduction at ten thousand? I
mean it should be zero, but you know they're talking
about forty thousand and it really upsets me.

Speaker 9 (01:26:13):
The answer your question is yes, if Donald Trump has
enough yank to get that done, Yes, he does. In fact,
I've talked to some folks inside the White House and
think that that's.

Speaker 3 (01:26:21):
Exactly what it's going to come down to.

Speaker 9 (01:26:24):
Look, I respect Mike Lawler, He's representing his district.

Speaker 3 (01:26:27):
That's the nature of the beast. It just is what
it is. But you're absolutely right.

Speaker 9 (01:26:31):
The policy that we put into place in twenty seventeen,
where the Trump tax cuts had good policy in them,
which is when they got when they put a cap
on the salt deduction, it got rid of this incentive
for high tax states to increase taxes. But what it
did was it used to be able to deduct your
state and local income taxes and other taxes.

Speaker 3 (01:26:49):
But let's talk about the income tax.

Speaker 9 (01:26:51):
So essentially said, if you pay one hundred dollars in
state tax. You could take that one hundred dollars in
tax as a deduction on your federal taxes.

Speaker 3 (01:26:57):
So essentially it gave the.

Speaker 9 (01:26:59):
States, you know, the state's ability to raise taxes more
than they otherwise would because they could go to their
voters and say, well, yeah, we're raising your state taxes,
but keep in mind, you're going to get a deduction
on your federal income taxes for all of that, right,
and that moves a burden from federal government or from
the state governs to the federal governments. It's good policy,
and Trump, I think, is still.

Speaker 3 (01:27:17):
Going to continue to defend it.

Speaker 9 (01:27:19):
By the way, every time I hear the media talk
about how the Republicans are for the rich and so forth,
which you hear every single day, the twenty seventeen tax
provisions on salt with the largest tax increase on the
wealthy in this country probably in history, and it was
one of the reasons you saw the middle class do
so well and close some of the income gaps some
of the wealth gaps between the middle class and the

(01:27:40):
wealthy during Trump's first term.

Speaker 2 (01:27:42):
I just want to clarify or maybe correct something you said.
You said that it's good policy, did you mean, it's
good politics.

Speaker 1 (01:27:52):
For these times.

Speaker 3 (01:27:53):
It's good policy.

Speaker 9 (01:27:54):
I think it's good policy to take away to take
an incentive for states to raise taxes.

Speaker 1 (01:27:59):
Right, got you?

Speaker 2 (01:28:00):
Lowering or better yet, eliminating assault deduction would be good policy.

Speaker 1 (01:28:04):
I couldn't agree with you more.

Speaker 2 (01:28:06):
I want to talk about do you do you have
anything more you want to say on BBB right now?

Speaker 1 (01:28:10):
Or can I move to another.

Speaker 3 (01:28:12):
You do three hours of the BBB what else you
want to do?

Speaker 2 (01:28:15):
I want to actually talk about a couple of things
you mentioned in your Twitter or x feed recently, both
of which are very much in the news right now.

Speaker 1 (01:28:23):
So when first, let's start with this autopen thing.

Speaker 2 (01:28:27):
So when when the when the autopen story first came up?
And you know, I'm not a Republican, I'm not a Democrat.
I tend to vote libertarian sometimes Republican. I never vote Democrat.
But you know, it was like, Okay, here's just more
of like the James Comer type, looking for anything to
complain about Joe Biden about. But as I hear more

(01:28:48):
about it, and as we learn more about Biden's cognitive incompetencies,
I think I'm even skeptical. Ross is starting to think
maybe there's an act actual issue here. And the question
I guess is might some people have signed stuff with
the autopen with the President's signature that the president didn't

(01:29:09):
know or order to be signed?

Speaker 3 (01:29:12):
Yeah?

Speaker 9 (01:29:13):
And I think the short answer is yes, I think
that's absolutely legitimate. By the way, I'm with you, I
don't you know. I'm not a conspiracy theorist guy. I
want to see facts. I want to see evidence. But
are standing. There was some testimony yesterday we're near Tandent
who was running the Domestic Policy Council, said that she
was a control of the autopen and there may be
some evidence that she used it without approval.

Speaker 3 (01:29:30):
That's wrong. You can't.

Speaker 9 (01:29:31):
We don't elect near to a t whoever. Last time,
I think it's tanded near a Tandent. We elected Joe Biden,
and the unauthorized use of the autopen is a serious thing.

Speaker 3 (01:29:41):
Keep in mind, Ross.

Speaker 9 (01:29:42):
Let's take one specific example on those pardons that were
that we think may be signed by autopen.

Speaker 3 (01:29:48):
Right, all all.

Speaker 9 (01:29:51):
Joe Biden has had to do is go in front
of a camera someplace and say yes, I approved of
those pardons. And he hasn't done that yet. What do
we three months into the this discussion already. So it
does raise the very real possibility that there was abuse
of power here, and that is a real problem. I
wish the Democrats, and I tell my Democrat friendsist on
News Nation, because we're on with Democrats Republicans all time,

(01:30:12):
and on things I like about is we can have legit,
you know, adult conversations without yelling and his experience. Like, guys, look,
you know at some point you were going to want
to make an issue of of of of Donald Trump's
mental capacity. Why are you ignoring all all of these
issues regarding Biden's mental capacity. You would have so much
more credibility if you would treat both parties the same,

(01:30:33):
right on the facts and so forth. And no one
wants to do it. None of the Democrats want to
have any discussion about.

Speaker 3 (01:30:38):
This auto pen. It is a real serious matter, or
at least appears to be.

Speaker 9 (01:30:41):
And again there's evidence that way now it's not just
conspiracy theories.

Speaker 3 (01:30:45):
And I hope it gets the attention it deserves.

Speaker 2 (01:30:47):
Oh my god, Mick, are you telling me there's hypocrisy
in Washington?

Speaker 3 (01:30:51):
You know, we don't know what the meaning of the
word is here.

Speaker 4 (01:30:53):
M h.

Speaker 2 (01:30:54):
So we're talking with Mick Mulvaney, who served as chief
of Staff and Director of Office of Management and Budget
in Donald Trump's first term.

Speaker 1 (01:31:01):
Also served in Congress for eight years, eight years. Is
that right, Nick?

Speaker 9 (01:31:07):
I was in Congress for six elected to eight and
then I left to go run omb Okay after.

Speaker 1 (01:31:11):
Six years, elected to four terms.

Speaker 2 (01:31:13):
And now he's a political and economic contributor at at NewsNation.
Last thing on the auto pen thing, So I find
it unlikely, but you know, the ins and out's better
than I do.

Speaker 1 (01:31:25):
That even if a lot of people believe that.

Speaker 2 (01:31:27):
This was that something wrong happened here, I doubt there's
gonna be any consequences or any undoing of anything that
was signed.

Speaker 3 (01:31:35):
But ah, let's play the chess game.

Speaker 9 (01:31:39):
Okay, Let's say there's a part and I don't know
who got a part. But let's say Ross gets a pardon, right,
or you got a pardon and we think it might
be from the auto pen.

Speaker 3 (01:31:47):
What does that pardon do?

Speaker 9 (01:31:47):
That pardon protects you against federal criminal charges? Well, what
if Pam Bondi decides, you know what, I want to
charge Ross?

Speaker 3 (01:31:54):
I go down and I charge, she goes down. She
charges Ross with.

Speaker 9 (01:31:57):
Whatever he might have been pardoned for and Ross you
have to come now and you hold up your pardon
and say, look, you can't do this to me because
I have this pardon. And she says, well, we're going
to challenge the legitimacy of the pardon, and now it
gets adjudicated.

Speaker 3 (01:32:10):
Now you get that battle.

Speaker 9 (01:32:11):
So there is a way to force this discussion outside
of Congress. And it wouldn't surprise me that Pambondi is
just you know, I mean, she's a wickedly smart woman
for sure.

Speaker 3 (01:32:20):
To come up with something exactly like that.

Speaker 2 (01:32:22):
Right, And just for the record, I'm not saying that
I think nothing with auto pen will be challenged. I
do think something will be challenged. I just don't think
Pambondi wins that case. I don't think I think courts
will be so reticent to, you know, undo something that
a president did, even if you and I think it

(01:32:44):
should be undone.

Speaker 9 (01:32:46):
Well possible, but I mean, if you're gonna call it
near teten Candid, whatever her name is, put her under
oath in court, not just talking to Congress. Now, I'm
talking about in court, hand on a Bible and say
did you have authority? Did you sign the autopen with
without the president's authority, Yes or no? She says yes,
Then there's a real questions whether or not those parts
are ali.

Speaker 1 (01:33:04):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:33:05):
Can you imagine if it gets there, and if we
get it would be great.

Speaker 1 (01:33:10):
Yeah, it as and not just in the pardons.

Speaker 2 (01:33:12):
Who knows what else was signed by auto pen as
far as executive orders in the last year and a
half or whenever Biden was really out of it.

Speaker 1 (01:33:21):
I mean it could be more than year and a half.

Speaker 9 (01:33:23):
I mean, who knows rules, regulations, executive orders. There's methods
for challenging those. All the times one gets challenged, the
rest of them might be Okay.

Speaker 2 (01:33:33):
There's another thing you mentioned on your Twitter feed that
I thought was real interesting, talking about how the Democrats
are jumping up and down asking for classified briefings about,
for example, battle damage assessment after the attack on the
Iraq nuclear facilities and other such things. And obviously, since
you were in Congress, since you were chief Staff, you've
been in a lot of these rooms in these conversations.

(01:33:54):
What do we need to know about these classified briefings
that are oh so important?

Speaker 3 (01:34:00):
Yeah?

Speaker 9 (01:34:00):
I had to laugh because I mean I saw Chuck
Schumer up there you know, just wailing and gnashing his
teeth over the fact there was no briefing.

Speaker 3 (01:34:06):
My guess is he wouldn't have gone anyway.

Speaker 9 (01:34:08):
Look, I've been at dozens of those briefings as a.

Speaker 3 (01:34:11):
Member of Congress.

Speaker 9 (01:34:12):
I never and this is not, this is not, this
is not an exaggeration. Never saw a single piece of
information in one of those classified briefings that I had
not seen on television or read one on the internet.

Speaker 3 (01:34:23):
They just don't.

Speaker 9 (01:34:24):
They don't share truly classified information with the broader members
of Congress. Ever, if you're on the Intelligence Committee, Democrat,
Republican either way, that's a different story. The Intel Committee
gets the real stuff, but the rank and file doesn't
because everybody knows the rank and file leaks and they're
never going to find out.

Speaker 3 (01:34:42):
Who did it.

Speaker 9 (01:34:43):
It's it's a violation of law to do it, but
they're never going to catch anybody, so they simply don't
tell Congress the really juicy stuff.

Speaker 3 (01:34:50):
And my guess.

Speaker 9 (01:34:51):
Is that most of the Democrats who are now pulling
their hair out over not getting the briefing wouldn't have
gone anyway because they know they weren't going to hear
anything interesting.

Speaker 1 (01:34:59):
I love that insight.

Speaker 2 (01:35:00):
Mick mulvaney former White House Chief of Staff, former Director
of Office of Management and Budget, former Member of Congress,
and currently, in addition to his regular day job, he
is a political and economic contributor at News Nation and
one of my very very favorite people to hear offer
opinions and insights. And I think you understand why after
hearing Nick just now. Nick, thanks so much for making

(01:35:23):
time for us. I always really enjoy having you on
the show.

Speaker 3 (01:35:26):
Ross, I'll talk to you, so thanks.

Speaker 1 (01:35:27):
All right, take it easy, Okay, that guy's a real slouch.
I mean, when is he going to do something with himself?
Come on, you know he's looking good, dude. Hi, Mandy, Hello,
what's up? You should do that forever?

Speaker 2 (01:35:47):
Welcome, Welcome, Welcome.

Speaker 10 (01:35:50):
It so pleasant, isn't it?

Speaker 1 (01:35:53):
Especially in that sing song.

Speaker 10 (01:35:56):
Everyone says it. You walk into a shop and they go,
canny you are.

Speaker 1 (01:36:01):
It's funny.

Speaker 2 (01:36:02):
So for I don't know how many of you right
now can see Mandy's face. Probably not that many of you,
because you know quite the right angle through the window
here to see Mandy's face.

Speaker 4 (01:36:11):
Check.

Speaker 2 (01:36:12):
But but you should see when Mandy does the kenichi
wah thing. She just looks blissful.

Speaker 1 (01:36:18):
You just look.

Speaker 2 (01:36:19):
It's like it raises your mood just to say it,
especially to say it that way.

Speaker 1 (01:36:23):
Absolutely does.

Speaker 10 (01:36:25):
And between that and my mission that I have, And
if people watch the side Hustle tomorrow afternoon, they'll see.

Speaker 3 (01:36:30):
Me talk about it on that.

Speaker 10 (01:36:31):
Yeah, Like I have been making an extra effort to
let people in in traffic and wave at them. Really,
and I think people think I'm crazy, but it makes
me happy. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not going
to be the person who lets a thousand people in. Right,
one person is plenty. I've done my duty. We're all
moving on right. They give them a little wave.

Speaker 1 (01:36:52):
How you did well? You I got one minute here?

Speaker 2 (01:36:54):
You uh. Probably more than any person in the history
of the human race has tried to educate people about
the zipper You know what, zipper merge people, Zipper merged.

Speaker 10 (01:37:07):
That was the second time this year that I agreed
with Kyle Clark. Kyle Clark and I were in agreeance
on something zipper today. Also, I have something I am
in an agreeance. An agreeance is a word. It's archaic, yes, yes,
but I'm bringing it back.

Speaker 2 (01:37:20):
So the beas means combining your missions right, being nice
and letting people in, yeah, and edumacating people about the zipper.
I think what you what you need to do is
you need to be in the in the lane that
continues through uh uh huh, and then you can let
someone in.

Speaker 1 (01:37:40):
That's what I do, yeh, what.

Speaker 3 (01:37:41):
I'm talking about, Ross.

Speaker 10 (01:37:42):
And since everything in the world in Colorado is under
construction right now, it's super easy to practice what you preach.

Speaker 1 (01:37:47):
What you got coming up? I got a thirty minute show.
Oh lucky you.

Speaker 3 (01:37:50):
Yeah, so I got a little of this, a little.

Speaker 1 (01:37:52):
Of that very shallow show today, Ross, super shallow.

Speaker 10 (01:37:56):
Okay, that a deep as a bag of Doritos.

Speaker 1 (01:38:00):
Everybody stick around for Mandy Conichiwa Connell