Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
My next guest, second time on the show with me,
also a huge Metallica fan. Actually is very not well
known about Mick mulvaney. Mick mulvaney that he has seen
Metallica somewhere around seventeen times.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Mick is the former.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
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
(00:38):
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 3 (00:54):
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 Markinnoffler, So that's about as.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Good as I go.
Speaker 3 (01:04):
In fact, I think the only time I've ever seen
Metallica was when they made a cameo appearance on what.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
Was that show on Netflix?
Speaker 3 (01:12):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (01:12):
Goodness? Interesting one about Wall Street? Oh? What about I
don't know, have yourill Billions? Billions? They did a cameo
on Billions one time. Really is that? That's about as
close as I got? So, No, I'm not a metallic again.
Is never a hair metal kind of guy? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (01:27):
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 2 (01:33):
Are you making that up?
Speaker 1 (01:36):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (01:36):
No, that's absolutely true.
Speaker 3 (01:38):
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 2 (01:50):
Wow, that's cool.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
I've only seen them once and 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 at it was at Madison Square Garden in
New York City when I was in college, and it
was it was a great show.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Oh I love that band. That's a great place to
see a show. Absolutely, I mean, what are you talk about? This?
Not much going on in Washington, so we can figure
out a way to fill some time.
Speaker 1 (02:12):
You know, as as I mentioned earlier, there was a
thing going on recently that that attracted a lot of attention,
and I keep forgetting what it was because out of
the news already it was it's like a war or
something like that.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
Which one, yeah, right, right, which way?
Speaker 1 (02:28):
And you know what, you and I will get to
some foreign policy and war stuff in a minute.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
But but the.
Speaker 1 (02:32):
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 you think
are important and good? And maybe you can name a
(02:53):
couple of things at the bill that you don't like
as much.
Speaker 3 (02:57):
Yeah, well, I mean the big thing is that and
this this goes in to 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,
(03:17):
no tax in overtime.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
I don't know what's going to make it in the
final bill.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
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.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
That's the biggest part of what this is all about.
Speaker 3 (03:35):
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 Management Budget, I care about
the numbers and the debt and the spending and the
big the big piece here on that is this extension
of the twenty seventeen t Trump tax cuts.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
I was talking with listeners about this earlier in the show,
and I noted, a gosh, I got to see if
I can find it.
Speaker 2 (04:02):
Anyway.
Speaker 1 (04:02):
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 here, sort of like that. Republicans negotiating because
something is polling badly, it means Republicans are looking for
ways to spend more or or heavy right or heavy.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
Yeah, that's about right.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
That's how you get thirty six trillion dollars in debt. 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. That's not how Washington works here.
A reduction is spending one hundred dollars this year at
one hundred and three dollars next year. That's a reduction
(04:47):
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
one year than the year before. So there is a
(05:08):
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, all that kind of stuff. No
one ever comes in and says, oh, my goodness, gracious,
the Republicans are actually trying to do something about the deficit.
That doesn't that doesn't sell advertising. So, you know the
Republicans as the Grinch does. And so it's just it's
(05:28):
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 (05:35):
Right, Okay, 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 fu I'm sorry.
Speaker 4 (05:44):
Leaders don't follow polls. They change them.
Speaker 1 (05:48):
And the example that I like to give on this
is how Donald Trump won his first election.
Speaker 4 (05:56):
Largely, not entirely, on the issue.
Speaker 1 (05:59):
Of immigration, and of course he did on the later
one win 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 not
(06:23):
just in you know, formerly smoke filled rooms with senators.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
That's fair.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
I mean, I wish you'd get out and talk more
about spending less. But he's not going to do that,
I don't think. But you're right, the man has a
tremendous ability to drive a narrative. Right now, most of
his efforts for ross are are are focused.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
On Washington, D C.
Speaker 3 (06:43):
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 spoke. 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 dozen
(07:07):
House members who have expressed concern over voting for it,
and so Trump's energies have been focused on those folks.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
But you're right, I mean, if one man.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
Can change a narrative nationwide, it's Donald Trump, and sooner
or later, I think you'll get around to that.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
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
(07:42):
what you just mentioned about a couple dozen House members,
do you think now this is more of a political
question than an economic tax question. 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
(08:04):
really upsets me.
Speaker 3 (08:07):
The answer your question is yes, if Donald Trump has
enough yank to get that done.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Yes, he does.
Speaker 3 (08:13):
In fact, I've talked to some folks inside the White
House and think that that's.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Exactly what it's going to come down to.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
Look, I respect Mike Lawler, He's representing his district.
Speaker 2 (08:21):
That's the nature of the beast. It just is what
it is. But you're absolutely right.
Speaker 3 (08:25):
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. What it did
was it used to be able to deduct your state
and local income taxes and other taxes, but let's talk.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
About the income tax.
Speaker 3 (08:45):
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 2 (08:51):
So essentially it gave the states.
Speaker 3 (08:54):
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, and that
moves a burden from federal government to or from the
state governs to the federal governments. It's good policy, and Trump,
I think, is still going to continue to defend it.
By the way, every time I hear the media talk
(09:15):
about how the Republicans are for the rich and so forth,
which you hear every single day. The twenty seventeen tax
provisions on salt were 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 gass some
of the wealth gaps between the middle class and the
wealthy during Trump's first term.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
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 for.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
These it's good policy.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
I think it's good policy to take away to take
it incentive for states to raise taxes.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
Right, I got you.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Lowering or better yet, eliminating assault deduction would be good policy.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
I couldn't agree with you more. I want to.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
Talk about do you do you have anything more you
want to say on BBB right now?
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Or can I move to another you do three hours
of the BBB? What else you want to do?
Speaker 1 (10:09):
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 4 (10:17):
So when first, let's start with this autopen thing.
Speaker 1 (10:21):
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.
Speaker 4 (10:31):
I never vote Democrat. But you know, it was like, Okay,
here's just.
Speaker 1 (10:35):
More of like the James Comer type, looking for anything
to complain about Joe Biden about. But as I hear
more 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 actual issue here, Like and
(10:56):
the question I guess is might some people have signed
stuff with the autopen with the President's signature that the
President didn't know or order to be signed.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
Yeah, And I think the short answer is yes, I
think it's absolutely legitimate.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
By the way, I'm with you, I don't you know,
I'm not a conspiracy theorist guy.
Speaker 3 (11:13):
I want to see facts, I want to see evidence,
but understanding, there was some testimony yesterday We're near Tandon,
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 2 (11:24):
That's wrong. You can't.
Speaker 3 (11:26):
We don't elect near to a tent. Whoever, last time,
I think it's tanded near a tandent. We elected Joe Biden,
and the unauthorized use of the autopen.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
Is a serious thing.
Speaker 3 (11:36):
Keep in mind, Ross, Let's take one specific example on
those pardons that were that we think may be signed
by autopen.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
Right, all, all.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
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 this discussion already. So it does
raise the very real possibility that there was abusive power here.
Speaker 2 (12:00):
That is a real problem.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
I wish the Democrats, and I tell my Democrat friends
this on News Nation because we're on with Democrats Republicans
all time, and on things I like about is we
can have legit, you know, adult conversations without yelling.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
And his experience.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
Like, guys, look, you know at some point you were
going to want to make an issue of.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
Donald Trump's mental capacity.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
Why are you ignoring all of these issues regarding Biden's
mental capacity? You would have so much more credibility if
you would treat both parties the same on the facts
and so forth, and no one wants to do it.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
None of the Democrats want to have any discussion about
this auto pen. It is a real serious matter, or
at least appears to be.
Speaker 3 (12:35):
And again there's evidence that way now it's not just
conspiracy theories, and I hope it gets the attention it deserves.
Speaker 1 (12:42):
Oh my god, Mick, are you telling me there's hypocrisy
in Washington?
Speaker 2 (12:45):
You know, we don't know what the meaning of the
word is here.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
H 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, also served in Congress
for eight years. Is that right now?
Speaker 2 (13:00):
Nick?
Speaker 3 (13:01):
I was in Congress for six elected to eight and
then I left to go run after six years.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
Elected to four terms.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
And now he's a political and economic contributor at at NewsNation.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
Last thing on the auto pen thing.
Speaker 1 (13:14):
So I find it unlikely, but you know, the ins
and out's better than I do.
Speaker 4 (13:20):
That even if a lot of people believe that this was.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
That something wrong happened here, I doubt there's going to
be any consequences or any undoing of anything that was signed.
Speaker 3 (13:30):
But ah, let's play the chess game. 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 2 (13:41):
What does that pardon do?
Speaker 3 (13:42):
That pardon protects you against federal criminal charges. But what
if Pam Bondi decides, you know what, I want to
charge Ross. I go down and I charge, She goes down.
She charges Ross with whatever he might have been pardoned for,
and Ross you have to come on now and you
hold up your pardon and say, look, you can't do
this to me because I have this pardon. And he says, well,
we're going to challenge the legitimacy of the pardon, and
(14:02):
now it gets adjudicated.
Speaker 2 (14:04):
Now you get that battle.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
So there is a way to force this discussion outside
of Congress. And it wouldn't surprise me that Pam Bondi
is just you know, I mean, she's a wickedly smart
woman for sure to come up with something exactly like that.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
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
Pam Bondi 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
(14:39):
it should be undone.
Speaker 3 (14:41):
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 auto pen
with without.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
The president's authority? Yes or no?
Speaker 3 (14:55):
She says yes, Then there's a real questions whether or
not those.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
Parts are valid. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (14:59):
Can you imagin if it gets there and if we
get it would be great?
Speaker 2 (15:04):
Yeah, it as and not just in the pardons.
Speaker 1 (15:06):
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, I
mean it could be more than year and a half.
I mean, who knows rules, regulations, executive orders.
Speaker 3 (15:21):
There's methods for challenging those times. As one gets challenged,
the rest of them might be Okay.
Speaker 1 (15:27):
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.
(15:48):
What do we need to know about these classified briefings
that are oh so important?
Speaker 2 (15:54):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (15:54):
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. My guess
is he wouldn't have gone anyway. Look, I've been at
dozens of those briefings as a member of Congress. 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
(16:15):
seen on television or read on the internet. They just
don't 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.
Speaker 2 (16:36):
Never going to find out who did it.
Speaker 3 (16:37):
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. And my guess 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 2 (16:53):
I love that insight.
Speaker 1 (16:55):
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 Mick just now. Nick, thanks so much for making
(17:17):
time for us. I always really enjoy having you on
the show.
Speaker 2 (17:20):
Ross, I'll talk to you soon. Thanks me all right,
take it easy,
My next guest, second time on the show with me,
also a huge Metallica fan. Actually is very not well
known about Mick mulvaney. Mick mulvaney that he has seen
Metallica somewhere around seventeen times.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Mick is the former.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
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
(00:38):
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 3 (00:54):
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 Markinnoffler, So that's about as.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Good as I go.
Speaker 3 (01:04):
In fact, I think the only time I've ever seen
Metallica was when they made a cameo appearance on what.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
Was that show on Netflix?
Speaker 3 (01:12):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (01:12):
Goodness? Interesting one about Wall Street? Oh? What about I
don't know, have yourill Billions? Billions? They did a cameo
on Billions one time. Really is that? That's about as
close as I got? So, No, I'm not a metallic again.
Is never a hair metal kind of guy? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (01:27):
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 2 (01:33):
Are you making that up?
Speaker 1 (01:36):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (01:36):
No, that's absolutely true.
Speaker 3 (01:38):
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 2 (01:50):
Wow, that's cool.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
I've only seen them once and 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 at it was at Madison Square Garden in
New York City when I was in college, and it
was it was a great show.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Oh I love that band. That's a great place to
see a show. Absolutely, I mean, what are you talk about? This?
Not much going on in Washington, so we can figure
out a way to fill some time.
Speaker 1 (02:12):
You know, as as I mentioned earlier, there was a
thing going on recently that that attracted a lot of attention,
and I keep forgetting what it was because out of
the news already it was it's like a war or
something like that.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
Which one, yeah, right, right, which way?
Speaker 1 (02:28):
And you know what, you and I will get to
some foreign policy and war stuff in a minute.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
But but the.
Speaker 1 (02:32):
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 you think
are important and good? And maybe you can name a
(02:53):
couple of things at the bill that you don't like
as much.
Speaker 3 (02:57):
Yeah, well, I mean the big thing is that and
this this goes in to 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,
(03:17):
no tax in overtime.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
I don't know what's going to make it in the
final bill.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
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.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
That's the biggest part of what this is all about.
Speaker 3 (03:35):
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 Management Budget, I care about
the numbers and the debt and the spending and the
big the big piece here on that is this extension
of the twenty seventeen t Trump tax cuts.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
I was talking with listeners about this earlier in the show,
and I noted, a gosh, I got to see if
I can find it.
Speaker 2 (04:02):
Anyway.
Speaker 1 (04:02):
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 here, sort of like that. Republicans negotiating because
something is polling badly, it means Republicans are looking for
ways to spend more or or heavy right or heavy.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
Yeah, that's about right.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
That's how you get thirty six trillion dollars in debt. 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. That's not how Washington works here.
A reduction is spending one hundred dollars this year at
one hundred and three dollars next year. That's a reduction
(04:47):
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
one year than the year before. So there is a
(05:08):
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, all that kind of stuff. No
one ever comes in and says, oh, my goodness, gracious,
the Republicans are actually trying to do something about the deficit.
That doesn't that doesn't sell advertising. So, you know the
Republicans as the Grinch does. And so it's just it's
(05:28):
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 (05:35):
Right, Okay, 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 fu I'm sorry.
Speaker 4 (05:44):
Leaders don't follow polls. They change them.
Speaker 1 (05:48):
And the example that I like to give on this
is how Donald Trump won his first election.
Speaker 4 (05:56):
Largely, not entirely, on the issue.
Speaker 1 (05:59):
Of immigration, and of course he did on the later
one win 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 not
(06:23):
just in you know, formerly smoke filled rooms with senators.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
That's fair.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
I mean, I wish you'd get out and talk more
about spending less. But he's not going to do that,
I don't think. But you're right, the man has a
tremendous ability to drive a narrative. Right now, most of
his efforts for ross are are are focused.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
On Washington, D C.
Speaker 3 (06:43):
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 spoke. 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 dozen
(07:07):
House members who have expressed concern over voting for it,
and so Trump's energies have been focused on those folks.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
But you're right, I mean, if one man.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
Can change a narrative nationwide, it's Donald Trump, and sooner
or later, I think you'll get around to that.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
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
(07:42):
what you just mentioned about a couple dozen House members,
do you think now this is more of a political
question than an economic tax question. 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
(08:04):
really upsets me.
Speaker 3 (08:07):
The answer your question is yes, if Donald Trump has
enough yank to get that done.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Yes, he does.
Speaker 3 (08:13):
In fact, I've talked to some folks inside the White
House and think that that's.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Exactly what it's going to come down to.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
Look, I respect Mike Lawler, He's representing his district.
Speaker 2 (08:21):
That's the nature of the beast. It just is what
it is. But you're absolutely right.
Speaker 3 (08:25):
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. What it did
was it used to be able to deduct your state
and local income taxes and other taxes, but let's talk.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
About the income tax.
Speaker 3 (08:45):
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 2 (08:51):
So essentially it gave the states.
Speaker 3 (08:54):
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, and that
moves a burden from federal government to or from the
state governs to the federal governments. It's good policy, and Trump,
I think, is still going to continue to defend it.
By the way, every time I hear the media talk
(09:15):
about how the Republicans are for the rich and so forth,
which you hear every single day. The twenty seventeen tax
provisions on salt were 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 gass some
of the wealth gaps between the middle class and the
wealthy during Trump's first term.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
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 for.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
These it's good policy.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
I think it's good policy to take away to take
it incentive for states to raise taxes.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
Right, I got you.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Lowering or better yet, eliminating assault deduction would be good policy.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
I couldn't agree with you more. I want to.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
Talk about do you do you have anything more you
want to say on BBB right now?
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Or can I move to another you do three hours
of the BBB? What else you want to do?
Speaker 1 (10:09):
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 4 (10:17):
So when first, let's start with this autopen thing.
Speaker 1 (10:21):
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.
Speaker 4 (10:31):
I never vote Democrat. But you know, it was like, Okay,
here's just.
Speaker 1 (10:35):
More of like the James Comer type, looking for anything
to complain about Joe Biden about. But as I hear
more 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 actual issue here, Like and
(10:56):
the question I guess is might some people have signed
stuff with the autopen with the President's signature that the
President didn't know or order to be signed.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
Yeah, And I think the short answer is yes, I
think it's absolutely legitimate.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
By the way, I'm with you, I don't you know,
I'm not a conspiracy theorist guy.
Speaker 3 (11:13):
I want to see facts, I want to see evidence,
but understanding, there was some testimony yesterday We're near Tandon,
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 2 (11:24):
That's wrong. You can't.
Speaker 3 (11:26):
We don't elect near to a tent. Whoever, last time,
I think it's tanded near a tandent. We elected Joe Biden,
and the unauthorized use of the autopen.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
Is a serious thing.
Speaker 3 (11:36):
Keep in mind, Ross, Let's take one specific example on
those pardons that were that we think may be signed
by autopen.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
Right, all, all.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
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 this discussion already. So it does
raise the very real possibility that there was abusive power here.
Speaker 2 (12:00):
That is a real problem.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
I wish the Democrats, and I tell my Democrat friends
this on News Nation because we're on with Democrats Republicans
all time, and on things I like about is we
can have legit, you know, adult conversations without yelling.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
And his experience.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
Like, guys, look, you know at some point you were
going to want to make an issue of.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
Donald Trump's mental capacity.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
Why are you ignoring all of these issues regarding Biden's
mental capacity? You would have so much more credibility if
you would treat both parties the same on the facts
and so forth, and no one wants to do it.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
None of the Democrats want to have any discussion about
this auto pen. It is a real serious matter, or
at least appears to be.
Speaker 3 (12:35):
And again there's evidence that way now it's not just
conspiracy theories, and I hope it gets the attention it deserves.
Speaker 1 (12:42):
Oh my god, Mick, are you telling me there's hypocrisy
in Washington?
Speaker 2 (12:45):
You know, we don't know what the meaning of the
word is here.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
H 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, also served in Congress
for eight years. Is that right now?
Speaker 2 (13:00):
Nick?
Speaker 3 (13:01):
I was in Congress for six elected to eight and
then I left to go run after six years.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
Elected to four terms.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
And now he's a political and economic contributor at at NewsNation.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
Last thing on the auto pen thing.
Speaker 1 (13:14):
So I find it unlikely, but you know, the ins
and out's better than I do.
Speaker 4 (13:20):
That even if a lot of people believe that this was.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
That something wrong happened here, I doubt there's going to
be any consequences or any undoing of anything that was signed.
Speaker 3 (13:30):
But ah, let's play the chess game. 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 2 (13:41):
What does that pardon do?
Speaker 3 (13:42):
That pardon protects you against federal criminal charges. But what
if Pam Bondi decides, you know what, I want to
charge Ross. I go down and I charge, She goes down.
She charges Ross with whatever he might have been pardoned for,
and Ross you have to come on now and you
hold up your pardon and say, look, you can't do
this to me because I have this pardon. And he says, well,
we're going to challenge the legitimacy of the pardon, and
(14:02):
now it gets adjudicated.
Speaker 2 (14:04):
Now you get that battle.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
So there is a way to force this discussion outside
of Congress. And it wouldn't surprise me that Pam Bondi
is just you know, I mean, she's a wickedly smart
woman for sure to come up with something exactly like that.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
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
Pam Bondi 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
(14:39):
it should be undone.
Speaker 3 (14:41):
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 auto pen
with without.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
The president's authority? Yes or no?
Speaker 3 (14:55):
She says yes, Then there's a real questions whether or
not those.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
Parts are valid. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (14:59):
Can you imagin if it gets there and if we
get it would be great?
Speaker 2 (15:04):
Yeah, it as and not just in the pardons.
Speaker 1 (15:06):
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, I
mean it could be more than year and a half.
I mean, who knows rules, regulations, executive orders.
Speaker 3 (15:21):
There's methods for challenging those times. As one gets challenged,
the rest of them might be Okay.
Speaker 1 (15:27):
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.
(15:48):
What do we need to know about these classified briefings
that are oh so important?
Speaker 2 (15:54):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (15:54):
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. My guess
is he wouldn't have gone anyway. Look, I've been at
dozens of those briefings as a member of Congress. 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
(16:15):
seen on television or read on the internet. They just
don't 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.
Speaker 2 (16:36):
Never going to find out who did it.
Speaker 3 (16:37):
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. And my guess 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 2 (16:53):
I love that insight.
Speaker 1 (16:55):
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 Mick just now. Nick, thanks so much for making
(17:17):
time for us. I always really enjoy having you on
the show.
Speaker 2 (17:20):
Ross, I'll talk to you soon. Thanks me all right,
take it easy,
The Ross Kaminsky Show News
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com