January 9, 2026 • 30 mins
(January 09, 2025)
House passes bill to extend healthcare subsidies. Minnesota officials and Trump administration battle over investigation into Minneapolis ICE shooting. December jobs report, data set to cap off worst year of hiring in decades. California sues Trump admin…again… this time over $10BIL freeze in childcare funds.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
Six forty Bill Handle here. Yes, it is a Friday morning,
January ninth. Oh, okay, We've got all kinds of stories
to talk about what's going on in Minneapolis. A real
fun one at eight fifty. And that's how dogs gifted dogs.
Didn't even know that there were gifted dogs unless you
get a dog for free. They can actually learn new
(00:30):
words by eves dropping dogs eve drop and they know
new words and they can learn them. That's a great story.
I'm just reading the research here. It's kind of insane.
So I'll be doing that at eight fifty. Last segment
on a Friday. Okay, ongoing the case between California and
(00:56):
the Trump administration, and we're going to be talking about
that big time. Well, here is a new one that
just came down the House passed. Oh do I get
the wrong one here? Yeah, yeah, we'll do that later on.
I'm sorry. This has to do with what happened yesterday
in terms of the healthcare subsidies. As you know Obamacare,
(01:20):
it allows for extended tax credits.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
This is what Biden put into place as.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
A result of the pandemic helping people who heretofore didn't
have medical insurance all of a sudden have medical insurance,
like twenty million people. Well, it's sunseted January first or
December thirty one. Done, and there has been a fight
like crazy to extend that. Now, keep in mind, the
(01:45):
Republicans have fought Obamacare and every aspect of Obamacare since the.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Day it was passed.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Bill after bill, I think there's sixty or seventy bills
were introduced to kill Obamacare, and of course the Republicans
kept on saying, it's terrible, horrible, it's horrible, it's terrible.
And then the question is, well, do you have to
anything to replace it? No, but as terrible, as horrible,
as god awful.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
So with that in mind, now came the issue of
the end of the subsidies allowing twenty some oni million
people to have insurance or could afford insurance under Obamacare
because of the subsidies, and the Republicans said, nope, absolutely not,
and so something and there was no way it was
(02:28):
going to be coming to the floor. There was no
way a vote was going to be put on the
floor because it's a Republican speaker Mike Johnson, who controls that.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
He's the one that controls what vote takes place.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Unless something called a discharge petition is voted into place,
which unlocks debate bypasses the speaker and goes on to
the floor for a vote. Well, that discharge petition was
voted on, and it won just by a few I
think there were five Republicans that jumped to the other side,
(03:00):
and Trump immediately went nuts and said, they're not going
to be in the set in the House anymore.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
I'm going to make sure that they're primaried out.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
I mean, you don't go against the president, which is
why so many Republicans are scared to.
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Death to say anything against the president.
Speaker 2 (03:15):
So what ended up happening It is it's passed two
hundred and thirty to one ninety six to extend those
affordable care subsidies for three years. Seventeen Republicans jumped, defied
leadership and joined the Democrats on this one. This is
(03:36):
what the Democrats did. I have to have a funding bill,
and we didn't have it. We had the biggest stoppage,
the longest stoppage in the history United States in terms
of the government shutting down.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
It was over this issue.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
It was over the subsidies under Obamacare. Thirty eight days
and what the what Congress wanted to do with the
Democrats say, let's extend this thing for three years while
we work out what's going on. Well, in the end,
what happened. The Democrats caved, Donald Trump won, and the
(04:08):
extension did happen. But the extension only happened till the
end of January. And in the middle of all that,
the promise was made to the Democrats that we will
talk about extending. Well they weren't talking about extending. That
just was a non starter. Why because well, everybody lies
(04:29):
to everybody, and so whoever promises one thing, it just
doesn't happen. And welcome to Congress, and so fine. So
now this thing ends December thirty one, the extended subsidies,
and all of a sudden, twenty million people are looking
at not having medical insurance under Obamacare. Now you may
(04:51):
think it's horrible, and a lot of people do. And
there are a lot of holes to be plugged, and
I don't disagree. There are a lot of problems with it,
but it's insurance versus not having Obamacare, where it's zero
insurance without these subsidies, and that's over twenty million people
that are affected. So the Democrats are saying, we need
(05:11):
those three years. The Republicans under Johnson say no, we're
not going to give.
Speaker 1 (05:15):
Them to you.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
So the discharge petition is voted on with five Republicans
jumping ship, and the House passed the bill to extend
by two thirty to one ninety six, with seventeen Republicans
jumping over to the under side to join the Democrats.
And it all has to do with affordability. The President
(05:38):
has a real interesting issue here because Congress has passed
the bill. The Senate it has failed even though this
bill has been introduced in the Senate. But they are
now senators and congress people who are sitting down and
trying to come up with some reconciliation. Both the House
and the Senate have to pass the same bill before
it goes forward for signature by the President, and they're
(06:01):
now trying to come to some reconciliation. And that's usually
what happens. You have a House bill, you have a
Senate bill. The Senate puts three four or five people
into a room, the Democrats. The House puts three four
or five people into a room on both sides of
the aisle, and everybody sits down, thrashes out a bill,
(06:22):
compromises here, pushes there, and finally a bill is put
through and the president signs it. Well, that's happening right
now before the Senate votes, and then it goes to
the president. Assuming that the bill goes through, don't know,
it's up in the air as far as the Senate
is concerned.
Speaker 1 (06:40):
Now what does the president do? I think he's going
to veto it.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
And there's three things that the president can do is
sign it, veto it, or just let it sit there
for ten days and do nothing and it becomes law.
And that's the easiest way because it quietly becomes law.
The president is involved. There are no press conferences, there
are no table set up where his signature is put
(07:06):
on a piece of paper, a directive with everybody behind
the president, those people that are in favor of the
bill being signed, and then the president hands out the pens.
I've often went hands out like thirty pins. I've often wondered,
how do you sign something with thirty pens? I don't
get that, but that's what normally happens. You'll see one
of the most infamous ones, or one of the most
(07:29):
famous ones, is President Johnson handing the pen to Martin
Luther King when the nineteen sixty five Voting Rights Act
was passed, And there's an iconic photo of the President
handing Martin Luther King that pen. So we're seeing what's
going to happen. But this is very rare. What does
this mean? That means they're cracks starting to happen, that
(07:53):
there are now a few Republicans who are who are
who are vulnerable. Okay, let's just say they're those who
have to resign. There's no issue, they don't care. But
there are a few Republicans who are in district swing
districts that are vulnerable can be voted out. And all
of a sudden, you know, backing up the President when
he says affordability is a hoax, is a Democrat hoax,
(08:18):
And all of a sudden you have a Republican congress
person nods his head and goes, that's right, that's right,
it's a hoax. It's a hoax. The President says it's
a hoax, therefore it's a hoax. Well, you're telling that
to people who constituents w or have a hard time
making the rent, whor have a hard time buying groceries,
who have to decide do we buy medicine or do
(08:40):
we buy groceries. And you have a Republican in this case,
Republican congress person parroting it's a hoax.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
It's a hoax. Well it's not. And the president is
moving away from that by the way.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
He has gone from it's a Democrat hoax to now
he is the affordability president.
Speaker 1 (08:58):
Eh, we'll see what happens. Anyways, that's what happened yesterday.
I wanted to share that with you.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
Okay, maybe I got that one wrong, but let me
tell you one that I think I'm going to get
right or at least explain what's going on. And this
has to do with the Ice shooting of that thirty
seven year old woman. It happened a couple of days ago.
So whenever there is an officer involved shooting, particularly when
(09:24):
there is a death involved, particularly there is an investigation.
Of course, the police investigation happens. So this was a
federal officer, an ice agent, who shot this woman. And
I'm not going to get into the particulars as to
was the agent was it justified shooting.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
Was he in fact in.
Speaker 2 (09:51):
Danger of being run over and therefore it was self defense.
I mean, we've gone through that. You probably have seen
the video, and there is a slight argument that it
was self defense. Not much of one in my opinion,
because as you know, Good turned right there, she is
in her SUV. The police officers, the ICE agents go
(10:14):
up to her as they're talking to her in hand
on the door. Right, the Asian has a hand on
the door. She is backing up and appears to be
turning away from the agent who was on her left
side fender area, and then the agent shot a few
times and killed her, shot her in the head. So
that issue, whether or not that was justified or not,
(10:37):
is one aspect of this case.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
Another one is the jurisdiction.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
You heard Vance say yesterday that the ICE agent has
total immunity, can't even be tried by the state of Minnesota.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
Now, originally it was announced that it.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
Was going to be a joint investigation by the state,
the BCA of the State of Minnesota, that's their investigative arm,
the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension with the FBI well
and the government.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
US government said yeah, that's what's going to happen.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
Well, the FBI soon reversed course and almost immediately now
the state's not getting involved. This is simply an FBI issue.
Will do our own investigating? What investigation? Because Christinome within
minutes after the shooting was announced, straight out and maybe
even before she saw the video, for all I know,
(11:37):
said this was self defense, this was a justified shooting.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
Conversation over Vance said the same thing.
Speaker 2 (11:44):
The President posts that it was defensible, and so the
government has already made his decision. There is no investigation.
Now the FBI is still there. But you tell me
what kind of investigation? What kind of conclusion the FBI
is going to have after the Department of Homeland Security,
of which the FBI is under, the president and the
(12:04):
Vice president all saying this was a justifiable shooting, what
do you think the conclusions are going to be? So
with that, where is the investigation? Where is the jurisdiction?
Because it was a federal agent, does the State of
Minnesota have the right to investigate and try and adjudicate
(12:29):
adjudicate the issue of whether the agent was this was
self defense or not. And it gets a little complicated
because it's not that easy.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
What ends up happening on Renee.
Speaker 2 (12:40):
Nicole Macklin Good was shot killed by the ice officer.
The analysis by The New York Times of the videos
found that the footage contradicted what the Trump administration's account
was of the shooting defense versus not defense move.
Speaker 1 (12:58):
Okay, so here's what happens.
Speaker 2 (13:01):
Van says, you have federal law enforcement official engaging in
a federal law enforcement action that's a federal issue. The
police officer, the I Sation is protected by absolute immunity.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
He is doing his job.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
And the idea that Tim Wilson a bunch of radicals
in Minneapolis is always radicals, the left wing radical wackos.
The fact that Waltz and a bunch of radicals are
going to go after this guy and make his life
miserable is preposterous. And Walts Democratic governor, demanded that the
state investigators be allowed to participate in the investigation.
Speaker 1 (13:37):
Is a joint investigation? Why?
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Because, yeah, it's a federal officer. But the shooting occurred
in Minneapolis. And the issue is does the federal law
does the investigation by federal authorities supersed anything the state
is doing. Usually under these circumstances as a joint investigation
and federal officers can be charged because a crime was
(14:01):
committed or a crime is presumed to have been committed
on Minnesota Minnesota soil. And quite often you know that
there are cases that are brought up that either the
state or the Feds can charge, and usually one or
the other agrees. Now, there as certain cases that can
only be charged federally, and that is a crime committed
(14:24):
on federal land parks for example, federal parks, well, the
state has absolutely no jurisdiction there.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
But this was not in a federal park. This was
just the public street. And so what happens.
Speaker 2 (14:38):
What's going to happen, My guess is the Feds are
going to prevail on this one because under the Supremacy
Clause of the United States, federal law supersedes state law. However,
this is a jurisdictional issue, and it's going to take
a judge to determine whether it is whether Minnesota should
(15:01):
engage in this or can even try the ice agent.
We don't know, but it's going to take a federal
judge to make that decision. And up to this point,
federal judges usually go on behalf of the Feds. By
the way, when I say a federal judge, federal judge
is not under the auspices of the federal government.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
That's an independent agency.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
We're talking about the court system, the judiciary, which is
separate than the executive, which is separate than the legislative.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
Although of these days it's kind of all mixed up,
isn't it. As we know, so what are we going
to see. You're going to see a fight.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
You're going to see a fight where the state is
determining and saying, hey, listen, we have jurisdiction here. We
should have the ability to investigate. The Feds are saying no,
you don't. By the way, as a practical course, the
Feds have shut out the state.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
They will not produce.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
The FBI came in almost immediately and gathered evidence, talk
to witnesses, and will not share any of that with
the state Minnesota. And so the head of the BCA,
the investigative arm of Minnesota, the Minnesota Bureau of the
Criminal Apprehension, has said we're done. We have no information,
(16:14):
we have no evidence, we have no witness statements. That's
all been done by the FBI and the GRAB it
all and will not turn it over. So as a
practical measure, is there going to be a Minnesota state investigation? No?
Not really, why because you know, at this point the
Feds just don't pay attention. You know, we've got a
(16:35):
situation with a federal government that believes it is far
reaching to the point where it overrides anything Congress says,
overrides anything the judiciary says.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
Welcome to America. All right.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
The jobs report just came out this morning at five
point thirty on at our time, and this is really
important stuff when the federal jobs report comes out because
so much of the economy is predicated on that report,
and so this gets it was okay, real quickly, fifty
thousand jobs radded in December.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
Oh, it's not bad. That's a solid gain for the economy,
but also it ends.
Speaker 2 (17:11):
The worst year for the labor market since the pandemic recession.
These numbers are astoundingly wonky how this comes out, and
politics are all through this thing too. So what ends
up happening is they're looking at October and there was
an initial announcement the Fed, the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(17:33):
comes out and gives you a number and then a
month later, two months later, they start revising it as
more numbers come in, and the revisions can be pretty dramatic. Now,
when the numbers are higher than expected, oh boy, the administration,
any administration, by the way, takes credit for it.
Speaker 1 (17:52):
And when the numbers are revised lower.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
Because there's more information, well, in the case of Donald Trump,
he's firing everybody in the Labor Statistics says no, we
need better numbers. And it's a Department of Labor Statistics
is an independent or a quasi independent department, which that's
going to disappear very quickly. So the job creation for
October was revised weaker, showing the economy actually lost one
(18:17):
hundred and seventy three thousand jobs that month.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
Tens of thousands of.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
Federal workers took a deferred resignation package, and November job
creation was revised down slightly. So the economists had estimated
that the employers added seventy three thousand jobs in December.
And so this gets really complicated. I'm going to try
to unwank it a little bit because there are so
(18:43):
many factors to this job market. Unemployment rates are all
over the place because there's U two and U three.
For example, people looking for work, people who have dropped
out of the market, who no longer count For example,
if you've been unemployed for a year and you go
I'm done, I'm not I'm going to go back to school,
you're not even counted as unemployed because you've dropped out
(19:05):
of the job market. According to some labor statistics, others
are different. So, for example, here we go in twenty
twenty five, the labor market was better than expected even
under Trump administration policies. Tariff and immigration enforcement policies still
going through the economy, but layoffs, which is another statistic,
(19:29):
are now contained, layoffs hitting a seventeen month low in December,
much better than expected. However, it's a lot more difficult
to get a job now. Corporate America is looking to
an extended hiring pause.
Speaker 1 (19:47):
And why is that.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Well, AI is stopping Corporate America from hiring people.
Speaker 1 (19:55):
It is much harder to.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
Get a job, particularly in those sectors in which AI
really is booming, legal sector, the computer sector. Certainly, entry
level computer folks just don't get a job. Also, the
Alliance Trade America's economists, and that's one of the big ones,
(20:17):
said a lot of job openings are ghost openings, which
means that they're posted, but they're really not meant to
be filled unless an awesome candidate comes along. They're just
up there looking for that perfect banner woman who has
extraordinary skills.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
This is about a real job opening.
Speaker 2 (20:37):
Now, fifty thousand job opening, fifty thousand jobs have actually
been increased, have actually now been added to the economy.
Some economists say that it's possible that fifty thousand jobs
a month is enough to maintain a healthy labor market.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
Others say no, but why.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
Net immigration plummeted in twenty twenty five, So if you
have fewer people, you really need fewer jobs, and so
fifty thousand jobs a month seems to be okay. However,
corporations are not hiring for the most part. Even though
the December numbers seem to be pretty good, they're less
(21:18):
than what was expected, which means that the economy is
going south, except that it means that it's still healthy
because we need fewer jobs out there.
Speaker 1 (21:33):
Am I making that clear? That's how crazy this is.
Speaker 2 (21:38):
And to look at labor statistics, which are critically important
in terms of the way our economy is based. The
Fed looks at labor statistics when dealing.
Speaker 1 (21:50):
With interest rates.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
Corporations look at labor statistics in terms of trying to
figure out what's going to happen in the future. And
you've got recession issues from the pandemic, you've got AI issues,
you've got immigration issues.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
It's how about jobs under the table?
Speaker 2 (22:09):
Where economy is based on the agriculture industry, what's happening
now because there are no illegal migrants coming in, which
is great unless you happen to be unless you own
a farm, unless you're in the construction industry, where so
many illegal migrants work and they create a big part
of the economy. So what's the bottom line here? You
(22:34):
don't know what the hell's going on. And more importantly,
I don't know what the hell's going on. But my
job is to try to explain to you something that
I don't know what the hell's going on. And even
if I did explain it to you appropriately, you still
wouldn't know what the hell's going on.
Speaker 1 (22:50):
This is a handle topic. This is what we do
every single day.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
Okay, Now I talk about this lot, the ongoing fight
between the Trump administration and California, and you've got left
wing wackos, you know, the radical left versus the crazy right,
the folks that don't believe in the constitution read the
(23:18):
Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
Those are the fights going back and forth.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
It is as polarized as you can humanly get one
thing about the president. And he has said this, and
we elected him based on this. You say no to me,
I hit you back, or you fight me. You hit
me once, I hit you back twice.
Speaker 1 (23:35):
He is not adverse to having a fight.
Speaker 2 (23:38):
He is conservative, actually is more of a populist, but
he certainly aligns himself with the super conservative movement read Maga.
On the other side, is a super liberal movement read California.
Speaker 1 (23:50):
Well, there's the fight now.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
The problem is that when you're dealing with those kinds
of fights between the Feds and the states, Feds have
a lot of power because a lot of federal dollars
go into the programs that the states have.
Speaker 1 (24:04):
So California just sue the Trump administration. Why is that?
Speaker 2 (24:09):
Well, the Trump administration has frozen ten billion dollars in
childcare and family assistant not.
Speaker 1 (24:18):
To ten billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
Now, this is no small amount of change, and the
lawsuit said that the freeze is based on unsupported allegations
of fraud and violates Congress's spending power. That's another fight
that the president is having with Congress. The President says,
I have the power, you don't, Congress.
Speaker 1 (24:38):
But Congress says, well, here it is in the constitution.
It doesn't matter. I have the power.
Speaker 2 (24:43):
And of course there are so many Republicans in Congress
they have to agree with the president. Why is that
Because he has the power to primary them out. He
literally can go into a district and say I support
the opponent of the the city in Congress person, and
in the primary, the city in Congress person is gone.
(25:05):
The president has that kind of power politically speaking, and
is taking that kind of power judicially speaking or in
terms of administratively speaking by saying, unilaterally, without Congress, we're
freezing ten billion dollars in childcare and family assistance based
(25:26):
on fraud, widespread fraud, and here is and he's done
this to other states. And of course the argument this
is political, No, it's not, it's all about fraud. Well,
why is it that only the Democratic cities and the
Democrat states are getting nailed? Well, because you're the fraudulent ones. Well,
(25:51):
does that mean that there is no fraud in Republican states,
there is no fraud in Republican cities. Why aren't you
investigating fraud? For example, Letitia James, who is the DA
in Manhattan, is being tried and investigated for fraud because
(26:15):
she signed a document saying that she lived in one
place versus living in another place. She claims that there's
no fraud involved, and that's another issue, but the Trump
administration is going balls to the wall doing everything it
can to put her in prison for this. In the meantime,
you have well fifteen sixteen hundred, sixteen hundred insurgents who
(26:41):
overran the capital arguing to undo the government. We have
to take over the government. They all got pardoned. There
are billionaires, multi billionaires who have screwed people out of
literally hundreds of millions of dollars pardoned. Why Because it's
one side believes in what the president says.
Speaker 1 (27:03):
On the other side is on the other side on
the other side.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
So the argument of polarization and the politicizing of this,
to me, it's obvious, and to you it has to
be obvious. I mean, do you really believe let me
ask you a question. Okay, even if you are a
Trump supporter, okay, And by the way, I have no
problem with people being Trump supporters, you know, Conservatives, liberals, Democrats,
(27:31):
or Republicans. To me, it's all the same. I have
voted both ways, I have supported both sides. But my
question is, do you really believe that fraud only takes
place in democratically led cities and states, that no fraud
exists in the Republican states jurisdictions none, and criminal activity,
(27:59):
strangely enough, only goes against in terms of this level,
against those that oppose Donald Trump. For example, Mark Kelly,
Senator from Arizona, was one of those five senators who
did that videotape saying to the arm services you do.
Speaker 1 (28:22):
Not follow illegal acts.
Speaker 2 (28:24):
Has to do with the allegation that the president is
acting unconstitutionally. Well, Pete Hegseth is now bringing Mark Kelly
up and is going to demote him because he is
allowed to do that because Mark Kelly is still in
the reserves, which means he is still under the jurisdiction
of the Defense Department, and Pete Headseth is bringing up
(28:47):
to demote him and cut his retirement. And let me
tell you the defense that Mark Kelly has it's in
the rules, it's in the code of the Military justice system.
You can't follow an illegal act or an illegal order. Well,
(29:09):
heg Seth said that sedition, that's being a traitor. And
does he have the right to Does heag Seth have
a right to demote Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, Well, yeah,
he has the right. Does it mean anything because the
guy's been out of the army the Armed services for years.
(29:34):
He does have the right, But it has to do
with his retirement, his pension. That is where the issue
is here. And heg Seth can really screw Mark Kelly
and is going to go forward. Now they'll be, of course,
an appeal and is going to go up and will
a court martial effectively be instituted And we'll see which
way that goes. But it's this is ten billion dollars, right,
(29:57):
this is just the start. By the way, We've got
more and more and more of these coming in. It's just, uh,
you know, it's it's really tough. It really is tough.
And I hate this level of politics where it's not
only a question of polarization, but it's just it's just cruel.
I mean, that's what it is. It's just cruel. I mean,
(30:18):
you can argue all you want. These are kids that
are eating. That's what this is about, you know, supporting
food banks. I mean, that's what this stuff is about.
I mean, come on, at some point, is there some point?
Probably not. You've been listening to The Bill Handle Show
Catch My Show Monday through Friday, six am to nine am,
(30:38):
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
Six forty Bill Handle here. Yes, it is a Friday morning,
January ninth. Oh, okay, We've got all kinds of stories
to talk about what's going on in Minneapolis. A real
fun one at eight fifty. And that's how dogs gifted dogs.
Didn't even know that there were gifted dogs unless you
get a dog for free. They can actually learn new
(00:30):
words by eves dropping dogs eve drop and they know
new words and they can learn them. That's a great story.
I'm just reading the research here. It's kind of insane.
So I'll be doing that at eight fifty. Last segment
on a Friday. Okay, ongoing the case between California and
(00:56):
the Trump administration, and we're going to be talking about
that big time. Well, here is a new one that
just came down the House passed. Oh do I get
the wrong one here? Yeah, yeah, we'll do that later on.
I'm sorry. This has to do with what happened yesterday
in terms of the healthcare subsidies. As you know Obamacare,
(01:20):
it allows for extended tax credits.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
This is what Biden put into place as.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
A result of the pandemic helping people who heretofore didn't
have medical insurance all of a sudden have medical insurance,
like twenty million people. Well, it's sunseted January first or
December thirty one. Done, and there has been a fight
like crazy to extend that. Now, keep in mind, the
(01:45):
Republicans have fought Obamacare and every aspect of Obamacare since the.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Day it was passed.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Bill after bill, I think there's sixty or seventy bills
were introduced to kill Obamacare, and of course the Republicans
kept on saying, it's terrible, horrible, it's horrible, it's terrible.
And then the question is, well, do you have to
anything to replace it? No, but as terrible, as horrible,
as god awful.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
So with that in mind, now came the issue of
the end of the subsidies allowing twenty some oni million
people to have insurance or could afford insurance under Obamacare
because of the subsidies, and the Republicans said, nope, absolutely not,
and so something and there was no way it was
(02:28):
going to be coming to the floor. There was no
way a vote was going to be put on the
floor because it's a Republican speaker Mike Johnson, who controls that.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
He's the one that controls what vote takes place.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Unless something called a discharge petition is voted into place,
which unlocks debate bypasses the speaker and goes on to
the floor for a vote. Well, that discharge petition was
voted on, and it won just by a few I
think there were five Republicans that jumped to the other side,
(03:00):
and Trump immediately went nuts and said, they're not going
to be in the set in the House anymore.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
I'm going to make sure that they're primaried out.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
I mean, you don't go against the president, which is
why so many Republicans are scared to.
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Death to say anything against the president.
Speaker 2 (03:15):
So what ended up happening It is it's passed two
hundred and thirty to one ninety six to extend those
affordable care subsidies for three years. Seventeen Republicans jumped, defied
leadership and joined the Democrats on this one. This is
(03:36):
what the Democrats did. I have to have a funding bill,
and we didn't have it. We had the biggest stoppage,
the longest stoppage in the history United States in terms
of the government shutting down.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
It was over this issue.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
It was over the subsidies under Obamacare. Thirty eight days
and what the what Congress wanted to do with the
Democrats say, let's extend this thing for three years while
we work out what's going on. Well, in the end,
what happened. The Democrats caved, Donald Trump won, and the
(04:08):
extension did happen. But the extension only happened till the
end of January. And in the middle of all that,
the promise was made to the Democrats that we will
talk about extending. Well they weren't talking about extending. That
just was a non starter. Why because well, everybody lies
(04:29):
to everybody, and so whoever promises one thing, it just
doesn't happen. And welcome to Congress, and so fine. So
now this thing ends December thirty one, the extended subsidies,
and all of a sudden, twenty million people are looking
at not having medical insurance under Obamacare. Now you may
(04:51):
think it's horrible, and a lot of people do. And
there are a lot of holes to be plugged, and
I don't disagree. There are a lot of problems with it,
but it's insurance versus not having Obamacare, where it's zero
insurance without these subsidies, and that's over twenty million people
that are affected. So the Democrats are saying, we need
(05:11):
those three years. The Republicans under Johnson say no, we're
not going to give.
Speaker 1 (05:15):
Them to you.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
So the discharge petition is voted on with five Republicans
jumping ship, and the House passed the bill to extend
by two thirty to one ninety six, with seventeen Republicans
jumping over to the under side to join the Democrats.
And it all has to do with affordability. The President
(05:38):
has a real interesting issue here because Congress has passed
the bill. The Senate it has failed even though this
bill has been introduced in the Senate. But they are
now senators and congress people who are sitting down and
trying to come up with some reconciliation. Both the House
and the Senate have to pass the same bill before
it goes forward for signature by the President, and they're
(06:01):
now trying to come to some reconciliation. And that's usually
what happens. You have a House bill, you have a
Senate bill. The Senate puts three four or five people
into a room, the Democrats. The House puts three four
or five people into a room on both sides of
the aisle, and everybody sits down, thrashes out a bill,
(06:22):
compromises here, pushes there, and finally a bill is put
through and the president signs it. Well, that's happening right
now before the Senate votes, and then it goes to
the president. Assuming that the bill goes through, don't know,
it's up in the air as far as the Senate
is concerned.
Speaker 1 (06:40):
Now what does the president do? I think he's going
to veto it.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
And there's three things that the president can do is
sign it, veto it, or just let it sit there
for ten days and do nothing and it becomes law.
And that's the easiest way because it quietly becomes law.
The president is involved. There are no press conferences, there
are no table set up where his signature is put
(07:06):
on a piece of paper, a directive with everybody behind
the president, those people that are in favor of the
bill being signed, and then the president hands out the pens.
I've often went hands out like thirty pins. I've often wondered,
how do you sign something with thirty pens? I don't
get that, but that's what normally happens. You'll see one
of the most infamous ones, or one of the most
(07:29):
famous ones, is President Johnson handing the pen to Martin
Luther King when the nineteen sixty five Voting Rights Act
was passed, And there's an iconic photo of the President
handing Martin Luther King that pen. So we're seeing what's
going to happen. But this is very rare. What does
this mean? That means they're cracks starting to happen, that
(07:53):
there are now a few Republicans who are who are
who are vulnerable. Okay, let's just say they're those who
have to resign. There's no issue, they don't care. But
there are a few Republicans who are in district swing
districts that are vulnerable can be voted out. And all
of a sudden, you know, backing up the President when
he says affordability is a hoax, is a Democrat hoax,
(08:18):
And all of a sudden you have a Republican congress
person nods his head and goes, that's right, that's right,
it's a hoax. It's a hoax. The President says it's
a hoax, therefore it's a hoax. Well, you're telling that
to people who constituents w or have a hard time
making the rent, whor have a hard time buying groceries,
who have to decide do we buy medicine or do
(08:40):
we buy groceries. And you have a Republican in this case,
Republican congress person parroting it's a hoax.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
It's a hoax. Well it's not. And the president is
moving away from that by the way.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
He has gone from it's a Democrat hoax to now
he is the affordability president.
Speaker 1 (08:58):
Eh, we'll see what happens. Anyways, that's what happened yesterday.
I wanted to share that with you.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
Okay, maybe I got that one wrong, but let me
tell you one that I think I'm going to get
right or at least explain what's going on. And this
has to do with the Ice shooting of that thirty
seven year old woman. It happened a couple of days ago.
So whenever there is an officer involved shooting, particularly when
(09:24):
there is a death involved, particularly there is an investigation.
Of course, the police investigation happens. So this was a
federal officer, an ice agent, who shot this woman. And
I'm not going to get into the particulars as to
was the agent was it justified shooting.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
Was he in fact in.
Speaker 2 (09:51):
Danger of being run over and therefore it was self defense.
I mean, we've gone through that. You probably have seen
the video, and there is a slight argument that it
was self defense. Not much of one in my opinion,
because as you know, Good turned right there, she is
in her SUV. The police officers, the ICE agents go
(10:14):
up to her as they're talking to her in hand
on the door. Right, the Asian has a hand on
the door. She is backing up and appears to be
turning away from the agent who was on her left
side fender area, and then the agent shot a few
times and killed her, shot her in the head. So
that issue, whether or not that was justified or not,
(10:37):
is one aspect of this case.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
Another one is the jurisdiction.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
You heard Vance say yesterday that the ICE agent has
total immunity, can't even be tried by the state of Minnesota.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
Now, originally it was announced that it.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
Was going to be a joint investigation by the state,
the BCA of the State of Minnesota, that's their investigative arm,
the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension with the FBI well
and the government.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
US government said yeah, that's what's going to happen.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
Well, the FBI soon reversed course and almost immediately now
the state's not getting involved. This is simply an FBI issue.
Will do our own investigating? What investigation? Because Christinome within
minutes after the shooting was announced, straight out and maybe
even before she saw the video, for all I know,
(11:37):
said this was self defense, this was a justified shooting.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
Conversation over Vance said the same thing.
Speaker 2 (11:44):
The President posts that it was defensible, and so the
government has already made his decision. There is no investigation.
Now the FBI is still there. But you tell me
what kind of investigation? What kind of conclusion the FBI
is going to have after the Department of Homeland Security,
of which the FBI is under, the president and the
(12:04):
Vice president all saying this was a justifiable shooting, what
do you think the conclusions are going to be? So
with that, where is the investigation? Where is the jurisdiction?
Because it was a federal agent, does the State of
Minnesota have the right to investigate and try and adjudicate
(12:29):
adjudicate the issue of whether the agent was this was
self defense or not. And it gets a little complicated
because it's not that easy.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
What ends up happening on Renee.
Speaker 2 (12:40):
Nicole Macklin Good was shot killed by the ice officer.
The analysis by The New York Times of the videos
found that the footage contradicted what the Trump administration's account
was of the shooting defense versus not defense move.
Speaker 1 (12:58):
Okay, so here's what happens.
Speaker 2 (13:01):
Van says, you have federal law enforcement official engaging in
a federal law enforcement action that's a federal issue. The
police officer, the I Sation is protected by absolute immunity.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
He is doing his job.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
And the idea that Tim Wilson a bunch of radicals
in Minneapolis is always radicals, the left wing radical wackos.
The fact that Waltz and a bunch of radicals are
going to go after this guy and make his life
miserable is preposterous. And Walts Democratic governor, demanded that the
state investigators be allowed to participate in the investigation.
Speaker 1 (13:37):
Is a joint investigation? Why?
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Because, yeah, it's a federal officer. But the shooting occurred
in Minneapolis. And the issue is does the federal law
does the investigation by federal authorities supersed anything the state
is doing. Usually under these circumstances as a joint investigation
and federal officers can be charged because a crime was
(14:01):
committed or a crime is presumed to have been committed
on Minnesota Minnesota soil. And quite often you know that
there are cases that are brought up that either the
state or the Feds can charge, and usually one or
the other agrees. Now, there as certain cases that can
only be charged federally, and that is a crime committed
(14:24):
on federal land parks for example, federal parks, well, the
state has absolutely no jurisdiction there.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
But this was not in a federal park. This was
just the public street. And so what happens.
Speaker 2 (14:38):
What's going to happen, My guess is the Feds are
going to prevail on this one because under the Supremacy
Clause of the United States, federal law supersedes state law. However,
this is a jurisdictional issue, and it's going to take
a judge to determine whether it is whether Minnesota should
(15:01):
engage in this or can even try the ice agent.
We don't know, but it's going to take a federal
judge to make that decision. And up to this point,
federal judges usually go on behalf of the Feds. By
the way, when I say a federal judge, federal judge
is not under the auspices of the federal government.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
That's an independent agency.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
We're talking about the court system, the judiciary, which is
separate than the executive, which is separate than the legislative.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
Although of these days it's kind of all mixed up,
isn't it. As we know, so what are we going
to see. You're going to see a fight.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
You're going to see a fight where the state is
determining and saying, hey, listen, we have jurisdiction here. We
should have the ability to investigate. The Feds are saying no,
you don't. By the way, as a practical course, the
Feds have shut out the state.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
They will not produce.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
The FBI came in almost immediately and gathered evidence, talk
to witnesses, and will not share any of that with
the state Minnesota. And so the head of the BCA,
the investigative arm of Minnesota, the Minnesota Bureau of the
Criminal Apprehension, has said we're done. We have no information,
(16:14):
we have no evidence, we have no witness statements. That's
all been done by the FBI and the GRAB it
all and will not turn it over. So as a
practical measure, is there going to be a Minnesota state investigation? No?
Not really, why because you know, at this point the
Feds just don't pay attention. You know, we've got a
(16:35):
situation with a federal government that believes it is far
reaching to the point where it overrides anything Congress says,
overrides anything the judiciary says.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
Welcome to America. All right.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
The jobs report just came out this morning at five
point thirty on at our time, and this is really
important stuff when the federal jobs report comes out because
so much of the economy is predicated on that report,
and so this gets it was okay, real quickly, fifty
thousand jobs radded in December.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
Oh, it's not bad. That's a solid gain for the economy,
but also it ends.
Speaker 2 (17:11):
The worst year for the labor market since the pandemic recession.
These numbers are astoundingly wonky how this comes out, and
politics are all through this thing too. So what ends
up happening is they're looking at October and there was
an initial announcement the Fed, the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(17:33):
comes out and gives you a number and then a
month later, two months later, they start revising it as
more numbers come in, and the revisions can be pretty dramatic. Now,
when the numbers are higher than expected, oh boy, the administration,
any administration, by the way, takes credit for it.
Speaker 1 (17:52):
And when the numbers are revised lower.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
Because there's more information, well, in the case of Donald Trump,
he's firing everybody in the Labor Statistics says no, we
need better numbers. And it's a Department of Labor Statistics
is an independent or a quasi independent department, which that's
going to disappear very quickly. So the job creation for
October was revised weaker, showing the economy actually lost one
(18:17):
hundred and seventy three thousand jobs that month.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
Tens of thousands of.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
Federal workers took a deferred resignation package, and November job
creation was revised down slightly. So the economists had estimated
that the employers added seventy three thousand jobs in December.
And so this gets really complicated. I'm going to try
to unwank it a little bit because there are so
(18:43):
many factors to this job market. Unemployment rates are all
over the place because there's U two and U three.
For example, people looking for work, people who have dropped
out of the market, who no longer count For example,
if you've been unemployed for a year and you go
I'm done, I'm not I'm going to go back to school,
you're not even counted as unemployed because you've dropped out
(19:05):
of the job market. According to some labor statistics, others
are different. So, for example, here we go in twenty
twenty five, the labor market was better than expected even
under Trump administration policies. Tariff and immigration enforcement policies still
going through the economy, but layoffs, which is another statistic,
(19:29):
are now contained, layoffs hitting a seventeen month low in December,
much better than expected. However, it's a lot more difficult
to get a job now. Corporate America is looking to
an extended hiring pause.
Speaker 1 (19:47):
And why is that.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Well, AI is stopping Corporate America from hiring people.
Speaker 1 (19:55):
It is much harder to.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
Get a job, particularly in those sectors in which AI
really is booming, legal sector, the computer sector. Certainly, entry
level computer folks just don't get a job. Also, the
Alliance Trade America's economists, and that's one of the big ones,
(20:17):
said a lot of job openings are ghost openings, which
means that they're posted, but they're really not meant to
be filled unless an awesome candidate comes along. They're just
up there looking for that perfect banner woman who has
extraordinary skills.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
This is about a real job opening.
Speaker 2 (20:37):
Now, fifty thousand job opening, fifty thousand jobs have actually
been increased, have actually now been added to the economy.
Some economists say that it's possible that fifty thousand jobs
a month is enough to maintain a healthy labor market.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
Others say no, but why.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
Net immigration plummeted in twenty twenty five, So if you
have fewer people, you really need fewer jobs, and so
fifty thousand jobs a month seems to be okay. However,
corporations are not hiring for the most part. Even though
the December numbers seem to be pretty good, they're less
(21:18):
than what was expected, which means that the economy is
going south, except that it means that it's still healthy
because we need fewer jobs out there.
Speaker 1 (21:33):
Am I making that clear? That's how crazy this is.
Speaker 2 (21:38):
And to look at labor statistics, which are critically important
in terms of the way our economy is based. The
Fed looks at labor statistics when dealing.
Speaker 1 (21:50):
With interest rates.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
Corporations look at labor statistics in terms of trying to
figure out what's going to happen in the future. And
you've got recession issues from the pandemic, you've got AI issues,
you've got immigration issues.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
It's how about jobs under the table?
Speaker 2 (22:09):
Where economy is based on the agriculture industry, what's happening
now because there are no illegal migrants coming in, which
is great unless you happen to be unless you own
a farm, unless you're in the construction industry, where so
many illegal migrants work and they create a big part
of the economy. So what's the bottom line here? You
(22:34):
don't know what the hell's going on. And more importantly,
I don't know what the hell's going on. But my
job is to try to explain to you something that
I don't know what the hell's going on. And even
if I did explain it to you appropriately, you still
wouldn't know what the hell's going on.
Speaker 1 (22:50):
This is a handle topic. This is what we do
every single day.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
Okay, Now I talk about this lot, the ongoing fight
between the Trump administration and California, and you've got left
wing wackos, you know, the radical left versus the crazy right,
the folks that don't believe in the constitution read the
(23:18):
Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
Those are the fights going back and forth.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
It is as polarized as you can humanly get one
thing about the president. And he has said this, and
we elected him based on this. You say no to me,
I hit you back, or you fight me. You hit
me once, I hit you back twice.
Speaker 1 (23:35):
He is not adverse to having a fight.
Speaker 2 (23:38):
He is conservative, actually is more of a populist, but
he certainly aligns himself with the super conservative movement read Maga.
On the other side, is a super liberal movement read California.
Speaker 1 (23:50):
Well, there's the fight now.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
The problem is that when you're dealing with those kinds
of fights between the Feds and the states, Feds have
a lot of power because a lot of federal dollars
go into the programs that the states have.
Speaker 1 (24:04):
So California just sue the Trump administration. Why is that?
Speaker 2 (24:09):
Well, the Trump administration has frozen ten billion dollars in
childcare and family assistant not.
Speaker 1 (24:18):
To ten billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
Now, this is no small amount of change, and the
lawsuit said that the freeze is based on unsupported allegations
of fraud and violates Congress's spending power. That's another fight
that the president is having with Congress. The President says,
I have the power, you don't, Congress.
Speaker 1 (24:38):
But Congress says, well, here it is in the constitution.
It doesn't matter. I have the power.
Speaker 2 (24:43):
And of course there are so many Republicans in Congress
they have to agree with the president. Why is that
Because he has the power to primary them out. He
literally can go into a district and say I support
the opponent of the the city in Congress person, and
in the primary, the city in Congress person is gone.
(25:05):
The president has that kind of power politically speaking, and
is taking that kind of power judicially speaking or in
terms of administratively speaking by saying, unilaterally, without Congress, we're
freezing ten billion dollars in childcare and family assistance based
(25:26):
on fraud, widespread fraud, and here is and he's done
this to other states. And of course the argument this
is political, No, it's not, it's all about fraud. Well,
why is it that only the Democratic cities and the
Democrat states are getting nailed? Well, because you're the fraudulent ones. Well,
(25:51):
does that mean that there is no fraud in Republican states,
there is no fraud in Republican cities. Why aren't you
investigating fraud? For example, Letitia James, who is the DA
in Manhattan, is being tried and investigated for fraud because
(26:15):
she signed a document saying that she lived in one
place versus living in another place. She claims that there's
no fraud involved, and that's another issue, but the Trump
administration is going balls to the wall doing everything it
can to put her in prison for this. In the meantime,
you have well fifteen sixteen hundred, sixteen hundred insurgents who
(26:41):
overran the capital arguing to undo the government. We have
to take over the government. They all got pardoned. There
are billionaires, multi billionaires who have screwed people out of
literally hundreds of millions of dollars pardoned. Why Because it's
one side believes in what the president says.
Speaker 1 (27:03):
On the other side is on the other side on
the other side.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
So the argument of polarization and the politicizing of this,
to me, it's obvious, and to you it has to
be obvious. I mean, do you really believe let me
ask you a question. Okay, even if you are a
Trump supporter, okay, And by the way, I have no
problem with people being Trump supporters, you know, Conservatives, liberals, Democrats,
(27:31):
or Republicans. To me, it's all the same. I have
voted both ways, I have supported both sides. But my
question is, do you really believe that fraud only takes
place in democratically led cities and states, that no fraud
exists in the Republican states jurisdictions none, and criminal activity,
(27:59):
strangely enough, only goes against in terms of this level,
against those that oppose Donald Trump. For example, Mark Kelly,
Senator from Arizona, was one of those five senators who
did that videotape saying to the arm services you do.
Speaker 1 (28:22):
Not follow illegal acts.
Speaker 2 (28:24):
Has to do with the allegation that the president is
acting unconstitutionally. Well, Pete Hegseth is now bringing Mark Kelly
up and is going to demote him because he is
allowed to do that because Mark Kelly is still in
the reserves, which means he is still under the jurisdiction
of the Defense Department, and Pete Headseth is bringing up
(28:47):
to demote him and cut his retirement. And let me
tell you the defense that Mark Kelly has it's in
the rules, it's in the code of the Military justice system.
You can't follow an illegal act or an illegal order. Well,
(29:09):
heg Seth said that sedition, that's being a traitor. And
does he have the right to Does heag Seth have
a right to demote Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, Well, yeah,
he has the right. Does it mean anything because the
guy's been out of the army the Armed services for years.
(29:34):
He does have the right, But it has to do
with his retirement, his pension. That is where the issue
is here. And heg Seth can really screw Mark Kelly
and is going to go forward. Now they'll be, of course,
an appeal and is going to go up and will
a court martial effectively be instituted And we'll see which
way that goes. But it's this is ten billion dollars, right,
(29:57):
this is just the start. By the way, We've got
more and more and more of these coming in. It's just, uh,
you know, it's it's really tough. It really is tough.
And I hate this level of politics where it's not
only a question of polarization, but it's just it's just cruel.
I mean, that's what it is. It's just cruel. I mean,
(30:18):
you can argue all you want. These are kids that
are eating. That's what this is about, you know, supporting
food banks. I mean, that's what this stuff is about.
I mean, come on, at some point, is there some point?
Probably not. You've been listening to The Bill Handle Show
Catch My Show Monday through Friday, six am to nine am,
(30:38):
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
The Bill Handel Show News
Popular Podcasts
Two Guys, Five Rings: Matt, Bowen & The Olympics
Two Guys (Bowen Yang and Matt Rogers). Five Rings (you know, from the Olympics logo). One essential podcast for the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics. Bowen Yang (SNL, Wicked) and Matt Rogers (Palm Royale, No Good Deed) of Las Culturistas are back for a second season of Two Guys, Five Rings, a collaboration with NBC Sports and iHeartRadio. In this 15-episode event, Bowen and Matt discuss the top storylines, obsess over Italian culture, and find out what really goes on in the Olympic Village.
iHeartOlympics: The Latest
Listen to the latest news from the 2026 Winter Olympics.
Milan Cortina Winter Olympics
The 2026 Winter Olympics in Milan Cortina are here and have everyone talking. iHeartPodcasts is buzzing with content in honor of the XXV Winter Olympics We’re bringing you episodes from a variety of iHeartPodcast shows to help you keep up with the action. Follow Milan Cortina Winter Olympics so you don’t miss any coverage of the 2026 Winter Olympics, and if you like what you hear, be sure to follow each Podcast in the feed for more great content from iHeartPodcasts.