-
Unknown A
Well, President Trump's winning streak continues. It doesn't just continue because of President Trump. It actually is continuing because speaker of the House Mike Johnson is doing an extraordinary job in the House, where he has an unbelievably slim margin. His margin in the House is somewhere between one and three votes, depending on who actually shows up for the vote. And yet, somehow, last night, he was capable of pushing through this gigantic House budget bill. Now, there are all sorts of problems with these gigantic bills. The biggest problem, of course, is that no one in power ever has any interest in serious cuts to the things that matter in American government. Instead, they sort of shuttle those cuts off down the road. They make commitments to commit. You know, all of that has just been a regular feature of American government from Republicans and Democrats for as long as I've been alive, which is why the line in terms of national debt keeps going up and to the right.
-
Unknown A
However, what this budget bill does is it enshrines the Trump tax cuts of 2017. It provides additional funding to defense, which is necessary. It provides additional funding to the border, which is necessary. And it pledges to actually take a look at cuts that will offset some of the loss of tax revenue theoretically to be achieved by the Trump tax cut. And last night, there was all sorts of consternation about whether House Republicans would be able to get it together. Originally, it seemed as though there were some House Republicans who are going to object to the House budget bill and who are not going to get on board with it because they believe that it didn't cut enough. A lot of these were fiscal conservatives, and again, I agree with them on principle. I also understand that the only way a bill gets done here, where you have Republicans in purple districts and where you have such a slim margin is with bigger spending than you would want.
-
Unknown A
This was Mike Johnson's entire proposal as speaker of the House. The reason that he pursued one big, beautiful bill is because he figured that if you separated all of these issues out, what you would get is a bunch of bills that would never pass because you'd have too many purists on too many issues who would be able to sink the boat. So instead, wrap it up in one big ball. Make people vote up or make people vote down. That was the strategy here. And if you don't like it, then maybe more Republicans should have been elected to Congress. It turns out that if you have a very slim majority, the bill that comes out is likely to be more, quote, unquote, moderate in its approach than if you had a much larger majority, where you could lose a few moderates in the vote and still maintain a majority.
-
Unknown A
According to Politico, House Republicans approved a budget framework for President Trump's sweeping domestic policy agenda on Tuesday. A major victory for Speaker Johnson, who worked with Trump and fellow leaders in a chaotic last ditch effort to win over naysayers within the Republican ranks. And Republicans, again, were very split on this. Democrats were already celebrating the prospective loss of this bill, and somehow Johnson cobbled it together. For all the talk about how Mike Johnson is inexperienced at this position, how Mike Johnson is, is simply a stand in for Trump. Mike Johnson is actually quite good at this. He's very good at this. And the reality is that Mike Johnson is also significantly more conservative on pretty much every policy issue than any speaker of the House, probably since Newt Gingrich on the right side of the aisle. So, originally last night, it appeared that the vote was gonna go down to defeat and Democrats were preemptively celebrating.
-
Unknown A
Democratic Representative Pete Aguilar from California suggested that Republicans had been hiding from the vote. As it turns out, he was wrong.
-
Unknown B
Republicans are hiding because they're terrified of voting against Trump's endorsed budget. But their constituents are banging down their doors and demanding answers on why they care more about reducing costs for billionaires instead of working families. Our challenge to House Republicans is after you pass this budget today, which cuts Medicaid by 880 billion, go home and have a town hall with your constituents. See how they feel about what you just did. If you're going to rip away health care from people, then you ought to be able to defend your vote directly to them. But that would require the House Republican Conference growing a spine. So we'll see.
-
Unknown A
Okay, but here's the reality. $880 billion is not going to be cut from Medicaid. The reason the Democrats are saying this is because, of course, they're going to claim that the most vulnerable will be hurt by this gigantic House budget bill, which again, expends extraordinary amounts of capital. The debt ceiling is gonna have to be lifted by something like $4 trillion over the course of the next 10 years in order to pay for this budget bill. So spending is not really the problem. The reason that they are saying all of this is because this budget bill basically kicks back to a bunch of different committees. An obligation to cut somewhere else in the budget in order to make up for the supposed lost tax revenue from the Trump tax cuts, among others. According to npr, in order to get the budget plan just to this stage, Johnson was forced to concede to demand from some conservative holdouts for $2 trillion in spending cuts under the budget framework.
-
Unknown A
The exact details of those cuts will be sorted out later by those individual committees in the House. So the House Energy and Commerce Committee is responsible with coming up with $880 billion in the savings. But the reason the Democrats are saying it's all coming from Medicare and Medicaid is because the House Energy and Commerce Committee presides over programs like Medicare and Medicaid. So House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, he of course, is suggesting that's exactly where all the cuts are going to come from. They're going to come from Medicare, they're going to come from Medicaid, they're not going to come from Medicare. President Trump does not want any cuts to Medicare. Medicaid is a bit of a different story. And we'll get into that in a moment, because the truth is, Medicaid is one of the great boondoggles in American public policy. We expend literally hundreds of millions of dollars a year.
-
Unknown A
We spend literally hundreds of billions of dollars a year on Medicaid. And the returns on Medicaid are truly atrocious. Just in speaking in terms of public policy, speaking in terms of health outcomes, there's some good studies that actually demonstrate that Medicaid coverage is no better than you having no coverage and just going for emergency care to the hospital. Why? Because the reimbursement rates on Medicaid are so low that doctors don't even take Medicaid. Good doctors don't like taking Medicaid because the reimbursement rates are pennies on the dollar of what they could earn from private insurance. Medicaid is, in fact, a giant government work make work program that does not have particularly good outcomes. But just as with every giant government make work program, it has now become a third rail of American politics. Hakeem Jeffries and Democrats are of course going to suggest that it's tax cuts for the 1%.
-
Unknown A
And on the basis of that, it's going to be cuts for the poor. Let's be realistic about this. The only people paying taxes in the United States of America on an income level are the people in the top quintile in terms of net taxes paid net of benefits received from the government. The only people paying any level of net income taxes in the United States are people in the top income quintile. Everybody else is receiving on net money from the federal government. So if you're going to cut taxes, how, who else presumably is going to have their taxes Cut? How would that work, by the way? It also happens to be the case that the Trump tax cuts disproportionately affected people in actually the middle income quintiles. Anyway, here is Hakeem Jeffries pushing the lie.
-
Unknown C
The Democrats are holding together. We're holding together, for instance, on this reckless Republican budget, which is a betrayal of working class Americans, and cuts to Medicaid, cuts to snap, cuts to veterans benefits. That's not theoretical. That hurts real people that I represent and that every single member of the House Democratic Caucus represents. That's not a theoretical fight. That's a real fight.
-
Unknown A
Okay, so we'll see if Democrats are able to play this off. The only Republican who voted against the bill was of course, Thomas Massie, who's basically just Ron Paul reincarnated as a congressperson from Kentucky. He, of course, says this is going to add to the national debt. And the answer to that is, well, duh, if you have an alternative anytime, it would be welcome, Congressman Massie. Like, you know, an actual, credible alternative that people will vote for. I too would love a situation in which we eliminate vast swaths of the welfare state. I would love that on principle. I don't disagree with Thomas Massie. I just think that Thomas Massie's entire approach to governance seems to be standing aside and shouting at things and, you know, fine, if that's what his constituents want, that's fine. But I will say that his approach is not actually aimed at the sort of horse trading that you see in Congress in order to gain actual support for proposals.
-
Unknown A
It is aimed mostly at sort of virtue signaling on the basis of public policy. And Massey again, is sort of inconsistent in the sorts of public policy that he will sometimes back. Sometimes he is perfectly in favor of things that increase the national debt. For example, he wants to get rid of, quote, unquote, double taxation on Social Security. Now, I agree with that. But let's be clear. That does in fact increase the national debt because it lowers the tax expenditures taken in by the government. In any case, 217 of the 218 Republicans who were present voted in favor of the budget yesterday. Mike Johnson put out a statement yesterday after the passage of the budget. His statement, along with Steve Scalise and the House GOP chairwoman, Lisa McClain, said, quote, Today House Republicans moved Congress closer, delivering on President Trump's full America first agenda, not just parts of it.
-
Unknown A
This momentum will grow as we work with our committee chairs and Senate Republicans to determine the best policies within their respective jurisdictions to meet budgetary targets. We have full confidence in their ability to chart the best path forward. While there is still much more to do, we are determined to send a bill to President Trump's desk that secures our border, keeps taxes low for families and job creators, restores American energy dominance, strengthens America's standing on the world stage, and makes government work more effectively for all Americans. Now, again, it is very difficult to do Speaker Johnson's job. It is. It's very difficult to do the job of Congress because, as I say, on principle, I agree very much with many of Thomas Massie's recommendations with regard to cuts, not with regard to the Defense Department, where I think he's delusional, but with regards to so many other parts of the government.
-
Unknown A
There is no American consensus, unfortunately. I wish there were. There is no American consensus on restructuring the entitlement programs that are the systemic drivers of our national debt. You can either recognize that or you cannot recognize that. Again, I wish reality were not what reality is, but that is the reality. That is a fundamental reality, by the way, that Donald Trump understands, which is why he and J.D. vance ran on the prospect of never touching Social Security and Medicare, among other gigantic entitlement programs. Those are systemic drivers of the national debt. They're not touching them. The reason they're not touching them is because they understand the American people don't want them touched. Let's be clear about what's going to happen to America fiscally over the course of the next 10 years. America is going to lurch toward precisely the same sorts of austerity measures that Europe had to put in place because the United States is lurching toward a national bankruptcy.
-
Unknown A
We are. That's just what it is. There are only two things you can do about that. One, you can push outsized growth. You can try to outgrow the debt. You can essentially grow the economy so fast that as a percentage of gdp, the national debt shrinks. I think that is one aim of Republicans. Or theoretically, you can radically increase taxes, which is going to sink the American economy and probably won't solve the national debt. You can't really tax your way out of a $37 trillion national debt right now. It's gonna get much larger over coming years. Or you could restructure the entitlements. All this government spending, not great, because it all cuts against freedom. And this country was actually founded on freedom. Freedom from a country that forced us to buy their overpriced tea and. And then try blockading us when we dumped their tea into the ocean.
-
Unknown A
How'd that work out for you Great Britain? Well, it's time to throw your overpriced big wireless contract overboard as well. You don't need to pay 100 bucks a month just to get a free phone. PureTalk, my cell phone company, says no to inflated prices with a qualifying plan. You can choose an iPhone 14 or a Samsung Galaxy for $0. And yes, this is for premium service on America's most dependable 5G network. Get your iPhone 14 or Samsung Galaxy for $0 with a qualifying plan. But by going to PureTalk.com Shapiro, you make the switch in as little as 10 minutes. No hassle, no gimmicks, just honest to goodness wireless priced right. Again, that's PureTalk.com Shapiro to claim your new iPhone or Galaxy with qualifying purchase from PureTalk, America's wireless company, visit PureTalk.com Shapiro for details. I've been using PureTalk again myself for years. All my business phone calls.
-
Unknown A
And you know, I value those calls. I need good reception. I need a good price. That's where PureTalk comes in. They can help you as well. PureTalk.com/Shapiro for the special deal. Also, did you know your home could be stolen right out from under you without you ever realizing it? The FBI calls this house stealing. It's a growing scam targeting homeowners across the country. Here's how it works. Scammers only need to forge your signature on one document, add a fake notary stamp, pay a small filing fee and submit it to your local recorder's office. Just like that, your home title gets transferred out of your name. Once they have control, they can take out loans against your equity or even sell your property behind your back. The worst part? You might not discover anything is wrong until collection notices or foreclosure warnings start showing up in your mailbox.
-
Unknown A
So when was the last time you checked your home title? If you're like most people, the answer is probably never. And that's exactly what these scammers are counting on. That's why so many people, including our senior video editor Adam, Trust Home Title Lock. Their million dollar triple lock protection helps keep your home and equity safe. Here's what you get. Immediate 247 monitoring of your property. Urgent alerts if there are any changes and if fraud should happen, their US based restoration team will spend up to a million dollars to fix the fraud and restore your title. And at no additional cost. Here's the best part. I've teamed with Home Title Lock to give you a free title history report. You can find out if you're already a victim and access to your personal title expert. A $250 value. Just for signing up, go to hometitlelock.com, use my promo code SHAPIRO250 or click on the link in the description.
-
Unknown A
Make sure to check out the million dollar triple lock protection details when you get there. That's hometitlelock.com, promo code SHAPIRO250. Get the protection and peace of mind you deserve. The American people and their elected congresspeople always forever prefer to kick the can down the road on all this sort of stuff. And so recognizing that inherent reality and that you can yell as much as you want, but if you're not getting elected, you don't got the power to do anything. This budget is probably the best that you could that you that you could do. Now it goes to the Senate. The Senate has already voted for a couple of different bills that cover so much of this area. There's going to be a plan to reconcile the Senate with the House bills, try and come up with some sort of workable compromise, and then it will have to go back to the Houses, the respective houses, for a revote.
-
Unknown A
But all the talk about how there was going to be going to be an ineffective Republican majority in the House, Speaker Johnson has proved that wrong. He's played this about as well as could possibly play an incredibly difficult hand. And in the Senate, I believe that the majority leader, Senator Thune, is going to do a good job of working with Speaker Johnson to come up with a bill that Donald Trump is then going to sign and that is going to provide some quiescence to the markets. It is going to make people feel as though the tax regime is not going to change anytime in the near future, which is a good way of getting people to feel comfortable in their investments. The last thing you want to do as somebody who invests a lot of money, the last thing you want to do is put your investment into something knowing the government could change the rules literally tomorrow.
-
Unknown A
This bill is also, as we say, going to increase funding for, for border security. This bill is going to change some of the rules with regards to immigration, which are necessary. This bill is going to increase defense funding, not decrease defense funding, which is something that actually does need to be done. We live in a rough world with aggressive enemies, and America's defense budget is actually not in line with our obligations globally. And those are obligations that are good for the United States. I think there are plenty of places in the world where we ought to go hands off and say, you know, do we have a real national interest here? However, there are also a lot of places where a significant American capacity to deter is absolutely necessary. And this bill does cover that stuff as well. So, as I said from the very beginning, when it came to this budget bill, if you have one giant crap sandwich, there will be more sandwich, but there will also be more crap.
-
Unknown A
However, it is a triumph for Johnson and for Trump to get this thing passed through such a narrowly divided Congress. Okay. Meanwhile, President Trump has achieved another victory with regard to Ukraine. So apparently, Ukraine has now agreed to a mineral rights deal with the United States. Now, you'll recall the United States originally reportedly proposed a mineral rights deal in which pretty much all rare earths minerals projects by the Ukrainian government would be split 50, 50 with the United States. In terms of upside, the United States would invest in some sort of joint fund, and then all profits would be split 50, 50. That's. That's not precisely the deal that is now emerging out of Ukraine, because Zelensky had rejected that deal. He said, that's unfair to our country. It takes $500 billion out of our economy and gives it back to the United States. The United States has only paid in at $160 billion, $170 billion in terms of AIDS Ukraine.
-
Unknown A
So even if you're trying to sort of redress the aid the United States has put into Ukraine, it's significantly more than that in terms of the mineral rights deal. This mineral rights deal is a little bit more perspective just in terms of content. According to the Wall Street Journal, the United States actually dropped its previous demand for the right to $500 billion in potential revenue from the development of Ukraine's mineral resources. The Ukrainian president had said for months Ukraine's allies in the war against Russia could have access to the country's mineral resources. But he said he couldn't sign an agreement that did not include security guarantees for Ukraine. And originally, the United States had demanded the right to up to $500 billion in revenue from mineral development. So this led to conflict, clearly publicly between Zelensky and President Trump. The new text does not do that.
-
Unknown A
The new text does not overtly include security guarantees. Under the terms of the agreement, Ukraine would pay some proceeds from future mineral resource development into a fund that would invest in projects in Ukraine. So what does that mean? It means that all the stuff that's already being developed in Ukraine, that stuff is not going to be subject to this joint American investment. It's future development that is going to be subject to joint American investment. Now, one of the big problems for the United States with this is that much of the rare earths material that we actually need is in the Russian occupied areas of Ukraine. So presumably the United States is not going to gain access over all of that. The size of the US Stake in the fund and joint ownership deals will be hashed out in future agreements. President Trump did celebrate the actual deal, suggesting that this was the beginning of a security arrangement between the United States and Ukraine.
-
Unknown A
He said, listen, what this basically does is it makes sure that the United States is investing in the future of Ukraine. And now we have a pretty strong interest in Ukraine actually not becoming just a Russian precinct. With Ukraine and this mineral deal, what does Ukraine get in return, Mr. President?
-
Unknown D
$350 billion and lots of equipment and military equipment and the right to fight on. And originally the right to fight. Look, Ukraine, I will say they're very brave and they're good soldiers, but without the United States and its money and its military equipment, this war would have been over in a very short period of time.
-
Unknown A
Now, again, the New York Times is citing a draft document. The US Would own the maximum amounts of the fund allowed under American law, but not necessarily all of it. And it appears that the sort of generalized change to the agreement does not require Ukraine to pay back some $500 billion in revenue from rare minerals. And apparently, again, it doesn't include a firm security guarantee from the United States. But you can hear from President Trump's language that he is essentially pledging a continued security guarantee from the United States, which is the preliminary to an end to this conflict. Everyone knows Ukraine is not going to come to the table unless there is a security guarantee provided to it by the West. And by the way, Ukraine would be foolish to come to the table with anything short of that. They'd be absolute idiots to do that.
-
Unknown A
After all, the United States and the west sold out Ukraine. Let's be clear about this. In the early 1990s, Ukraine had literally thousands of nuclear weapons on its soil. In an attempt to denuclearize the area, the United States and its allies in Europe pledged security guarantees to Ukraine in return for them denuclearizing getting rid of their nuclear weapons. In retrospect, Ukraine never should have done that. It was an idiot move. And so now the Ukrainians are saying, listen, we are not going to give up our right to fight for our country unless somebody else is gonna come in and guarantee this. That is perfectly rational, and I think President Trump knows that. President Trump says Zelensky is actually coming to the United States on Friday for a joint signing ceremony.
-
Unknown D
Is it true that President Zelensky is coming on Friday to meet with you and is the mineral deal sorted out? Yeah, I hear, I hear that he's coming on Friday. Certainly it's okay with me if he'd like to. And he would like to sign it together with me. And I understand that's a big deal. Very big deal. And I think the American people, even if you look at polling, they're very happy because, you know, Biden was throwing money around like it's cotton candy. And it's. It's a very big deal. It could be a trillion dollar deal, it could be whatever, but it's rare earths and other things.
-
Unknown A
Okay, so in the end, we end up where we're basically supposed to be is the United States. We're going to be able to make future rare minerals deals with Ukraine, which is great. And we are also going to ensure that Russia doesn't walk into Kyiv, which, as I've suggested all along, was never the policy of the United States. There are some people who are associated with sort of MAGA world who'd be eager, apparently, to see Vladimir Putin walk into Kyiv. I do not think that President Trump is one of those people. I do not think he actually wants that. He wants the Europeans to pay up. He wants the Europeans to staff the peacekeeping force. He wants more redress for America's taxpayer dollars in Ukraine. And it appears he's gonna get all of those things. So we are moving toward a speedy consolidation of position between actually the United States, the Europeans and the Ukrainians.
-
Unknown A
And now the Russians need to get on board. And I think that the American position with regard to Russia, which is, we'll stop saying mean words about you, but why don't you guys get on board? That may bear fruit as well. That remains to be seen. Well, obviously there's a ton going on in the news. And in this fast moving news cycle, there's an important issue that very often gets overlooked. Supporting expectant mothers facing difficult decisions. There are women in our own communities who need support and guidance during one of life's most challenging moments. Preborn's nationwide network of clinics works directly with women who are considering their pregnancy options through compassionate care and comprehensive support services, including ultrasounds that allow women to see and hear their developing baby's heartbeat. Preborn helps women make informed decisions about their pregnancies. Experience shows that women who receive these services are much more likely to continue their pregnancies.
-
Unknown A
The impact of this support extends beyond the immediate moment, creating positive changes that can span generations. A monthly donation of just 28 bucks can make a significant difference in providing these essential services. To support this cause, you can donate securely. Just dial pound250, say baby or visit preborn.comBen. your support today can help create lasting, positive changes that impact multiple generations. Writing new stories of hope and transformation. Go check them out right now. Visit preborn.com to/Ben or dial pound 250 and say keyword baby. That's pound 250 and say baby. Also, feeling like my best self means I'm energized, clear headed, confident, balanced. My mind is clear. My body feels strong. I can tackle each day with purpose and determination. To help us feel our best each day, my team and I have partnered with LiveGood. My executive assistant, Kelly recently tried their Bioactive complete multivitamin as well as the organic complete plant based protein powder because this year she wants to stay on top of health and wellness.
-
Unknown A
Since taking them and getting all the nutrients, vitamins, minerals your body typically needs, she's noticed a big difference in her overall health and strengthened immune response. Even with a lot of the bugs that are going around recently, the protein powder is so convenient for throwing in smoothies after gym recovery as well. With LiveGood, my production team and I can always feel like we're at our best and what's better than that? Plus all their products fit conveniently into your day. Kelly takes their multivitamin after breakfast. She throws some of the protein powder into smoothies after workouts. She's really noticed just how much energy and focus she has throughout the day collecting compared to before she added the LiveGood products into her daily routine. If you're ready to make the switch and start saving, we'll make it even easier for you. Use our link. You can save an additional 10% off your first order on top of the already lowest prices.
-
Unknown A
Just head on over to livegood.com Ben save 10% on your first order. That's livegood.com Ben don't miss out on this opportunity to invest in your own health without overspending. Meanwhile, President Trump has made a new proposal with regard to immigration. One of the big questions with regard to immigration is how do we bring the best immigrants here? Very few Americans, right, left or center want to bar all immigrants from the United States. There are some that is a very low number. Most Americans do not want vast swaths of illegal immigration. People who are impoverished, who are coming to the United States, who are not going to actually adhere to American culture They're not going to assimilate. They'll be dependent on welfare. That's not something most Americans want. However, what most Americans want is some way of finding the best immigrants and bringing them to the United States to enrich our economy and to make America stronger.
-
Unknown A
And again, this is a perfectly rational calculation. The reality is it's very difficult to make the case against full scale, like any immigration at all, when President Trump has Elon Musk standing next to him. Elon Musk is an immigrant. If you look at the founders of the Magnificent Seven, right, the top stocks in the stock market, several of them, the CEOs of these places, are immigrants to the United States. Again, this does not mean that there needs to be some sort of antipathy between domestically born Americans and immigrants coming to the United States. Far from it. One of the great strengths of the United States has been its status as a powerhouse commercial republic that basically draws like a magnet the most talented people here in a competitive global environment. Of course, we want the smartest people coming here. Well, President Trump actually understands this on a root level.
-
Unknown A
Again, there's all sorts of battles that sort of simmer underneath the lid of the pot in MAGA world between immigration restrictionists and people who are a little softer on immigration. But the reality is that President Trump, in the end, is a business person. And because he's a business person, he understands the implications of saying no more immigrants. So one of the things that he's doing now is he's proposing that wealthy individuals pay 5, $5 million for what he calls a gold card that would grant them permanent United States residency, ending an existing program that offers green cards to people who invest in the country. He said, quote, wealthy people will be coming into the country by buying the card. They'll be wealthy, they'll be successful. In other words, if you want to come here and invest like 5 million bucks to come to the United States, that seems like a pretty good investment in the American taxpayer.
-
Unknown A
Here's President Trump explaining, we're going to.
-
Unknown D
Be doing something else. It's got to be very, very good. We're going to be selling a gold card. You have a green card. This is a gold card. We're going to be putting a price on that card of about $5 billion. And that's going to give you green card privileges. Plus it's going to be a route to citizenship. And wealthy people will be coming into our country by buying this card. They'll be wealthy and they'll be successful, and they'll be spending a lot of money and paying a lot of taxes and employing a lot of. Lot of people. And we think it's going to be extremely successful.
-
Unknown A
Now, again, there's this sort of weird debate that was happening just a few months ago, you'll recall, about H1B visas and foreigners coming to the United States to work in tech. And it sort of devolved into the world's stupidest version of that debate, which was there should be no immigrants at all. Immigrants are bad, and we should involve everybody in the world in our immigration process. And that's really a very stupid version of the debate. There are many practical things you can do to make immigration more restrictive while drawing the best and brightest to the United States. And it is in the interest of America, again, to do that, because while autarky sounds fun, meaning the idea that we can produce everything in the United States, the reality is that smart people are going to go somewhere. And if smart people don't go to the United States, they will go to countries that oppose the interests of the United States.
-
Unknown A
In all likelihood, President Trump says that companies like Apple could pay 5 million bucks to get approval for highly skilled workers to reside in the United States. And he estimated the United states could sell 1 million or more gold cards. He says that it would replace the EB5 system, which was launched in the 1990s to channel foreign investment into economically marginalized areas and create local jobs. It offers green cards to people who invest at least 900 grand, or $1.8 million depending on the area, into qualified US projects and show they've created at least 10 jobs. Spouses of investors and their kids under 21 would also get green cards. The program has had cases of fraud. Obviously, this always happens. I mean, any government program has a lot of fraud. We have to do a better job of policing that, obviously, which is why you hope that DOGE is going to do exactly that.
-
Unknown A
Under EB5, every country gets no more than 7% of the program's 10,000 visa annual quota, which creates long backlogs for countries which large numbers of applicants, especially China. Now, again, that seems to me a really dumb way of doing it. I'm not sure why we should have sort of quotas by country as opposed to individually looking at candidates and determining whether or not they should come in. Why should there be a quota on, say, France or England or Germany or anywhere else, as opposed to just doing it on the basis of merit? Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who was at the Oval Office on Tuesday, according to the Wall street journal, criticized that EB5 program pointing to fraud, he said people who apply for the gold card would be vetted, quote, we're gonna make sure they are wonderful world class global citizens. Well, presumably the idea would be that they're wonderful world class global citizens who want to become American citizens.
-
Unknown A
Trump, he was asked about if Russian oligarchs would be eligible. He said, I know some Russian oligarchs who are very nice people. And then Lutnick started laughing and Trump said, they're not as wealthy as they used to be. Now, again, it is unclear exactly how Trump would be able to, quote, unquote, unilaterally change this law. But the generalized approach that Trump is taking is draw money and investment to the United States. Draw smart people to the United States. That is not a bad approach. That is not a bad approach. Again, those who are arguing otherwise, if we're not talking about failures of cultural assimilation, I get that and I'm with you. If somebody wants to pay $5 million to come into the United States and promote Qatari propaganda, for example, the answer should be no. If somebody wants to come in from China and pay $5 million to end up stealing IP on behalf of the Chinese, the answer should be no.
-
Unknown A
If you are talking about somebody who will make an excellent American citizen, we go through vetting. And again, this is a very small program. It's like 10,000 people a year. If you're talking about vetting those people and they bring their money and they bring jobs and they bring their. Know how. I fail to see how this is a terrible thing for the United States. I think President Trump is correct about all this. By the way, President Trump was having fun in the Oval Office yesterday. He started handing out hats that read, trump was right about everything.
-
Unknown D
Give me all of them. Look.
-
Unknown A
Yes.
-
Unknown D
See that? Trump was right about everything. Just came in. Somebody said, I said, this was sent in by a fan. I said, I think we should make some of them right. But we were pretty much, you want one?
-
Unknown A
I'll pass.
-
Unknown D
Are you allowed to take one?
-
Unknown A
Probably not.
-
Unknown D
He'll consider it. I know him well. He's sort of a stiff. Brian, you're not a stiff. He's sort of a stiff guy. He'll take other things, but not a free hand. Always say yes to the president. Always say yes to the president. Would anybody like one?
-
Unknown A
I mean, hilarious, Hilarious stuff. Again, look at the image of this. And then he's got like a map behind him that says Gulf of America. Trump is a world class troll. He always will be the greatest troll in world history, probably President Trump. And second is the guy who's leading Doge, Elon Musk. Speaking of which, Elon Musk's super controversial email, you know, the what did you do last week email, which seems not all that controversial to me. It may not be the sort of most sophisticated way to determine who is a good government employee and who is not, because you can just go to ChatGPT and have it type out five things you did last week. Or possibly you're in a department where actually you can't say publicly what it is that you did last week. But the idea this is some sort of massive attack on the federal bureaucracy for people to actually explain what they did last week.
-
Unknown A
I mean, if I asked any of my employees, name me five things that you did yesterday, they would probably be able to name me five things that they did yesterday. Just because you're on the taxpayer dime does not mean that you should be basically held as some sort of immune person when it comes to accountability. Apparently over a million federal employees have already responded to last weekend's controversial email. The White House, eager to present the email demand as part of its coordinated attempt to dramatically scale down the size of the federal government, made that announcement in Tuesday's press briefing. According to Politico, Caroline Levitt, the White House press secretary, said all federal workers should be working at the same pace as President Trump is working and moving. This is to ensure federal workers are not ripping off American taxpayers. By the way, that is literally one third of the federal workforce.
-
Unknown A
That is a big number. Again, there's been a lot of confusion as to whether people are quote, unquote, resigning. Now, they could theoretically be fired. Trump could theoretically fire them, but there are protocols and procedures for firing them. The email said, failure to respond to this email will be considered a resignation. That's not how resignations work. But again, the sort of general approach here, which is to make the federal bureaucracy scared for their jobs, seems to be a useful thing. And in the absence of a large enough doge department to go through every single one of those 3 million federal employees and determine who's a good employee and who's a bad employee, this is sort of a self winnowing process. That is not a terrible idea. Well, the Democrats are of course, very, very upset about this. Jasmine Crockett, who has taken the lead, she's sort of, I will say, she's sort of stolen AOC's thunder.
-
Unknown A
Remember that time AOC was so fresh and so faced. She was fresh faced and had a fresh face and all that. And now she's just that kind of, you know, tired lady on Instagram who's putting her face in ice water and babbling nonsensically about Bernie Sanders proposals. Jasmine Crockett is the hot new version of the resistance because she says spicy things on the TVs here she was yesterday saying F off to Elon Musk. If you could speak directly to Elon Musk, what would you say? Off. That's it. That's genius level stuff there from Jasmine Crockin. That will certainly stop Elon Musk in his tracks. No one has ever said that to Elon before. Meanwhile, Rashida Tlaib, who is in a run and gun battle with Ilhan Omar for most pro terror member of Congress. She suggests that government spending being cut is a real. It's horrifying.
-
Unknown A
It's just horrifying because it affects the workers. Now, again, this demonstrates, it's amazing how disconnected Democrats are. The argument you want to make, if you're gonna make this argument is cuts to government affect the people. When you cut the government workers, that affects the people to whom the government workers are providing services. You know who no one has sympathy for people on the taxpayer dime who whine about how they are going to lose their jobs because it turns out that if you're in public service, the people who actually should matter are the people you are serving. But again, Democrats do not get this on a fundamental level because the people who are cutting checks for their campaigns are of course, the people in the federal government. I want you all to know they are moving, of course, with these massive cuts to programs. And I talk about the $880 billion in cuts in Medicaid.
-
Unknown A
But behind all those cuts is a person. You know, it's not even saving organizations, it's saving lives. Oh my gosh, these people. These people. But again, this is a very highly popular program, Doge. It's going to continue to be popular because most Americans do want this stuff rooted out. Well, in just a minute, we'll get to a wide variety of Biden appointed judges who are now attempting to stop the Trump train. The question that has everyone talking right now, however, is what did you do last week? No idea why that causes so much drama, but fine. Here's what we did at the Daily Wire last week, the entire Daily Wire gang went back to D.C. for Backstage Live at CPAC. You heard Chris Rufa on the show breaking big news. Sharing tapes exposing Department of Education contractors supporting sex tapes in schools. Michael Moles faced off against 25 LGBTQ divided by sign, trans activists and Jubilees most explosive debate yet.
-
Unknown A
Matt Walsh released Clearing the Air, a behind the scenes look at the number one documentary of the decade, am I racist? And that list is just us being compliant with Doge. Well, it seems simple enough. Don't miss a moment of the news shows and entertainment. Become a Daily Wire + member now@dailywire.com subscribe well, meanwhile, Judge after judge appointed by Joe Biden is trying to slow the role of the Trump administration. Yesterday, in less than 90 minutes, three separate Biden appointed judges tried to put nationwide injunctions on President Trump's policy. Now, again, this is a very controversial matter, legally speaking, as to whether a local district judge has the capacity to stop nationwide a gigantic presidential action, for example, or say, a piece of congressional legislation. Why should some district court judge in California be able to block the enforcement of a piece of legislation or regulation or an executive order across, you know, all 50 states?
-
Unknown A
That's a wild proposition. And in the past, up until the 1960s, it was never even requested. Typically speaking, you could enforce an injunction against the government with regards to the specific plaintiff, but you wouldn't have a gigantic nationwide injunction. And it really does break down the system of law and order. When any judge anywhere can simply enjoin any action by the federal government wholesale over the entire 50 states. That's a wild notion. And yet three separate judges attempted to do it yesterday. First, according to the Wall Street Journal, a federal judge in Seattle ordered the Trump administration to restart the refugee admissions program that legally resettles people from across the globe from had shut that down on day one. U.S. district Judge Jamal Whitehead, a Biden appointee, issued the injunction on Tuesday during a court hearing. He said that President Trump had acted outside his authority by shutting down the program completely before leaving office.
-
Unknown A
Biden had set up a program to take in as many as 125,000 refugees this year. And Trump halted the refugee admissions program through an executive order on his first day in office, part of a series of immigration actions meant to shut down the southern border. And so a bunch of local refugee serving agencies, you know, left wing NGOs, decided to sue the federal government. And they argued that this overstepped the authority that was provided by Congress for the president to do this. Now, again, I'm finding it bizarre that the same people who are very much in favor of executive authority when it came to Joe Biden, are suddenly turning around and saying that it doesn't apply as soon as the president's name is Donald Trump. So in other words, you can use executive authority to completely ignore immigration law for years on end and let 10 million illegal immigrants through the border.
-
Unknown A
But the minute you reverse yourself and you say, no, no, no, no, hold up, we're now going to enforce immigration law, then the NGOs and the judges step in. So that was Federal judge number one. Then again, this is all within 90 minutes. Federal judge number two indefinitely blocked President Trump's freeze of federal funding. U.S. district Court Judge Lauren Alicon, again a Biden appointee, enjoined the government from, quote, implementing, giving effect to, or reinstating under a different name, the White House Budget Office's directive to freeze federal assistance while the court reviews the spending. Ali Khan said defendants either wanted to pause up to $3 trillion in federal spending practically overnight, or they expected each federal agency to review every single one of its grants, loans and funds for compliance in less than 24 hours. The breadth of that command is almost unfathomable. Well, I have a question.
-
Unknown A
Why is that unfathomable? We have 3 million federal employees. What is it you would say you do around here? What is it you would say you do? Federal freezes have been a common, long standing part of American public policy in the executive branch, going all the way back to, like Thomas Jefferson. So you may not like the extent of the freeze, but the idea that it's unconstitutional to freeze federal spending for a defined period of time to review whether that spending is going to useful things under the auspices of actual legislation. What's your legal case right there? Now, the OMB had put out a memo, the memo had suggested almost an indefinite freeze. And so that seems suitable because that was akin to basically the executive branch saying that they were going to never spend money allocated by the legislative branch. But temporary freezes, again are within the ambit of the executive branch.
-
Unknown A
Kevin Friedel, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said, quote, it's an administrative priority to end wokeness. And they're backing this with the cudgel of withholding billions, perhaps trillions in funding. On Tuesday, the judge said the plaintiffs had more than met their burden for further relief. So that is number two. So they've blocked President Trump's attempts to stop Biden era resettlement programs that again were put in place by Joe Biden. They were not put in place. My understanding is by Congress itself, it was Biden who put it in place. But as soon as Trump strikes him out, then no, the answer is no. That's now congressional authority when it comes to the federal freeze. The idea is not a narrowly driven decision that says, well, you can freeze it, but only for so long. In instead, it's just temporary injunction on the whole thing. And then finally, US District Court Judge Amir Ali, again, another Biden appointee, expressed frustration that the Trump administration was ignoring his two week old order to unfreeze dollars at usaid.
-
Unknown A
The judge said, I don't know, I can't get a straight answer from you. He apparently wants to make sure that $15.9 billion in foreign assistance grants get out the door so that we can't get them back. Earlier this month, Ali ordered an end to the blanket freeze after grant recipients and foreign assistance organizations warned of catastrophic consequences. Ali said the State Department phrase likely violated the law. So the idea was that USAID could not be zeroed out. Well, I mean, its spending could be transferred over to the State Department. The State Department does have power over usaid, but again, these are all judges who are standing in the way of the will of the American people, not on the basis of constitutionality or balance of powers. They're doing so specifically because they don't like the decisions that Trump is making. Right. The job of the judicial branch is to enforce the separation of powers between Congress and the executive branch.
-
Unknown A
You can make a case that the Trump administration needs to be more specific. That's not the case that's being made. The case that's being made here is that they just don't like the policy implications of what Trump is doing, and so they're simply stopping it. You want to undermine the credibility of the judiciary even further. Great way to do it. Speaking of credibility, I gotta say, the media are just blowing out their credibility each and every day. It truly is amazing. Apparently it can now be said there's a new book out by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson titled Original Sin, President Biden's decline, its cover up and his disastrous choice to run Again. I'm glad that we can do this now, you know, like four months after the election. And I will never stop saying Joe Biden's collapse on stage was the death knell of the legacy media in this country.
-
Unknown A
Destroyed it. Because for years the legacy media said it was all cheap fakes, it was all exaggerated. Joe Biden was totally fine cognitively. And then Joe Biden went out there and he crapped his pants on national television. He looked as though he was staring into the open maw of death in an open televised national debate with Donald Trump. He didn't just finish his own presidential candidacy at that point. He finished off the legacy media who'd been lying to you because they all had access. They all knew. They all knew, knew they had more. I've never met President Biden. They all have. I've never dealt directly with President Biden. They all have. And I could see because I have retinas and a prefrontal cortex exactly what was happening with Joe Biden. And we'd all been calling it out since like 2019 when he first ran, saying, this guy is obviously in a state of cognitive decline.
-
Unknown A
And that became even more obvious day after day after day when they were hiding him in the basement and then releasing him like the Crypt Keeper from the Coffin Creek open. He'd get out, he'd wobble on up, say a couple of nonsensical sounds from his face hole, and then they put him back in the coffin at night. And we were saying this for years, and the legacy media said that we were exaggerating. It wasn't true. He was fine behind closed doors. He was doing handsprings and backflips and reciting all the numbers of PI up to a thousand digits. And then it turned out that he was a senile old dotard and the entire media knew it. So when he exposed that on national tv, the entire media had to then shift into were shocked mode. None of them were shocked, but they had to shift into, how could we have known?
-
Unknown A
And now they're reporting on their own failures. Now they're reporting on, my gosh, you know, it turns out that he was always, yeah, we know, guys, we know. We are aware. The human centipede that exists between the Democratic Party and the legacy media is the untold story of the last 50 years in American politics. The insane conciliation between the media, which is supposed to be a watchdog, and the Democratic Party. I mean, it's full scale. It is just a revolving door at this point. And this is why there's all sorts of controversy that is now broken out over the White House picking who is in the press pool. According to the New York Times, the Trump administration said on Tuesday it would start hand picking which media outlets were allowed to participate in the presidential press pool. That's the small rotating group of reporters who relay the President's day to day activities to the public.
-
Unknown A
That change breaks decades of precedent. It allows the White House to assert more control over which journalists can witness his activities up close and ask him questions. Now, the White House Correspondents Association, a 11 year old group representing journalists who cover the administration, has long determined on its own which reporters would participate in the daily pool. But the White House is like, well, we don't trust you, you guys. Because it turns out that, for example, the White House Correspondents association head is now apparently joining msnbc. Eugene Daniels, the WHCA head and political reporter, is now headed on over to msnbc. And so the Trump administration is like, why would we allow you, the staffers at MSNBC, to decide who covers the president? When it comes to the White House Correspondents association, they're not going to allow the Daily Wire to be part of the press pool, not going to allow Daily Caller or Breitbart to be part of the press pool, not going to allow the Free Beacon or the examiner to be part of the press pool.
-
Unknown A
The only people they will allow are legacy media outlets that hate President Trump. Obviously, Caroline Levitt said, well, you know what, I don't understand who exactly made, who died and made the WHCA kings, but they are not kings any longer.
-
Unknown E
We want more outlets and new outlets to have a chance to take part in the press pool to cover this administration's unprecedented achievements up close, front and center. As you all know, for decades, a group of D.C. based journalists, the White House Correspondents association, has long dictated which journalists get to ask questions of the President of the United States in these most intimate spaces. Not anymore.
-
Unknown A
Okay. I mean, that seems perfectly reasonable to me. If the White House doesn't want to designate that, then perhaps they should just pull the room. Meaning there are alternative ways where it's not the White House dictating who's part of the press pool, but it also isn't a corrupt organization run by Democratic acolytes who work for msnbc. That might be a pretty good way of allocating responsibility for this. Caroline Levitt said, we are giving power back to the people instead of to the President. Of course the press is like, no, no, that can't happen. What you're really doing is consolidating power in the way. Again, you are ignoring the elephants in the room. The press have been the willing partners of the Democratic Party for as long as I have been alive. They literally covered up Joe Biden's decline. They were all complicit in it. Joe Biden stood up there at the podium with actual note cards with the faces and names of reporters from a variety of mainstream legacy institutions, all of which were part of the press pool and pre printed questions from them.
-
Unknown A
And you were all complicit in it. You were all complicit. Now you have the balls to come back and say, my Gosh, how can the objective media cover the administration if they're just going to pick it? You already did it. The Biden White House was already picking who's part of the press pool via the whca, which basically worked for them. And now you're complaining you blew it. This is your fault. If you didn't want to be treated as opposition media by a Republican administration, perhaps you shouldn't have been praetorian guard media for a left wing administration. Unbelievable. Here's Caroline Levitt.
-
Unknown E
I am proud to announce that we are going to give the power back to the people who read your papers, who watch your television shows, and who listen to your radio stations. Moving forward, the White House press pool will be determined by the White House press team. Legacy outlets who have participated in the press pool pool for decades will still be allowed to join. Fear not. But we will also be offering the privilege to, well, deserving outlets who have never been allowed to share in this awesome responsibility. Just like we added a new media seat in this briefing room, legacy media outlets who have been here for years will still participate in the pool, but new voices are going to be welcomed in as well.
-
Unknown A
Now, again, WHCA is complaining about all of this. Eugene Daniels, who is moving over to msnbc, said, quote, this move tears at the independence of a free press in the United States. It suggests the government will choose the journalists who cover the president. In a free country, leaders must not be able to choose their own press corps. They have been for literally years, for years. We know utter insanity from the press. That's how you got here. That is how you got here. Amazing stuff there. Just slow clap for the media who destroyed their own credibility in order to save the Democrats. And now it turns out that no one actually cares whether they are allowed in the press pool or whether they're not allowed in the press pool. This is your fault, guys. You broke it. You bought it. Fafo. By the way, the sort of underlying theme here seems to be that President Trump is not transparent enough that you need the media, like in his private spaces in order to with the press pool in order to find out what he's doing.
-
Unknown A
President Trump is the most transparent president in American history. It is not close. President Trump answered in the first month of his administration, not even kidding. 1009 questions from the press. 1009. President Trump loves it like nobody else. Let me give you a contrast in numbers. Joe Biden in his first month took 141 questions from the press. Donald Trump in his first month, the first time around took 199 questions from the press. Barack Obama took 161 questions from the press. Donald Trump, in his first month took 1009 questions from the press. 1009 as in like eight times higher than any of his predecessors, including himself last time around. And they're complaining that there won't be enough access to him. I'm pretty sure that access is not going to be the problem. I really, I really don't think that's it. Are you? Coming up, we'll get to a hot debate on HBO between Bill Maher and John Lovett on the trans issue.
-
Unknown A
Plus, we'll get to President Trump tweeting out an amazing AI video of the Gaza Strip. Mara, Gaza, Gaza, lago, as it's said. First, you need to head on over and become a subscriber. We have so much great stuff. We've got Jordan Peterson's entire compendium of amazing content ranging from Exodus to the Gospels to depression and anxiety. Got Matt Walsh's amazing, groundbreaking, massively hit documentaries. What is Woman, Am I Racist? All sorts of good stuff. All access with me. If you're not a member, become a member. Use code Shapiro Checkout for two months free on all annual plans. Click that link in the description and join us sa.