Today's show sponsored by Lear Capital, the precious metals leader since nineteen ninety seven and only company I trust and recommend to my family, friends and viewers. Visit Lear Alex dot com.
Ready to break the narrative, get the real story with no filters and no apologies. Cut through the noise with real conversation, real conviction, and real news. It's time for truth without spin. It's the Alex Marlow Show.
I'm Alex Marlow.
This is the Alex Marlow Show, and I am live today on location. I got a couple of speeches to a group of great conservatives later in the day, but the news does not wait for me to give speeches, because I will tell you right now.
This is a big news day. Is a big news day, and not in a good way.
We got a big mess on our hands, those of you who are just coming to this new Supreme Court strikes down trump Tariff's to three majority. Roberts, Gorsich, and Barrett all side with the Libs. Roberts and Barrett do seem to live to disagree with Trump from time to time, and Gorsich has this libertarian streak, so you can bet he's not a huge tariffs guy. We've got some very strange stuff in this decision, but some stuff that I
think we were kind of anticipating. And later on in the show, I'm going of John Carney with me, my economic and finance not just editor at bry Bert News, but my guru, the guy who I trust more than anyone else on this topic. He is going to break down what he thinks is a solution, which I tasked him with a long time ago. You've got to come up with a solution so we can tell people that this goes away. And I had a feeling some of these tariffs we're going to go away, that it is
not the end of the world. But it's very noteworthy that this decision comes after the tariffs are obviously working to the point where just last week I was saying, we probably need to now have a external revenue service because we have so much money that's coming into the treasury from the tariffs, and now all of a sudden, we have to go back to the drawing board on some of the tariffs. But I'm going to give you
the details before I give you the hot takes. So these were the president's tariffs that were imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Acts AIPA is what people say who like saying all of the acronyms is a one word.
I don't think we need it, but maybe we do. IEPA.
They're unlawful because the statue doesn't authorize tariffs, which is something that is kind of typical of what the Trump administration has done in the first year with some stuff, which I really love this. They move fast and break things, and they enact policy and they go for it and they take a big swing, and they know every once in a while the court's going to block them. But they've tried to overwhelm the system by putting a bunch of stuff in, so they knew there was a possibility
that this could happen, and it did. Unfortunately, so which tariffs were covered. Ruling knocks out two big buckets, the broad reciprocal tariffs aimed at trade deficits, and the fentanyl link tariffs that were imposed on Canada, Mexico and China. Because remember it's important to note this, we don't know this off enough that China is trying to kill us literally with fentandel. There's no other explanation for it. They're
allaring Fritz going to our country. I don't know Mexico is competent or cares enough other than the theaters in bed with cartels. But China literally is trying to kill Americans via a war via fentandel, and we try to teariff them try to stop. That seems kind of mild and it's purely illegal, at least under this particular act. These represented about seventy percent of the second term tariff,
so not everything. So some of the tariffs that I talked about last week on the podcast with Howard Lutnik, which was also a live event. Those of you missed that, highly recommend. As I always say every day, there's always one reason to subscribe to my feeds because there's always more content over there for you to diet a more thorough dive and stuff I'm thinking about and stuff I care about. But some of the stuff on lutnixx plate not covered. This is a lot of the stuff on
Besson's plate. But again Best is super smart guy, so he'll be prepared for this. So we'll give you where this goes from here coming up.
But this was.
Expected to raise one point five trillion dollars over the next decade and now they're gone because three people in the Supreme Court sided with the Lips, So very noteworthy that that's where we're at and whether or not this is the right legal decision. Carney is an attorney, so he'll weigh in on that too. You'll get all sorts of opinions across the board, but policy wise, pretty devastating
for the country. So why they ruled that way, Roberts joining Groces and Barrett, They basically implied the Major Questions doctrine, So the Major Questions doctrine saying the tear of power is extraordinary and belong to the Congress, and if Congress is meant to grant that power through AEPA, it would have done so expressly, not implicitly, through language allowing the president to regulate importation. So Trump saying I'm president, I
can regulate importation. This is why I'm good. And the scotis just saying no, no, no, you don't get to do that. Congress does that, and it is we don't do it. You don't do what Congress does it, basically saying that this was crossing over into congresses territory, of which is I obviously Clarence Thomas and Justice Alito, the two biggest defenders of the Constitution disagreed. So they're not just conservatives. These are a strict construction list who defend
the Constitution at all costs. They disagreed, so it's, you know, noteworthy, that's the case. So Sodamayor, Kagan and Jackson had the same result. They use something called the ordinary statutory interpretation, so they did not invoke any major questions with it. They just said, I guess it was a less of a nuance or less interesting ruling, more of a we just disagree with Trump on everything sort of vibes. Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Alito were in descent. Cavanaugh warned the unwinding the
duties and handling refunds could be a mess. And that's right, you heard me say handing out refunds. So now the movement is going to be this could be a media thing, could be a legal thing. Again, we'll get this answer at the bottom of the hour. What I bring in karting, But the revenue is at risk that we've already collected. So Reuters, because they're very clever over there, they got
a lot of my very clever news wire. They did the math and they figure we've already taken in one hundred and seventy five billion from this specific type of tariff, which we were told would not work, and now we've got one hundred and seventy five billion delta, and we may need to give that back. And that's going to
be what the people hate this country. And this is why it's so noteworthy all these news cycles over the last few weeks with the sports where you've got all these sports stars admitting how much they hate this country and either playing for communists China or going overseas and trashing our country, and all these people who clearly think America is a terrible place, acting like we got the Gestapo and Jim Crow and all that stuff is still here.
So the people hate our country are going to root for us to give back the one hundred and seventy five billion dollars we've already collected. So clearly just pretty devastating if that would be the case, and also really messy. And I think that that's something that clearly caught Thomas's, Alito and Kavanaugh's attention, is that this is going to be you know, it's gonna be It's gonna be hard
to figure out just how to do that. The court did not decide how refunds should work or how the refunds would be given out, So that will create more new cycles, probably extending the new cycle, and they're going to leave that, I guess, to lower courts to sort that out. And so I don't know how long this
is going to take to fully unwind. But we don't know whether or not is expected from this decision as of now for my interpretation, whether or not there's going to be refunds that are gonna be mandated, and if
they are manded how to do it. But this is more than half of the revenue the tears have generated thus far, and it could potentially go away in a time where we've got an affordability crisis, we've got a budget deficit, and just note I think at least half of the country still wants Trump to fail at all costs and would rather America lose money so long as Trump looks like he took an l okay. So what's
going to happen next? And this is going to be the question for a long period of time, and we'll return to it the Bond of the Hour In the third segment of the show with John Carney. But operationally, the IEPA tariffs should come off the books once the decisions implement implemented, and so they'll be guidance some when that takes place. But the administration is going to try to replace some of the tariffs using other trade statutes.
That's where it's going to get interesting complicated. It's going to take a lot of time for all of us short through this, but there's more procedural requirements and constraints with other means, which is why Trump opted for this, because this is stuff that could get applied quickly. Cash flow starts coming in quickly, Trump starts touting w's and that's how he wanted.
To do it.
There are other options that they're just going to have more procedural requirements, more constraints, and take longer to implement, which is they're prepared. So I assume we'll be getting announcements right away, certainly as soon as the State of the Union, maybe even before then. We'll say the Union A dresses on Tuesday, and importers are going to press
the refund claims. They're going to try to get refunds as soon as humanly possible, so they'll go through trade courts, and I think there's going to be a I have no idea how this canna go. I really don't. This is where I You're looking for good answers for me and how to get the refunds. I don't know if this is going to happen, and I don't know what it could look like. But I do think that overall this could get implemented right away. It's going to overwhelm
the news right away. It's going to be a something that will be another huge challenge for this administration and also the American public because this was a pretty easy way to start making things more affordable in this country is to start generating money because of our massive trade deficit. As I spoke about Secretary Lutnik last week on the show.
What we spoke about is that we had this mindset for as long as I've been alive, which is four four decades in this country, that having a trade deficit is perfectly acceptable and it should be completely limitless. How much we have does not matter how much trade deficit we got. We can have a bunch of it doesn't make a difference. It's all good in the end. Well, how has that gone for us.
Not great.
Trump tried to fix that, and the robes of the Supreme Court said, no, you cannot do it this particular way. Are they right from a constitutional standpoint? I can't say. But what I can say not good news for the country.
But what do we do next?
We'll answer that question next on the Alex Marlow Show. If a red light therapy device is cheap, there's a reason, and it's not a good one. Most red light devices on the market are built to hit a low price point, not to deliver real results. They use weaker components, inconsistent light output, and non medical grade standards. That's why so many of them feel underwhelming or stop working altogether. Flashy ads and big promises can't make up for poor performance.
The super Palm is medical grade built for consistent, deep penetrating light that professionals trust. That means stronger results, better reliability, and real relief. You can feel, not guesswork. It's also easy to use, handheld and comfortable, making it simple to add your daily routine as I have. I try cheaper devices made in China and didn't feel anything with the super Palm. The pain in my knee and back. Finally, eased after just a few weeks. It's the first one
that actually worked. SunPower led backs it with a money back guarantee and a two year warranty, something most competitors just can't offer. And it's made in America. Use code Marlowe for ten percent off today. Stop settling for low
quality devices and upgrade to real medical grade relief. All right, We're back on the marlow Show, and I gotta say, I feel like let's take a little bit of a breather from the economic stuff for a second, and let's spend a little bit of time talking about some things that are fun, because we should have some fun on the show, shouldn't we. It feels like at this moment in time that we've got an opportunity to play some
really fun clips of Democrats being stupid. So let's not forget, let's not despare, because there are a lot of Democrats who are completely crazy and we should be playing them. This is someone named Lee Fink, who is a Minnesota state legislature and this individual is a trans person. And heed this to say about kids getting access to adult reading material, will say reading Let's play.
Cup four mentioned the Paxton case and the ags in many states are very clear about that. They're almost jubilant about being able to use these laws to ban young people from accessing content that could be educational if they are queer, and you are principal, you have LGBT students in your school, and we also know that they're not receiving sex education for queer kids. We know that purient interest could be for many people, the very existence of transgender kids.
So basically, we need pornographic material because it is because we need transgender kids to understand if they're trans. So this is the biggest admission I think of grooming I think we've ever seen, is this is actually revealing. The whole game they're doing is that they want to expose minors to adult material so that they become trans because they believe I guess trans is also now biological.
It's not.
It just has always been inside of you. I guess this is the point they're making. And so if they give just of access to X rated adult content, then they'll be able to know their trans And that's a good thing, because why it's just the the truly that this is we've turned over the entire country to insane people, all right, I'm gonna do something. This is one where I am cautioning you guys in the booth because we've got some F bombs here that are coming.
But this is a new candidate.
We got new candidate among us, some name Julia Stratton, and she's got an ad for Senate. And this I think reveals exactly where the Democrats are when it comes to depths. Right now, let's play this cut cup five police.
Trump vote Juliana, Trump Vote Juliana, Trump Vote Juliana.
They said, it's not me.
I'm Juliana Stratton, and I'm proud to have lived my whole life on the South Side of Chicago. I'm not scared of a want to be dictator. I'm running for Senate to stand up to Donald Trump. I'll abolish ice and hold Trump accountable for the crimes he's committed.
Just like they said, Trump Trump, Trump, Vote Juliana.
That's why I approved this message.
I underplayed this.
This is the lieutenant governor of Illinois and she's running for Senate and her whole message is f Trump and he's a want to be dictator. As if a lieutenant governor of a state could say F Trump and that would be the whole ad in a dictatorship, and then the dictator would just allow for it. They never get that, but their audience doesn't demand that they get it. But they've completely abandoned any sort of depth, have no quality
of arguments. All they have is anger and emotion, and they feel like that that's the way to motivate people to win, and just should scare you because if they do win, then it's a it's a big deal, no wonder. The Bears might be moving to Indiana. How fun would that be if the Chicago Bears fans had to go over to Indiana to go to the stadium.
That'd be cool.
The'd be Almost as good is when the Angels out here in Anaheim, which is a very close where I am today, when they change their name to the Los Angeles Angels, which I always thought was awesome because Los Angeles of course means the Angels, so the Angels Angels.
I thought that was pretty cool. That was pretty cool choice.
But I think putting the Bears stadium, it's kind of like, don't the Giants and the Jets play in New Jersey. It's all amusing, it's all amusing. All right, I'm sad that that's where they're at. But we will make fun of them over and over and over again. But if they get power, just don't forget. These are very bad people who are have a huge power on a huge power trip.
Let's play cut one.
This is Susan Rice, one of the most powerful people in Joe In Barack Obama's adminished ration and in the whole Democrat establishment.
Play cut one.
But when it comes to the elites, you know, the corporate interests, the law firms, the universities, the media. I agree with you, Preed it is not Ah, it's not going to end well for them. For those that decided that it was. You know that they would act in their perceived very narrow self interest, which I would underscore is very short term self interest and you know, take a knee to Trump. I think they're now starting to realize.
Wait a minute.
She's saying that she's talking to pre Bahara, who is a guy who's a pretty good attorney and then just got completely trumped arrange and now is a podcaster.
It happens to people.
So she's saying, first of all, she's actually the elites are with Trump, not with Obama, and Biden, Democrats, et cetera. But she's actually threatening them that if you're in the media, or if you're a corporation and you bent the need of Trump, which means you heard definition, bent the needed Trump is what you work cooperatively with the democratically elected president of the United States. That's where she's at, and she's threatening them, and it actually gets worse from there.
We're gonna get back to economic news. I gotta get out here, right John, all right, we'll be right back on the All right, we're live, John, John, we're the chit chatting here.
We're getting cue. We don't get any cues this break. It was busy today. It is a wild day. We got the tariffs coming.
John Carney's here men, Economic and Finance editor The Bright Bar Business Die just the number one business newsletter you can read if you want to understand Meganomics, and you should, regardless of your politics, read every day by the Treasury Secretary, among others in the Cabinet and the White House. All right, John, we get a lot of news. But before we dig into the tariffs in the Supreme Court decision, you're also a trained attorney with a lot of greed so that's
very helpful in this case. I got two quick ones to bounce off you. First, we also got GDKEY numbers today. A little disappointing, but how much.
What do we think?
Yeah, so the GDP number was disappointment. Came in at one point four percent, dragged down by maybe two percent. The BA says one percentage point by the government shutdown, so they think and a lot of that will probably get added back in the first quarter of this year. So yeah, it wasn't a great number. A lot of
it had to do with the government shutdown. Another big part of it was not just government shutdown, but actually the government contracting consumers and business were doing pretty well actually, and trade helped boost GDP in this number as well. But what you know, it was government partly because of the shutdown and also just because Donald Trump has been shrinking the government that led to the number being so bad.
Okay, so a nice segue to Streme Court trade decision is America's trade deficit according to you, John and us. In the bright part, Business Digest had its best quarter in thirty three years. Yet I read a million nostalgia media headlines in the last forty hours that the tariffs aren't working and we're not closing the trade deficit.
Yeah, So what happened was the trade deficit was actually very high coming into this year, and then it exploded even higher in the beginning of the year before Trump's tariffs. A lot of businesses, you know, I'm not gonna like insult them for this. This was a smart move. They knew tariffs were coming, so they bought every import they
could get their hands on ahead of time. So you had a high trade deficit in the beginning of the year, but once the tariffs came on, you actually saw a decline in the trade deficit that was pretty serious, so year over year and quarter over quarter, So just concentrating on that last quarter that we just got the data in compared to the year before, the trade deficit was down around forty percent, and the goods only trade deficit that's the one the tariff's effect was down twenty six percent.
So we saw a huge decline in the fourth quarter of this year compared to the fourth quarter of last year. That really does say the tariffs seemed to have cut imports. Of course, some of that may be because of the front running that I was talking about, So what we you know, until today, I would have told you what we need to do is look to see what happens to the tariffs of the next year, to see if they're going to be as effective as they were in
the last quarter. But we may not get to because the Supreme Court just knocked down all of those terrors.
Okay, so the I want to get to the tariffs now, and I think this is important and I want to focus on what happens next mostly. But as an attorney, what do we know about the decisions themselves at this point? Were there any surprises? And just give us a brief summary from your vandpoint as a legal mind of what the rationale was.
Sure, I've watched it very closely. I watched because I listened to the oral arguments. I've read all the briefs in the case. It seems to me that the dissenters, who are the most conservative justices on the court, Kavanaugh, Alito, and Thomas, were right that actually the law does grant the the President of the power to do tariffs.
But they lost.
They had six votes against them. The main thing I would say that the decision was on is not a crazy thing. What the Roberts' opinion here says more or less is, Look, this law has been around for fifty years. Nobody ever tried to impose tariffs under this particular law, and we don't think you can do it. We think you need Congress's authorization to do it. I think that's really important that Congress can re by changing one word
in the statute. If they just add tariff to the list of things that the President is able to do under the Emergency Economic Powers Act, he will absolutely be able to do this. So it's not like Trump's powers were unconstitutional or anything like that.
It's just that the.
Majority of the courts said they don't think he has the power to do it under the AIFA statute. That's easily repairable. It's probably wrong, but you know that's the way the Suprame Court works. It's now the law of the land.
Okay.
So is there any way is the decision vulnerable at all? Is there any way to just tweak something simple and then all of um, we're back on or do you feel like the solution is going to be more complicated?
Well, so, if we had a more reliable US Senate, I would just say, you know, that's it. Guys put tariffs into the statute, but we can't pass you know, simple things like voter id vas through the Senate because of Republican opposition. So that's unfortunate. We need better lawmakers the law, like the US Senate absolutely should put tariffs into the Emergency Act. That would fix everything. But the other thing is there's about a half dozen other statutes
that specifically authorize the president to impose terriffs. They did it under AEPA because there's less procedural hurdles and they believed it allowed them more flexibility. They can do it under these other statutes. So a lot of the tariffs that will get knocked down because you can't do them under AEPA are probably going to come back pretty quickly because the Trump administration has not you know, they didn't just like sit on their hands and wait for the
Supreme Court to decide this. They've been preparing how to respond if the court went this way. It's not a surprise. The consensus view was that the tariffs were in trouble. I've said that many times myself, that they were in trustle.
Yes, yeah, yeah, we thought so.
And especially you know, this is one thing for me maybe I was to cash about this, but after researching breaking the law as long as I did, and knowing that Gorsis really is a libertarian, Barrett really does like to go. She always takes the safer route on the controversial decisions. Roberts lives to defy Trump. I just I'm kind of surprised. I mean, I thought it could be seven too, Like, I'm glad we kept Kevin of kavanaughh around. Like, to be honest with you, that was kind of where
I was going. So now what next? And you say, the administration you've written this out, so if you go to Brightbard dot com, get the bright Bard app get the whole thing. But you say, the Trump administration's got a hidden ace to rebalance the trade.
How do we do this?
Yeah, so there's a the president is absolutely This is one of the ironies is the president could actually ban imports. They Kavdough points out that.
This is ridiculous.
You can't charge a one dollar terrify on something, but you could absolutely say no, you can't import it at all. That seems kind of crazy, but that's where the Supreme
Court's decision leads you. So what the administration could do is basically ban imports from any country that runs that we run a trade deficit with, that runs a trade surplus against US, and say we will allow imports if you pay us, if your national government pays us a fee, you have to pay us a fee equal to I don't know, you know, a number twenty percent of your trade surplus, fifty percent of your trade surplus, one hundred percent, and make it two hundred percent for really bad actors,
and then you're allowed to export things into the United States. Again, that's absolutely allowed under AEPA. In fact, the Supreme Court decision makes it clear the president can block imports under a EPA. So I think that they can move to this licensing thing. I've written it up at Briper Business Digest. It's also a new idea. You know, it's not one that's been tested, but I do know that you know,
you know, Alex, you know this. We've got some readers in the in the White House and in the Treasury and in the US Commerce Department, and they have so they're aware of this idea and they and they're definitely have read up on it. But that's not the only idea.
There's also, like I said, a lot of other statutes, and it's and that one survived this Supreme Court decision because we already have tariffs under these statutes and two that can then be imposed on other countries under these other statutes.
So it's the.
Tariffs aren't completely going away, and a lot of them can be restored in the ways that I've described.
One thing that's just interesting here there's been a lot of trust that's been lost is I'm pretty sure Greg flagged that Brett Kavanaugh wrote in his descent that the tariffs not be ah may not be a wise policy. Like he ends up siding with Trump, but he comments on the policy like.
What are we doing here?
It's the I thought, are we interpreting the law or are we hot taking on politics here? I mean, it's one of the things that when you get that job, it is one lane.
You got to stay in that lane. Correct.
Yeah. Look, we've seen this with the Federal Reserve, We've seit it with the Supreme Court. Nobody stays in their lane anymore. Somehow they feel like Donald Trump gave them a license to start, you know, making policy everywhere. It's unfortunate. I kind of understand why Kavanaugh might have wanted to do that. He may have been hoping. Remember when they're writing these opinions in the sense.
They're convincing each other.
Yeah, so he may have been like, like, maybe I could get Gorsic, Maybe I could get you know, as you said, it's like a libertarian. Maybe I could get him on board. Maybe I can get Amy Cony Barrett on board. I think this thing was a closer. Uh, you know, even though it comes out six' three, TODAY i think it may have been closer because it has taken several weeks for you, know a lot longer than people thought for this to come. Out, remember right, afterwards everybody,
decided oh that's. It The Supreme court is definitely going to strike This downy struck it, down but in a divided. Court and even six' three is a little bit confusing because there are there's really actually three.
Or four opinions.
Within this so there's the There's the, roberts opinion but the liberal judges wrote their own version of why this should.
Be, overturned, yeah well which. Is Different but john and we all got me in together. For now we'll do much more content. On this but your main solution is you threaten. Other countries we're just going to ban, your goods and all of a sudden they're going to come to the table and they're going.
To cooperate. We're, okay so but Let's say trump doesn't.
Do that what do you think is other options forty five seconds that you think are on.
The.
Table, Yeah absolutely so there's section three, twenty three which is two. Thirty, two rather we already have tariffs under. THESE statutes a whole bunch of other statutes are actually listed In the. Cabinet opinion the administration has already imposed tariffs under. These statutes in, some cases they're just going
to impose more of them over the next. Few months but the problem is these, take longer and often have different procedural hurdles and sometimes have time limits, on them so you only get to you have to reimpose them every year.
Or So john carney.
Amazing stuff don't, miss anything he writes today bright our. Business digest so we'll get the weight to the world on, Your, Shoulder john, thank you. My friend, All right gold and silver recently soored record highs than they. Pulled back so are precious medals a good?
Bye?
Still, oh yeah of course. They Are Many wall street experts predict higher. Prices ahead why because we see trillions in, national debt a, declining dollar an inflation that keeps shrinking. Our savings even with corrections along, The way gold remains a historical hedge for. Wealth protection That's Why morgan stanley's chief investment officer gets the sixty forty stocks and bonds portfolio and is now recommending up to twenty percent in.
Precious medals they're ed getting EDUCATED as, i did and you. Should Too Call lear capital my Friends At lear capital eight hundred nine ninety two two two. Five five get a free gold investment kit when, you do and you can learn how you can qualify for up to twenty thousand dollars in. Bonus Gold lear capital has over three billion dollars in transactions and they got thousands of five. Star reviews call eight hundred nine nine to two two two five five eight hundred nine nine to two two
two five Five Or lear alex. Dot com, all right always. Nice up such a great team and a big breaking. News Day, greg evans our. Executive producer sean McConnell runs. The Boards, Roger Rick Roger, Wicker Junior, Rick Locke, Gerrit Chollie, Matt Sebel, Brandon Couples, misty Callahan And. John cassio i'll make vital contributions to. The SHOW and i say this when there's, tougher days it's really important to note that things can get so so. Much Worse and i've got
audio evidence to. That point earlier in, THE show i played a Clip Of susan rice literally threatening the elites who bent the Need, of trump meaning actually we're willing to work. With him somehow it got more sensational. From there this is Former top Obama Advisor susan rice's play.
Cut two if these corporations think That the democrats when they come back, in power are going to, you know play by the, old, rules uh and, you know and and say oh, never mind we'll we'll forgive you for all the people, you fired all the and principles, you've violated all, you know the laws, YOU'VE skirted i think they've got another. Thing coming this is not going to be an instance of, you know forgive.
And, forget yeah it's not gonna be.
Forgiven forget we're gonna be coming after the people who were part OF the, maga movement and that includes you don't think that's Isolated To stephen Miller And donald Trump And eric Trump And. Don junior of. Course not they will, debank you they will. Deplatform you they are coming. For you which is why we need to be engaged now more.
Than ever people taking the, black pill getting discouraged because we don't win every single time we lace them up and go out on the field is not acceptable because the stakes are just. Too high let me play. Another clip this is What ilhan omar wants. To do not to say she'll personally be in power beyond what she, is now but. Who knows let's play cut.
Ten PLEASE.
What i will say is that there is a an easier conversation happening today than, you know six seven years AGO when i Got to congress about what we need to do, with ice which is still.
Abolish it and there is a.
Lot of conversation about what the dismensle meant Of the Department Of homeland security should.
Look like.
And this is her suggesting flat out she wants to abolish ice In the Department Of. Homeland security that's what. She's saying she doesn't think we Should have Immigrations and. Customs enforcement that's, the point THAT'S what i. Stands for she not believe we should Have a Department Of. Homeland security she believes the country should be have an open border and we should be run over by all the smalling. Migrants imaginable so we get a more leering centers and
less safety security and less affordability for Tax paying. American citizens that's not her. Main constituency it's the people who are running the leering centers with no children.
In them so that is.
The point and that's why we've got to stay focused here and not get, to discouraged because again we get such beautiful Moments from trump. As well let's play. Cut nine this was him kicking out the media at the. Governor's breakfast check.
This out we're going to be asking the press to leave. That way we're gonna talk very candidly and. TAKE questions i think at the end it was supposed. TO be i just Said, to susie what, about? Questions sir you can do whatever. YOU want i don't know if she says that to other people that she's represented over, The years but thank you very much for. Being here it's a, great honor and, the media. Thank you you can.
Leave now and he does it with. A smile that's my favorite part. About it we're gaining so. MUCH power i was THINKING About Ccp Barbie. EILEEN goo, i mean she's been whining over the Backlash that american fans aren't
totally embracing her like the. Media has this is the woman who grew Up, in America Went, stanford university benefited from All the america's well and large ass and skills and talent, and coaching and then took a giant bag FROM the ccp to Compete for china And, the olympics and, very well she got golds, last time is that many golds?
This time but she's got two more medals this, time around and she's very sad that she's a. Punching, bag well if you're someone who is going to take a lot of money from a communist regime that is engaged in human rights atrocities at, this moment right the second they're doing it and are trying To murder americans By importing fentanel into our country to, destroy us then people are going to say something is not only going to be magazine covers. For YOU and i think that's great
because the fact that she's feeling the heat. At all she didn't feel any heat, at all not one iota of heat the last time she was In. The olympics and the reason why she didn't feel any heat is because we did not have the foothold in.
The media we had not completely.
Broken it as we've tried to do a, bright PART and i Think reelecting trump and going from there has been a huge part. Of it and it's a very, big thing and we can't underestimate so many of the good things that. We've done i've been going through some of the accomplishments again that through the first Year the, trump administration from the doging to the big, beautiful bill to the peace around the world that's. Breaking out all
of these things we've. Underestimated it the fact that border crossings are down, To zero homan's rounding up all these illegal, alien.
Predators all these things are.
So wonderful and if we lose sight of that because we get discouraged By One supreme court ruling or when new cycle doesn't go, our way it is completely unacceptable because we're going to be handing over the Country To susan RICE and aoc And iohan omar and. The rest that's all. For today thanks for listening. And watching Scott's covering trump's live speech right now, on radio so check.
That out go, in peace, for love and serve