Speaker 1: And hello, how are you happy? Thursday? Today is the
third day of July year of our lower twenty twenty five.
My name is Tom Sullivan. We are, yep, getting ready
for the fourth of July Independence Day holiday. But in
the meantime a lot of things happening today, and one
of them was the big beautiful bill. Geez, what a
way to do business. So it passed the House right
and then it went over to the Senate, and then
they did an all nighter in the Senate for fifteen
hours or reading the bill, and then they had to
bring it passed there barely. But then they got it
back to the to the House with the changes the
Senate made, and it passed there after overnight. Jakeem Jeffries,
the Democrat leader, spoke at from five am this morning
until about one this afternoon Eastern time. I don't know
why to delay it, but it was inevitable and it
did pass. The vote to pass in the House today
to eighteen in favor to fourteen against it. The two
Republicans who voted against it Tom Massey of Kentucky no surprise,
and Brian Fitzpatrick from Pennsylvania. The President will sign it
tomorrow morning. He's going to have a signing ceremony at
the White House. He's in Iowa this evening. It's kind
of a patriotic rally, Rah rah rah, and so tomorrow
morning he'll have a signing ceremony at the White House.
The big question behind all of this is will it work.
I told you the other day that, remember, there was
trillions of dollars spent by the Biden administration and it
led directly to inflation. But what happened with the Biden
spending was that it went to people. You, me, and
your neighbors and everybody else got money they did not
have before. And so what did they do. They ran
out to go buy things. Well, they swamped the retailers
out there, and they had the supply chain could not
keep up. And since they couldn't keep up, the prices
of goods went up. So it was a whole combination
of things that led to inflation. This isn't that. This
is the government is going to be spending a whole
lot more money, but they're going to be spending it
on things like defense spending, and they're going to be
spending money on billions of dollars for immigration enforcement, the
wall and more border patrol and more ice. They're going
to raise the debt ceiling. The states are going to
have to chip in more money for the chips or
for the snap benefits. I should say that. In other words,
food stamps and the Medicaid reformed probably the most controversial
part out of all of this, and I don't know
if we're going to see that ever explained properly. There
will be stories of people that, well, there'll be a
lot of people that lose their Medicaid benefits. But the
real question is Medicaid. When it started in nineteen sixty six,
there were ten thousand people enrolled in it. It was
designed for people in poverty. It was designed for single
moms with children at home with dependents. But it has
grown from ten thousand to one hundred million. One hundred
million people live get their medical benefits from Medicaid, and
it's a lot of people that are able to go
to work, but are not going to work because they
don't have to because they get everything given to them.
And so this is like, for those of you that
are old enough, Welfare reform. In the nineteen nineties, Bill
Clinton signed it into law. Newt Gingrich was the speaker.
And what it did was it said, you've got we'll
give you welfare benefits, but you've got if you're able
to go to work, you've got to go to work.
And it led to a lot of people going to
work and getting dignity and staying off of welfare. Finally,
and it changed and lowered the cost of welfare dramatically.
It was a huge success. Can that be repeated by
having the work requirement for people that are on Medicaid?
And I got a call a play for you. I
don't know if I can get it today. If not,
I'll get it as soon. But a guy called and
he was all upset about everything, and he said, oh
my gosh, there's going to be twelve million people are
going to be cut from Medicaid. Yeah, there are twelve
million people. What the people voted for was to cut
back on government spending and especially people that are malingerers
that are taking advantage of it. They could go get
a job, they could go get health insurance, probably through
a job. So there's another whole side to the story
that's not being told. The media is going to bring
you all the heartstring stories. People are going to have
sad stories about I lost my benefits. Well, if you're
able to go to work, go to work, we will
not apply. They will not cut off low income, single family,
single moms with children at home, nor the elderly. So
it's there's a lot there to go through. Let me
go through some of the provisions that I haven't seen
the final final, nine sixty some pages. But it does
provide the long promised tax incentives for no tax on tips,
no tax on overtime. The way it will work though,
is it will be a deduction. It'll be a deduction
on your tax return, so first you don't get the
benefit until you file your tax return. Instead of no
tax on Social Security, there will be I believe it's
a six thousand dollars credit that seniors will get and
they can apply that basically against their Social Security income
and no tax or sorry, you can deduct interest expense
on car loans if the car is made in the USA.
So essentially, it extends the Trump tax cutbill from twenty seventeen.
If they did not pass this, all of our taxes
would have gone up. It raises the child tax credit,
it raises the as they call it, the salt deduction,
is for state and local income tax deduction on the
federal return from ten thousand to forty thousand. It will
as we got in here, the Medicaid recipients will have
to work eighty hours a month minimum, and there's going
to be some copays for people on Medicaid. There will
be a cap on student loan borrowing. There's a new
I got to look into this tax tax free savings
account for children. The idea is to put money into
an account with your child's name on it so that
when they grow up they have some money. I'll have
to look into it for more details. And again interest
payment deduction for car loans if the car was made
in the USA. So that's all coming out of this
bill that did pass today. A lot more obviously to find.
Carl Rove was asked about this new bill and how
the Republicans now that they've got it passed, now the
big job is for them to go out and basically
explain it to the public because right now the Fox
newspoll I think I had fifty nine percent of the
people were not in favor of this bill. I don't
think anybody knew what was in the bill, but they
were not in favor of it, and so they're going
to have to go out and explain it.
Speaker 2: To the voters. Well, I think you're absolutely right. Polling
the focus has been on getting the bill passed, and
it's an extraordinary achievement. To take this big a piece
of legislation, with as many moving parts as it is
as it has and get it past the House, get
it past the Senate, send it back to the House,
and get it passed again is remarkable. And let's not
get ourselves. This required not only presidential leadership, but the
Speaker of the House and the Senate majority leader have
demonstrated key leadership as well.
Speaker 1: But you're right, pass the bill. Check that off. But
there are three other steps that need to be taken.
Speaker 2: First of all, the president needs to lead the effort
to go out and explain it. He has the biggest
megaphone in America. He needs to deploy it on explaining
why this is the right thing to do and what
it's going to do for people. And that means he
needs to go on the offense. For example, Democrats have
been attacking and saying people are going to lose their
Medicaid coverage. The president needs to go out and say
that people are going to lose their coverage. Are the
able bodied who refuse to work. They're going to be
the illegal aliens, and they're going to be the people
who don't belong on the system according to the laws
that we have in the United States on the books.
So if you're a Democrat and you're criticizing us, then
you're defending people who are able bodied and refuse to work.
You're defending having illegal aliens on our tab and you're
in favor of allowing people who are today improperly on
the roles to remain on the roles. If you want
to defend that, Democrats, go ahead and do it. But
most important, perhaps of all, is over under promise and
over deliver. Remember the problem that Joe Biden had Biden
Nomics is working, he said, when Americans didn't think it
was working at all, And the administration and Republicans in
Congress need to make certain they under promise and overdeliver.
Say that this is going to take time to get
to make its impact felt, but it's going to help
strengthen our economy and control our spending. At this life sashink,
it'll be a big impact on I think it'll have
a huge impact on twenty twenty six because member has
these changes, particularly the Medicaid changes come into effect, they're
going to people are going to be losing their coverage, and.
Speaker 1: The able bodied.
Speaker 2: If think about an interesting study done of able bodied
people on Medicaid, and you know what their number one
activity was if they weren't working, It was watching television
and number two was playing online games. And so we
are going to the Republicans that better go on the
offense and say we are doing what you told us
to do, which is to make cutain that this program
served the vulnerable among us. Medicaid was meant for poor seniors,
for children and poor families, and for the disabled, and
we should not be paying for health care for people
who are able bodied and can work and are refusing
to work. That this is why they got to go
on the offense. But yeah, it's going to be a
big impact, and the work is just beginning that there's
going to be always a tendency to say we got
the bill passed, Oh let's all take the time off
and god, we got it done.
Speaker 1: That's the requirement that you then go to work. So
speaking to Karl Rove, he wrote an op ed for
the Wall Street Journal he does every Thursday. Today's addition
is the Declaration of Independence made America great. The nation's
two hundred and fiftieth anniversary is a chance to relearn
our founding principles. It's in the Wall Street Journal today,
and speaking of the two hundred and fiftieth birthday, which
is a year from tomorrow, it was July fourth, seventeen
seventy six that obviously the declaration was signed. But this evening,
that's why the President is going to Des Moines, iow
where they're going to kick off basically one year of
celebrating the leading up to the two hundred and fiftieth
anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. And Carl wrote in
this op ed in the Journal, he says, it seems
interesting that we don't focus on the first shots fired
at Lexington and Concord, or the British surrender at Yorktown,
or the signing of the Peace Treaty. Instead, our attention
has always been the Declaration of Independence. And the reason,
Carl Wrights is was it was the seminal event in
the creation of the United States and world changing too,
so well worth reading if you have a chance to
grab the opinion from Karl Rove in the Wall Street
Journal Today. Something much less serious, more lighthearted about the
fourth of July Independence Day is it is the annual
hot dog getting contest that Nathan's famous over in Coney
Island neighborhood of Brooklyn, and this has been going for years.
To my amazement and surprise, it's that they actually broadcast
the hot dog getting championship on ESPN. I watched it
one I cannot unwatch it. It is one of the
grossest things that you will ever see as they shove
their hot dogs down their throats. There was a guy
that won it for years and years I forget for
Kobeyashi was his name, Japanese guy, and he finally was
dethroned by a guy named Joey Chestnut. So we talked
you about Harry Inton all the time, the statistician guy
over at CNN, and for some reason he wanted to
go over to Nathan's and talk to George Shay, who
is the founder and the owner of the Major League
eating sport. I guess it's what you call it. Here's Harry.
Speaker 3: I'm always stuck in the studio and so I've decided,
you know, I want to go out in the field.
I want to actually enjoy America. So this past Tuesday,
I decided to go out to Coney Island, where of course,
the hot Dog contest is held, and decided to do
some investigations on how you can in fact be a
champion hot dog eater. And let's take a listen. Oh gosh,
if I were picking the absolute best physique for a
competitive eater, I would say your height six to two
maybe six three, big shoulders, big frame, but not tight
ab you don't want to be ripped in one expansion, Well,
then I'm in perfect condition.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So if you really want to see something terrible,
tune into the hot Dog Getting Championship tomorrow over at Nathan's.
It'll be on ESPN. And it's pretty gross to watch.
The guy, this Joey Chestnuts, makes a very good living.
He goes around the world to eating championships. I don't
know what else they eat, but this George Shay started
a major league eating league, and Joey Chestnut is making
a very good living shoving hot dogs down his throat
and other things. Apparently, And speaking of CNN, did you
see where they are there? In a mess. Their audience
ratings are terrible. They actually are now losing in many
different statistics to MSNBC, but own their ownership is keeps changing,
and they're part of Paramount, and Paramount is trying they're
the owners of CBS and they're trying to sell Paramount
to Larry Ellison's son, the guy who owns Oracle. So
they're billionaires. And along the way, they edited an interview
they did for sixty minutes with Kamala Harris, and that edit.
If you look at the edit of what she said,
it was a word sound in the classic Kamala Harris version,
and so CBS clipped the original version of one of
her answers and made it sound it was still terrible,
but made it sound like she was a little more coherent.
And because of that, Donald Trump sued them for billions
of dollars. Well that we just got word that the
CBS or Paramount is going to pay Donald Trump sixteen
million dollars. I think it goes to his library, but
he's going to get sixteen million dollars, which is a
lot of money. Not for Paramount. It's just a cost
of doing business for them. But the media in general
is aghast because of the fact that the media should
be a free media and should be able to report good, bad,
and indifferent on any politician out there. So on one hand,
I get the con is that you've got a CBS
who appeared to try and interfere with the presidential election
by cleaning up an answer that Kamala Harris had given,
and they were interfering in the election. I think it's
pretty clear, and I think that there's a lot of
people at CBS, including the executive producer of sixty Minutes
who resigned recently and others have stepped down. I think
they truly are trying. They were trying to throw the
election in favor of Kamala Harris. So that's I'm sorry,
that is way wrong, and you can't have the media
doing something like that. We have to trust that the
media is giving us the information, but we all know
they're biased. And this is where I have a problem
with this whole payment thing, because I wouldn't want the
next Democrat president to file a lawsuit against Fox News
or the Wall Street Journal because they said something about
the then president. It's a dangerous area. I think a
lot of the people at CBS are upset because it
looked like, and I'm not a lawyer in this case,
but it looked like this was a slam dune for
CBS to win. But Donald Trump has been successful. Now
this is the second time you went after ABC, and
the ABC paid him money millions because of some things
that George Stefanopolis had said. So the media has to
try to be accurate. They're not going to be accurate
one hundred percent of the time, but they got to
try harder than where they are right now. So yesterday,
I believe it was Christinoam, the head of the DHS,
came out and so she wants to sue. She wants
to prosecute CNN for doing a story about a new
app that is out there that is Ice Alert, And
what somebody came up with was a map that you
can report if you see ice in your neighborhood they're
doing a raid at some particular address or business. You
can go on this app and put in the information
that ice is at the corner of X and Y,
and everybody will be alerted and all the people that
are illegally in the area will scatter. And so she's
very upset about this, But again, the government suing the
media is a tough one because this was a story
about an app. Wasn't a CBS app. CNN did the story,
and I think it's a legitimate story. My favorite traffic
app is ways Waze, and the way Ways works is
it's crowdsourcing. And if you are driving down the road
and you see a police officer sitting behind a tree
with radar, you can go on the app and push
a little button that says police are at this location,
so that other people coming down the road won't be
caught in the radar. It has again where traffic accidents are.
It's all crowdsourced. You tell the app what you see
and everybody else benefits from it. That's exactly what this
app is about, alerting where ICE is showing up. Does
it make it tougher on ice, Yes. Does it make
it tougher on the traffic cop in your neighborhood, Yes,
But I don't think it's illegal. I don't know what
she wants to do, but she wants to prosecute CNN.
Over all of that, a couple of trials who got
to wrap up. One of them is the Didty trial
and Joey Jackson. I know Joey. I've known him for
a number of years. He's a great guy, and he's
a great defense lawyer. And he was asked earlier today
about the fact that Sean Ditty Combs has been held
in the detention center. His sentencing isn't until mid October.
The judge would not let him out even though he
was acquitted on three of the five charges. You're Joey
Jackson talking about the case of Diddy being held in jail.
Speaker 4: Not surprised, and I would certainly concur with that thinking
because the judge could have very well done that. Right,
There's a couple of things that judge could consider. Let's
talk about environment the defense perspective. There's two real things.
Number one is is he a flight risk? Do you
really believe that he would be a flight risk pending sentence, right,
especially when he was acquitted of a charge that can
keep him in jail for life, knowing the consequences of
trying to flee from the court's jurisdiction. I think not.
Number two, is he a danger to the community? You know, look,
there was conduct, certainly that was raised during the trial.
The tate was awful as it relates to the beating
of Cassie Ventura. But I could you can argue what
is the danger that he poses? So on those from
that scenario, I don't see why the judge would keep
him in if there are and the lawses there's any
condition or combination of conditions that could ensure his return
to court, and there certainly are restricting your passport, limiting
where you can travel. So I get it from a
prosecution's perspective. However, Listen, the judge certainly could have concluded
he has certainly exposure in terms of him being sentenced,
and there's an argument prosecutors say it's four years, you know,
the defense says it's two. They'll make the argument in
terms of what he's elgib before. But I for judges
thinking about giving him two years, you keep him in.
He's being sent in some time in October. Presumably he'll
accrue more time and he'll get credit for the ten
months he's in, he serves you know, a number of
other months and he's out, So that could have been
the judges thinking as well. But the judge certainly would
have been well within his discretion yesterday to release. So
I think without question. In terms of the past jail time,
you're always going to get credit for time you've already served,
and he's served to ten months, and that'll be the calculus.
I think there'll be certainly an argument between prosecutors who
want more time. You know, what happens in federal court
is the judge is allowed to consider what's called quote
unquote relevant conduct. So even conduct for which you're not charged,
but conduct which is you know, somewhat bad, right, the
judge could evaluate that into the mix to give you
a higher sentence. So there'll be an argument from prosecutors
as to all this relevant conduct and all the things
we heard about what he did during the trial, and
how the judge should be more severe with him. And
from a defense perspective, you'll hear about the fact that
this is a first defense. You'll hear about the fact
that he was acquitted of the rico charge, that is,
the racketeering that could have kept him in jail for life.
You'll hear about the fact that the jury did not
buy this sex traffick gang, which would have carried a
minimum of fifteen years. And on that basis, judge, we
should be here to sentence him for which the jury,
which a system we respect, really found him guilty of.
And if you do that, the calculation would be more
along the lines of two years as we look at
the counts there, and so it's always up the discretion
of a judge. But no matter what anybody says, but
I think the calculated guideline range, which is from twenty
one months to twenty seven months, is reasonable and accurate,
and I think certainly that's something that the judge could
adhere to.
Speaker 1: Then back to Idaho, where the idea that Brian Koberger
has pled guilty to murdering four college students back in
November of twenty twenty two, it's still not sitting well
at all, especially with the father of Kaylee gunzoalve Is.
Here's her father, Steve Gunzalez, still very upset.
Speaker 5: It wasn't our deal. He never negotiated with us. We
were never given any terms whatsoever. He negotiated with the devil.
So he asked to sleep with the devil, and that's
his deal. I don't want anything to do with it.
But he's not gonna tenability and Pumpson didn't force him
to take accountability. He didn't even negotiate it. That's terrible.
Speaker 1: You don't think four life sentences is justice?
Speaker 5: No, of course, not his daycare, prison, his daycare.
Speaker 1: Why do you want is to go to trial because.
Speaker 5: Then my peers, this community will decide that he's guilty.
We could take it out of Frickin Thompson's hands. One
man shouldn't decide what four souls are worth.
Speaker 6: We know from a letter that the prosecutors sent to
members of the victims' families that the defense just last
week reached out and did ask for a plea deal.
We know that that came after Judge Hitler determined that
the continuance in the case of delay was not warranted
and had also limited what defenses Brian Coberger's attorneys could
put up, including in the past about an alibi that
was not really an alibi as many appointed to and
also that there were alternate perpetrators, and he said that
they had not met the legal threshold. So the defense
reaches out to the prosecution, and we do see that
Steve Gonsalves and also the father of Xana Kernodle, has
come out publicly and said they are not in support
of this deal. They wanted answers. They wanted the potential
for the death penalty with a conviction of trial, and
I think what we're seeing is there has been either
a lack of communication, a miscommunication, or some combination over
the history of this case, and the prosecution didn't meet
the requirements or the demands of some of the families.
Your guest is as good as mine, but we do
know it's sentencing. Not only are the families given the
opportunity for victim impact statements, but the judge may have
some probing questions for Brian Koberger. It is possible that
he will need to answer those things under oath once again,
and I think Brank cooperg also will be given an
opportunity to make a statement if he chooses.
Speaker 1: Now to the economy, we got our June jobs report today,
usually the first Friday of the month, but tomorrow is
a holiday, so the numbers came out today. We told
you yesterday that ADP they came up with a private
employment number and they said that thirty three thousand jobs
were lost last month. Sometimes sometimes ADP is just way
off from what the government comes up with, and there's
no question it was way off. So people were thinking
that the jobs report for the month of June that
came out today was not going to be good. In fact,
it would be very weak, and instead it turned out
to be way above what economists had been expecting. They
were looking again. That print yesterday from ADP was a
minus thirty three thousand, and a lot of economists thought
that the jobs would be somewhere around one hundred and
six thousand, was the consensus of a large group of economists.
It wasn't. It was much better than that. It was
one hundred and forty seven thousand. Payrolls were added last month.
The unemployment rate dropped to four point one percent. There
was only one economist who predicted a higher number of
the seventy nine that are polled or every month by Bloomberg.
That was a guy from Scotia Bank. But everybody else
thought it was going to be a very weak report.
So they went back and revised April up to one
hundred and fifty eight thousand. They went back and revised
May up to one hundred and forty four thousand, just
the opposite. During the Biden years, they were always revising
him lower. So the unemployment rate dropped from four point
two down to four point one. Expectation was it was
going to go up to four point three. So all
of this, all of this is a much stronger jobs
report than had been expected. Go through some of the numbers.
Unemployment rate for black six point eight percent. That's the
highest unemployment rate for African Americans in four years. Adult
women three point six, Whites three point six teenagers fourteen
point four, Asian three point five, Hispanics four point eight.
Most of those did not show much of a change.
The drop in the unemployment rate was the result of
ninety three thousand increase in employed workers. People went looking
for jobs and they got them, to the tune of
ninety three thousand. It offset a decline in the civilian
labor force to one hundred seventy thousand, down from one
hundred seventy three. The number of unemployed people seven point
two million down to seven point one million. Labor force
participation rate sixty two point three, that's the lowest in
two years. So people percentage of the population, everybody from
grandma down to a newborn baby, sixty two point three
percent of the population is working. That's the lowest we've
seen in two years. Good news for the inflation panicking.
FED average hourly earnings over the year three point seven percent,
so you're making a pay raises of three point seven percent.
Inflation is below that, down around the low threes, so
you're making more than the inflation rate. Let's see what
else do we have in here. Government employment went up
by seventy three thousand. That was the biggest of any sector.
Government employment up seventy three thousand. Forty seven thousand of
it was from state employment. Healthcare added thirty nine thousand jobs,
Social service employment up nineteen thousand. Otherwise, most of the
other major industries showed very slight changes at all. I'm
talking mining, oil and gas, construction, manufacturing, not much going
on with any of that. So overall, it was a
decent to good report. That means that the FED is
not going to go lowering interest rates anytime soon, because
if you've got a strong labor market, they're not going
to lower interest rates. So that'll make the President even
more unhappy with the Fed. But that's what we got today.
As far as the market, it was a short trading
session today, there will be no trading session tomorrow. The
Dow liked all of this. The Dow up three hundred
and forty four to forty four thy eight twenty eight
s and p up fifty one nasdak up two hundred
and seven. Goldfell twenty three dollars down to thirty three
thirty six, and oil prices down just slightly sixty seven
dollars for one barrel of oil. So that's it for today.
Tomorrow Independence Day, have a wonderful long weekend, and we'll
see you back here on Monday.