Amanda Carpenter

Yeah, to say the least.

Well, here's I think any discussion about how this is getting bungled, because it is to start with the fact that, oh, wait, where's Elon Musk? I thought he had this handled, right? Like, that was the whole reason he came in to do the Doge rescission, send it to Congress and... We got the cuts. We're good. And somehow his 70 bazillion trillion in cuts dissipated to 1 billion to 150 to nothing.

Well, here's I think any discussion about how this is getting bungled, because it is to start with the fact that, oh, wait, where's Elon Musk? I thought he had this handled, right? Like, that was the whole reason he came in to do the Doge rescission, send it to Congress and... We got the cuts. We're good. And somehow his 70 bazillion trillion in cuts dissipated to 1 billion to 150 to nothing.

Well, here's I think any discussion about how this is getting bungled, because it is to start with the fact that, oh, wait, where's Elon Musk? I thought he had this handled, right? Like, that was the whole reason he came in to do the Doge rescission, send it to Congress and... We got the cuts. We're good. And somehow his 70 bazillion trillion in cuts dissipated to 1 billion to 150 to nothing.

To where is it? So, number one, I think we need to evaluate that the guy that Trump brought in to take care of this has failed. Otherwise, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. But also, it's an all Republican Congress. What's the problem there? These guys can't solve it.

To where is it? So, number one, I think we need to evaluate that the guy that Trump brought in to take care of this has failed. Otherwise, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. But also, it's an all Republican Congress. What's the problem there? These guys can't solve it.

To where is it? So, number one, I think we need to evaluate that the guy that Trump brought in to take care of this has failed. Otherwise, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. But also, it's an all Republican Congress. What's the problem there? These guys can't solve it.

And so I think that is also a mark against a key economic promise of the Trump 2.0 presidency, which was supposed to be so much better, so much more efficient. Isn't the Project 2025 thing rolling? No, it's not. It's not. And one thing I am in particular watching and think is extremely interesting, just as a baseline, the Trump budget cuts more than the Hill wants to. The Hill wants to spend more.

And so I think that is also a mark against a key economic promise of the Trump 2.0 presidency, which was supposed to be so much better, so much more efficient. Isn't the Project 2025 thing rolling? No, it's not. It's not. And one thing I am in particular watching and think is extremely interesting, just as a baseline, the Trump budget cuts more than the Hill wants to. The Hill wants to spend more.

And so I think that is also a mark against a key economic promise of the Trump 2.0 presidency, which was supposed to be so much better, so much more efficient. Isn't the Project 2025 thing rolling? No, it's not. It's not. And one thing I am in particular watching and think is extremely interesting, just as a baseline, the Trump budget cuts more than the Hill wants to. The Hill wants to spend more.

And the secret weapon that Russ Vogt and others have always wanted to deploy is something called impoundments, which I know you've talked about before, which is essentially Donald Trump unconstitutionally, unlawfully saying, you know, Congress, you can pass all the money you want, but I'll just cut where I want. This is how we held up the Ukraine funding in Trump 1.0.

And the secret weapon that Russ Vogt and others have always wanted to deploy is something called impoundments, which I know you've talked about before, which is essentially Donald Trump unconstitutionally, unlawfully saying, you know, Congress, you can pass all the money you want, but I'll just cut where I want. This is how we held up the Ukraine funding in Trump 1.0.

And the secret weapon that Russ Vogt and others have always wanted to deploy is something called impoundments, which I know you've talked about before, which is essentially Donald Trump unconstitutionally, unlawfully saying, you know, Congress, you can pass all the money you want, but I'll just cut where I want. This is how we held up the Ukraine funding in Trump 1.0.

But now Republican senators are sort of onto that fact, because I do think there is a contingent of people thinking, well, okay, the Hill can do what they want. We can let them pass the budget, but we can knife it later through impoundments. But there was an interesting story in Politico, I think published two days ago, where it quoted Republican appropriators.

But now Republican senators are sort of onto that fact, because I do think there is a contingent of people thinking, well, okay, the Hill can do what they want. We can let them pass the budget, but we can knife it later through impoundments. But there was an interesting story in Politico, I think published two days ago, where it quoted Republican appropriators.

But now Republican senators are sort of onto that fact, because I do think there is a contingent of people thinking, well, okay, the Hill can do what they want. We can let them pass the budget, but we can knife it later through impoundments. But there was an interesting story in Politico, I think published two days ago, where it quoted Republican appropriators.

Simpson of Idaho, I think, essentially said, you know, we see impoundments and we think it's illegal and there's going to be a challenge on that. Murkowski was weighing in. And so that to me is a very positive development when it comes to. to how the budget process will be used and how Trump could potentially be constrained on some level.

Simpson of Idaho, I think, essentially said, you know, we see impoundments and we think it's illegal and there's going to be a challenge on that. Murkowski was weighing in. And so that to me is a very positive development when it comes to. to how the budget process will be used and how Trump could potentially be constrained on some level.

Simpson of Idaho, I think, essentially said, you know, we see impoundments and we think it's illegal and there's going to be a challenge on that. Murkowski was weighing in. And so that to me is a very positive development when it comes to. to how the budget process will be used and how Trump could potentially be constrained on some level.

But one other really interesting development is that there's talks about cutting Medicaid funding. And Josh Hawley, who he has been out there, he's the number one mega populist, essentially, and I haven't really seen, maybe JD Vance got close to it, but making the case that the president, you can't cut this funding for our people.