Mark Wayne Mullen (11:24)

Do.

Charlie Kirk (11:25)

No one should know who she is. She should just be a silent actor. She's a staffer. And I have confidence they're gonna figure this out. But the fact that we cannot restrict food stamp benefits for illegals because some technocrat Senate staffer says, no, I don't know what form of government that is, but that's not a democracy. That's not a republic. Remember, she has exactly as much power as the Senate gives her. So they can change any rule by majority vote. And I think it's time to override Elizabeth McDonough on that provision in particular, Charlie Kirk here. Crime is skyrocketing. You may already own a firearm, but before you face the financial and emotional weight of pulling the trigger, consider Burna. Burna's less lethal launchers fire tear gas and kinetic rounds designed to incapacitate attackers for up to 40 minutes, giving you time to escape and call for help without deadly consequences. I use Burna. My family all has them. And now meet the new compact launcher. An amazing product. Sleek, slim and hits like a sledgehammer. But the size of a smartphone. It's perfect for concealed carry. Comfortable, discreet and confidence building. It fires at 400ft per second with 41 joules per square inch of stopping power. That's enough force to halt a threat. Cold about the legal and moral complexities of lethal force. What I love about Burna is they're proudly American. Over 80% of their compact launcher's components are sourced in America and each unit is hand assembled in Fort Wayne, Indiana. Best of all, Burna is legal in all 50 states. No background checks, ships directly to your door, trusted by hundreds of police departments and government agencies around the world. Visit Byrna to learn more. That is by r n a.com joining us now is Senator Mark Wayne Mullen from the great state of Oklahoma. Senator, thank you for taking the time here. You are the official liaison between the House and the Senate. So part of this process is passing stuff that we know the House can pass and some of this stuff got cut out by the parliamentarian. So Senator, I have a two part question. Number one, please give us the update. But number two, can you please explain to us is there any way that we can get like the no food stamps for illegals back in the bill even though the parliamentarian struck it down? Senator?

Mark Wayne Mullen (13:29)

Yeah, first of all, sorry about the shot. We are running on off the floor. So I'm stuck down in the basement trying to make this work off of iPhone. So where we're at with the bill we're going through this vote a Rama. We'll probably finish up late tonight. I would say just because the dog and pony show that, you know, the Democrats want to show that we're, that they're fighting which is just like a, you know, I don't know, spoiled child. So they're probably going to go through the primetime shows. Sometimes after the primetime shows go off the air, they'll probably quick quit their fight around 11 o' clock Eastern Time or so. As far as the parliamentarian kicking this stuff out, keep in mind the bird rule which the bird rule exists to allow us to do reconciliation without the bird rule. You can't do reconciliation because all Appropriation bills require 60 votes in the Senate, not just a simple majority. And the bird rule specifically requires you to only deal with mandatory spending, not discretionary spending. Discretionary is what we do through the procreation process. Mandatory spendings, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security. We can't touch Social Security, and it has to deal with. With taxes, no policy. So what she ruled on, on the food stamp issue was that that should have been going to the appropriation bills, such bill. And the only way to override her is it takes 60 votes. So we can still put the amendment in. Every Republican can vote for it, but we need 60 or six Democrats to vote with us to be able to override the parliamentarian on that. There are some amendments that are moving forward to try to override her, but we won't get a single Democrat to support this.

Charlie Kirk (15:05)

Right. So. But just two questions on that. So the. You cannot override the parliamentarian on simple majority vote, is that right?

Mark Wayne Mullen (15:12)

No, not on this. If it was, if it, if it was outside of reconciliation, there are some cases to which you can, but because reconciliation exists only for a funding policy, a procedure through bird rule, you can't. It's very specific. And keep in mind, the House doesn't have to deal with parliamentarian bird rules. We do in the Senate because the House can always operate off simple majority. So the bird rule made it off, made it possible to do a funding bill by a simple majority in both Houses, but can't.

Charlie Kirk (15:47)

And correct me if I'm wrong, Senator, but can't reconciliation rules be changed by majority vote?

Mark Wayne Mullen (15:53)

You can change a. You can change the rules, but that also takes 60 votes. So it's, it's a way. It's. You know, keep in mind the Senate was designed for the, for the purpose of the majority rules that are. The House was. The Senate was designed to slow down and give the minority a voice. That was the way our founding father set it up. You know this as good as anybody does. So there's certain rules that are in place and they've been in place forever. And in order to change those rules, it does. It takes it. Once again, the majority can't simply override the minority in this. It will take 60 votes, in some cases, actually takes two thirds. And it's frustrating as heck. Listen, as a former House member, Charlie, I used to get as mad as anybody about it. Just override them. Just override them. Yes, you can Override them. You can also. Now, the leader can remove the parliamentarian, but in this case, is it. Is it one of those questions that you should remove the parliamentarian over? Now, keep in mind, that same parliamentarian kept Bernie Sanders from being able to put the minimum wage increase when Biden did reconciliation. The same parliamentarian also kept Bernie Sanders from doing Amazon.

Charlie Kirk (16:59)

No, we've been very. I think you're right. No, you're right. We've been fair on McDonough, but right now, I think she. I think she's out of control. But, Senator, we have a minute here, and thank you for being generous of your time, but there is a nuclear option. I just want to make sure I'm clear with the audience. You can go nuclear. Right. Which I think is like Rule 5, where we did with Supreme Court Justice. I'm not even saying we should do it. I know that people will lose their mind. But if we're saying that we can't, all of a sudden we have to keep on giving food stamps to illegal aliens, I mean, come on. That's a fight. I think that is worth happening.

Mark Wayne Mullen (17:27)

Yeah. Well, we can change it through the appropriations, through discretionary spending. What the parliamentarian ruled was, is this isn't mandatory spending, meaning that Congress doesn't have to automatically spend the money, which she's absolutely correct on that. But during. When we do, when we do discretionary spending through the appropriation process, that's one of the 12 bills. She's saying that's where that belongs, and you can have that fight. Then when we do, when we do the appropriation process, you can go nuclear on some of that stuff and change it from. From majority to minority, but not through the whole appropriation bill. Because as I, as I keep, as I repeat myself here, the Senate was designed to give the minority of voice, which is why we were able to keep so much stuff when Nancy Pelosi was ruling the House, is why we were able to keep so much stuff from moving forward, even though at that time we had Harry Reid running.

Charlie Kirk (18:18)

No, that is correct. I respect that. No, trust me, I do. And I'm just. I'm expressing my frustration and the audience's frustration because it seems arbitrary, and I don't think we should be in the business of defending every decision of an unelected Senate staffer. I'm with you. She was helpful with some of the Bernie stuff, but some of this seems so outrageous. The world is waking up to the power of gold. National banks are scrambling to secure it according to the World Gold Council. Central banks added 1,000 tons of gold in 2024, the third straight year of net gold buying. They understand what many investors don't. Gold is real money. Unlike paper currency, gold's value doesn't disappear with inflation, reckless government spending or market crashes. Now, Noble Gold Investments makes it easy for you to claim your share as our new administration works to reverse the economic chaos of the past. Market swings are inevitable when uncertainty rises. You need something solid, something to keep you on the path to financial freedom. Gold can be that foundation. And right now, when you make a qualified investment, Noble Gold will send you a free 10th ounce of a cold coin. Visit noblegoldinvestments.com that's noblegoldinvestments.com the world is turning to gold. Shouldn't you be looking into doing that too? Senator, thank you for the time. I know that you're in between the voting right now and it's kind of chaotic, so Senator, just humor me and I know you're doing a great job and this is the audience's frustration directed towards the system and the compromising of the mandate. But let's say we did remove the parliamentarian with someone that would be more sympathetic, that would be more fair minded. If we can't do it just via rule, what would that look like? What would happen with some of your other colleagues, potentially erupt in anger? Has it ever happened before? Please walk us through that scenario.

Mark Wayne Mullen (20:11)

Well, technically, I'm thinking here, technically you could do it, but you're not guaranteed that the next parliamentarian is going to be any better because they have to interpret what the bird rule is. It's kind of like a judge is supposed to interpret the court, the constitution. But it's funny that you get, you know, a 6, 3 decision all the time out of the court. I mean either it's constitutional or it's not. I know that's your frustration too, but that, so you're not guaranteed to get a different outcome from a different parliamentarian. You can just do the best you can. However, if you did do it, the leader could fire the person they could cause it could trigger a vote. And I would say you would have at least 10 Republicans that would vote with the Democrats to probably override the leader in that unless it was a, for a legal purpose or a, or a job performing purpose, meaning job performing like she didn't show up to work or something like that. That would be grounds of firing. That'd be the only reason why we wouldn't have to over a vote couldn't be called Override the leader.

Charlie Kirk (21:13)

Got it? Yeah. So that, that's not shocking to me. It's disappointing. I think it's rather pathetic, but it's not disappointing. Just so. And I want to get to some of the wins. I don't want to say in the negative, but I have to. I represent the audience. The audience is on top of this issue. Just to make sure I understand, we have to now live with the parliamentarian. Is there any way to change the wording? Because even from people that were once sympathetic to the parliamentarian, I've been getting messages from members from the administration and also in the Senate. They think she is reaching way too far. It's incredibly arbitrary. There's no board, there's no council, there's no committee. It's just her mind that gets in the way of 75 million people that voted. Something seems really imbalanced there. So is there any way to try to compromise with her? Can you meet with her? Can you negotiate? What's the process here? Is it like you submit your homework and the teacher grades it? Like, walk us through some of the sausage making here, Charlie.

Mark Wayne Mullen (22:04)

Actually, that's a good example. You do. You can submit your homework and a teacher grades it. Except with a parliamentarian. She doesn't just exit out, she will exit out. And then you can meet with her and say, how can I change this to get my grade better? She's a good. She's one of those individuals that will let you do that. So what she'll do is she'll work with the language, explain what your ruling is. I stopped. Good, by the way. But she's, she's, she was. She will allow you to change your wording if it's possible. But if it's ruled that this funding specifically is in discretionary spending zone, which is where the SNAP program for the most part is. It's in the Farm Bill, which is discretionary spending, then it's hard to actually move that into mandatory because you'd have to draw mandatory, that it's inside Medicaid or Medicare, and that doesn't fall inside Medicare, Medicaid, the SNAP program. So that's, that's, that's a little more difficult to do. On some of the other programs that she's kicked out, we was able to go in and rewrite them. She will help us with some of the language to write it, to make it within the Bird rule. The problem when you do that, sometimes it changes what your objective is, because during the Bird rule, it has to do with revenue only. It can't do with policy. So anything that does a policy can't be in there revenue. So taxes or increasing or decreasing mandatory spending, that's a very, very narrow window we have to fight in.

Charlie Kirk (23:28)

Yeah. So I bring back to your conference. No, please finish your thoughts.

Mark Wayne Mullen (23:33)

Well, I was going to say, I get this is very frustrating. It's very frustrating to me. And the rules in the Senate are so old, so ridiculous and need to be reworked. And the reason why they've never been reworked is because when you rework rules, a lot of cases, it actually takes two thirds of the Senate to actually agree. So just for, for instance, I know this is stupid. We can have water and milk on the floor, but you're not allowed to have coffee. I can go to the floor wearing a tie and a jacket and no shirt, but I have to have long pants on in closed toe shoes. These rules have been there, I don't know before I was there and way before probably Chuck Grassley was there. And that you can't get on change. It is the most frustrating thing you've ever seen.

Charlie Kirk (24:21)

All right, well, here's what we need. I want to get to the victories here. We got four minutes. Then I got to let you go vote. We got to have the Trump rules. You're allowed Diet Coke. You have to wear a red tie if you're a Republican. And how about we fix this whole parliamentarian thing? Just bring it back to your conference. You can say, I was just on the Charlie Kirk show. We had a polite conversation. Let me tell you, people are pissed and that we had this wonderful election, we worked so hard, and then some unelected Senate staffer can just say no, no, no, no. Especially food stamps are illegal. So I think you guys should consider termination. Trent Lott in 2001, I know there was retribution from that, but we are in special times now. With that being said, we'll just put, put a capsule on that. Senator, go back to your conference that we're going to socialize this and you've been a good sport with all this guy know you have to interpret all this talk about the wins four minutes uninterrupted. Senator, what are the wins we got out of this? Because it's not all bad. In fact, it's overwhelmingly good. It's more than 80% of the pie. Senator, please.

Mark Wayne Mullen (25:10)

We're, we're making tax cuts permanent. We're securing the border. You talked about that previously. We're, we're defending our country by plussing up the DOD where we're making sure that we're energy independent. And at the same time, we're boosting take home paid to the average household of four. Their, their take home paid this year for you can't compared to last year be $10,000 higher. We're, we're locking in the economic policies for Trump. We're cutting $1.6 trillion in deficit, which is the largest deficit reduction in any Congress or in the history of Congress, which is massive. And there's a lie out there being told to turn. There's a lie that the Democrats are spreading that a lot of the media has picked up that we're adding $3.3 trillion in deficit. That's a lie. And what they're lying about is the CBO scored this bill two ways. One, they scored it with saying, hey, let the taxes expire. This is what the Democrats said. If we let the taxes expire that we're currently operating on, which is called current policy. What's the deficit on that? Well, since the tax, if we let them expire, it's $4 trillion plus to the Washington D.C. bureaucrats to spend. If we allowed to expire, the CBO said, well, then you have a $3.3 trillion deficit. But if you let current policy, which is the current taxes that we're currently in, continue to move forward, it actually is a $507 billion surplus. So we're not. It's all about numbers, and it's ridiculous numbers. But the media and the left is spreading the lie by saying this is a $3.3 trillion deficit increase.

Charlie Kirk (26:48)

Right. And again, the supercharging of the economy is underrated here. It's about growth, growth, growth, Border, border, border. And so, Senator, last question. What is a voterama and what amendments do you anticipate being added to the bill? Anything. And does that also have to go through a bird bath, too? Is the amendment so really quick? About a minute remaining on those two elements?

Mark Wayne Mullen (27:09)

Yeah. So any amendment has to go through the bird bath. The parliamentarian will rule if it's within the bird rule or if it's out. If it's out as 60 votes. If it's in, it's 51 vote. A Rama means that we vote as long as people can last, which, you know, Chuck Schumer's pretty old leader, Thune's pretty fit. I think the Republicans can outlast the Democrats on this one. They can put any amendment forward. There's nothing that stops anybody from putting any amendment on the, on the floor. And it's as many as you can get in until you can't keep your eyes open anymore. And it's one of these, one of these crazy rules that the, once again the Senate has. As far as getting in there. Rick Scott's got a, got a provision that could possibly change the FMAT back and it give you five years. What it does is it goes, it goes at some of the Medicare expansion that happened underneath Obamacare. It brings it back in and makes you focus specifically on the areas that need it the most. Meaning that we have 35 million people inside the United States that live under the poverty line. Over 70 million are signed up for Medicaid. That, that number, those numbers don't work. Why do we have so many people gaming the system? It's because of the fmaps. And so that's one amendment that could help and it would, it would decrease the deficit, secure Medicaid for those that need it the most and make sure that people that are on there deserve it, not people that are on there because they're too lazy to work.

Charlie Kirk (28:31)

Senator, you got to go vote. Thanks for your time. And deliver that message back to your conference. Do not dismiss the idea of firing her. Do not dismiss it.

Mark Wayne Mullen (28:38)

And I Coke and I co and.

Charlie Kirk (28:40)

Red Ties and Diet Cook, both of those together. That's right. Yes, sir. That's right. See you soon.

Mark Wayne Mullen (28:46)

Thank you.

Charlie Kirk (28:47)

Look, here's the takeaway and I wanted to have that. I wanted to get all the facts out there for you, the audience, because your information is power. For you guys, knowledge is ammunition. The lesson is this. The person who rules you is the person you let rule you. And right now, the US Senate, they have to start to think a little bit more creatively. They only have a majority because you guys gave them a majority. And if you got to go nuclear, you got to change some rules. By the way, the July 4 deadline that President Trump said, hey, I want it by July 4th. That's a self imposed deadline. If it has to go another week to have a rule vote. Here's what I've learned about the Senate. And I like Mark Wayne, Mom. We don't agree on everything, but he's a wrestler, he's energy. Unlike some of these other senators that have just no spunk, no spirit. At least he'll talk. You can, you can get answers out of him. I'll tell you, so many of these centers, they just don't want to work. You know what? The Senate schedule is under regular order, I kid you not. You arrive Tuesday early afternoon and you leave Thursday afternoon. That is their work. Schedule, Tuesday evening, all day, Wednesday, Thursday till afternoon, they fly back to wherever they want to go. They go to Florida, they go back to their constituency. It's literally two and a half days of work. And you guys can, you know, you have this whole conversation where you have to debate we have to work weekends. I'm sorry, a lot of people in this week, in this audience, they are EMTs, they are nurses, they work Christmas, they work weekends. The Congress is like an unheard of concept to work holidays and weekends. They're above that. They're the ruling class. Don't you understand? They need their Christmas break. Remember we did that whole show back in November, December, of how much of our national debt and our public policy is hinged on the most expensive Christmas vacation ever. The most expensive Christmas vacation is I'll just decide to go spend a couple trillion bucks because they're tired. I want to go home on Christmas vacation. Republicans need to start playing hardball here. It's time for us to just throw it down and say, you know what? We won this election. The deep state is against us. The intel agencies are against us. We finally have cultural energy. We're not going to get in the way of our core promises. And our core promises are very simple, which is illegals should not be getting food stamps. Hold on a second. They are foreigners in our country receiving government benefits so they can go get SNAP benefits and EBT cards. We're not going to put up. That is a red line. You want to talk about a red line, I'll draw it with my Louisville Slugger. That is a red line. Okay? It's a red line. Very simple. We're not going to put up with that. And you got to fire the parliamentarian. Fine, let a bunch of people scream. But no, you might have missed it. Mark Wayne Mullen told you. That's why I really wanted to have that conversation. Respectfully. Let's try to flush it out. Let's get to the bottom it. Let's try to figure it out. He said, well, 10 Republicans would side with Democrats and they would just lose their mind. Ah, now we have the core problem. Now we have revealed the issue. The issue is in front of us. It's that 10 Republicans are holding the entire conference hostage because they're more sympathetic to the Democrat cause than the Republican cause. And look, we got some big, you know, we got some benefits on. I'm going to read some of this. We got some SNAP eligibility, but still the idea that illegals are going to keep on getting food stamps, that should Be verboten. We shouldn't put up with it. Private student loan debt in America totals over $300 billion. About 45 billion of that is labeled as distressed. Why refi refinances distressed or defaulted private student loans that others will not touch. Why refi can reduce your monthly payment and guarantees interest rates under 6% ensuring affordability and financial relief. Go to yrefi.com that is yrefy.com do you have a co borrower? Yrefi can get them released from the loan and you can give mom or dad a break. Just call 888-YREFI 34 that is 888-YREFI 34 and may not be available in all 50 states. Can you imagine being debt free and not living under this burden anymore? We'll go to yrefi.com that is yrefy.com that is yrefi.com bad credit is accepted and do you have a co borrower? Well, why refi can get them released from the loan. That is yrefi.com this is full circle, full circle as to why I'm here with my Louisville Slugger. Why am I here? The fact that there are 10 Republicans. Listen, 10 Republicans that would go vote if we fire the parliamentarian is exactly why I'm here in Kentucky. Mitch McConnell is resigning and he's not resigning. He's not seeking reelection. Here is a real pickup opportunity to have someone that would not be one of those 10. One of my life's missions at Turning Point action and our advocacy here in the Charlie Kirk show is make that 10, 9, 8, 7, 6. It doesn't mean we have to agree on everything. It's are you in the Republican Party to win? Are you here to use power for the good of the country or here to protect some sort of antiquated ancestral institution where you can't have water and milk on the Senate floor. And what does that even mean Democrats play to win. You got Letitia James out there who's tried to put Donald Trump in prison for 700 years, taking his business empire away from him. I'm not even recommending that. You have Fanny Willis. You had Alvin Bragg, you had Jack Smith. They went after us with everything they had. Now, part of that resulted in a backlash. So you got to be a little bit careful with that stuff. But at least it shows that they were playing to win and end up. They ended up losing big time. The Republican Senate is at a crossroads right now. We're even unelected Senate staffers. I gotta just And I'm gonna call Mark Wayne Mullen after this. I'm going to call a couple senators and I say, guys, just slow down a second. Do you hear yourself? You're saying, well, she won't allow this and she won't allow. What are you talking about? She won't allow? She works for you. One thing, if she was some sort of, you know, constitutional provision that our founders put in Senate parliamentarian is not in the U.S. constitution. It's like handed down from parts of Article 1. It's all it's read into there. Obviously it's constitutional, but it's not explicitly in the Constitution. Do you hear yourself? Oh, she's not going to allow this. And I have full respect for a lot of the guests that have on the program. That needless to say. But hold on, back up. You know who should be calling the shots? The American people call the shots. That's the system we have here. We don't have an oligarchy who voted for her. Now, getting mad at the parliamentarian is totally understandable, but the key is this. And that's where I want to now bring you to the next level. Technically, she has no power. So in some ways, the senators, they want you to be mad at the parliamentarian. And here's the game. Some of the senators want you to get really angry at the parliamentarian because in essence, she has no power. The senators have the power. She is a veneer. She is a very helpful punching bag. So getting mad at the parliamentarians, like, okay, it's a shield. Who has propped up the shield, who has funded the shield? Who has voted for the shield? Everything that happens because senators want it to happen. Period, End of story. And you can go nuclear. I know that people might not like it. People might get upset. Oh, my goodness. Have we learned anything? All the hysteria from the left is largely unfounded. The world is going to end because of climate change. The world is going to end because Trump is leading us to a war with Iran. All that stuff was nonsense. It was garbage. All of the rules of the Senate, the parliamentarian, the filibuster, the indefinite holds, the glacial pace. They all protect the senators from having to deliver on their promises. And they have endless excuses for inaction. Endless. And a lot of these guys are my friends, and I think they're on board with me. By the way, I think that the old crows, I think Mitch McConnell and the old crow demo, oh, we can't up. We can't upset the apple cart. I'm sorry. The American people voted for that in November. So it's either we have an oligarchy of a philosopher king ruling class that is entrenched over all of us, that calls the shots, or the American people are in charge. Which is it? Do you notice how many old institutions get the way of President Trump? The deep state, the administrative state, the courts got the way of Donald Trump and now the US Senate is getting in the way of the people. It's as if there are all these places that have been built to fortify the defenses against the will of the people. And that's unhealthy and that's wrong. And that's exactly what brought me to Kentucky to endorse Nate Morris, to try to then replace Mitch McConnell. Because if we don't actually start replacing Republican primaries and act that the divide is not Republican, Democrat, that's part of the divide. The divide is oligarchy versus representative government. It is citizen versus oligarch. And the US Senate should say, you know what? Enough. Thank you. We don't work for you, Ms. McDonough. We're changing the rules. We're going to make sure illegals don't get public benefits. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us. As always, freedomarliekirk.com thanks so much for listening and God bless.

Unknown (37:26)

For more on many of these stories and news you can Trust, go to charliekirk.com.