D (3:07)

So that sounds like them. Yep.

B (3:10)

This is the big one. We're talking about the 12 punch. And then when you add tariffs in, it's like three. It's the hat trick of shittiness for taxpaying middle class Americans.

D (3:20)

I think that might be the title of the episode. The Hat Trick of Shittiness.

B (3:24)

The Hat Trick of the Hat Trick of Shit. Brought to you by the hat trick. Maybe. Oh, maybe Hat trick. Oh, shit. We'll see what Apple has to say

D (3:35)

about we'll see what other gems come out of our mouth between now and the end of the episode.

B (3:39)

There could be quite a few. And speaking of that, we do have a lot of news to get to, so let's hit the hot notes. Hot notes. All right. First up from abc, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has issued a temporary administrative stay all by his lonesome, putting off the midnight deadline for the government to return a mistakenly deported, admittedly mistakenly deported Maryland man to the U.S. giving they want to return him to the U.S. giving the court more time to consider the arguments presented by both sides. But lawyers for Abrego Garcia filed their response immediately, within minutes after the Supreme Court issued this temporary administrative stay, even though the Lawyers had until 5pm today to respond. Solicitor General John Sauer argued that the federal court can't order a president to engage in foreign diplomacy, which he says is implicitly involved in any potential return of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, who the Trump administration Alleges is an Ms. 13 gang member.

D (4:38)

Can we all agree also that this president can't participate in any diplomacy? I mean, let's be serious here for real.

B (4:46)

Banging on pots and pans with a wooden spoon is not diplomacy.

D (4:49)

That's it.

B (4:51)

Oddly, in Trump's brief to the Supreme Court, Sauer's brief, he refers to Abrego Garcia as an alien enemy. But the Alien Enemies act proclamation is not for Ms. 13. It's for trend Aragua. But you know, hey, whatevs words, right? Am I right?

D (5:06)

That's right.

B (5:07)

This could have an impact on the Boasberg alien enemies case because if the Trump regime brings this guy home, it kind of guts their argument in the Trend Aragua case that they can't bring the Venezuelans home because they don't have custody. Steve Vladeck, will Jo, Andy McCabe and I this weekend on Unjustified to discuss the concept of constructive custody. Boasberg is holding a hearing today on the invocation of the state secrets privilege that Trump is trying to use to avoid having to give actual publicly known details on the flights that the judge ordered turned around on March 15th. So what?

D (5:44)

Oh boy. I saw something today and I could be wrong, but it's a 60 minutes dropped that 75 of the people deported to Venezuela, not 75 don't have criminal records at all. At all.

B (5:58)

Yep. And they also verified that the the man who put his face in his hands and sobbed and then was slapped while he had his head shaved is actually Andrey, who is the the gay makeup artist that has a non gang related tattoo because actually all tattoos are non trend Aragua related because trend Aragua doesn't have gang tattoos. But yeah, that it was actually him. That that's they did confirm it was him. And it's just the conditions there are terrifying. And so for Justice Roberts to issue this brief administrative stay, even though it's only a day, it's another day that this Maryland father, Abrego Garcia has to spend unlawfully and unconstitutionally in c cot and it's just got to be so terrifying there for all of them.

D (6:48)

I would imagine so. All right, from Forbes. I wish this was good news, but it is not. The U.S. stocks, they sank even further Monday after historically bad Thursday and Friday trading with wiped out trillions of dollars in equity in a whirlwind session. All three indexes reversed to massive gains, though, following an unsubstantiated claim that circulated on social media saying that the White House would pause the tariffs for 90 days. Isn't it crazy a little rumor like this? Everyone okay? Everything's fine. The S and P rose more than 6% from 9:45am to 10:15am yeah, before slipping again as the Trump administration indicated it had no plans to do what that rumor said they were going to do. The losses since prior to Trump's quote, Liberation Day announcement Wednesday are staggering. The dow's down almost 10% or almost 4,300 points. In the S and P and NASDAQ, they're down 11% a piece. So, you know, it's interesting. I saw a meme today and it's like I was fine with the massage, the racism, the transphobia, the, you know, the deporting of brown people. Now I feel like this is starting to affect me and this guy. You know, the cartoons, looking at their stocks. It's just, this is a mess.

B (7:59)

Same with Republicans in the Senate.

D (8:01)

Right?

B (8:01)

Like, for how many years have we been like, what is Your red line, bros. Yeah, like it's their money.

D (8:08)

It seems to be this. Yeah, there's a. There's a lot of people, a lot of Republicans higher up, Republicans saying, hey, hey, who? We didn't vote for a trade war. This is not what we voted for. Get your shit together.

B (8:18)

Hey. Our donors are losing trillions in value. Our really important donors. The ones that bought us and put us here.

D (8:24)

Exactly.

B (8:25)

And so then, Dana, out of the blue, Treasury Secretary Scott Besant flies down to Florida to encourage President Trump to focus his message on negotiating favorable trade deals or risk the stock market crashing further. That's according to two people familiar with the conversations who were granted anonymity to leak this to the press so that everyone would know about it.

C (8:49)

Yep.

D (8:49)

Yep, that's it.

B (8:51)

What a mystery. Trump allies from the meeting told the press that Scott Besant is talking about pausing tariffs, almost as if to set up a scenario in which Trump later this week announces that he spoke with his Treasury Secretary and they're going to pause the tariffs, giving pretext for Trump to magically fix the fucking disaster that he caused.

D (9:11)

How.

B (9:11)

No. What a concept. Who could have seen this coming?

D (9:14)

It almost sounds like they're manipulating the stock market so his friends can make billions of dollars.

C (9:19)

What?

B (9:19)

Who said anything like that?

C (9:21)

I know.

B (9:22)

Was it us? It was us. This is just. So when he saw today, I. Here's what I think. When he was like, let's. Let's start a rumor that we're gonna pause 90 days. And Brian Kilmeade said it on Fox, Ackman said it on Twitter. Like all these right wing pundits were like, oh, 90 days, 90 day stop. 90 day pause. And then bam. The stock market shoots up 6%.

D (9:48)

Yep.

B (9:49)

In 30 minutes. And then. No, I. We're not saying that necessarily. We're not saying that. And then bam, it goes back down to like minus 300. Like, it kind of hovers there and the market's like, what is, what's it gonna do? What the. And then all of a sudden, the Treasury Secretary is like, oh, I'm gonna head down to Florida and it's a big secret. And we're gonna have a big secret chat about this. And then it's gonna be leaked to the press following the. After learning that they have that much control over the stock market, that just. That rumor.

D (10:20)

Yeah. All you have to do is a little experiment. Does this work? It worked.

B (10:24)

Yeah, it totally worked. Also from NBC, the North Carolina Supreme Court on Monday temporarily blocked a lower court's ruling that would have required 65,000 votes that were cast in the disputed 2024 state Supreme Court race be recounted and verified. So this is, this is good news, but it is a brief, temporary stay, right? It's only for a minute. This is a very conservative North Carolina Supreme Court. The brief order Monday did not say whether the Supreme Court was going to review the entire case or only Riggs's appeal. Allison Riggs is the judge that was running against Griffin, which had sought a halt to Friday's appeals court ruling. So a couple different things going on here. Like I said, Republicans have a 5:2 majority in the North Carolina Supreme Court, but Riggs and Griffin have both recused themselves. Both these judges sit on the North Carolina Supreme Court. They've recused themselves from the matter.

D (11:19)

That's interesting. That actually sounds like they're doing the right thing in this case.

B (11:23)

What so odd. But I'm very glad that we don't have to, at least for now, find 65,000 people and get them to cure their ballots.

D (11:33)

This one is from the Post. Scientists at the National Institutes of Health demonstrated a promising step toward using a person's own immune cells to fight gastrointestinal cancers in a paper in Natural Medicine on Tuesday. The same day, by the way, the agency was hit with devastating layoffs that we covered yesterday that left many NIH personnel in tears. The treatment approach is still early. It's early in its development. The personalized immunotherapy regime. Wow. Regime. See, we're just talking about all kinds of fascists, but that's not that word. It's the regimen, the immunotherapy regimen. It shrank tumors in only about a quarter of the patients with colon, rectal, and other GI cancers enrolled in a clinical trial. But a researcher who was not involved in this study, it called the results remarkable because they highlight a path to a frustratingly elusive goal in medicine, and that's harnessing a person's own immune defenses to target common solid tumor cancers. But the progress, it arrives at a very sad time for science, like we said, and for patients. This is from the leader of the work, NIH immunotherapy pioneer Steven Rosenberg. Two patients, treatments using the experimental therapy had to be delayed because NIH's capacity to make personalized cell therapies has been slowed by the firing of highly skilled staff and by purchasing slowdowns. Now, those occurred even before major layoffs took place Tuesday. By the way, and I quote, everything I tried to do, I tried to do at warp speed. These are people with Desperate illnesses and nowhere to go. That's what Rosenberg said and went on to say, right now, assuming things don't get any worse, it would be a month delay. These are not patients that have very many months left. This isn't a time to fuck around with people's health. And the money that is going into this, these cures, truly. And these breakthroughs.

B (13:26)

Yeah. And I guarantee you that because it was Vice President Joe Biden's cancer moonshot that probably kicked off a lot of these, a lot of this research that just to be a petty dick, Trump wants to shut all this shit down. And, you know, even if it weren't all the studies, he's probably like really against finding a cure for cancer because Joe Biden was trying to do it.

D (13:48)

Yeah. I would not be surprised, which is. He's just a petty child. He's. Anyone call him a child because that insults children. He's just a petty, gross human.

B (13:55)

Yeah. I mean, going after law firms because they had lawyers that at one point worked on the Mueller investigation in eight years ago or whatever, like, Jesus, it's

D (14:05)

fascist shit right there.

B (14:06)

It's fascy, it's petty. And, you know, I'm not going to say anything else about what happens to fascists generally, but wink, wink, nudge, nudge from the Hill. A federal appeals court flipped on Trump's firings of two independent agency leaders. I love this story. Temporarily reinstating them Monday and likely setting up a battle for the Supreme Court. So they were fired, then they were rehired. Then they were re fired. Then they were re rehired.

D (14:35)

Oh, boy.

B (14:36)

In a 7 to 4 vote, the full U.S. court of Appeals en banc. U.S. court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. That circuit wiped a ruling from a three judge panel on the court that sided with Trump's government late last month by greenlighting his firing of Merit Systems Protection Board member Kathy Harris, my friend and former attorney, and Gwen Wilcox, a member of the National Labor Relations Board. Monday's ruling clears the way for Harris and Wilcox to return to their jobs. For now, though, the Trump administration could and probably will file an emergency appeal at the Supreme Court. They want to gut Humphrey's executor, which is the doctrine that the Supreme Court has purposefully left in place, which basically says that, you know, in a couple of cases, particularly, I'm thinking Consumer Financial Protection Board, the Supreme Court was like, no people who head up agencies. It's illegal for Congress to make a law limiting the President's ability to fire those people. But we're leaving in place purposefully, Humphrey's executor, which says if you're a multi board member like the National Labor Relations Board or like the Merit Systems Protection Board, you're fine. There can be laws that protect you from being fired without cause. Now, Clarence Thomas has wanted to get rid of this shit for a long time. Oh, of course, he's had his eyes on Humphrey's executor for a while. And Harry Dunn and I are going to cover these cases which were consolidated in more detail on tomorrow's cleanup on aisle 45 podcast. So look for that.

D (16:06)

Thank you so much, Alison. This one's from the Post. A second child unfortunately has died of measles amid an outbreak in West Texas, prompting Health and human services secretary RFK Jr to meet with the family of the deceased eight year old. Now, the child had no underlying health conditions, but was not vaccinated against measles. Just after the visit, Kennedy followed up with with photos, as one does, including what two doctors he described as extraordinary healers who use the steroids and an antibiotic that infectious disease specialists say are not recommended for measles treatments. He did that right after attending the funeral of the eight year old girl. It's just the tone deafness of this fucking administration is mind boggling sometimes. Ben Edwards, he's one of the doctors Kennedy praised, has criticized measles vaccination and released a podcast earlier in the outbreak describing mass infection, quote, God's version of measles immunization. Yeah, Richard Barlett, the other, by the way, the other doctor has inaccurately touted the steroid treatment as a cure for COVID 19 and was disciplined by Texas medical regulators in 2003 for inappropriate use of antibacterial and steroid treatments. This whole story is so full of layers of fuckery and people that should be disbarred and should not be practicing medicine. I just, I, I can't even, I don't even know where to start to

B (17:31)

be like an earlier he had put out a little video on Twitter being like, the best thing for measles is to get vaccinated.

D (17:39)

Yeah.

B (17:40)

And then he goes down to this girl's funeral and then minutes after takes photos with these doctors who push these bullshit treatments for measles. It's disgusting.

D (17:54)

It is disgusting.

B (17:55)

I hate him.

D (17:58)

And that's the end of that story. What's up next?

B (18:00)

Allison from the Times. The Trump administration is seeking to spend tens of billions of dollars to set up the machinery to expand immigrant detention on a scale never before seen in the United States with private detention centers, by the way. And that's according to a request for proposals posted online by the administration last week. The request, which comes from the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement ice, calls for contractors, private contractors, to submit proposals to provide new detention facilities, transportation, security guards, medical support and other administrative services worth as much as over $45 billion over the next two years. Now, without a baseline of what we usually spend on immigration. 45. What do we do with 45 billion? It's just. It's kind of just a number that's out there. Yeah, but the sprawling request to contractors was posted last week with a deadline of Monday in the fiscal year. In the last fiscal year, Department of Homeland security allocated about 3.4 billion for the entire custody operation overseen by ICE. 3.4 billion to 45 billion. This is part of the massive Republican budget reconciliation, by the way, that will cut SNAP benefits and Medicaid benefits, that will increase taxes on the rest of us and grant massive tax cuts to the ultra wealthy. And Bobby Kogan and I are going to talk later in the show about that budget reconciliation and the process and how Republicans intend to basically break the rules to get it passed.

D (19:33)

Thanks, Allison. This story's from the Hill. The Trump administration, they're planning a June 14th fascist parade. I'm sorry, a military parade through the streets of Washington, D.C. to mark the president's 79th birthday. Bring on the ears. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge. You will also mark the Army's 250th anniversary. I wonder how much energy is going to be put on that portion of the celebration.

B (19:57)

Right? That was, huh?

D (19:59)

Yeah, that's a coincidence. Washington City Paper first reported on the parade, noting it will stretch almost four miles from the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, to the White House. That is a lot, a lot of land to be able to protect if the president is going to be in this little parade. President Trump's in his first term, by the way. It was in obvious, we know, 2018. He had ordered the Pentagon to plan a large military parade after he visited Paris and was inspired by a French Bastille Day event. Quote, we're going to have to try to top it. He reportedly told French President Manu Macron that event set for November 10th. By the way, that was canceled after defense officials quoted the price tag at $92 million and were slow to plan it, citing more pressing issues. The event also was heavily criticized, both publicly and in private within the administration. But all of those people are go so there's no guardrails and no one to tell the little baby no about his parade.

B (20:55)

No, I want my parade.

D (20:58)

No. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin from Illinois at the time called the military plans a fantastic waste of money to amuse the President. And it is still that Washington officials also complain that heavy military equipment such as tanks would damage the city's roads and cost the city millions of dollars for public safety. As I said, that is a lot of ground to cover.

B (21:19)

He doesn't care.

D (21:20)

He doesn't give a shit.

B (21:21)

But I remember that he wanted a big old North Korea goose stepping military parade. And everyone was like, you'll wreck the streets. And no, don't be. No. And he listened back then, but now, 79th birthday party, he's gonna have his big stupid parade and just nobody watch it. Please. Seriously, media don't cover it, okay? We're telling you about it now, and this is probably the last you'll hear about it here on the beach. Like, what a waste of money. It's going to cost us like, north of a hundred million dollars.

D (21:57)

Yeah. Oh, but no. What about Doge? They're not investigating this shit.

B (22:01)

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Yeah, and, and, you know, 45 billion for ice, but okay, ma', am, just a giant, giant pile of bullshit. Which means we have to get into some good trouble. What are you guys doing? All right, so I was all set to have everybody jump online and help cure ballots in North Carolina for your good trouble today. And that still might need to happen. So be ready for that once the merits of the case play out in the North Carolina Supreme Court, which is very conservative. But since we're in a holding pattern on that good trouble, there just happens to be another survey from the Heritage foundation about Doge that would just be terrible if you participated in. It's definitely not encouraging you to screw up their data. So definitely don't go to secured.heritage.org v. Heritage Doge Survey. And certainly don't click the link in the show notes. If you missed that, we wouldn't want to fuck with the Heritage foundation or their data.

D (23:05)

No, that'd be awful.

B (23:06)

Yeah. So definitely don't go to that website and definitely don't fuck with their data. I know I can't keep a straight face when I'm telling people not to do shit that I really, really, really, really, really want them to do.

D (23:20)

Well, I can never keep a straight face, so you're one up, but I'm pumped. Shelby here all week Tip wait staff,

B (23:26)

tip your wait staff, tip your servers, ladies and gentlemen. She will be here all week, ladies

D (23:33)

and gentlemen, days and thems. Make sure that there's money bound days and them.

B (23:37)

Thank you for adding that. I always add that and I just forgot. All right, everybody, we'll be right back to talk about Republican budget reconciliation. Woohoo Party with expert Bobby Kogan. And that's after this quick break. Stick around.

C (23:48)

We'll be right back after these messages. We'll be right back.

A (23:55)

History is messy. It's weird, wild and anything but boring. Rainy Day Rabbit Holes is a history podcast about unhinged stories that make you stop and ask, wait, is this real life? From crazy disasters and tasty scandals to enlightening and surprising heartwarming tales, we explore the moments where people behave badly and sometimes beautifully. We've got naughty politicians, cultural chaos, and a deep love for the Pacific Northwest, including Bigfoot. It's thoughtful, irreverent, occasionally serious, and always entertaining. Let's fall down the rabbit hole.

B (24:30)

MSW. You. Hey, everybody. Welcome back. I'm happy to be joined today by just an absolute expert. This is a person I follow when I want to get information on budget reconciliation and the processes around budget reconciliation. He's a former Biden Office of Management and Budget guy. He was on the Biden transition team, Senate Budget Committee, and now he's the senior director of Federal budget policy for the center for American Progress. Please welcome Bobby Kogan. Hi, Bobby. How are you?

C (25:08)

Alison, I'm great. Thanks so much for having me on.

B (25:10)

I am so grateful for you today because we're going to talk about what's going on with the budget reconciliation. We've got this one, two, three punch of increasing the wealth gap in America and disappearing the middle class. And we could talk maybe a little bit about what's going on with the market and pensions and 401. But today I wanted to focus on this massive budget reconciliation bill. And just a brief reminder for listeners about the difference between a budget reconciliation bill and regular legislation and how many votes are needed to pass it.

C (25:44)

Sure. Yeah. So you can do whatever you want in the House as long as you have a majority in the Senate, you have the filibuster. It takes 60 votes. What's special about budget reconciliation is as long as you stick to the rules asterisk, this is going to turn out to be important. But as long as you stick to the rules, you can do it with only 51 votes instead of 60. That means there's a specified amount of debate time. So there's no vote to invoke cloture. So you can just do it with a simple majority as long as you stick to the rules. And so the practical effect is that the Republican trifecta can enact a significant amount of its agenda through budget reconciliation.

B (26:22)

Yeah. And the Democrats have used budget reconciliation to pass things. We did that during the Biden administration. But there's a limited number of times you can use budget reconciliation per term, per Congress.

D (26:33)

Correct.

C (26:34)

Yeah, that's right. Though I would say, in reality, what's going to. What's going to be their limiting factor is their political will. Right. They. They have enough attempts to do what they want to do, they're going to run out of steam, you know, and in 2017, we were facing a similar thing. They only made two attempts, and they gave up after, you know, after their. After their second go at it.

B (26:54)

And so what are these? I think that in the thread that I was reading from you, there are, like, two main rules that you have to follow in order to be able to use budget reconciliation. So talk about those rules. And maybe there's more or less, I might be wrong on that. But what are the rules and how are the Republicans circumventing them?

C (27:12)

Sure. So there are more than two. There are. There are a handful. One is you can't change the Social Security program. So that's great. That's one of the rules. Another is that every single. Every single provision and provision is undefined. It could be a whole sentence. It could be part of a sentence. Every single provision has to be either budgetary or a term and condition necessary to make a budgetary action happen. Reconciliation is about getting federal dollars and cents in or out of the door. So you could say something like, we want to procure 50 green buses. So a necessary term and condition, which is not actually budgetary, is you have to define what it means to be green. But if I say, and I also want the buses to play Bruce Springsteen, that is awesome. But not a necessary term and condition, you know, not a term and condition necessary to get the budgetary effect. So.

B (28:07)

Right. Yeah. I remember when we were trying to tack on, like, voting rights to our budget reconciliation. And basically the way that I understand it in my head is if it has to do with money. Yeah, that's right. And the budget, if it doesn't, it falls outside. And that is something that you would have to have, like a 60 vote to pass to get closer to.

C (28:25)

That's right. And. And then there's this confusing one, which I won't go into much because it ends up not being relevant for, I think, the discussion we're going to have today. But even if something is budgetary, the budgetary effects can't be, quote, unquote, merely incidental. So this was why the minimum wage died when in in 2021, Democrats said, Great, we want to do the minimum wage that affects the budget. And the Senate parliamentarian said, while the budgetary effects are merely incidental. Don't tell me that the reason you're doing the minimum wage is you wanted to change federal revenue and change Medicaid spending and change SNAP spending. That is true. That has those effects. But you're doing this because you want to tell a private company what it can and can't do.

B (29:05)

It just so happens to impact, sort of like when that one judge decided that the unions didn't have standing to sue because, sure, their membership dollars might go down in the future because of these layoffs, but because it's not a direct effect or a direct impact on or, you know, irreparable harm to you, the unions, that that doesn't count for standing.

C (29:28)

Yeah, that's right. It has to be about getting federal dollars and cents in there at the door. And then there are two that end up being really relevant at what's play here in reconciliation in a budget resolution, which is kind of that first step of making a reconciliation bill happen. And what we saw from the Senate last week and what we are probably going to see from the House this week, the will give committees an instruction. They will say, okay, committee, increase the deficit by no more than X dollars or decrease the deficit by no more than Y dollars. And you have to be within, you have to comply with those instructions. If you're outside of it, then there is a bird roll violation. And then another one is that you can't increase deficits beyond the budget window of the budget resolution, which in this case is 10 years. So if they have a deficit in year 11 or beyond, if they try to make their tax cuts permanent without paying for them, then that is a bird rule violation. Asterisk. They're trying to get around all of these rules, but those are the rules. The way that they have worked for the, you know, 50 years of reconciliation through today and you know, how they ought or how they're supposed to work going forward.

B (30:36)

Yeah, let's talk about the circumventing, because what if Republicans just say, oh, no, no, no, we're inside the window, it's only going to cost $1 trillion, even though the CBO says Something different. We're, we're telling you, and you have to listen to us. Is that kind of one of the things they're trying to do here?

C (30:53)

Yeah. So they. Section 312 of the Congressional Budget act on paper says that the Budget Committee shall determine the numbers. Right. And so the concept there is that Senator Graham, the. The chairman of the Senate Budget Committee is asserting that he has the power to invent his own numbers. CBO, the official CBO and JCT score, will say 5.3 trillion. They left Senate Finance and Instruction for 1.5. CBO will come out and say, hey, you're actually many trillions of dollars beyond that. And he will say, no, I'm not. No, I'm not. And therefore we're fine. And so there's basically going to be a brewing debate around that. Initially, they wanted. They were going to have a fight before the parliamentarian whether they could force CBO to tell them that the answer was only 1.5 trillion. That it wasn't. This isn't technically confirmed, but that, you know, talking to my old colleagues back at Senate Budget and talking to, you know, and seeing kind of the reporting from the press, I think we believe that Republicans thought that they were going to lose that fight. And so instead of having the fight and losing, they are going forward with a different approach. Right. The approach now where they're saying, we're just going to make it the numbers ourselves. And that could play out by eventually getting the parliamentarian to maybe say yes or maybe say no, or there are, you know, kind of weird jiu jitsu that they could do to try to follow the procedure of the Senate to. And use it. Use the procedure of the Senate to break the rules of the Senate. Now that sounds dumb, right? You're like, I'm following procedure.

B (32:22)

No, it kind of makes sense. So they can preserve their rules, but also circumvent the rules at the same time so that they can save face and say, no, no, no, we're not trying to nuke the filibuster. We're not trying to screw things up. We're definitely following the procedures, but it's going to end up the way we want it to.

C (32:38)

Yeah. And so. And yeah, so I'm trying to make the distinction between the procedure and the rules. Because the Senate is a parliamentary body, there are ways in which, you know, the presiding officer, the person sitting in the chair with the gavel, when you watch, when you watch the tv, the presiding officer, that person's job is to carry out the business of The Senate in accordance with the rules, but based on the procedure, the Senate presiding officer is allowed to invent new rules on the spot. And so does that mean that they're following the rules or breaking the rules? Right, they're following the new rules that they made up. But really what they're doing is they're following the procedure to break the rules. And so it depends on which senator you're reading and you know, who said what. But basically Republicans are contemplating one of a million different tendrils. Well, probably only four or five tendrils. To follow the procedure to break the rules that exist. Right. To, to increase long term deficits and reconciliation, to go outside of their committee compliance. Right. To go above that 1.5 trillion.

B (33:38)

And this helps them out because I'm assuming they're very rich. Donors are going to be very pleased with the fact that they followed the procedures. But to break the rules to get these massive tax cuts in place.

C (33:54)

Yeah, this is, this is all in service of doing enormous tax cuts. Right. For the rich. Right. So and when I say enormous, right. So like the average 0.1 percenter. Right. People making above like 3 or 5 million dollars, depending on, you know, kind of how you're doing it, the average 0.1 percenter would get $278,000 tax cut. Right. Like quarter of a million dollar tax cut to 0.1 percenters, modicum, you know, a pittance for other folks. So that's what these tax cuts are. And this is all in service of breaking existing rules. So they can do that and at the same time rip away health care from, rip away people's Medicaid, rip away health care from folks and severely cut people's nutrition assistance. Right. So snap, one of the biggest nutrition assistance programs that the United, that the government runs, what they're contemplating is an over a 20% cut to benefits. Right now the benefits are around a little over two bucks per person per meal and they take it down to about $1.67 per person per meal.

B (34:56)

Yeah. Is that to make room for their deficit that they don't want to create? Because it seems to me if they're going to violate the rules, why not just leave SNAP and Medicaid and everything in place? I mean, if you're going to go 5.3 trillion, go 7.3 trillion and don't cut our benefits.

C (35:14)

Yeah. So it's funny, that's the House, the House approach is one that doesn't use the magic fairy, you know, fairy dust math does. Do you know the multiple trillions of dollars of tax cuts and then calls for about one and a half to $2 trillion of cuts. So still has many trillions of dollars of deficits, but just you know, rips people's, rips people's Medicaid and food away nonetheless. And they're kind of fighting about how much they want to do what deficits they can deal with. Part. So part of there are two kind major things that the magic math helps them with. One is because you can't do long term deficits. If you just pretend that there aren't any long term deficits, then boom, you can make the tax cuts permanent. So that's a real procedural thing that it helps them with. And the other is an emotional thing. It makes them feel sad that they are doing such large deficit increases. Mike Crapo, the Senate Finance Committee chairman, the guy who's going to be writing the tax bill in the Senate at the top of his official website, has a debt counter on the top, is busy counting our US debt. He says that debt is an existential threat and also is going to do a multi trillion dollar tax cut that will, you know, that will increase upward pressure on the debt by 50%. So you know, make kind of the upward trajectory 50% tougher. And that makes him feel sad. So he's left with pretending that it's not doing that. Right. Like, and I know it's like I'm being like a little like being a little mean here but, but like literally like inside the budget window you can do whatever you want. They could do a 300 trillion dollar deficit in inside the window if they don't like it. So why are they saying that it's only 1.5 instead of 5.3? Because it makes them feel sad to admit that it's 5.3. So it like literally helps them. And that's why this, they're doing this procedure right? So like one way that they're going to do is the person sitting in the chair, J.D. vance. It'll be J.D. vance there. He can just make up on the spot that they're in compliance. And then, and then Democrats can say, hey, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to appeal the ruling of the chair. I think that you have broken the rules. And then they're not voting on whether it's 5.3 or 1.5 and what their deficit is. They're doing a procedural vote on whether they've interpreted the rules of the Senate correctly. So it allows people to say, oh, I'M not voting to overrule the parliamentarian. I'm not voting to go nuclear. I'm not voting. We're just voting on whether J.D. vance correctly interpreted the rules of the Senate. You know, and these people have like very strong opinions about whether they're ignoring, whether they're voting to overturn, whether they're firing the parliamentarian. When, when folks went nuclear on parts of the judicial filibuster, they didn't choose to ignore the parliamentarian, they chose to uphold the parliamentarian and then vote that that had been misinterpreted. That's a dumb distinction without a difference. But it makes them feel different. You know, they have different feelings about these things.

B (38:09)

So it's about their feels. They're in their feelings and they have a sads about big deficits because they've been against it for so long. So they're just, they're in denial.

C (38:20)

Yeah, they're, they're in total denial. I mean, and when you say to them, you go up and you say, you say like, I don't understand how you, you can do this. They will just say, well, the problem is spending. You say, but, you know, like a deficit is just a difference between spending and revenue. If you cut revenue, then you have a bigger deficit. If you increase spending, you have a bigger deficit. And they don't have a response to that. And so they like, what they'll turn to is say, well, do you want to be the person who raises taxes on people? And when you say, well, I want to find a way to pay for it, maybe by taxing the rich more, then they don't really have anything to say there.

B (38:55)

Well, if you want to be the person raising taxes on people, then ask those four Republicans why they voted to stop the tariffs with Canada. Because tariffs are taxes on people.

C (39:05)

Sure.

B (39:05)

And so that kind of leads me to my final question. What does this look like for middle class taxpayers? Or the 99%, I should say, which is just basically the rest of the peasant class taxpayers there because of, because of the tax increase we're already going to be feeling and already starting to feel because of the tariffs.

C (39:25)

Yeah. So about 14 million Americans who are not, you know, not in the upper 20% of the bottom 80% of Americans. About 14 million Americans see their taxes go up with the Trump tax cuts. About 22 million Americans don't see any change at all in any way, shape or form. Right. The rich people get a tax cut. Plenty of people who are poor don't get a tax cut at all of the other folks, on average, there is, you know, there's a small tax increase. So the average American household saw a $1,000 tax cut. Now, again, contrasted with the quarter of a million dollars that the top point 1% gets. But the average American household would see a $1,000 tax cut relative to the old system. So it's not anything new they're getting. They're already living that right now. But the tariffs are a $4,000 tax increase on the average household. So the Trump tax scheme leaves the Average American household $3,000 in the hole and in the.

B (40:25)

Before you figure in how they're going to pay for food now because SNAP is gone, and Medicaid because their health care has been slashed.

C (40:31)

Yeah, that's exactly right. So there's just. No. And it's not just me saying this, actually, give me a second. I want to, I want to pull up the quote. This is, this is Paul Ryan's former tax guy who wrote.

D (40:44)

I saw this.

C (40:44)

Yeah, yeah. He wrote most of tcja, Right. He'll be ill, you know, whatever.

B (40:49)

But, like, that's the first Trump tax cut, right?

C (40:51)

That's right. That's right. He wrote most of this bill that. Some of which was made permanent and some of which is expiring. But he even, he says, and I'm so sorry, I wish I had this. I wish I had this ready right now. Yeah. So he says, I have never been one to get hung up on distributional tables because they're misleading. Well, I don't think they're misleading, but anyway, this is Paul Ryan's former tax dude says, I've never been one to get hung up on distributional tables because they're misleading. But there is no escaping that. Taken together, yesterday's Trump tariff for Senate tax cut trade is a tax cut on high income taxpayers paid for by tax increases on the middle and working classes. Right. So it's not me saying that. This is raising taxes on the middle class and the poor to pay for tax cuts for the rich. This is Paul Ryan's former tax dude who wrote the tax bill to begin with.

B (41:38)

Yeah, I mean, how often have you been in agreement with the guy who wrote the first Trump tax bill?

C (41:44)

Almost never. But surprisingly, on this magic math issue, I have been, I was on a panel with George and George was like, I think you should be able to do deficits if you want. I just think you should be honest about the accounting. I don't think you should, like, you know, do a thing and then pretend it's free to keep it going. So George and I don't see eye to eye and just about any ideological policy issue. But, yeah, I mean, it's, it's. I mean, it's an incredible. It's, it's, it's not even that. It's an incredible admission. It's just like it speaks to how profoundly bad their policies are.

B (42:21)

All right, so to put it on a bumper sticker, they're. They're breaking their own rules so they can give tax cuts to the wealthy on the backs of the middle class. Is that a good way to sum it up?

C (42:31)

Yeah, they're. They're breaking their own rules. They are ignoring the rules as they go. They're voting. They're voting to change them on the spot as they go. They are, you know, they're overruling the problem turn. They're firing the parliamentarian, one of whatever. Yeah. Whatever they do, they are breaking their own rules so they can give giant tax cuts to the rich and harm most of the rest of America.

B (42:53)

On the backs of us. On the backs of the rest of us. Well, thank you so much for explaining all this. Again, I've been warning about this budget reconciliation coming out, what it's going to do to middle. Middle class Americans and American families. And honestly, when I say, when I say middle class, I mean the bottom 99%, I think. I sent an open letter to millionaires yesterday reminding them that they're not billionaires and that they're not in the club. They're down here with the rest of us. But I appreciate you coming on. Would you let everybody know? Because I have learned so much from your social media. Let everybody know where they can find and follow you.

C (43:27)

Well, Allison, thank you so much for having me on. It was my pleasure. I am primarily now on Blue sky, so it's just. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. I mean, the other place is quite bad. So I met BB K O G A N again. That was baby B K O G A N And you know, at the Blue sky social one.

B (43:46)

All right, you're the best. Thanks so much for explaining this and breaking it down for us. I appreciate you. We'll have you back on hopefully as this process unfolds so we can see which way they have gone into denial and circumvented their own rules. When we learn more. So, again, thanks for joining us.

C (44:02)

Thanks so much for having me on, Allison. It was, it was my pleasure. And you know, however I can be helpful in the future, just let me know.

B (44:08)

All right, we'll do. Everybody stick around. We'll be right back with the good news.

D (44:13)

I'm Brian Caram and I've spent decades covering politics. Now I'm taking you behind the scenes one interview at a time.

C (44:20)

Join us as each week Brian confronts the issues that matter, posing the questions you wish you could ask.

D (44:26)

No filter, no agenda, just the truth. We're not here for sound bites. We're here for substance. Join me, Brian Caram, every week as we cut through the noise and get straight to it. This is just Ask the Question for curiosity will lead us to the facts.

C (44:45)

Subscribe now on your favorite podcast platform and remember, when you want answers, all you have to do is just ask the question.

B (45:01)

Hey everybody, welcome back. It's time for the good news

D (45:06)

then. Good news, everyone.

B (45:13)

And if you have any good news whatsoever. Concessions, corrections, pronunciation corrections. You want to give a shout out to yourself or a loved one or your small business or a small business in your area that could use a boost or some great activism that's happening in your community, or a shout out to a government program that has helped you or a loved one, whether it's Medicare, Medicaid, snap, which is on the line. We know those things are on the line in this budget reconciliation bill, the Affordable Care act. So the subsidies from the ACA section 8. Great VA health care you you may have received from from your VA healthcare clinic would love to hear about that and student debt relief. Send it all to us@dailybeanspod.com and click on contact. And all you got to do to get your submission read on the air is submit your tax that can be pod pet tax, baby photo tax, bird watching tax, otter photo tacks. Oh, yep. Yeah.

D (46:06)

Baby otter photo tacks. Baby pandas, baby red pandas, baby any pandas.

B (46:12)

Yeah. So any animal, your pet, pod pet tax. If you don't have a pet, an adoptable pet in your area works. We want your baby pictures. We want your happy places. We want your favorite signs from the hands off rally. If you went, I would love to see some of those signs so you can send it all to us. And the bird watching photos, by the way, can be an actual bird or you and your friends flipping off Trump and Musk properties. Again, that's DailyBeansPod.com and click on Contact. First up from Holly Pronoun. She and her hi. Oh my God, I'm Holly. I like Can I touch. Five bucks for you if you know that reference listeners, this picture stopped me in my tracks. Okay, okay. Holly Pronoun. She and her hi Beans Queens. I have A correction or rather a confirmation of the pronunciation of Bournemouth. You were right in the end. It's pronounced Bournemouth. Oho. And it's not part of London. It's about two hours away on the south coast. I grew up there and was visiting my parents there this weekend when I took this picture of the beach in the glorious sunshine. The story that took you there is awful, but I'm glad you know about my hometown. May I present for my pod pet tax Giles or Giles. What do you think it is?

D (47:30)

I think Giles.

B (47:32)

Giles the bunny and his human best friend. I think I interrupted them plotting a snack heist. We miss Giles and his wife Vivi every day since they crossed the Rainbow Bridge last year. Thank you for all your news and swearing. Keep us keeping us all informed on this side of the pond too. Lots of love to you both. And it's a baby and a bunny. So cute.

D (47:56)

I don't know if my geography screwy but I performed in Portsmouth and I have to wonder if it's near Bournemouth.

B (48:01)

I don't know, I don't know. But that's. It's beautiful. That beach is gorgeous.

D (48:06)

Yeah, it is very pretty.

B (48:08)

And look at the bun and Vivi.

D (48:10)

I mean so cute. So cute. Thank you for the kickoff with a bunny and a baby. All right, this is from Joel Pronoun C and him hi AG and DG Joel here writing in once again from Sioux Falls, South Dakota. I'm a daily listener and I always start my morning with a cup of coffee and your stories in my ears today. Writing to share some good news from over the weekend. On Saturday between 2,000 and 5,000 people gathered in downtown Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Seriously? As part of the Hands off demonstration. Ours was hosted by 50501, South Dakota and Indivisible 605. The demonstration it might be 5051, South Dakota and Indivisible 625. The demonstration that took place in downtown was hosted at the courthouse, which happens to be right next door to the Tap house that I currently work as a morning manager. I opened the shop for coffee and breakfast at 7am and despite the demonstration not starting until 11am had a packed house by 9am Nice. Yep. South Dakotans with smiles and signs and sense of urgency shuffled into the shop as they prepared to protest the utter destruction and downfall of our nation under the Trump and Musk regime reign. But I'm sure regime counts. What shocked me is the majority of folks visiting the Taphouse were older people, veterans, survivors and those we've lived through some of our Nation's darkest moments In a state like South Dakota, it was a breath of fresh air to see generations older than me rallying against someone their own age. I had the misconception that most older people in the state were conservative, but the demonstration on Saturday, that proved otherwise. Anywho, while the demonstration was impactful and cool to see even from inside the taphouse while running around serving guests and customers, the best and worst part of the day was when one of the organizers of the local protest had a heart attack.

B (49:57)

Oh my God.

D (49:58)

He was whisked out of the crowd quickly and moved into the tap house where care could be provided easier. A customer ran to me and asked for assistance. I quickly stopped taking orders, cleared some space by pushing tables and chairs out of the way, and asked guests to move momentarily so I could help direct EMTs inside to help our friend in need. Because EMTs were on the scene, they were in the tap room and responding in less than a minute. And due to the quick work of protesters, my staff, customers and EMTs, the man who suffered the heart attack was rushed to the hospital Hospital and to best my knowledge, survived. The fact that so many people jumped in to help immediately without question, despite the chaos and the crowds shows the true character and impact of our community. That was what the demonstration was all about. Yes, we want change in action, but we really want to be seen, heard, felt supported and taken care of. South Dakotans did just that and it made me damn proud to be part of this community. Especially because I'll be moving from South Dakota to my home state of Michigan in May. Thank you 5051 South Dakota and Indivisible 605 for making this happen. Thank you South Dakota for standing up and speaking out. Thank you to everyone who helped our friend in need on Saturday. We saved a life. Keep showing up as podpet tax. I'm sharing a photo of my roommate, Sweet goldendoodle puppy Montana. Montana's a great name by the way. There's going to be a link in the bio how it was covered in the local media in the show notes. So there's going to be a link in the show notes to this story, how the media covered this and this is a lovely story of humanity. Also a beautiful picture of his pup. I love golden doodles and thank you for being there. You know I saw someone and I know it was a trumper but I saw someone that was Instead of protesting and blocking these shops so that people can't get to work and they're blocking traffic, why don't you try, you know, taking in an immigrant. Why don't you try doing this and that. And everyone saw right through the bullshit. Protests is just as important as actual. When I say actionable things like, you know, making a statement by. Yes. Making your home a safe space if you need to, or, you know, making it a safe state for trans individuals or, you know, giving health care to making sure you have abortion access for those that can get pregnant. Like, all of those things are important, but protests are First Amendment rights. This is a direct story of how these protests actually gave business, gave business to one of these little community taphouses that happen to be next to the Capitol. So these are the stories I'm talking about. Yes to protests, yes to actionable items, but they don't have to be one and they don't have to be mutually exclusive, right?

B (52:35)

Oh, thank you so much, Joel, for that story. That's really makes my heart happy that that many people showed out in Sioux Falls what a great community. And the photo is just absolutely adorable,

D (52:46)

the both of it. It is, it is.

B (52:48)

All right, next up, anonymous pronoun. She and her. Hi AG and dg. I love your podcast and the real news you bring to the forefront. I live in the country and it wouldn't make sense. A yard sign that no one can see. Besides my sister and brother in law are Trumpers and I don't want to rile them, but I do buy magnets and bumper stickers to advertise my descent to the Trump regime on my vehicle. I've gotten a few negative comments, like when I was at a car wash drying my car and the fella next to me was eyeing my words of dissent and said, I don't know what to tell you. I just can't stomach the guy. He got all flustered and said he was on the other side of that. And I said, oh, what do you like about it? And then he got really flustered and after a few guffaws said, and it's all your fault. And then he just turned away. Like I was like, okay, then.

D (53:33)

Weird.

B (53:34)

I do get more people telling me they like my stickers. I've sent a few pics of my car. I've got full coverage in case somebody really takes issue with it, but so far, so good. Thanks, ladies, for always bringing it and never backing down. Me neither. I'm also sharing a pic of my cat, gone for almost 20 years now. Oh, my goodness. All right. These bumper stickers are great.

D (53:54)

Yeah, they are. And the sweet kitty vase.

B (53:56)

Oh, look at the kitty baby. Yeah. Anonymous. I had a Honda element. And in 2004 I had a. You know, just a picture of George Bush's face with a circle and a line through it. And somebody peed in my gas tank.

D (54:12)

Oh my God.

B (54:13)

Mm.

D (54:13)

Mm.

B (54:14)

Yeah. So now every car I have has a locked gas tank.

D (54:17)

Smart.

B (54:19)

Oh my God.

D (54:19)

People are fucking gross.

B (54:21)

Yeah, they are. Yeah.

D (54:23)

This person's not. This is from Cecilia Pronoun. She and her morning Beans Queens. I've been a listener for years and I want to begin by thanking both of you for what you do. Honestly, I never thought I'd have any good news or self shout out to share, but here we are in the midst of a fascistic. I love that fascistic takeover of democracy. And if not now, when I live in Casey. Don't ask me why it's pronounced that way. Because it's spelled Casey. A tiny town in the largest red sea within the proudly blue state of Illinois. We like big things here. Our motto is big things, small town. And we boast over 12 world record largest objects, from a rocking chair to a giant mailbox just a couple of blocks from my house. Unfortunately, folks around here, they also really like maga. Until recently, I wasn't able to do much about that due to my health reasons. Speaking of which, I should mention that I'm a physically disabled single mom to one amazing young woman and two awesome cats. My life is a testament to both the necessity of strong social systems and the urgent need for reform. But I won't get too far off track. This message is about Eastern Illinois, Indivisible. After the shock of November, a close family loss in December, and some much needed time to get my feet under me, I finally registered with the Eastern Illinois Indivisible Chapter. We joined the upcoming protest in Charleston, Illinois, and Terre Haute. Terre Haute. Terre Haute. Excuse me.

B (55:46)

Terre Haute.

D (55:47)

Terre Haute. I had it right the first time. Terre haute, Indiana on April 5th. And I'm working to build space not only for organizing, but for communication within the communities in this very red part of the state. For beans listeners, if you're interested or have questions, you can reach me at Eastern Ilindivisible. Proton me. I've also launched a YouTube channel called Blue Wing Things to Do in case of a Coup. We're going to have links to both of those in the show. Notes, Notes. If you don't have a pen, don't worry about it. And that's a place where this submitter promotes all things good trouble and shares ways for those who can't march rally or protest to still get involved. As a person with a disability, I also advocate for those with disabilities. I believe we all have a place in the resistance and I hope to inspire action with a few laughs along the way. Nice for pod pet taxer Pedro Giovanni Thomas, currently a teenager and a pic of him as a cute, witty bitty baby kitty and Ruby Jo Road, my majestic potato. Yes, she's named after that Ruby Road. It's the first thing that came to mind when the shelter told me her name. Thanks again for all you do. I love kittens. Cats are cute too, but I love kittens.

B (57:03)

Oh my goodness, look at this. Oh, they're beautiful. Yeah. Oh, thank you for that, Cecilia. That was really a wonderful submission. Next up From Kirsten in PA1 Woohoo. I love PA1 pronoun she and her hi ladies of the Luguminati. Thanks for your good work. I wanted to highlight the very important message that Dana discussed on the what Plants Crave episode where she discussed messaging discipline and how folks who brought their butter emails Hillary stuff into the conversation about the HEGSA signal war plans debacle. First off, Dana, you're 100% correct.

D (57:38)

Thank you very much.

B (57:39)

And it's critical that all allies onboard this message and it's way bigger than this one situation. Dan Pfeiffer from Crooked Media and former high level communication staffer for the Obama administration and former guest on the Daily Beans once said, and I'm paraphrasing, don't share content of anyone you would give money to. That means you shouldn't re skeet rethread content from the opposition or even screen print what your opposition said, even if you're trying to ridicule it. Yeah, Empty Whale calls it being a data mute. What you should do is reframe what they say in your own words, making it sound as awful or heartless as you can before refuting goes even further than that. Messaging expert George Lakoff and Anat Shankar Osorio, who was also a guest on this podcast, talk about how you should never use the opposition's messaging in any way. So everyone who thinks they're being clever by rewording MAGA is making America kind again. Like that, Or a variation on something like that. Please don't do that. It's not helpful. Studies have shown that all you're doing is amplifying and strengthening the original message, and none of us want to do that. We all have to be very careful about how we deploy messaging, and that means educating ourselves, listening to experts we trust, and Taking the opportunity to hone our own skills in support of our shared agenda and the leaders and candidates we support. Thanks, Dana. Your words of advice about messaging were excellent and much needed in our community. In solidarity, y' all all. Thank you. Very good point, Dana. You're 100, right? Thanks, Kirsten.

D (59:07)

Every once in a while it happens. But listen, like I said, I didn't just come with but come up with that I was sharing some information that someone very loving and respectively gave to me. And I was like, oh, good call.

B (59:20)

Yeah. And it's not about us. Right. It's not like we don't think that you can't filter out the message. Right, Right. That's not about us. It's about them. So, yeah, if I'm in a room with nothing but beans listeners and I want to make a joke about something.

D (59:40)

Right.

B (59:40)

Then that's us.

C (59:42)

Yeah.

B (59:42)

And we get it.

D (59:43)

We often get sarcasm.

B (59:45)

Yeah. It's about putting it out to the world. So, yeah. Thank you so much for that, Kirsten, and thanks to everybody for your amazing good news submissions. Thanks to Bobby for joining us today to discuss budget reconciliation. And we will be back in your ears tomorrow. There's also a fresh episode of cleanup on aisle 45 that comes out tomorrow. And I just got some breaking news, and we're going to break this down in more detail tomorrow. But it looks like the Supreme Court has overturned Judge Boasberg's temporary restraining orders to return the Venezuelans from CECOT 54 rulings. But it clears the path for Trump to resume deportations under the Alien Enemies act as long as detainees are given due process. So I'm not sure what that means for the people who were wrongfully taken there, but I'm going to look more into this ruling from the Supreme Court and we'll break it down. There's supposed to be a hearing in Bozberg's court on the state secrets privilege today. I'm not sure if that's going to take place now. I'll check the docket one time to see if it's been changed.

D (60:53)

Yeah.

B (60:54)

And it doesn't look like it has been, but we'll keep you posted tomorrow. So that's not good news, but I had to get it in there before, before the end of the show because it just came across my desk. So, again, we'll talk about that more tomorrow. Do you have any final thoughts, my friend?

D (61:09)

No. Thanks, Allison.

B (61:10)

All right, we'll see everybody tomorrow. Until then, please take care of yourselves, take care of each other, take care of the planet, take care of your mental health and take care of your family. I've been AG and I've been dg. And them's the beans.

C (61:20)

Refried beans.

B (61:21)

I like refried beans.