Donald Trump (7:17)

Well, they wouldn't be saying that if they didn't hate our country, and they obviously do. I'm surprised that they would do it, knowing a little bit about them. I don't know them well, but these officers are doing a tremendous job. They're great patriots. If you expose them because of, you know, statements like have been made by Democrats and others on the left, usually, mostly, I think probably exclusively, you put them in great danger. Tremendous danger. And it's sort of funny when people pick it in front of Columbia, in front of Harvard, and they have masks on. More than masks. I mean, you can't see anything. Nobody complains about that. But when a patriot who works for ICE or Border Patrol puts a mask on so that they won't recognize him and his family so they can lead a little bit of a normal life after having worked so hard and so dangerously.

Vince (8:17)

Yeah. Amen. All right, so Trump doing the right thing, standing up for the cops here, standing up for law enforcement, the Democrats standing up for the terrorists. That's what they're doing. And the President. Right. To make that comparison, how often are these lefties putting masks on in order to wreak havoc in the United States of America? How often are these antifa goons, the very ones who are acting as terrorists, attacking ICE agents wearing masks and the commission of crimes? And then the left is just saying, well, that's a mostly peaceful protest. Let them get away with it. All the time. All the time. These people are agents of chaos, and they're being incited by the top agents of chaos, people like Alex Padilla and Cory Booker. So that continues. President of the United States condemning all of that. The president also said, anybody who shoots at ICE officers, well, yeah, they deserve very stiff punishments. His words, very stiff.

Russ Vogt (9:05)

But two, if they are found guilty, for people shoot at ICE officers, very, very stiff.

Donald Trump (9:12)

Very stiff. A long time in jail. A long time.

Vince (9:20)

Long time. Very stiff. Now, I think he's maybe even going easy on them. I think that if you shoot an ICE officer, death penalty should be for you. The death penalty. I mean, look, you need consequences here, and you need these consequences to be theatrically presented to the public. People need to know that there are consequences for doing horrific things. Horrific consequences for doing horrific things. It's as simple as that. And the left is doing in the media, they're doing everything they can to downplay this. And the fact that these two goofball senators can get away with continuing to advance the attacks on ice, and the most they get is some muttering from the legacy media. It's not enough. It's not enough. These guys really should be ashamed of themselves and they should be made to be ashamed of themselves for what they've done. All right, that's. That's the update on that. And these, these assaults continue. I do have. In case you're wondering, the White House also included a list of all these Democrats who have said the craziest possible things about ice. They mentioned Hakeem Jeffries, who has been calling to unmask ICE agents. That's a huge deal. Pramila Jayapal has called ICE agents deranged and said that people need to obstruct immigration enforcement. Lamonica McIver straight up assaulted ICE officials when she was trying to break into that Newark facility. Tampon Tim Walls was smearing ICE agents as the modern day Gestapo. The mayor of Boston, Michelle Wu, she said that ICE agents are just like Nazis. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said they're like secret police and terrorizing communities. Bernie Sanders has said that people need to figure out a way to stop ice that is obstruct them from doing their jobs. There's a guy called Crazy Mafume, and he's challenging the Trump administration to a, quote, street fight. You listen to these people. It's straight up, oh, violent language. What is calling for a street fight? Crazy Mafume. Stephen lynch is smearing ICE agents, Congressman, as the Gestapo. Aoc, agent of Chaos herself said that ICE shouldn't exist. Becca Bailin, whoever that is, said that ICE agents are vigilantes. Eric Swalwell, Fang Fang's boyfriend, says it's a priority to unmask ICE agents, and he compared them to the kgb. Dan Goldman, the Levi Strauss heir, has said that federal agents are also like Nazis, the secret police. And then Jerry Nadler, the Penguin, has said that ICE agents are hiding misbehavior while wearing masks. Of course, they're doing no such thing. They're concealing their identities in order to protect themselves and their families from ghouls like everyone I just mentioned. That's what's going on. That's what's happening right now. And so, yes, we will stay on this story, because these ICE agents deserve a lot better. And there's about to be a lot more of them. A lot more reinforcements coming in, thanks to that big, beautiful law. 10,000 new ICE agents on the way, and rightfully so. Okay, we've got that. We also have some great legal news for you this morning. Do you remember Douglas Mackey? Do you remember the man who made a meme in 2016? He made a very simple meme, a hilarious one, suggesting that the way that you could vote for Hillary Clinton is to text your vote in. You don't even have to go to the polls, text your vote in. And it was funny. It's a funny meme. It was a part of the meme war. Remember the meme war? The meme wars. The meme wars actually still continue. The right is dominating in the meme Wars. But it was amusing. And there is nobody with two brain cells to rub together who actually thinks you can vote by text. It is crystal clear that this thing was a joke from the very beginning. It was meant to make fun of, oh, how stupid the left is. And so Douglas Mackey was able to go on his merry way. Nothing bad happened to him. He just was able to post that until Joe Biden came into office. That's right after President Biden came into office and Merrick Garland began running the Department of Justice as the Attorney General, they decided that they were going to hurt as many Trump supporters as they possibly could, and that included Douglas Mackey. So this week, well, I'll tell you what ended up happening, was they charged him with interfering in the 2016 election. And then he ended up being convicted and sentenced. He was sentenced to seven months in prison for what the Justice Department referred to as his role in a conspiracy to interfere with potential voters right to vote in the 2016 election. And since then, he has been appealing that conviction. Now, by the grace of God and by the grace of a new administration, this week, Douglas Mackey gets great news. Douglas Mackey, who was convicted, has had his conviction thrown out. Now, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has thrown out Douglas Mackey's conviction for lack of evidence. The case has been remanded, Douglas points out to the district court with orders to immediately dismiss. Hale Luya is what Douglas Mackey has to say about all of this. And the President of the United States weighed in on this at one point. Take a look here. This is cut three, I believe. Cut three. The President talking about how unfairly Douglas Mackey was being treated by a tyrannical and politically corrupt United States Department of Justice under Joe Biden. Look at this.

Donald Trump (15:00)

Crooked Joe and his henchmen have tried to shut down free speech with a massive government censorship operation. To silence their critics, they're putting Douglas McKay in jail for sharing a joking meme about Hillary Clinton seven years ago. Nobody ever heard of anything like that.

Vince (15:20)

Nobody. Nobody ever heard of a thing like that. By the way, Douglas Mackey should change his name to accommodate the President's pronunciation. I like McKay. Douglas McKay sounds sophisticated. And he has reason to celebrate this week. He's free. He's free and this thing's been overturned. Now where does he go to get his life back entirely? Where does he go to get all the money back that he spent on legal fees? Where does he go to be made whole? I'd like to know the answer to that. I feel like this guy's got a lawsuit in the making. Given that he was treated like utter crap by the United States federal government at the hands of the deep state and the people around Joe Biden. Just awful stuff. But, you know, sometimes, you know, it is easy to get frustrated. You ask, where are the results? Where the results with all of the tyranny we've seen in the past. And it's nice to see at least this result, that a good man is able to walk free and have his conviction overturned despite the fact that it was a long, a long fought endeavor. So our congratulations to Doug Mackey, a man who I had the privilege of speaking with during his ordeal. And I, every time, just every time I heard about his story, my heart broke for him. The fact that he had to deal with that for exercising his First Amendment right to tell a joke about Hillary Clinton and her supporters in 2016. So that's, that's where we are now. Congratulations to Douglas Mackey. And yeah, I agree, he has to sue Kofoy 1963 says, yeah, if he can, if he can get his back, he definitely should pursue it because the man deserves it. All right, so the meme warrior finally beats the system. That's wonderful stuff. Also, we get the, we, we get, you know, this investigation that's been launched against John Brennan and James Comey by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. I was telling you yesterday. Well, I talk about something that is so long overdue. The FBI is investigating the former CIA director and the former FBI director for being a part of a corrupt conspiracy to subvert the President of the United States. That's what the reporting tells us. The President, President Trump, well, he's responding to all of this. He's got something to say about it. And I've got more to say about it. Especially because now John Brennan and all of the goons around him are acting like we did nothing wrong. Trump's the bad guy here. I've got that for you straight ahead. And Russ vote just around the corner. We're going to talk to him about how we can finally bring some sense to our government when it comes to all that money it keeps spending. And all those dollars they keep printing is all ahead on Vince. Hey, first, I want to tell you I've been using the Bone Charge infrared sauna blanket and red light face mask ever since they sent them to me. Can't recommend these things enough. I like the sauna blanket. That's a big deal for me. It helps me with muscle recovery, detoxification become a game changer in my house. It's easy to use. I can just wrap myself up, let that infrared heat work its magic. I've noticed a real difference now. I relax and I rejuvenate and how I feel afterwards. Love that. And then my wife loves the red light face mask. She's been using it every single night. Allison sees all sorts of fantastic results with this thing. It helps improves your skin's texture, reduces inflammation, and it's just great. It's just really great. And it's like having a mini spa treatment right in the home. And thanks again to Senator Roger Marshall, who joined us yesterday on the program and he heard us talking about Bone Charge. He goes, I use Bone Charge. And then after that, I don't have it with me right now. After that, I got a text message of all of Senator Marshall's Bone Charge products at his house. Hilarious. I love it. And he loves them, too. So if you're thinking about trying these out, you're in luck. Head to bonecharge.com, use the code Vince at checkout and you'll get 15% off. That's bonecharge. B O N charge.com both of these products have made such a huge impact for me and for my wife. I'm sure you're going to love them, too. Use the code vince@bonecharge.com to save 15%. These statements and products have not been evaluated by the fda. These products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease or condition. That's bonecharge.com yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay, so the President of the United States has some thoughts on John Brennan and James Comey finally being criminally investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Here's President Trump cut four. Take a look.

Russ Vogt (19:39)

James Comey and John Brennan now under criminal investigation related to the Trump Russia probe. Do you want to see these two guys behind bars?

Donald Trump (19:48)

Well, I know nothing about it other than what I read today, but I will tell you, I think they're very dishonest people. I think they're crooked as hell, and maybe they have to pay a price for that. I, I believe they are truly bad people and dishonest people. So whatever happens, happens.

Vince (20:10)

They're truly dishonest people. They're crooked as hell. You heard it there from the President of the United States. Ratifying my judgment. Ratifying your judgment about these jackasses? Yes. They deserve this. They absolutely deserve it. All of the evidence is in plain sight. Wasn't that Adam. What's his face? Adam Schiff said that at one point, claiming that Trump was colluding with Russia. It was obvious to everyone. It's plain as day. It was a lie. It wasn't plain as day. It was because it was completely invented. This, this kind of corruption, the public record on these guys. Yeah, it's crystal clear that they were involved in a conspiracy to subvert the United States. And the duly elected President of the United States tried them, tried them. And, and as I said yesterday, and I'll reiterate today, it's not enough to just investigate them. That's what the FBI does. They do the investigations. But the prosecutors at the Justice Department need to take it the next step. Start the prosecution of John Brennan and James Comey. Get it done. Get it done. Now. John Brennan went on msnbc. Where else would he go? He went on MSNBC yesterday and he played dumb about who, me under investigation. I don't even understand this. Cut 5. Look at Brennan acting like an idiot.

John Brennan (21:24)

I testified in front of many, many congressional committees in the House and the Senate over the years, and I continue to explain exactly what we did during this process, why we tried to make sure we stayed true to our intelligence responsibilities and that we were not going to do anything at all to try to interfere in that election. And again, it was a challenging time, but also one, I think that the people who actually worked this, both in terms of trying to collect intelligence prior to the election and then the ones who put together the intelligence assessment, they really, I think, showed the best of what the intelligence community and what CIA is made of. So, again, I am clueless about what it is exactly that they may be investigating before me.

Vince (22:07)

What? Why would they be investigating? Okay, so John Brennan lied to Congress. Not, not the only Time he's done that. He, he lied to Congress about the fact that he shoved Hillary Clinton's Steele dossier into the intelligence community assessment to try and debilitate President Trump. He did that. John Ratcliffe just put out a big report on this subject this past week and it was Brennan, it was Brennan who did that very thing. He shoved it in there. And by the way, for those of you watching this on rumble.com, vince, does he not look like your classic movie villain, like the kind of guy from the beginning of the movie you already know he's going to be the bad guy even though the big reveal hasn't happened yet? Yeah, that's John Brennan. John Brennan who is a central casting villain, villain on tv saying, oh no, I don't, I don't know what I did wrong. You lied, you lied, you conspired and you corrupted the tools of the United States designed to be concentrated on our adversaries at the CIA. And instead you concentrated on trying to destroy one of your domestic political opponents. And for that you should be in jail. That's what you should be. So that's John Brennan yesterday playing dumb. Now that Hillary Clinton funded dossier was only made possible by a guy called Mark Elias. He is an infamous Democrat election interferer and he too was on MSNBC yesterday. They all go running to msnbc, they wanna talk there. And here he is freaking out yesterday that John Brennan and James Comey are under investigation. Cut 14. Take a look. Here's Mark Elias.

Mark Elias (23:46)

The fact is it was Hillary Clinton and the Democrats who had been the victims, not Donald Trump. And so Donald Trump is now back in office. And the same people who are peddling the same nonsense who are once again trying to make Donald Trump the victim of something that was actually Donald Trump encouraging the Russians from the stage to release hacked emails are now once again leaking and suggesting and otherwise saying maybe now it's not, it's not this person, it's now John Brennan. When the fact remains the Russian Federation wanted Donald Trump to win in 2016. Donald Trump gleefully, gleefully, he took advantage of that fact and ever since has been peddling this misinformation, these lies and having his minions open this investigation and that investigation one after another that ultimately either conclude that what he is saying is not true or that end as John Durham's did in failure and efforts to prove cases that never existed.

Vince (24:50)

Yeah, so everything that guy just said was bullshit. You know, Mueller was the guy that Rod Rosenstein actually employed to Andrew Weissman, Mueller's pit bull was the one who actually compiled the report. And at the end of it, they could find no evidence whatsoever that President Trump colluded with Russia. And these guys were out to get President Trump. And even they couldn't in good conscience write that into a report. John Durham would subsequently find that everything about this process was jacked up, starting with the fact that Mark Elias was involved in procuring this horse crap dossier that was full of lies and then going after President Trump with it. Everything that that guy just said was a lie. Everything. He's, oh, the real victim here was Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump. Donald Trump was the bad guy. It's all projection, it's all inversion of the truth. And so Mark Elias is freaking out. You know what this means when a guy like that freaks out? And then when movie villain John Brennan gets on TV and says, oh, I don't know why they're looking into me. And the fact that they're rushing in front of cameras to do all of this, that means there we are over the target. That means that the FBI right now is way over the target at this very moment. And I just hope these guys, I hope that FBI just keeps drilling them, keeps drilling them, put a bow on that case, shove it off the prosecutors in the United States Department of Justice and then it's time for Pam Bondi to finally do her job on these guys. Do it, do it. I don't know how much clearer this case can be against them. So they're playing dumb in the midst of all of this. Before we get to our guest, coming up here in a few moments, Russ Vogt, who we desperately need to hear from. I gotta talk spending cuts with this guy. I do want to emphasize the fact that we are now just three days away from the one year anniversary of the attack in Butler, Pennsylvania on President Trump. Corey Comperator was killed that day. Others were grievously wounded. This is a massive story and we've got some, some things to help you reflect on it because looking back on it is just stunning that any of this even took place. First and foremost, let me show you a cut eight. Here's Susie Wiles. This is the White House Chief of Staff. She helped lead the Trump campaign this go around. She said the reason President Trump's even here, he was saved by the grace of God.

Susie Wiles (27:12)

The way the, the rally itself unfolded. The chart he had them put up on the screens, on the big LED boards came, it was always the last chart in the rotation and it was always on the other side. So for to have him ask for that chart eight minutes in and to have it come on the side that is opposite caused him. Well, it's this way. Caused him look in a different direction and lift his head just a little because it was higher. And that just doesn't happen because it happened. It happened because I believe God wanted him to live.

Vince (27:54)

I believe God wanted him to live. I believe that, too. I believe. I bet my guess, Chad, is you believe that, too. That there was something providential about the way all of that played out, including the unusual circumstances, the direction of the screen, the mulligan he made to call that that graphic up in the first place, everything about it. Also, the Trump supporters who began making a commotion when they saw a shooter on the roof was the only thing that began to trigger a response. The local police officers started climbing up because of the Trump supporters, not because of a warning from the Secret Service, not because of a warning from law enforcement. Instead, Trump supporters were the ones who helped save the President's life. Because when those cops got their head over the edge of the roof, Thomas Crook started frantically taking shots. He didn't have time to take a steady shot. And that frantic shot came very close to taking President Trump's life. But again, every. Every piece of that event to me seemed providential. That's right, yeah. Dr. Fotini saying God is protecting President Trump. I think you're right. I think you're very right about that. All right, I've got more on all of this coming up. We'll see what we can cover today and tomorrow, for that matter. We've a lot more coming up on that anniversary of Butler, Pennsylvania. It's such a huge story, and it's worth dwelling on. The President of the United States was almost assassinated twice, and that was a big moment. But in a moment, we've got our guest, Russ Vogt. Before we get there, I want to tell you about our great sponsors. Quince. Vince loves Quince. I do love Quince. I'm not into chasing trends or anything, but I am about finding clothing that fits right and feels good and actually lasts. And this is actually why I keep coming back to Quince. They've got these great lightweight layers and high quality staples that for me, they've become part of my everyday essentials. Quince has the kind of stuff that you actually want to wear on repeat. That's a sign, right? You know, if you keep reaching for the same thing, that's a good sign. It's like breathable flow knit polos, crisp cotton shirts, comfortable lightweight pants. That somehow work for both weekend hangouts dressed up dinners. The best part Everything with Quince is half the cost of similar brands. By working directly with the top artisans and cutting out the middlemen, Quince gives you luxury pieces without the markups. And Quince only works with factories that use safe, ethical and responsible manufacturing practices and premium fabrics and finishes. Quince is just phenomenal and it makes it an easy pick. When I go into my closet, what am I going to wear? Quince Going for it. Vince loves Quince. Stick to the staples that last with elevated essentials from Quince. Go to quince.comVince for free shipping on your order and and 365 day returns. That's Q-U-I-N C E.comVince to get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.comVince yes indeed. Also, hey, do you ever find that you're lying in bed with your mind racing? You got that endless to do list and then the early alarm and the chaos tomorrow and it's just all you're thinking about. It's hard to unwind. But something that does help me unwind. Bowl and Branch sheets Just was sleeping on my bowl and branch last night. Slept great. I start I started with their signature sheets crafted with the finest 100% organic cotton. And they're great. They're buttery, soft and toxin free. And honestly, they get even softer every time we wash them. It's like my bed has become a spa. And as the weather heats up. I tried their Percal sheets too and these have been phenomenal. They're cool, they're crisp, they're breathable. So you never sleep hot again. You can feel the quality. You can feel them the moment you open the box. Just touch them. Okay. These are legit. They're very good. These sheets are ethically made and it shows in every single stitch. Get the best savings of the season during Boland Branch's annual summer event. Get 20% off plus free shipping on your first set of sheets@bolendbranch.com Vince that's Boland Branch. B O L L a n d branch.com Vince Save 20% and unlock free shipping. Limited time only exclusions apply. Visit bolandbranch.com for details. Our thanks to Bolland Branch. All right, joining us right now is the head of the Office of Management and Budget. Russ Vogt. Is in the building. Well, he's not in the building. He's joining me remotely. But we're glad to have him. Russ, nice to talk to you Today, sir.

Russ Vogt (32:03)

You too, Vince. Good to be on.

Vince (32:06)

By now you likely know I am obsessed with rescissions. And I think maybe the only person who's more obsessed is you. You're the person who's obsessed with rescissions. Using this ability to cut federal spending, you already sent over a $9 billion package to Congress. Is that gonna pass soon?

Russ Vogt (32:22)

I think so. Next week it's gonna be considered by the Senate. We had a great vote in the House. It was narrow. It was another example of how hard it is to cut spending in this town. But it went to the Senate. The Senate is now gonna consider that next week and we're hoping that it is passed intact. And again, I think it's helpful to zoom out for remember what this first package is. It is $1 billion cut to corporation for Public Broadcasting. So we begin to defund NPR and PBS and the political broadcasting that they have been doing, which is not just, you know, politically biased against, you know, one side or the other, but. But has just been part of the cultural revolution, the attempted cultural revolution to change Americans viewpoints on a host of matters that they never signed up for. And similarly, foreign aid. So most of the package is $8.3 billion in foreign aid cuts. USAID, getting rid of the non profit spending that goes to these organizations that are both aimed at the regime change at many times, but also just flat out wasteful in many of these countries.

Vince (33:36)

Okay, help me understand what happens here. So if the Senate does vote yes to cut this spending, how long does that spending cut endure? I had Senator Eric Schmidt on the radio show and I asked him this and he suggested to me that it only lasts for the fiscal year. In other words, you'd have to do this every single year.

Russ Vogt (33:52)

Or is this cut permanent every year we do appropriations. So anytime you cut anything in the appropriations process, that is a one year episode. But what it does allow you to do is to build over time a lower amount of money into what the agency will say they need. So we have proven now that, and we have more, honestly, $8.3 billion of foreign aid is unnecessary. And so when it comes time next year to, to build a larger budget and we have a fiscal year 26 budget that's up on the Hill. It's one of the reasons we have $163 billion in cuts is because we're already building into future plans lower spending levels based on what we have found is totally unneeded, flat out wasteful, and so outrageous that you would probably prefer to just burn it in the parking lot than have it spent.

Vince (34:45)

So help me understand, does that mean that next year that you would have to submit a rescissions package to cut npr, PBS and USAID again or no?

Russ Vogt (34:54)

So remember, rescissions occurs on after Congress is already appropriated. So because we're living in the continuing resolution, we have to go back and rescind it formally. When we send up a budget, we're on the front end of the appropriation. So we're trying to, we're trying to get them to cut before they've actually spent money. And so our hope is that we would never have to do rescissions because Congress at the first juncture had taken our recommendations and had much lower appropriations bills.

Vince (35:24)

Okay, I think I understand. All right, so then tell me about. Well, we'll get to pocket rescissions in a moment, but I want to ask, are you do you plan on sending any more rescissions packages in the weeks ahead to Congress?

Russ Vogt (35:36)

We hope to. We're looking very carefully at this, at this vote. We want to make sure it's successful. But we do have other packages prepped and ready to go. And we, you know, we may make a decision to send those up. But one of the things that's important is that these things actually pass and are successful because to the extent that they don't pass, that limits our ability to do a rescissions package later in the year. That would be a pocket rescissions. And so it matters as to the success of the matter because of once for a particular account, for a particular amount of funding, we get one shot per year to use the Impoundment Control act to send something up. And so we're watching pretty carefully. But we certainly $9 billion is not the only amount of money that we've identified in this year that we can do without.

Vince (36:27)

$9 billion is a very small amount of money, as you know, when it comes to federal government spending. So you consider this to be a test of Congress?

Russ Vogt (36:35)

I do. And I've said that from day one. There is a reason this is a small amount. There's a reason we started with foreign aid. If we can't start and pass on a partisan basis a cut of $9 billion to two things that the country can't stand and honestly, Republican voters can't stand, Corporation for Public Broadcasting and all of the political programming there. And foreign aid, which is not this is not like, you know, astute foreign aid that's useful for, you know, they call it soft power that keeps us out of wars. That's none of that. It's literally wasting federal funding in leftist nonprofit sinkholes in other countries. If we can't do 9.4 billion, then it is a huge indictment, honestly, of congressional's ability, Congress's ability to cut spending. And it's going to create an additional argument of why we're going to have to use executive tools to do this, because the President came to town to balance the budget, to deal with our fiscal house, and we have tools that will allow us to make a lot more progress than we've ever seen in the last few decades.

Vince (37:49)

Who's waffling on this in the Senate, and why are they waffling, if at all?

Russ Vogt (37:54)

Well, you know, I'm working with all these senators, so I want to continue to have good dialogue with them. I think, you know, there's a conversation in the Appropriations Committee, and they're trying to get their minds wrapped around doing rescissions. And they haven't done this process in a long time. And rescissions was very normal, honestly, until the 1990s, and then it fell into disuse. And there's this argument that the Democrats are making, and some appropriators are trying to get their mind wrapped around whether they agree with it or not, that somehow if you make a deal to get spending bills in place with 60 votes with Democrats, that you're locked into that and that you can't then come back later and use your tools to rescind that money. And that's the kind of Washington, D.C. argument and precedent that the American people is just scratching their head and thinking, like, what on earth, Guys, we sent you to Congress to be able to make common sense. We've been asking for you to make many of these Doge cuts permanent. You finally have an opportunity, and you're worrying about what Patty Murray and Chuck Schumer think about the appropriations process. I mean, that is the head scratcher here. Ultimately, I think we're gonna have a great vote next week, but we're in the middle of those kind of conversations.

Vince (39:08)

Okay, pocket rescissions. Tell us, would you please tell this audience, and tell me what. What is a pocket rescission? How does it work and why is it valuable?

Russ Vogt (39:18)

Pocket rescissions is a. A normal rescission that comes late in the fiscal year. And so when we send up a bill and ask Congress to rescind it, we have 45 days to hold the money. And so it can't go out the door. And this is a part of the Impoundment Control act that allows us, without Congressional vote to basically hold that money and ensure that it evaporates at the end of the fiscal year. And so we have a process in place that we are looking to use this tool later in the year. Obviously we are taking it one step at a time with regard to the bill that's on the Hill. And if we can do more, we will do more with the votes of Congress. But this is a tool that the executive has and we're strongly considering using it later in the year. In addition to the President also has the ability to impound money, and that is to just not spend it. And even using the tools of the Impoundment Control act, that was something that 200 years of presidents used that effectively. And if you look when they stopped using impoundment because of the Impoundment Control act in the 1970s, that was the moment where fiscal irresponsibility began to reign in this town.

Vince (40:38)

Yes.

Russ Vogt (40:40)

And you lost the branch on branch tension to control spending. And it became kind of a caricatured view of what Congressionals power of the purse. No one disputes that they have the ability to set what an appropriation is. You can't go above that level. That is a hallmark congressional principle. But the notion that you had to spend at that level is totally anonymous to what the founding fathers would have said. And we're attempting to get back to an original understanding of what presidents enjoyed for many, many years.

Vince (41:18)

Okay, I want to explore that a little bit more in a moment. But once again, on pocket rescissions, am I right to believe that August 18 is the date that that clock begins where you can file a pocket rescission?

Russ Vogt (41:30)

Yeah, about that. In the August is when you're up against your 45 day clock. And so we will be watching that date very carefully.

Vince (41:38)

And how big are your ambitions? How much is there? Can you give us a ballpark of how much money you think you could possibly cut?

Russ Vogt (41:46)

You know, I don't want to do that at this juncture right now. We're obviously when we were able to start this programmatic review of federal spending, we were in the middle of the fiscal year. And so this is not going to be the same amount as what we put forward in our congressional budget that we sent to the Hill for fiscal year 26, the next one coming up. But we do believe that we will have a very good story to tell if we're to going successful with all of these different maneuvers. And honestly that's it's going to take all of these different tools. Each tool is different. Each Funding amount is different. They're written differently. They expire at different times. And so I know it's a lot for the public to get a handle on, but I think the best thing to understand is that this administration is committed, this president is committed to using everything at his disposal to get a handle on the waste and abuse that's been going on for far too long.

Vince (42:44)

But I think it's safe to assume it'll be a lot more than $9 billion, right?

Russ Vogt (42:48)

I think you can assume that, yeah.

Vince (42:50)

Okay, good. So lastly, on the Impoundment Control act of the 1970s, as you were describing, for 200 years, the president was allowed to save money for the American taxpayer. If something wasn't as expensive as Congress thought it would be, the president could save them money and said, we're not spending that money because we don't need to. But that all changed in the 1970s when Congress said that actually you have to spend every single dollar and you're not allowed to save money at all. You believe, if I understand you correctly, that that is unconstitutional to take that position. Are you willing to take this to the courts and fight that out?

Russ Vogt (43:24)

You know, we fully anticipate that this will be litigated in the courts. We're well prepared for that conversation when it gets to that point. There has not been an impoundment at this point. And that's, you know, you'll see a lot of fake news right now of Democrats in the General Accounting Office, which is a complete partisan institution that is quasi independent, that largely just takes the Democrat viewpoint on all of these spending issues, and they will say there's an impoundment, but impoundment has not occurred yet. These are programmatic reviews. And then each funding has a different path for. For if we find that we want to make savings and make cuts. But when that moment comes, if the President decides to exercise that executive tool, we will be well prepared for the court battle. And I would also say, because this is another argument that you'll hear from the Democrats, impoundment has not been litigated by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court cases, there was one in the 1970s. It was not on the Impoundment Control Act. It was not on the president's constitutional authority about impoundment. It was strictly on a particular statutory construction. And the arguments were never made on the issue of the constitutionality of this. And similarly, line item veto was not about impoundment. That was a much different issue. And so you will hear Democrats say, this has been litigated. It has not been. And what they are trying to do is assume basically the 1970s post Watergate legal precedents and structures stay in place that honestly would be foreign to the American founding.

Vince (45:06)

Finally, and we're letting you go after this Russ, vote. These spending cuts that you're talking about, did your efforts help get the big beautiful bill across the finish line? Were you able to convince senators to vote for it by saying that we're going to use rescissions, we're going to use impoundment to cut spending?

Russ Vogt (45:24)

Well, we had a great effort across the board and the president closed out. And I think the arguments that we collectively made on fiscal matters were very credible because in fact, they were true. Number one, that bill had historic levels of mandatory savings. So the kind of spending that's outside the appropriations process, it was double the last largest bill of that nature, $1.5 trillion. So it reduced the debt, reduced the deficits. But people were excited about all of the things that we were doing, planning to do on the appropriations process because I think at the end of this year we could come away with it having the most historic mandatory package on one side of the House and tariffs, which we've never seen before at this level, or at least not since the turn of the century. And then also on the appropriations, the discretionary changing the way for the first time in 50 years this town has done things and getting back to a more complex common sense approach where an executive could spend less than money that he has been allotted and he can be a wise steward of taxpayer dollars. If you give me $100 to do something, Vince, and I can do it for 75 million, who on earth would force me to spend up to that $100 million? Why wouldn't we want to pocket that $25 million? 200 years of presidents did that. And, and it was common sense. And sometime along came this notion that we're just going to put that paradigm completely on its head and force presidents to spend money. And once we did that, we were able to go around and have this use it or lose it phenomena where you would have new flat screen TVs and copy machines because the agencies are just dying to spend it by the end of the fiscal year and it's just waste.

Vince (47:13)

Yeah. The answer to your question, who on earth would do that? Washington would do that. I know you're trying to fix it. Russ. Vote. Thank you so much. Appreciate you. I know you're busy. Good to have you today, sir.

Russ Vogt (47:22)

You bet. Thanks, Vince.

Vince (47:24)

There he is, the head of the office of Management and Budget at the White House. You want to get this crazy federal budget under control, let that guy be unleashed. That needs to happen. Russ Vote is the real deal. That guy was brought back for this purpose to try and rein in the out of control federal government spending. We're approaching $37 trillion in debt right now. If you'd like a country for your grandchildren, you'd like that guy to succeed. So again, thank you to Russ Vogt. Good to have him with us today. This is a very big deal. Sancher, 47, says nobody cares about saving taxpayers money. I think Sancher means in Washington they don't care. That's true. And so they need to be made to care. We will make them care, won't we? Won't we unleash him, says Hugh Marczak on the chat. Thank you, guys. Yeah, this, this, that was, that was worthwhile and I appreciate having having that gentleman stop by. Russ Vote. Okay, let me see. I've got some other pieces for you here today that I want to make sure to hit. Kevin o' Connor is the White House doctor for Joe Biden. Remember, he has been a Biden family business associate for a very long time, a very long time. And they bring him in quite obviously as a cover up artist for Biden's nonexistent health. And never before the press never, never showed up to do a press briefing. They released these ridiculous letters claiming that Joe Biden was in great shape when of course he wasn't. He is afflicted with cancer. We now know it is very obvious to most people that he had that cancer. And it was well known inside of his inner circle for a long time. They claim they recently discovered it. That just seems impossible that that's the case. Anybody who could observe the president of the United states from afar 3,000 miles away in California, you could turn your television on and see that Joe Biden wasn't of sound mind. Yet in Washington, the game of pretend continued. He was fine. He was fine. The auto pen was being used relentlessly to conduct the work of the presidency of the United States outside of Joe Biden's ability to even grasp what was going on. And that led yesterday to, to a subpoena and a House Oversight committee hearing behind closed doors with the Biden doctor, Kevin o'. Connor. It was during that hearing yesterday, it only lasted 20 minutes, that that doctor pled the Fifth. Now, the Fifth Amendment is the ability to preserve yourself against self incrimination. In other words, like you're trying to avoid running afoul of the law. And you're entitled to your fifth amendment rights. But why would you plead the Fifth? Why would Kevin o' Connor plead the fifth under these circumstances? Well, it seems pretty obvious to me. He's pleading the Fifth to avoid discussing the 25th Amendment, which is, hey, the president's incapacitated. We should have replaced him. Kevin o'. Connor. We did get video from the oversight committee yesterday. Here he is, cut nine, taking the fifth amendment, saying he's not going to answer any questions.

Dr. Kevin O'Connor (50:25)

Look, the questioning will proceed in rounds. The majority will ask questions for an hour, and then the minority will have an opportunity to ask questions for an hour if they choose. There will be one staff council per side asking the questions during each round. To the extent members have questions for the witness, they will be propounded during their side's respective rounds. Do you understand?

Jake Tapper (50:47)

On the advice of Castle, I must respectfully decline to answer based on the physician patient privilege and reliance on my right under the fifth amendment of the constitution. I am not a lawyer, and I must follow my lawyer's advice in this matter.

Vince (51:01)

So, gentlemen, we intend to assert both privileges with regard to any questions that would be asked at this deposition. And Dr. O' Connor will not answer any questions. Can we go off the record for one second? Can we go off the record? We need to chat about this. It didn't get much better throughout all of this. But you notice he's making two claims. One, he doesn't want to incriminate himself. That's the fifth amendment claim. The other is, well, I'm a doctor. He's my patient. We're entitled to secrecy here. Well, what aren't you admitting? That you then didn't tell us everything about his health in all these letters that the Biden White House kept releasing? These statements, these overviews of the president's health, Are you now admitting that they weren't a fulsome declaration of everything that was going on with Joe's body? Well, yes, he is. No. There are secrets that I can't share with you. You see, their patient. Patient doctor privilege here. Doctor patient privilege. Can't tell you about that. What? Again, we have a 25th amendment for a reason. We have an entire amendment that's dedicated to the health and well being of the President of the United States. Or lack thereof. What are we to do under that circumstance? Doctors are compelled to share information about their patients when you have a legitimate legal justification for doing that. A congressional investigation of this nature definitely qualifies. And it involves the health of the President of the United States and the constitutional fraudulence of the last presidency. So, yes, he has every obligation in the world here to share the information. The Republicans did give it a try. They asked him two pertinent questions, both of which were met with Fifth Amendment stonewalling. Here is Dr. Kevin O' Connor being asked the only two relevant questions from a 20 minute hearing.

Dr. Kevin O'Connor (52:56)

Dr. O', Connor, were you ever told to lie about the President's health?

Jake Tapper (53:02)

The advice of counsel. Mr. Respectfully declined to answer based upon.

Donald Trump (53:06)

Yes, he was.

Jake Tapper (53:07)

Privilege. And in reliance on my right under the fifth Amendment of the Constitution, I am not alone must follow my lawyer's advice in this matter.

Dr. Kevin O'Connor (53:15)

Dr. O', Connor, did you ever believe the President was unfit to execute his duties as President?

Jake Tapper (53:23)

On the advice of counsel, I must respectfully decline to answer based on the physician patient privilege and. And in reliance on my right under the fifth Amendment of the Constitution. I'm not a lawyer and I must follow my lawyer's advice in this matter.

Vince (53:38)

It's the lamest cover up ever. Doesn't that guy look like Milton from Office Space? Like he's zealously guarding a staple somewhere. A stapler somewhere. Like they move him to the basement because they don't know what else to do with him, but they never cut that guy's paycheck off. I bet you he's still getting paychecks to this day in order to try and protect and cover up for the Biden family. So he shows up to Congress with a lawyer, says, I can't answer questions, and there are secrets about his health that I can't disclose. Well, that's fascinating. Now here's a question for you, Chad. I had one of our great viewers suggest this to me yesterday. I want to see what you think of this. If President Trump. Again, this is just theoretical, but if President Trump were to pardon this guy. Bear with me. Were to pardon Dr. Kevin O', Connor, he would have no basis to make a Fifth Amendment claim. There's no chance of incrimination if he is given a pardon by the President of the United States. Now, going into that hearing yesterday, the White House actively removed all of his executive privilege claims. The White House counsel released a statement saying, no executive privilege claims are allowed here. We've revoked that ability. So he couldn't hide behind that. So he tried to hide behind other things. He's still gonna try and hide behind this doctor patient privilege nonsense. But the Fifth Amendment, it is possible for the President to make that go away. He could pardon him. And in the end, are we trying to catch Kevin o' Connor specifically? Not really. He's more of an Indian, not a chief. There are bigger fish we wanna go after. Could we use him? Or maybe not a pardon. Maybe some level of immunity could be granted by the United States Department of Justice. I just want to get creative here. I just want to get very creative here with how we dig. Somebody said waterboard him. Yeah, we could do that. Let's just waterboard Milton. Let's just. That's not bad. That's not a bad. A little enhanced interrogation could go a long way here. All right. All right, Doc. Yeah. Yeah, that's right. John Brennan probably knows a lot about that. We could. We could ask John Brennan for some tips. How do we do enhanced interrogation on this guy? Well, one way or the other, we got to get to the bottom of it. And I saw Dr. Ronny Jackson saying, yeah, this guy's coming back. This guy's going to come back because we've got to get answers out of him. And Dr. Ronny Jackson, we've had him on the program. He was the White House doctor. Right. He worked for President Trump. He worked for President Obama. He does not think very highly of Kevin o'. Connor. In fact, he's got a very low regard for Kevin o'. Connor. Yeah. Am I wrong about that, Justin? Look at these guys. I think it's Milton. I think it's Milton. I mean, I think the prescription on Kevin o' Connor's glasses probably needs to be enhanced a little bit to make his eyes more comically large. But beyond that, they're pretty close, I gotta be honest. Give him immunity. Yeah. So the chat thinks. Give him immunity. That could be good. So if we give Milton immunity, we might be able to get to the bottom of all this. And. And I'd be fine with that. I'd be fine with that deal. You know, this guy's just a henchman anyway. We could just use him to our advantage. We'll see. Hopefully the Justice Department is thinking creatively. Hopefully the Justice Department is thinking at all these days. We. That would be. That would be a good sign. That'd be a very good sign. Okay, I've. I've got a bunch of other stuff. Do we want to do. Do I want to make fun of Thom Tillis? We want to crap all over Tom Tillis before we get out. What do you think, Justin? Should we do that? We should. Okay, we should crap on Thom Tillis. Thom Tillis did an interview with cnn. You know, now that he's retiring from the United States Senate, After President Trump threatened a primary opponent against him, he instantly retired. He insta quit. And here we go. Here is Thom Tillis sitting with Jake Tapper on CNN in an utter bitch fest about the way his career is ending. Here he is, cut 11, complaining about Trump's advisors. What does the Republican Party need to.

Dr. Kevin O'Connor (57:31)

Do to get its message right?

Vince (57:33)

Less fealty to one man.

Thom Tillis (57:36)

I have fealty to ideals. I don't have fealty to any one man. And I do believe that we're doing the president a disservice. The president, President Trump, nor any president should, could possibly be expected to have a detailed understanding of all the things that they have to deal with. What the president needs to do is start really looking at the outcome of some of these policy decisions and ask Trump. Is stupid the best professional advice? That's what I've been trying to provide him for the last few years, and that's what I'm going to continue to provide him. And it's worth what he paid for it. But as somebody who's been in elected office for 20 years at the leadership level in the State House and doing all I can up here, I hope that he starts listening to more of us and fewer of those people who pretend like they're the president when he's out of the room over in the White House.

Russ Vogt (58:26)

Who are you talking about?

Thom Tillis (58:27)

There will be plenty of time for me to cover that later.

Vince (58:31)

Not later in the show. So gossipy. So gossipy. So bitchy. You heard it there from Kermit the Frog. He straight up told you that, you know, that Trump doesn't know what he's talking about. And everybody who walks into the room, they think they're the president. They're not the president. They should respect me. I'm a United States senator. No, you're a loser and a lunatic. And that's the guy who fought to destroy Ed Martin. Ed Martin. He said, because Ed Martin stood up for the. The rights as a lawyer on behalf of January 6th defendants, of January 6th defendants, that they deserve to have their lives destroyed and that Ed Martin should not be the U.S. attorney. Take a look. Cut 13. Here he is on Ed Martin.

Thom Tillis (59:06)

I was here. I was the last member out of the chamber on January 6. I saw everything unfold, and I'm still angry about it. And I have no tolerance for anyone. The president should know if there is anyone coming up for a nomination to, through any committee of my jurisdiction that excused January 6, that they're not gonna get confirmed in my remaining tenure in the US Senate.

Vince (59:28)

Thanks, Kermit. Great to hear from you. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. I'm so glad that guy's leaving the Senate. He's gonna be a pain in the ass, though. Before he goes, just to warn you, he's already doing it. He is already doing it. Tomorrow on the program, we've got Selena Zito. We're gonna talk to her about what's going on, the one year anniversary of that attack on President Trump. A lot to get to and all of the news that develops today. I'm with you on the radio show today. That's 12 to 3 Eastern time. Check me out rumble. Com, Vince, or go to the vinshow.com for your local radio listings. Great to be with you as always, the best damn audience of media. I'll be talking to you again tomorrow.