The Trish Regan Show - BREAKING: Biden Staffer FACES JAIL Over Autopen Scandal! FULL LIVE EPISODE | Trish Regan Show

Episode Date: June 26, 2025

🚨Breaking: First Lady Jill Biden’s Chief of Staff, Anthony Bernal, is now defying Congress. After refusing to testify about his involvement in the White House’s controversial “autopen” scandal, lawmakers are responding with a formal subpoena. Legal consequences may soon follow.🚨Meanwhile, former Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is calling out Fox News and other mainstream outlets for their biased coverage, while CNN issues a quiet correction of its own misleading report.🚨In New York, Letitia James is running out of money and out of support. As her poll numbers drop, she’s launching yet another lawsuit against President Trump in what appears to be a desperate move to stay politically relevant.🚨And President Trump’s big beautiful bill is nearing the finish line—possibly as soon as July 4.All that and more on today’s episode of The Trish Regan Show. Don’t forget to like, subscribe, and share. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Well, it seems the day has come for the Biden administration to own up to what it may have done. Why didn't it invoke the 25th Amendment? Why did Anthony Bernel continue to act as Jill Biden's chief of staff, possibly okaying all of these auto pardons? The chickens are coming home to Roos, shall we say on that? We're going to get to that story, everyone. Plus up Pete Hagseth, my former colleague over at Fox. He's calling out the media big. time, including, including people at Fox. You're not going to believe the fireworks on this, as again, some of the intelligence on Iran is debated. I will say this, CNN's now caught scrambling, trying to apologize for one of its reports. We'll show you that. It's, well, typical CNN. And guess what? Latisha James, she's out of cash. Oh, boy, she's really

intrally up against it. Ladies and gentlemen, big show here on. on the Trish Regan show today. Big, big news coming for you. Please make sure you subscribe, share, like, all that good stuff. I will say this, Anthony Brunel, is finding himself in just a little bit of trouble. This is the chief of staff, of course, for one, Jill. I got to be sure, Jill, Dr. Jill. Dr. Jill Biden's chief of staff, Anthony Brunel,

is now getting called up by Congress because he was supposed to testify. You know, they get some questions. Fair questions, shall we say, in light of, how Joe Biden seemed, and they want these questions answered, but Bernal has no interest, apparently, in actually showing up for these questions. And so Congress now is in a position where they have to subpoena him, and this is exactly what we saw Comer do today, putting out this subpoena. Do you see this? I got a copy of it right here. And along with a little tweet, making sure that everybody knew just exactly how much trouble Anthony Bernal might actually

be in. Signed, Deliver, Jill Biden's work husband. A little dig there. Anthony for now must appear before GOP oversight. Let this subpoena sent a clear message to Biden's inner circle. We will stop it. Nothing, he writes, to expose the truth about Joe Biden's decline and unauthorized use of the autopen. So again, this is the guy that was kind of running the thing behind the scenes, because, you know, if you're Dr. Jill's chief of staff, you got it going on. I mean, Dr. Jill had access to the president, unlike anybody else. else, right? So if you have access to Dr. Jill, then you're the bomb. And this was Anthony Bernal. And so the word on the street, and you don't even have to go to Project Veritas and

their undercover cameras for this. I had heard this. Everybody had heard this. In fact, even the New York Times, I think, put this one out, Anthony Brunnell was running the show. So if Anthony Brunel was running this show, what was he okaying all the time? Was he actually, Mr. Autopin himself? Was he effectively acting like the president? I don't think we elected one Anthony Bernal, we didn't elect Dr. Jill, we elected as a nation Joe Biden. So if Joe Biden was incapacitated and for whatever reason was not up to the task, why is it that they didn't come forward with some of this information sooner? I mean, we knew it, I knew it, you knew it. I mean, remember the where's Jackie? Jackie, upstairs knew it, okay? Jackie, by the way, God rest her soul,

had passed away in a car accident months before. This is a congressional representative that he tried to thank while on stage. Where's Jackie? And I want to thank all of you here for including bipartisan elect officials like Representative Governor, Senator Braun, Senator Booker, Representative Jackie, are you here? Where's Jackie? I didn't think she was going to be here to help make this. Yeah. And then there was this moment. This was actually pretty telling for me because he slowed down so significantly, right? He slowed down when he was at G7. He tried to wander off to look at parachuters and Georgia Maloney, she's amazing. She like caught wind of it right out of her,

the corner of her eye. And she went over and she rounded him up and brought him back to the cameras. And if you look at this, if you're listening to this on Spotify, thank you for that. If you're watching on Spotify video, thank you for that. If you're looking live here as we are on YouTube at this moment, you can see how slow he is to put those sunglasses on. And that tells you something, guys. I'll tell you, it actually tells you a lot because, and we've talked about this before, if you've had a loved one that's been through that. you recognize some of those signs and symptoms. But one of the most alarming ones was for me when he was doing this economic event.

And he seemed to be like falling asleep. If you look at how slow he is and what he's doing there, he says, oh gosh, I shouldn't take questions. I'm going to get in trouble if I take questions. And then he doesn't quite seem to know what to do. This to me was really, really telling. You see him? I better not start the questions. I'll get in trouble.

What's your message for Super Tuesday voters? Everyone, please move this. Super Tuesday, send you have a message for voters? Thanks, come on. Thank you so much. Thank you all. Unbelievable. And he's just sort of staring off into space.

He actually, he looks ill. He looks like he might actually pass out or that he might vomit in this particular moment. I mean, this was just unbelievable to me. So there were all of these things, okay, pointing to troubles all along. And yet, for whatever reason, Everybody was there encouraging him. I mean, for goodness sakes, after that abomination of a debate, what did we hear from Dr. Jill?

Joe, you did such a great job. You answered every question. You knew all that. Unbelievable. Well, you know what? Now, her chief of staff is being subpoenaed, and he could actually find himself in jail. I mean, this is serious stuff, you guys. And the reason it's so serious is because do not forget Peter Navarro went to jail, Steve Bannon went to jail.

that's never the first option. But, you know, when you get subpoenaed and you're supposed to testify, you know, and this is, you think what you want about Bannon or Navarro and taking one for the team. I mean, the reality is they chose not to testify. So when you choose not to testify, you go to jail. Unless, of course, you know, your Loretta, what's her name? Remember the woman, the IRS? Was it a Lois? Anyway, unless it was during the Obama. administration and you have a split situation and the president can get you off. But you're looking at a Republican House, Republican Senate, and a Republican president. So that means, Mr. Bernal, if you choose to not testify, then you're actually going to find yourself in the slimmer. Okay? Like, I'm sorry, but that's how it works. It's pretty basic. And, you know, if you have any questions about it, you can call Navarro, you can call Bannon and they'll explain it. So you're going to have to show up and you're going to have to answer these questions unless you want to actually be behind bars. And so that perhaps is the option that he's now looking at.

I think it's really sort of just amazing that all this was going down. And nobody was daring to ask the questions. I mean, we did here on this show, right? I've been telling you ever since 2020. You can't run that guy. Hey, Dems, like, you know, if you had a couple brain cells, maybe you'd actually tune into the Trish Regan show and you'd find out what, one, the other side is saying, and two, what would actually be sensible? Because for, for whatever reason you had the emperor has no clothes thing going on and you kept insisting he was the grace thing since sliced bread in fact i'm going to quote msnbc jess garbara who told us he was the best biden ever oh yeah and the brazenkies have known him forever and i've known him forever and he's the best

biden ever except that he can barely stand he can barely walk he can barely put his sunglasses on when he's at g7 so i'm telling you that's not the best biden ever no way hose all right so stuff went down. The guy could only be up, what, how many hours a day he only worked and how many vacation days? I think he did the most vacation of any president. So he wasn't all there and you got to ask yourself, what were they doing behind the scenes? And how do we make sure that that doesn't happen again? Both sides, right? If Donald Trump suddenly came down with what seemed to be some form of significant mental decline, and by the way, the same exact team, they were always going on about how Trump had declined so badly when their own president, their own team member had declined so badly.

They were refusing to recognize it. If he was suffering from mental decline, obviously, you would want J.D. Vance to step in. I mean, hey, look, I get it. Nobody wanted Kamala. Believe me, nobody wanted Kamala. So that was a tough, tough, tough lever to pull. I get it, okay? But who was this guy, Anthony Brunel that we did not elect, who was Dr. Jill's chief of staff, calling all the shots, telling him to continue running when clearly he shouldn't have been running. Meanwhile, here's another question. What exactly was going down with all those pardons? Because some people, including the representative from Tennessee, Tim Burchard are asking whether or not there were any pardons for sale. You know, they had a history of that in Tennessee.

He knows it well. And so, you know, maybe he's a little guarded because of that, but he wants to know whether or not there was any money going back and forth because you're talking about more than 8,000 pardons in one day. I mean, that's a lot of signatures, right? Well, Biden wasn't signing these things, guys. So how did these things get approved? Was Bernel the guy that did it? Or did you have low-level staffers, as Tim Burchett is suggesting here on my friend Benny's show, let's take a listen. He said this maybe about 10 days ago or so, but I think it's relevant in light of what we're learning. Listen. We've got staffers. I would look, Tennessee has had a history of this. We had a governor, several governors ago. He's since passed away. But he, um,

He sold pardons. You can look it up. His name was Ray Blanton. It made national news. And, I mean, they wrote songs, Pardon Me, Ray. And it was a cash for clemency deal. And that's exactly what I think you're going to find out. You're going to find staffers that were able to take forms, get them,

and run them through some sort of bogus legal system. And then they auto-pinned them. And there's probably people out on the street that are, it shouldn't be. But somebody got rich off that. And that's. And I think those people, I hate to say it, but you'll see something probably horrible happen to some of those people because it goes up the chain.

This is a very dangerous town to play games in. I have no direct proof of that, but I know, but I'm just talking about history. And, you know, you got somebody making $100,000 a year and somebody offers you a quarter of a mill in some safety deposit box. So then you take it? I don't know. So two kind of things to think about here.

One, did you have low-level staffers that were getting paid to push things through? Two, was Anthony Brunel running the country? You know, the whole time we're like, who's in charge? Like, really? Who's in charge? Because it clearly wasn't Joe. He didn't seem to know what day it was, right? In many, many situations.

And that was all brought forward in that now infamous debate. and everybody had to sort of eat their words. And even Jake Tapper, I mean, well, gosh, he's, he's a commercial little enterprise if I ever saw one, right? I mean, he was the guy who was like, Best Biden ever, along with Scarborough. He tore Lara Trump to shreds because she dared to say that Joe seemed to be declining and he accused her of making fun of people with a stutter. She said, I didn't know Joe had a stutter. I don't think that's a stutter. I think that's mental decline. And Jake went on and on. We've played the soundbite here.

You've seen that, okay? And then Jake turns around and says, oh, gosh, that debate was bad. That debate was really, really bad. And now he's got to go. Of course, his buddy George Clooney must have told him. And then, fast forward, he writes a book about it, about how the media didn't know what they were doing. Gee, we couldn't tell you that, Jake.

So here's the question. Who was in charge? Was it Barack Obama behind the scenes? I'm beginning to think not. I'm beginning to think it was this guy. Dr. Jill, right? She controlled access. Think about that. She was the access point to the president. And if you need the president to kind of sign off on anything, okay, anything, even just a nod or a thumbs up, you would have had to go through her, which meant you had to go through him.

So there are a lot of really important questions that need to be answered right now. Meanwhile, other questions circulating about just exactly what has happened here vis-a-vis Iran. and the damage that was done. So there's some different reports, and what I would just remind you of is everybody has a bias in this, okay? There are some people that want to say it's contained forever. And we know that, you know, look, you can always rebuild, et cetera. So it's not necessarily realistic to say that,

but it's certainly not realistic to say, we got nothing, which is what the media has been saying. I mean, unbelievable. I do recall as recently as Sunday morning, they were flipping out saying the president did not have the authority to do this, number one. And then, number two, they said, well, there's nothing there, right? I mean, there's nothing there. Remember what Tulsi said a few months ago? There's nothing there. So why on earth would we be doing this? That was their MO.

And then, as soon as this leaked report came out of the likes of CNN, which incidentally, one of the writers on this thing also wrote the bit about Hunter Biden's laptop, not being anything but Russian misinformation, disinformation? Yeah, one of those reporters who's clearly hooked up with his deep state sources decided to write this little number saying that really, you know, that not a lot of good was done here and they did not destroy the nuclear sites. I have seen myself intelligence suggesting otherwise, as has the president, as has the Secretary of State, as has the Secretary of Defense. So why is it that the media gets so stuck on this? I mean, keep in mind, like the flawed logic, all right, guys? Because hours before this report,

they were saying, well, there was nothing there, right? There was nothing there. Why on earth we'd be bombing? Because there was really nothing there. We didn't need to do this. Let's question his authority to do this, because he doesn't have any intel suggesting there was anything there. And then they get this one and they said, oh, there was a whole lot there and they didn't get it. It's like, guys, make up your mind. I'll tell you this, the market's made up, it's mine. Look at how it's been sore in the last four days. We'll get to that in a second.

But I'm only pointing out the inconsistencies that are really pretty darn spectacular that you're seeing in the media. Well, Pete Hagseth noticed these too, along with the president, along with Marco Rubio. And everyone's noticing this, okay? And he just let him have it. He totally let him have it. He actually let his former colleague at Fox have it, too. We'll get to that.

but first up, Pete Hags at totally shredding the media over their inconsistent reporting, but not only their inconsistent reporting, their refusal to actually do any kind of, you know, maybe nice reporting. Like, hey, think about these men and women that achieved this. Like, why not actually celebrate them a little? I mean, think about World War II days back when we actually had war heroes, et cetera. There's none of that. It's all just immediately, how do we take down Trump?

because we have TDS on steroids. Here is Pete Hagseth, Secretary of Defense. How many stories have been written about how hard it is to, I don't know, fly a plane for 36 hours? Has MSNBC done that story? As Fox? Have we done the story how hard that is? Have we done it two or three times so that American people understand how about how difficult it is to shoot a drone from an F-15 or 16 or F-22 or F-35? Or what it's like to man a Patriot battery?

or how hard it is to refuel mid-air, giving the American people an understanding of how complex and sophisticated this mission really was. There are so many aspects of what our brave men and women did that because of the hatred of this press corps are undermined because people are trying to leak and spin that it wasn't successful. It's irresponsible. And folks in this room are privy to that information because of the proximity here in the Pentagon. It's an important responsibility. And time and time again, classified information is leaked or peddled for political purposes to try to make the president look bad. And what's really happening is you're undermining the success of incredible B-2 pilots

and incredible F-35 pilots and incredible refuelers and incredible air defenders who accomplished their mission set back a nuclear program in ways that other presidents would have dreamed. How about we celebrate that? How about we talk about how special America is, that only we have these capabilities. I think it's too much to ask, unfortunately, for the fake news. So we're used to that. But we also have an opportunity to stand at the podium and read the truth of what's really happening.

And the reality is you want to call it destroyed, you want to call it defeated, you want to call it obliterated, choose your word. This was an historically successful attack. We should celebrate it as Americans. And it gives us a chance to have peace, chance to have a deal, an opportunity to prevent in nuclear Iran, which is something President Trump talked about for 20 years, and no other presidents had the courage to actually do. I mean, he's totally right, and I keep going back to this. Just look at what the market's telling you.

Dow, S&P, and Aztec, all flying. I mean, this is amazing, you guys. This is definitely being touted as a success, certainly by the international financial community that believes we're closer to peace, and yet you get the media just going bonkers with their little stories in CNN, first and then in, you know, in New York Times and the rest of them all picking this up saying, oh, we didn't get anything.

This was, you know, this was a lousy, lousy deal. We didn't get anything. I mean, come on. This was rarely, really interesting. So Pete also directed some of his fury, understandable, justified fury, at one of his former colleagues from Fox, who is the Pentagon reporter, listened to her here as she's asking him questions and he just levels her. He's like, you're one of the worst, Jennifer. One of the very worst. Watch. How many stories have been written about how hard it is to, I don't know, fly a plane for 36 hours? Is MSNC? We're going to do it again. That all the highly enriched uranium was inside the Fordham Mountain or some of it because there were satellite photos that showed more than a dozen trucks there two days in advance. Are you certain none of that highly enriched uranium was moved?

Of course, we're watching every single aspect. But Jennifer, you've been about the worst. the one who misrepresents the most intentionally. What the president says. I'm familiar. I was the first report about the ventilation shafts on Saturday night. And in fact, I was the first to describe the B-2 bombers, the refueling, the entire mission with great accuracy. So I take issue with that. I appreciate you acknowledging that this was the first operation, the most successful mission based on operational security that this department has done since.

you'd be here, and I appreciate that. So we're looking at all aspects of intelligence and making sure we have a sense of what was where. Why not acknowledge the female pilots that also participated in this mission? The early messages that you sent out only congratulated the boys. So when I say something like our boys and bombers, see, this is the kind of thing the press does, right?

Of course, the chairman mentioned a female bomber pilot. That's fantastic. She's fantastic. She's a hero. I want more female bomber pilots. I hope the men and women of our country sign up to do such brave and audacious things. But when you spin it as, because I say our boys and bombers is a common phrase, I'll keep saying things like that, whether they're men or women, very proud of that female pilot, just like I'm very proud of those male pilots. And I don't care if it's a male or a female in that cockpit and the American people don't care. But it's the obsession with race and gender

in this department that's changed priorities. We don't do that anymore. We don't play your little games. Yes, right there. Good for him. Because that is like taking you down a rabbit hole that's a complete waste of time. I mean, for goodness sakes. Anyway, he clearly has no use for her. He knows her personally. I know her as well.

And look, here's what I'm just going to say. And I have more to say on this. As a reporter, you always have to be very, very aware because somebody's trying to spin you someplace somehow. Right. So you have to have your own compass. And I go in with a little bit of paranoia because I just assume somebody has an agenda. And so until I understand all sides, and I've read the documents myself, I'm not going to sit there and have an opinion that is just what somebody else wants me to have,

should we say, in deep state. You've got a lot of lousy, lousy journalists out there. You get a lot of lazy journalists, too. And so here they are spoon-fed stuff, right? Spoon-fed stuff by people with clear agendas. Marco Rubio hit the nail on the head when he said this at NATO. He's like, these people in deep state, they have a particular bias. And by the way, let me be perfectly honest, their bias might actually be towards having us in a bigger controversy.

They don't care, right? Like maybe the bias is, oh, you didn't get it also. We got to do even more, more, more, more, more. And then they play that with the media because they know as long as it's anti-Trump, the media will lap it up, right? And they'll do it all day long singing that chorus. But you've got to understand who is the source of the info and most importantly what that person's bias is. So, I mean, I'm going to show you some of the reports that suggest exactly the antithesis of what CNN is trying to tell you.

But nonetheless, let me go first to Marco, because the Secretary of State really outlined this well in terms of it's so critical to understand what the motivations of these particular people that are glomming onto particular sentences and highlighting that for the mainstream media that has only one desire. And that's the take down Trump. Stuff about the intelligence. This is what a leaker is telling you the intelligence says. That's the game these people play. They read it, and then they go out and characterize it the way they want it characterized, and they're leakers. This is the game they play.

So that's number one. Number two, here's a fact. The conversion facility, which you can't do a nuclear weapon without a conversion facility. We can't even find where it is where it used to be on the map. You can't even find where it used to be, because the whole thing is just blackened out. It's gone. It's wiped out. Then we dropped 12 of the strongest bombs on the planet right down the hole in two places.

Everything underneath that mountain is in bad shape. And I refer you to the statement of the IAEA, Mr. Grossi. You know what he said? He said there was Iran the way it looked, the day before the attack, and what their nuclear program looks like now, two very different things. They are way behind where they were just seven days ago. Now anything in the world can be rebuilt. But now we know where it is, and if they try to rebuild it, we'll have options there as well.

But all this leakers stuff, these leakers are professional stabbers. That's what they are. They go out and they read this stuff and then they tell you what it says against the law, but they characterize it for you in a way that's absolutely false. There's no way Iran comes to the table. Somehow nothing had happened. This was complete and total obliteration. They're in bad shape. They are way behind today compared to where they were just seven days ago because of what the president did. And that's good, right? And clearly the markets are telling you that. So when CNN comes out with this little number, let's go back to it for a moment saying they got Intel suggesting something

entirely differently, entirely different. You can understand the frustration of this administration. You have the IAEA assessment, okay, that says totally different place Iran is in today. Meanwhile, you've got another organization. This would be the International Institute for Science and Security. Let me just show you what they're saying. They're saying overall Israel and U.S. attacks have effectively destroyed Iran's centrifuge enrichment program. It will be a long time before Iran comes anywhere near the capability it once had before the That being said, there are residuals such as stocks of 60, 20, and 3 to 5% enriched uranium in

the centrifuge is manufactured, but not yet installed at Natazzo. These non-destroyed parts pose a threat as they can be used in the future to produce weapon-grade uranium. So that's one side of things. But then they go on to say, and this is really important because it does suggest your mission accomplished that it is possible the Iranians tried to move the enriched uranium kept at the site, dismantling and transporting some of that installed centrifuges, or at least their rotor assemblies may have occurred, but this is a process that's complex and time-consuming and may

have damaged centrifuges. And then this is critical, guys, okay? So here's what we had in the follow-up attack. Israel struck the site on the night of June 22nd, 23rd, reportedly targeting access routes to the facility in order to obstruct access to the Ford O site. But as yet, we are unable to confirm the imagery, what I would just say is that's actually pretty important. So not only were we able to take out what was there, but anything that might have been left over, apparently Israel was able to pretty successfully take that out, at least based on the imagery that we now have. And then this is important, okay? Because they're saying the time Iran would need to build even a non-missile deliverable nuclear weapon has increased significantly. I think this is critical for everybody. And this is a very

balanced report, okay? Very, very balanced. Like, we don't have to say win, win, win, although we did kind of win on this one. But we can be balanced here and still say the administration did a heck of a job, because here's that key sentence, that time Iran would need to build even a non-missile deliverable nuclear weapon has increased significantly. So take that CNN. Okay? Like, that's a big freaking deal. And they just want to spin themselves up and, you know, all the libs are running around saying, well, it didn't do anything. And I'm like, guys, if I recall like 24 hours earlier, you were trying to say that there was no uranium there. Like, we didn't have anything we needed to take out, right? That was the story. Remember Margaret Brennan on CBS News on Sunday morning,

arguing with the Secretary of State trying to say, but why would you do this? Because the Intel report from Tulsi Gabbard back in March said they didn't have anything. Well, now that same crew over at CBS News and the rest of these places, they're spouting a totally different thing because now they're saying, oh, oh, we didn't get it. It's like, guys, you got to actually pick the side. I mean, the only side these people have is the anti-Trump side. And that they're in lies the problem, right? It's all because they hate one person and one person only. Because you, and I mean specifically you, the press, specifically you, the press corps,

because you cheer against Trump so hard, it's like in your DNA and in your blood to cheer against Trump, because you want him not to be successful so bad, you have to cheer against the efficacy of these strikes. You have to hope maybe they weren't a fact. effective. Maybe the way the Trump administration is representative isn't true. So let's take half truths, spun information, leaked information, and then spin it, spin it in every way we can to try to cause doubt and manipulate the public mind over whether or not our brave pilots were successful. How many stories have been written about how hard it is to, I don't know, fly a plane for 36 hours?

has MSNBC done that story as Fox? Have we done the story how hard that is? Have we done it two or three times so that American people understand how about how difficult it is to shoot a drone from an F-15 or 16 or F-22 or F-35? Or what it's like to man a Patriot battery or how hard it is to refuel mid-air

giving the American people an understanding of how complex and sophisticated this mission. They're not going to do those stories because they don't want to celebrate this. And they're in the, lies your problem. You have a media that is so biased against one person that they can't see the forest for the trees. Okay, take the bias away for a moment and actually look at what was accomplished. And you don't have to take my word for it, all right? I'm going to just,

I'm going to go back to the market because the market's doing great. The market clearly believes that this was a success. And you know what? CNN needs to get it, you know what out of it, you know what, because they're just a bunch of bias, silly people that want to put forward their own bizarre sense of reality that tarnishes Trump. And I'll tell you, the more they do it, the more the American people are just sick of it. I mean, they're now trying to sort of kind of apologize. This is unbelievable. So they got caught, right? They're caught with their pants down because, look, every other report is suggesting something entirely different than what their little Lintel is telling them. By the way, those reporters didn't actually read the report. No, they're going

on sources that allegedly have read the report and then are like spinning something to them. It's all spin. They're not reading anything. They're just regurgitating a bunch of points that somebody wants to deliver. And you don't even know what the biases is of those people that want to deliver, whether they're just anti-Trump, whether they want to drag us into something bigger. We don't know, okay? And so it's one, illegal. for them to leak classified information. And two, for these reporters to just take it, right? Like little lap dogs.

Oh, and now we're going to spin this. And then everybody runs wild with it because they just want to hate on Trump. Listen, the markets are telling you something else entirely. Justin, thank you for your generosity. I'm going to get to some of your comments. In the meantime, take a look at that little guy. He's not so little. He's just little, but he's not so little.

Is there media person? He was, like, fired by them and then, I guess, rehired? not to host a show because he clearly can't host a show, although that hasn't stopped CNN from putting other people on that clearly cannot host shows. Anyway, he's got some little title as their media guru, and I want you to hear him try to apologize but not apologize because, you know, he said, oh, no, we didn't really say all that.

We didn't try and, you know, dismantle any of it. We're actually, oh, well, we'll let him say it. There's so much more reporting to do on this topic. This is a very complex matter, even though Trump tried to make it sound simple on Saturday night. It's really important to note what CNN did not report. CNN did not report that this mission was a failure. Far from it. It may have turned out to be a tremendous success.

We just don't know all the facts yet, and neither does the U.S. government. Hmm. That's a good little spin. Okay, so they're trying to reframe things because, you see, they're in more trouble. They're in more trouble, and it's not just that they're in trouble with the administration that doesn't have a whole lot of use for them. They're actually in trouble with their viewers. Because the viewers are sitting there, and they kind of agree with Pete. They're like, yeah, why don't we hear about some of the good stuff?

Ever. Well, you're not going to hear about the good stuff because this particular team of media reporters, one, are lazy, two, have a bias, and three, want to take down Trump. okay it's pretty darn simple but the markets say something else for goodness sakes wow i mean we're looking at four straight days of increases okay the market just keeps flying so that tells you a lot again you can put all the intel reports aside what does the media say you can put that aside you can just look at where the money's going and it's going right into u.s equities this is and and you know what more's coming in so i hope you're in And if you're not, please do me the favor of going to my company.

I'm going to put it here in the chat. 76 research.com. Use code word dollar, okay? Use code word dollar because then it's just a dollar a month for the first two months. And this is my financial research company. We have a lot of great ideas. Actually, we're publishing a new idea for 76 report folks this afternoon. I think that's coming out this afternoon, maybe tomorrow at the latest.

But we have another stock idea we want to tell you about. One of the ones that we had put out recently is up 23%. and it's actually up more than 23% right now because the market's been so on fire. But since we acknowledged it recently, and we expect that it's going to continue going higher. So you want to be part of this, okay? You want to be part of this.

I hope you're part of this. It's a really important time for the economy and for the markets. So again, 76 research, use code word dollar there today. We have more to get to because Latisha James is out of money. Latisha James is like really losing it. I mean, she's got her own personal troubles, right, that she's up against. But the state of New York is up against quite a bit, too.

We're going to get to that. We're going to get to that. But first, quick word on oil, because we've got oil prices up a little bit today. You know, I'll tell you this, oil's been coming down rather significantly. Oil's actually been, let me give you the quote on crude right now. It's at $65.50. So up about nine-tenths of a percent. But I'll tell you, the other day.

Right? Monday, we were watching it together. It was down 8%. I was like, wow. And then the next day, on Tuesday, it was down another 5.5%. We saw it tick up a little bit yesterday, ticking up a little bit 8 tenths of a percent today because, you know, look, there's still some uncertainties here. And I understand and would expect this. I actually was surprised that it came down so much on Monday and Tuesday. But I think that that gives you a certain amount of insight guys into, again, what the markets think. And the markets think this was a success. And look, we need oil, right? We need oil. We need oil. We need oil here. Thank you very much. That's why the drill, drill thing is going over so well. And everybody wants to paint fossil fuels is bad, bad, bad, and that they're the villains and you get that from the

legacy media all the time. But here's the reality. You know what? We've had a heat wave where I am right now in New Hampshire. Thank God for the air conditioner. Right now, that air conditioning, actually, you know, I'm a person who's in good health, et cetera. I don't need to worry about crazy heat, but there are a lot of older folks that do, and if they don't have air conditioning, what happens to them? I mean, that's actually an example of fossil fuels keeping us safe, right? Like, they don't tell you this. Air conditioning keeps you safe.

It prevents heat stroke. You know, it actually also helps us in the winter, does it not? Because we would be struggling with extreme cold if we didn't have fossil fuels. They provide low cost power for our storm warning systems, which are kind of important again, saving lives so that we can have time to evacuate and save our lives. So as much as they want to taint this all as bad in oil and fossil fuels, et cetera, I think you've got to always kind of look at the whole picture here.

It's a big part of what we try and do here on the Trish Regan Show. And just remember that, you know, it's not all bad because we wouldn't have been saved from so many really disastrous climate situations, extreme temperatures, drought, floods, storms, wildfires, things if we didn't have the fossil fuel infrastructure and technology. You can learn more at one of our show sponsor's sites. Oilfax.com. This is brought to you by the NASDAQ listed Prairie operating company, a high-growth, low-cost producer of safe and responsible American energy. Go to oilfax.com. Again, oilfax.com, you'll learn much more about this. It really, though, is just amazing how they try and twist and turn all of this. 76 research.

for more on oil prices and how you play this right now. Meanwhile, wow, I mean, the media just keeps, keeps doubling down on this stuff. I would say, you know, they're getting called out bit by bit, though. In the beginning, in the beginning it was, oh, he doesn't have the right, does he, to actually declare, quote-unquote, war? He didn't declare war. This was an orchestrated strike. Listen to Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House. It is ridiculous for anyone to assert that the commander in chief, using his Article 2 power under the Constitution, should have to consult all the members of Congress or even all the leadership in Congress every time he has to make a decisive, quick action. I mean, that would not be feasible. So the idea that they're saying that what he's

done is somehow inappropriate or unconstitutional is nonsense. None of them ever complained when Barack Obama and Joe Biden used the same authority to drop bombs all over the Middle East, all over the world. You know, it's entirely inconsistent with their their previous actions, and I think we call them on that hypocrisy. You better believe it. We have to call them on the hypocrisy. You get AOC saying you get to impeach the guy because he did this without consulting her. Oh, like we're going to consult AOC and Jasmine Crockett before we, it would kind of ruin the element of surprise, don't you think? I mean, maybe just a little teeny tiny bit. Moreover, this is not actually a war. We are not at war.

This was a strategic strike, and it's happened many, many times. I mean, go all the way back the Reagan years, and we talked about this, H.W. Barack Obama, you name it. This has been used before. So for them to try and call this out like this, it's once again just the hatred of one particular person. I'm going to tell you it's getting old. Trump country is booming. We're building, hiring, and winning in America because energy tax credits put America first, bringing manufacturing jobs home and creating a stronger middle class. Jobs and factories will come roaring back into our country. More production at home will mean stronger competition and lower prices for consumers. And America's comeback depends on American energy. President Trump, keep what works. Don't repeal

energy tax credits. Paid for by Built for America. It's amazing, though. It's just amazing how they all think alike. There are no independent thinkers in the media anymore. I mean, that's why you guys are over here, right? Because you want a little bit more perspective on things. You don't want to be spoon-fed some bit of nonsense by a couple of people in the deep state that have sources at CNN that they've cultivated. Oh, let me just tell you, CNN, you better actually work on your sources because it was that, again, same reporter that put out the nonsense on the Hunter Biden laptop trying to tell us, oh, that whole thing was just nothing but a bunch of misinformation, a bunch of garbage. No, no, no. The FBI was actually investigating that laptop. That laptop was

real. You all threw a giant fit. We remember the 51x books and all those hacks, those political hacks trying to do what they did. And you know who was involved in that too? Our former secretary of state. Mm-hmm. Yeah, Tony Blinken. That was his idea. And he worked with Mike Morrell, the deputy director of the CIA to put all this stuff together. It is mind-blowing, you guys, absolutely mind-blowing. I mean, even, you know it's bad when even Joe Scarbo was trying to say, yeah, but you know, maybe this was actually a good thing. Maybe this actually worked. And Hakeem Jeffries is having a hard time.

Watch. Well, this has been the debate. We talked about it yesterday with another member of Congress. This has been debate going back 30, 40, 50 years. Obviously, Republicans were saying this after Barack Obama attacked Libya. Republicans were saying this with Bill Clinton in the 1990s on Kosovo. But if you're going to have a surprise attack with B-2 bombers, that are going to be going over to Iran striking their nuclear facilities.

Do you think it's a good idea to inform 535 members of Congress before that operation takes off? Well, the key here is what was the imminent nature of the threat that justified immediate military action and surprise military action. Right. If there was no imminent threat. I'm curious if you're concerned. The United Nations, a nuclear agency,

the IAEA had said that Iran had already enriched uranium up to 60%. And as you know, the jump from 60 to 100% is negligible and had enough

enriched uranium for several weapons. Would you consider that to be a considerable enough, a considerable enough threat to strike Iran under those circumstances? Well, certainly it's a challenging situation, but one of the reasons why we need a briefing, Joe, is to have an understanding, was that enriched uranium even damaged, or was it removed by the Iranians prior to the strike? We don't know the answers to that question. It certainly is something that should be talked about, and the American people should be informed about the

reality of whether it was a successful strike or not. In terms of the Iranian nuclear threat, I think we've all been clear that Iran can never be permitted to become nuclear capable. But the Constitution is not. Because again, you see how the story keeps shifting and changing. It's like, which is it? Hakeem. Oh, I get it. It's just, you know, we hate Trump. We're going to go with that narrative. And whatever we can to take him down, we're going to actually, whatever we can come up with, we're going to employ that. Because it keeps shifting and keeps changing. Oh, did he have the authority? Oh, was there anything there? Oh, it turns out there was a lot there, and he didn't get it all. I mean, come on. All right? Like, yeah, think we're that stupid.

I'm sorry. I'm sorry. We're not. You know who might be, though? Latisha James. Yeah, we've got to get to her. But first, another word from one of our great sponsors. Balance of Nature. Do we have Balance of Nature? Where did my little balance of nature then go? Well, we'll come back to Balance of Nature. It's your lucky day. We get to go to Leticia first. How about that. Leticia James, who my goodness, my goodness, is really and truly up a creek without a battle because they got no more money in the state of New York. Yeah, Pam Bondi said, I'm cutting off the spigig. You guys, you got nothing because you don't play ball. You don't play by our rules. You don't actually follow the Constitution in the United States. And because you are at odds with us,

we don't have to give you a dime. Hmm. So Leticia is filing another lawsuit. Oh, she's all proud of this one. Really, really proud. She actually put this one out on Twitter, her sad little Twitter account. You know, I'm just saying, she didn't get a whole lot of pickup on this, but it makes sense, right? Because actually, her constituency doesn't love what she's doing. You go out into the state of New York and there's a lot of support for one Donald Trump. She's only got a following in Manhattan, okay? But here is what she put out. Let me show you right now. The Trump administration, she writes, has used a single sentence buried buried in the federal regulations to cut billions of dollars in critical funding slashing from

education to health care. And so she is suing him because of that, because you can't take away New York's funding. You can't take away Letitia James' funding. Let me tell you, this woman knows how to get her funding, shall we say, right? Those allegations about the mortgage stuff, those are pretty serious. We'll get to those in a second. But here she is out on some little podcast making the rounds in her friendly little territory places saying she's all low over this brand new sound this afternoon, out from Letitia James, the AG of New York. Listen in. People are rising up and standing up against this government, partitioning our government, that in fact this is not how we operate. This is not what we wanted. This is not what we voted for.

Individuals who are demanding due process and individuals who are demanding that this federal government follow the rule of law. And so I'm just, I am just really excited about all of the energy that I am seeing on the ground. And I'm also very proud of the fact that the one institution that's standing up and fighting back and holding this administration accountable are the courts.

Well, the courts are actually standing up. The Supreme Court of the United States of America as well as the Ninth Circuit Court. I mean, Leticia, along the court. with, what, 23 other states, decided to file a lawsuit against the Trump administration. They were joined by Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Arizona, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, and Vermont.

I'm very happy not to see New Hampshire on there. Anyway, they filed this lawsuit, you see, because she's saying California should not have had its National Guard federalized by one Donald Trump. But you see, there is this ability for the President of the United States to actually federalize the National Guard. Title 10, U.S. Code 12406. Federal statute allows for the president to, quote, call into federal service members and units of the National Guard in such numbers as you consider it's necessary to execute the laws of the United States. And guess what? California wasn't executing the laws of the United States.

You know, who else is not executing the laws of the United States of America? That would be New York, okay? So now the feds are coming in. And yes, they're taking away the money. Letitia's now filing another lawsuit. She's like, this is the one, this is the one. I mean, how many? I can't even keep up with them.

None of them make any sense because they've already been refuted. I mean, she's out there. You saw Elon is taking her on Elon Musk and X because she wants all these rules and regulations surrounding what you can put on social media. And she wants to be the final arbiterer of all that and AOC's with her and Kathy Hocles with her. And they're all like, you know what? We don't want misinformation and disinformation. We have to rein in the media.

we're going to put all these rules and regulations and Elon's like, I don't think so. And guess what? He already fought that one in California. And he won. It's already been decided, Letitia, by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. I mean, sure, we can take it all the way up to the Supreme Court if you really want to waste time and money. And guess what the Supreme Court will tell you? Yes, the President of the United States, thanks to Title 10, U.S. Code 12-406, can actually call into service, the National Guard. And you know what? The president can do this. And it's been done before. Just think George Wallace and Alabama, right? You weren't going to integrate the schools? Well, guess what? They sent the feds down. They nationalized the Guard there. And sure enough,

George Wallace had no choice but to comply. And as much as I'm a believer in state rights, you know, there's some things where the state does not have the jurisdiction. And when it comes to things like immigration, no, they don't have the jurisdiction. Justin, thank you so much. And because they don't have that jurisdiction, guess what? She is increasingly up a creek without a paddle. Just in writing that Leticia's so broke when she goes to the pond, I don't understand the reference anyway. But yeah, she's out of money, okay?

Like, New York has no money. I don't think Lettisha has any money. That's why she's looking for $10 million in the state budget, to fight her legal bills. More on that in a second. but Elise Stefano hit the nail on the head when she's like, wait, what are you guys doing? So this is another good one. They're taking $50 million of New Yorkers money, okay?

And they're putting it towards legal costs for migrants, many of whom have committed crimes and the administration is trying to take out of the country. By the way, the Supreme Court ruled on that one the other day too and said, these lower courts cannot get in the way. So Letitia, I know you're so proud of your lower courts, but the lower courts keep getting turned down. Why? Because they have their own crazy TDS. bias and they're forgetting about the Constitution of the United States of America. And guess what?

The feds have the power. I mean, lots of power when it comes to immigration. And, you know, we've talked about this before. You've got the naturalization clause, Article 1, Section 8, clause four, the Congress shall have the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization. And that means anybody who's going to become a citizen, they get to go through the federal government first. Congress establishes those rules. So Letitia, you're a, you're a in a state. You don't get to be your own little island there in Manhattan. No, no, no. You actually have to comply with the laws of the United States of America. And the federal government has the jurisdiction here, and they've got this, you know, they get everything going for them on this one,

whether it's the naturalization clause, whether it's the supremacy clause, whether it is the Commerce Clause, one of my favorite, that you can use for quite a bit, right? Because that's also regarded, you know, you have to have some kind of consistency, as a United States of America. And this is why we were set up in this federalized system. So that, yes, you have limited, limited federal power, but there's some kind of basic things. And she doesn't understand the basic things.

So she's out there preparing for this hostile takeover of New York, which is going to have to happen. Okay? It's going to have to happen, ladies and gentlemen, because she just doesn't actually, Michael Meadows, let me get to your comment. Thank you. Thank you so much. It's just thanking me for staying on top of everything.

We try to do so very much here on the Trish Regan Show. You know what? You guys have been great because we are now, again, in the top 100. I think we went up. This week we're like number 62. Up from 80, not bad, right? Hey, we're getting there. Pretty soon we'll be in the top 10.

Watch. Joe Rogan, watch out. Anyway, this hostile takeover. Trump's new sweeping directive to ICE sends liberal cities quaking. He is saying, okay, you guys don't. want to do the hard work, the dirty work, well, I'm sending ICE in to do it. And if you're not going to cooperate with any of this, then Pam Bond is cutting you off. You're going to have no funding, no money. And now Letitia is flipping out. And she's relying on all these lower courts,

but the lower courts are not going to get anywhere. I'll tell you one other thing that she's going to have to really focus on right about now. I told you she's out of money. She's got a lot of legal bills that she's going to pay. Remember when she said, by the way, she's like politically in a very, very bad spot because we've talked about some of these numbers, some of the poll numbers that are pretty extraordinary. She is in a very delicate spot. You just had that election right in New York City. Well, the rest of New York is not like New York City. They're actually pretty pro-Maga and they're pretty pro-Trump. And so they don't appreciate what Letitia James is doing right now, but she's getting money from somebody to keep moving forward. Well, she's got money from taxpayers. What am I saying?

She's getting money from the taxpayers because, I mean, the GOP doesn't want this happening and they're trying to stop this from happening, but she's got $10 million that she's trying to use for her fancy schmancy lawyer who actually represented none other than Hunter, but in the small world that it is, right? When powerful people cheat to get better loans, she wrote back when Donald Trump was getting charged, what, $500 million? He still is. That hasn't changed. When powerful people cheat to get better loans, it comes at the expense of honest and hardworking people, quote, everyday Americans cannot lie to a bank to get a mortgage to buy a home. And if they did, the government would throw the book at them.

This is coming back to Hunter pretty spectacularly. There simply cannot be different rules for different people. Now Donald Trump is finally facing accountability for his lying, cheating, and staggering fraud. Because no matter how big, rich and powerful you are, ha ha. Or you think you are, no one's above the law. Gosh, I'm so glad you said it, Tishy. I'm really, really glad you said it. because Bill Pulte over at FHA, he's got a little something that he had to refer to the DOJ.

Because again, if you cheat to get a better loan and you try to use federal taxpayer dollars to do it, you're going to have some problems. And right now, judging at the evidence we've seen thus far, I think you're going to have a really hard time explaining all these allegations away. bill. We recommended that the DOJ investigate New York Attorney General Letitia James over alleged mortgage fraud. The AG, Letitia James, has responded. We don't have the video, but here's the quote, this investigation into me is nothing more than retribution. It's baseless. It has to do with the fact that on a power of attorney, I mistakenly indicated that I was a state of Virginia

resident. And prior to that, I indicated to the mortgage. that in fact in bold cap letters that I am not a resident of Virginia and never will be. They just took the power of attorney and they're using that as a basis for enforcement of their investigation. Bill, do you know why she said she was a resident of Virginia on the power of attorney if in fact she wasn't? Well, I know that we are mortgage experts and we only refer things that we think are mortgage fraud and we stand 100% behind the letter. I'll let the letter speak for itself. I do know and I have seen some reports from that subject, from that subject's criminal defense lawyer saying certain things. I'll leave it to the DOJ to correct various things.

But again, when we see mortgage fraud, we are going to report it. When we see mortgage fraud, we are going to prosecute it within the confines of our duties. And we are not going to be intimidated by a subject's criminal defense lawyer. We are not going to be intimidated by a politician or just because you have an ask wire behind your name. We are not going to be intimidated by people. If we see mortgage fraud, we're going to do something about it. And I think that you're going to see us be taking this on in a big way. Mortgage fraud is a big problem. These companies are safe and sound, but where we see it, we are going to do something about it. And that subject's case is no different. Well, what are the ramifications of this now that you've referred this for criminality to the DOJ?

Well, I would refer that to the DOJ. Again, as I say, we spend our days. We are mortgage experts. We are not politicians. I view this as an economic job. Obviously, the president can fire me at any time. So I guess in that way. But look, I look at this as an independent agency. We found the mortgage fraud, whether it be that particular subject or other subjects. And we work actively with the DOJ and different law enforcement. How do you like that? So when you apply for federal loan, it's completely different than, say, what Donald Trump was doing with Deutsche Bank. And the reason why this is actually a criminal referral and she could find herself in a whole lot of hot water, including frankly jail, if this all proves that to be true, is that FHA loans are issued by the federal

government, thereby being backed, of course, by U.S. taxpayers. And so in the case of Deutsche Bank with Donald Trump, that was just risking, say, Deutsche Bank's money. And Deutsche Bank said, I'll take that trade and I'll take it all day long. And guess what? I'd do it again and again and again, because everybody made money. And the idea that somehow Letitia can come in the middle of it all and say, well, I don't think Marlau is worth that. And I think, you know, you lied on your square footage. By the way, it's up to the bank to do the due diligence. In this particular case, that you're talking about using government dollars, our taxpayer dollars.

I mean, this is why, by the way, an aside, and we did this story yesterday, so go back and watch it if you can. It's so bad that you have this socialist coming into New York City right now, because take a look around the world. anytime you put these people like a Letitia James who's quasi-socialist or the guy who just won in or in New York City or an AOC, et cetera, you find that there is a lot of corruption. And they're all out for themselves. They're all out for the government. They want the government to get bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger, right? Because as the government gets bigger,

then they are the ones that have more and more of the power. You know, Justin makes a good point. I'm going to add this to the broadcast. Justin, I'm just seeing what you're saying about and thank you again for the generosity, you would think an attorney general would not mess up a power of attorney thing. Exactly. Right? So she's going to be held to a higher standard for sure because of her legal background. And she should be held to a higher standard. Frankly, I think the woman should be disbarred just because of what she did over Donald Trump. And I expect that the appeals court, I'm getting annoyed with them, really annoyed with them, really annoyed. You know why? Like we've been sitting here waiting. We know exactly what they're going to do. For some reason, they can't quite do it. We

know what they're going to do. They're going to throw the whole thing out of court. And Latisha James, I'm telling you, this woman not only needs to be disbarred, she needs to be voted out and voted out fast. I mean, if she doesn't go to jail first, and you know how I know that the appellate court has no use for the case that she brought? Well, they said it. Remember? It was using... I'm sorry, but what's being described sounds an awful lot like a potential commercial dispute between private actors. Well, to go back to the first question about whether there's other examples of this, There are other examples of this. In the first American case, the Attorney General brought a 6312 case

where the transaction at issue was between a very big bank, Wells Fargo, and a professional appraisal firm. But it wasn't the concern there that the public would ultimately be negatively impact and affected by what those corporate actors were doing? And that concern is here as well, because when you have hidden risks getting injected into the market, that hurts the market. and honest participants in the market.

And the legislature also decided, contrary to what defendants think, that making sure that business in New York stays honest is the way to attract and keep business in New York. So to that point, the executive law 6312, I just want to read a section of it. Well, not exactly, but... Yeah, the only judge that seemed to be standing up for her. I loved how they just slammed the woman who was due to fail, arguing the case for Letitia James.

Like, right off the bat. The judges were like, You don't even have a victim. What are you doing here? May it please the court, Judith Vail for the New York Attorney General's office. All of the defendants repeatedly violated. Ms. Vail, can you identify any previous case which the Attorney General sued under Executive Law, 6312,

to upset a private business transaction that was between equally sophisticated partners with the supposed victim had the ability and legal obligation to discover the allegedly misrepresented matters by conducting its own due diligence, where the supposed wrong doer advised the supposed victim through written disclaimers to conduct its own due diligence

and to draw its own conclusions, where the alleged misrepresentation almost entirely concerned inherently subjective valuations of properties and businesses. Yes. And where the victim never complained about any fraud in the transactional losses from it. Because I've gone through the cases which you've cited,

And all of them always involved the consumer protection aspect. It involved protection of the market. Several responses. And I want to add to his question, and little to no impact on the public marketplace. Yeah. Okay. Little to no impact. You guys remember that.

That was just brilliant, right? Little to no impact on the public marketplace. So now she's being sued. She's being, the indictments coming, the grand jury's issuing subpoenas. They need to get to the bottom of this. I mean, granted, they want to do this, and they want to do this. this right, but I don't think this looks good. One of you guys was making the point, and it was a good one. Justin, I think it was you. In fact, that she should be held to a higher standard because she's an

attorney herself. It's a very, very good point. And also, I think I would question this, like, what was the history of stuff going on? This is the one in Virginia, right, where she's saying, with the power of attorney, that she intended to live there full time. Then you had that brownstone in Brooklyn where it was disputed about how many, like, levels there were, because apparently you got government money if it was four instead of five. So even though she had five levels, she was out there saying it was four. So how many years did she get government money for that? And then there's this one. I mean, I don't know how she explains this one away. She got a mortgage with her dad, this house with her father, where she labeled herself his wife. I mean, I know it's

going back to 1983, but you see, it kind of seems like there's a history of problems, if you would. This is the house that they were buying. And she seems to have no problem. Manipulated. I don't know, the law, when it's going to serve her purposes. These are allegations, I need to be clear to say, but it certainly seems a little fishy, does it not? So I think she's going to be in more and more trouble. Again, the history of problems here is one of the big, big issues is Stephen Miller, policy advisor to the president so accurately pointed out. My response is that Letitia James is one of the most corrupt, shameless individuals ever to hold public office.

is guilty not only of those crimes, but of countless more crimes by using and abusing your public office to try to persecute an innocent man, depriving him of his rights, engaging in a conspiracy to obstruct our election, and to overthrow our democratic processes and procedures. She is guilty of multiple significant serial criminal violations. So this is the document that was in question where she did say that it was her principal residents. I mean, her point is, oh, you know, it was just a mistake, just a clerical thing. I think she's going to have to explain more. I really do. And I think that things are going to start to get very, very difficult for one, Letitia James. But you know what? For the rest of the country,

we're looking pretty good, right? Again, market higher right now. And that's in part because of the deemed success overseas. I mean, the market sees this completely as a success. So CNN can say whatever it wants. MSNBC can say what it wants, but look at the market, because the market is telling you a lot. These are investors that are trying to predict three to six months out. It's why I keep saying you want to be invested right now. You want to be invested for the long term. Oh, we have our June pick. We put it out for Father's Day, and it's up 23 percent since we picked it. It's actually up more right now. I should actually check that number because we've had such a successful week in the markets. But you can look at all of our picks. If you go to 76 research,

use code word dollar today do that for me and this is my company okay i started it with a very dear friend long time colleague who spent decades on wall street managing billions of dollars and so i'm able to with him we're leveraging our expertise to bring it to you and we don't have any conflicts there's no constraints there's no you know if you push this or whatever there's none of that so this is just it really is for you guys i wanted to create something to enable more people to to have this this power to invest, and I know it's scary. It's very scary for a lot of people, but there's so much good happening. Right now, I'm a big believer in the MAGA economic policy, so I've been excited about everything that's happening, and I think there's more and more good things to come. I mean, heck, we got the big,

beautiful bill on the way, right? I mean, I know we've been focused on the Middle East, but there's something happening on the economic front that's going to make a lot of investors very, very happy, too, because the expectation is those tax cuts are going to continue. I sat down with my friend, Couchman from AFP Americans for Prosperity, one of our favorite groups here on the Trish Regan show. And he had some very interesting things to say, including this. It's happening, baby. It's happening. Here to talk about what's going on with that big beautiful bill. We have my friend Kirk Couchman from Americans for Prosperity, budget policy fellow over there at AFP.

Good to see you, Kurt. It's great to see you, Trish. I'm always excited to talk about the one big beautiful bill. The one big beautiful bill. I mean, look, it's important. It's important to the president. He's got some timelines under consideration that he'd like to see through, but we got a lot of other stuff going on.

It's kind of sucking up the news cycle right now. Where are we on this bill? Is it going to happen? It looks like it's going to happen. It's already passed the House. It's in the Senate right now. They've got some procedural stuff they need to wrangle through, but we are giving it all of our energy and all of our support.

We're doing grassroots events across the country. We've had a bunch of leadership team members here at our offices to talk about the legislation. We've been hitting the hill, doing all these meetings across the AFP concerned veterans for America and Libre Brands. And we're just talking to everybody we can about the need to prevent tax hikes. Okay. So all systems go. Who are the holdouts? Well, there are different concerns that different senators have about the legislation. Some want more spending cuts, somewhat less. Some want this or that energy or health care or tax provision to be tweaked. And this is democracy. They have to sort this stuff out. It's a deliberative process.

Okay. That's all fine. Are we serious about like a July 4th prospect? I mean, could this actually be signed, sealed and delivered with a big celebration on the 4th of July? I mean, it's like just days away. Yeah, it's eight days away. So that's a long time in D.C. sometimes and sometimes it's no time. But we've seen all of the Senate committees put out their language. And now they're just working on the final details. So that could come together pretty quickly. The Senate is trying to have a vote this weekend, send it back to the House, so the House can send it to the White House,

in time for the president to sign up by July 4th. That's the hope. What happens if it gets stalled again? I mean, just the what-ifs, right? And I'm also thinking from a market perspective, because I think that the market wants this to happen as well. I mean, I think there's a lot of good stuff that come as a result of the tax cuts, and we want that to get signed in.

And if taxes go up, like, I don't know what to tell you. because that's a whole other variable that I don't think the market has really priced in at this point. But give me the what-ifs if it doesn't happen in eight days. Well, we hope it will. But if it takes a little bit longer, then that's okay. They don't really have to do this until the debt limit binds. And that's going to be sometime in August or September. So the drop dead date is really at that point.

But it would be really nice to have it done in the middle of summer. We don't have to worry about that anymore. And there's a lot more business that needs to be taken up. So it would be good to move on to that. What does it mean for salt? I mean, this is coming up, especially in light of the socialist, getting the Democrat nomination there in NYC. And his chatter, and whether or not he'd ever see this to first base, we'll see even Kathy Hokel, the governor of very, very liberal governor of New York is like, yeah, that's not happening, buddy. But he'd like to take the income tax on high earners up by two percentage points.

So you're already paying 4% right, no matter what in New York City. Now it's going to go to 6%. And here's the deal. I mean, you used to be able to deduct that, right? I used to live in New York City. I mean, I paid a lot of money in both city tax and in state tax. But the good news was I could deduct it from my overall federal tax bill. And then they put in salt and all those sort of high tax places like New York and California.

When they kept saying, oh, this is like a gift to millionaires and billionaires. I'm like, well, not the ones that live in blue states. Thank you very much. They're actually very disadvantaged by this is why you saw this like Exodus to Florida. We may see more of that coming. But what would this mean in terms of salt, what's your anticipation of what they're going to get through if this happens by, say, July 4th? Yeah, so salt is the state and local tax deduction. And it essentially subsidizes high taxes in certain states.

We don't need to name any. We know who they are. And so there is no constituency for this in the Senate. There's no Republicans senators from those states. But there are some House members, and the margin is very narrow in the House. So the House had said, like, let's increase the amount that you can deduct to $40,000. And the Senate said, no, we're just going to keep it at 10. And so now they're in negotiations about what can actually pass.

it's one of those things where there should be no deduction whatsoever for state and local taxes. It's a separate sovereign. It should be treated totally separately. But the politics are going to require something in the middle. I hear you. All right. So, you know, look, they'll hopefully work it all out. One other thing I do want to ask about it, and it's not related to this, big, beautiful bill, but we got news this week that the Social Security trust fund, if you would, is going belly up. eight years earlier than we thought. I mean, that sounds like it could have some pretty devastating or serious consequences. Yeah, the trust funds do to run out in eight years in 23. And what that

means for Social Security beneficiaries is that your monthly checks would be cut by 23%. 23% every single month. A lot of people are living on the edge and cannot afford that. So Congress has to fix it somehow. And they don't really have the tools to do it right now, but we've been helping members of Congress build them so that they'll be able to take on that challenge and a whole bunch of other things facing us. Listen, you guys have a lot on your plate. I mean, in the social security thing, there's a lot of fascinating approaches. I once went down to Chile and covered how Chile had privatized their social security quite

successfully. There was a guy who was very popular with Cato, Jose Pinera, who had actually modeled this all out and people had privatized accounts and it worked actually decently. But, you know, there's a lot of creative ways to come up with it. But I think bottom line is people want to have something that is a safety net. And so when you tell them that safety net's going to be gone or their payments are going to get cut by 23%. That is really, really scary stuff. And it's a big, big deal.

And, you know, I know you guys have a lot on your plate and on your agenda. But that's another fascinating one that's coming up for sure. I would encourage people. Like, I love what you guys do. And you're so grassroots oriented. If viewers are out there and you're as dorky as me about this stuff, although I would say, Kurt, you may give me a run from my money. Oh, I'm definitely dark here.

Yeah, no question. If you guys want to walk out on this or you just want to get your community involved, go to protectprosperity.com. That's what you guys are using to kind of get the word out and see how you can be involved in your local community because we need to care about this stuff. I mean, this is actually, as much as we focus on a lot of the sexier, quote unquote, sexier issues, this is the nuts and bolts of government. And this is what's going to determine, frankly, our success in the future.

Absolutely. Freedom, prosperity, social peace. It's all important stuff. You bet. Hey, Kurt, it's good to see you. Thank you so much for all you do. Protectprosperity.com. We'll catch up very soon.

Sounds good. So very good to have Kurt on the show. But look, it's great that this would be a big. victory that for the president should this all happen. He's hoping for the 4th of July because you know what? It'll be big celebration. You guys are asking when I'm going to sing on the 4th of July. I'll have to play my tunes again, right? Anyway, great to have you guys here. Remember, we are climbing, climb and climbing. It's thanks to you. Hopefully we'll get to a million rather soon. We're coming up on 900,000 here on the channel. It's all thanks to your commitment

and your generosity and you guys getting out the word. We are now again in top 100, climbing up all the way to number 62, okay? So we're still got a ways to go. We can do it. I know we can. We've got a lot of news to talk about. Listen, the mainstream media, they keep getting it wrong. They have TDS on steroids.

We need to cut through all of that bias. That's what I've been trained to do, right? Think about investors. They have to cut through the bias. You can't listen to that spin. You have to know what's up. So it's a big, big part of my sort of devotes. here on this show. And I know you guys are very interested in the truth as well. So very good to have

you guys all here. We're going to continue the conversation live here on the Trish Rican show tomorrow. Make sure you subscribe.