Shownotes Transcript
This episode is brought to you by Rakuten. If you're shopping while working, eating, or even listening to this podcast, then you
Then you know and love the thrill of the hunt. But are you getting the thrill of the best deals? Rakuten shoppers do. They get the brands they love with the most savings and cash back. And you can get it too. Start getting cash back at your favorite stores like Samsung, Expedia, and Sephora. And even stack sales on top of cash back.
It's easy to use and you get your cash back through PayPal or check. The idea is simple. Stores pay Rakuten for sending them shoppers and Rakuten shares the money with you as cash back. Download the free Rakuten app and never miss a deal. Or go to Rakuten.com to start getting the most bang for your buck. That's R-A-K-U-T-E-N.
Your payments are showing. But with Apple Cash, your payments are private by design. There are no public feeds. Send and receive money privately, in messages or with tap to cash. Switch to Apple Cash. Apple Cash services are provided by Green Dot Bank member FDIC.
Saturday, June 21st, 2025. I'm Jared Halpern. President Trump is weighing his options to eliminate Iran's nuclear capabilities. There's no good outcomes here in terms of not taking action against Fordow.
whether it's the more risky options that the Israelis have available to them or the United States option, something has to be done to destroy that capability. And the president wins a court fight over deploying the National Guard to those violent anti-ice protests. You just have these out of control states and cities that don't care about law and order and don't care about following the law in their books. And if you have to send in the National Guard to protect
federal buildings, federal law enforcement officers. That's what needs to be done. This is the Fox News Rundown from Washington.
President Trump is giving himself two weeks to make a decision on whether to order U.S. forces to join Israeli strikes against Iran. For now, White House Press Secretary Caroline Leavitt says the door to diplomacy is not shut. He is a peacemaker in chief. He is the peace through strength president. And so if there's a chance for diplomacy, the president's always going to grab it. But he's not afraid to use strength as well, I will add.
Iran's foreign minister was in Geneva, Switzerland, meeting with European counterparts Friday. While those talks seemed to pave the way for further negotiations, there was no breakthrough. And President Trump has said his conditions for a nuclear deal are simple. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and cannot be allowed to enrich uranium.
The U.S. assessment is that Iran could have several nukes ready to go in a matter of weeks. The press secretary telling reporters Iran has all the ingredients for making a nuclear weapon and just needs a decision from the supreme leader to do so. Should the president order an attack, the belief is it would include unique U.S. capabilities Israel does not have, mainly massive bunker-busting bombs flown by B-2 bombers.
General Jack Keane is a retired four-star general, the chairman of the Institute for the Study of War, and a Fox News senior strategic analyst. We spoke Friday afternoon about the options in front of the president, his decision timeline, and the risk of a broader regional war. Well, first of all, he's had, up to that point, he had very detailed briefings
on what the options are available, what the risks are associated with those options, what is likely the options that are available for Iran if they wanted to retaliate, and then what risk is associated with that. He has all of that information. And I think what's happening here, a couple of things. One is let's take the president at face value, and I think we should.
He wants to try one more time to see if the Ayatollah will voluntarily dismantle his nuclear program. I can tell you unequivocally he will not do that. And the reason is because the nuclear program that they designed and is on the ground in 12 different sites has built into it redundancy and resiliency to be able to absorb an airstrike, survive it, recover and rebuild.
to voluntarily dismantle
His nuclear program, with verification, means it doesn't exist anymore. The Ayatollah and the thugs around him are convinced that they can absorb and survive some of this. That's why they're willing to accept the airstrike. They're not going to that kind of negotiation. So the second thing that's happening is the carrier strike group that's coming from the Pacific. It takes over a week to get to where it's heading, to the Middle East, and it's arriving this weekend.
That may be a factor also in the delay. And what is the carrier strike group being used for? Well, there's already one there. And that, from a Navy perspective, is helping to protect our bases in the region. We've got 40,000 troops in the region spread out over multiple bases. And also to, if Iran attacks us, to retaliate against them.
And I think that also sends a message to Iran in terms of the weight of military capability that's now in the region, which is really quite significant.
So those are factors that are taking place, I think, that may indeed have entered into that decision. Based on what you know about Iran's facilities and based on what you know about American capabilities, would there be any option the president is considering other than ordering B-2s to drop these bunker-busting bombs on Fordow? Yeah, well, there are other options, but...
But none of them give you the likely certainty that the B-2 massive ordnance penetrator does. I mean, I doubt we would do this, but the Israelis obviously have options in the event the president's not going to support them. And that could be a commando raid to take physical control of the facility, put fighters above to make certain that nobody interferes with it. It would take time to blow that facility up.
and then extract those forces. For anybody looking at that, you don't have to be in the military to understand that that's considerably more risky to do something like that. You can take down the electric grid that supports Fordow. They did that in Natanz, and a lot of the centrifuges were destroyed because if they're not spinning, they're going to self-destruct in terms of their capability and the ventilation system as well. You could do some of that
from the air, but it doesn't have the same certainty that it's really going to end the capability that the Mass Subordinates Penetration System does. And even that, look, we've never dropped this thing on a mountain before. That's what I was going to ask. Yeah, that was going to be my next question. Is there any doubt that even that would be effective? I think...
Given we've never done it before, we don't know for certain, right? You'd have to replicate something exactly to know for certain. And we don't know that. But, you know, in terms of should we do it or not and is it worth trying to do it and the expectation is that it will destroy the facility? Of course. I mean, Eisenhower going into Normandy,
when asked after the operation was so successful, he says, where did you place this? He said, well, I actually talked openly with my staff. I thought we came to the conclusion it was about 50-50. So given those things, but the alternative to not doing it is we lose the war to the Germans. The alternative of not trying it
is they develop a nuclear weapon that is intended to destroy Israel and at a minimum put the Arabs into a nuclear arms race with the possibility of the first nuclear exchange. There's no good outcomes here in terms of not taking action against Fordow, whether it's the more risky options that the Israelis have available to them or the United States option. Something has to be done to destroy that capability.
I mean, I guess when you look at the diplomatic talks going on,
Would that be sort of trying to get the Iranians to agree to dismantle that site on their own? They're not going to do it. They just will not do that for the reason I stated. If they dismantle it with verification, then it doesn't exist anymore. Right. If the Israelis keep banging on it and the United States hits it, they are hoping that they'll be able to absorb it and recover and rebuild, and they still will develop a nuclear weapon. They believe...
This is the way these people think. They believe that's a much preferred option than destroy a system they spent over 20 years investing in. This is a major nuclear enterprise. The only thing they spend more money on is oil. Their military costs don't come anywhere near the cost for this nuclear enterprise that they put together. And you hear people out there say, well, they haven't actually made the decision to develop the weapon yet.
Give me a break here. Well, but they have it, right? I mean, that was kind of the next line of questioning was what does the intelligence tell you about the – because we've been hearing about the Iranian nuclear threat since the Axis of Evil speech that President Bush gave in the early 2000s. Oh, God, yeah. I mean, but we've had intelligence people provide testimony and saying that, well, they actually haven't made a decision to build a bomb yet.
And Grassi, you know, who's the head inspector for the IAEA, you know, I was watching him on the screen today. He said, well, they haven't made the decision yet. And he's sort of discounting whether we should do the operation or not we should negotiate. But in the same breath, here's what we know. Within two weeks, they can have nine weapons. So if they haven't made the decision yet, fine. But they can make the decision. Let's say they made a decision today. Two weeks from today, they're going to have nine nuclear weapons. Are we going to know that? I doubt it.
And that means that they become a nuclear state, much like North Korea did. That's the absurdity of these people's arguments. It makes no sense. If that decision has not been made over the last two decades...
Why would it be made now? Well, they made a decision to develop nuclear weapons. There's no doubt they're building nuclear weapons. They just haven't made the decision to put the final ingredients together that would actually give you the weapon. They've got this massive enterprise out there. You know, on some of these sites, there's 25, 30 buildings on a site. And Natanz being the perfect example of that to include underground facilities.
All we're saying here is that they have everything they need to have nine or ten nuclear weapons. Netanyahu says ten, other people say nine, and they're two weeks from that. So what are we talking about? It's irrelevant to discuss that they don't have a nuclear weapon. But have they been – I mean how long do you think they've been two weeks away?
I guess my question is, is that a recent development? When they got to 60% grade, which they've been for close to a year, they've been that close. So it is a relatively newer development that predates the early warnings in the 2000s. Right, right. Yeah, no doubt about that. I mean, they moved from 3.7 and risked uranium...
after the United States pulled out of the nuclear deal and began to gradually, over time, move closer to a nuclear capability, considerably more enriched uranium. They have tons of enriched uranium now, and they have thousands and thousands of advanced centrifuges. They used to buy the advanced centrifuges. Now they manufacture them themselves.
So they become considerably more dangerous in terms of developing their own capability as opposed to depending on other countries to give them the raw materials. And Israel has been systematically destroying all of what I just said. Would taking these types of steps that both Israel is taking and the steps that the U.S. is considering taking or the president at least says he'll make a decision about over the next two weeks –
Would that set the nuclear program back months, years? Would it be eliminated forever? What kind of, I mean, what's the ability for this to be reconstituted? Yeah, sure. That's a great question. So developing the weapons in a couple of weeks' time because they marry the centrifuges and the enriched uranium together and then the rest of the process is pretty complicated even to describe it, you know, for a novice like me.
But I am familiar with it. That gives you the weapon. But being able to deliver that weapon is another matter. And before hostilities broke out here, it was believed to miniaturize that weapon so you can put it on a missile delivery system is pretty sophisticated stuff.
And that would likely take six months at a minimum to a year. Different opinions as to the length of time that I just gave you. But everybody agrees it's about six months. Looking at what has happened now, that has been delayed even further.
So the Israelis are accomplishing that for sure, delaying the development of a delivery system. My concern has always been if they have the capability to develop a nuclear weapon but maybe not be able to deliver it by as sophisticated means as a ballistic missile, they can put it in a truck. They can put it in a shipping container, drive the truck someplace where an adversary –
regime exists or put it in a shipping container and send it to an adversary report port or one of the other things they've threatened doing and this is one of the things that has really got the Israelis concerned is they would give those capabilities to their proxies and that becomes an incredibly dangerous situation not just for Israel but for the Middle East and the world writ large
As you kind of look at all of the options here, you mentioned the 40,000 American service members that are spread across the Middle East. Obviously, we know that Israel and some European cities are within range of these ballistic missiles that Iran has.
How real is the threat of this spiraling into a much broader conflict, a much wider conflict? And what sort of danger is there in the regime in Iran falling when you look at it? I mean, let's be fair that the U.S. track record in that part of the world over the last quarter century. Well, I think these arguments are pretty specious and shallow for this reason. I mean, talking about Iraq and Afghanistan is the issue here.
We made a political choice to change the regime in Iraq and Afghanistan, physical change of regime by invasion, occupy the country, and attempt to rebuild the country. Those three major events took place. That is not on the table for Israel in any shape, form, or fashion, and it's certainly not on the table for the United States.
So from that perspective, those who say, well, this could get into a forever war or a protracted war, the conditions are completely different. What we are doing, and I believe we should send a message to the Ayatollah describing something I'm about to say by the Trump administration and tell him in no uncertain terms that Israel is at war with you. We are not.
But we help them with intelligence and we help them with munitions to fight that war. And we're going to assist them in a one-off limited strike against your nuclear facility to make certain it doesn't exist. And you didn't want to dismantle it yourself. So we're going to help the Israelis dismantle it. But we are not declaring war with your nation. However, if you retaliate against us,
then we are going to react to that in a very consequential manner, which will have huge implications to your survivability as a regime. Our intent is not to take ground, to occupy your country, and to physically remove you. But your country is going to be so politically weakened by what has happened that your very survival as a regime may be in doubt. So I think...
Limited strike is what we're describing here only. And then our retaliation would be an air and maritime retaliation. But because of the weapons we have, the intelligence we have, and it would be very damaging to Iran. So you don't foresee any scenario in which U.S. troops, boots would be on the ground? None. None. Now, to take the Fordow site down...
We could do what the Israelis certainly have prepared to do and likely have rehearsed in terms of some kind of a raid. But I doubt seriously the Israelis would watch us do something like that and not do it themselves. But no, in terms of a fighting force – and listen, what people really don't appreciate is how weak –
the Iranian military is. They hardly have a need. Well, it certainly seems like Israel has total control over the skies at this point. Yeah, exactly. They just, at the beginning of the war, they took down all 70 air defense batteries, all of them gone. Air Force, gone. Their frigates and patrol boats still exist. Their army still exists. It's quite large, but it's poorly trained, poorly equipped, and poorly led. The...
Iranian leadership knows how weak their military... They're strengthening their military's rockets and missiles. And you can see that on display in terms of what they've given to the proxies and also what they're doing against Israel. And the other thing to note here, look at how isolated Iran is. I mean, they...
They supported the organizational development of Hezbollah into 60,000, 70,000 under arms. No terrorist organization, which they wanted them to be, was organized like that and also into a quasi-military organization. They were the ground force fighting and defending Assad after the Assad military turned to be so incompetent.
And the primary reason they organized and funded Hezbollah was not for that, to defend Iran against Israel. And they haven't fired a shot in their defense, nor has Hamas, nor has anybody else except the Houthis flew a couple of drones. Think of that.
These proxies are there to help them as a country, and now they're in a very desperate situation, and none of them are helping him. Where is Russia and China? I was about to ask. Russia and China don't seem to be players at all in this. They don't want any part of it. And what I think, they all see what's happening. Iran is really on their heels here. We're looking at the finish here, and they see it, and they don't want any part of it. They don't want to get caught up in it.
So look at it. I mean, it's quite stunning. Some of this has surprised me. I thought for sure Hezbollah would get back. I asked the Israelis, Israeli generals, I said, do they still have capability after you decapitated? Yeah, General, they have thousands of weapons. Well, why haven't they fired a shot to try to, I mean, Israel's right there on their border. And they said they have lost their will. They see Iran is close to being finished. Isn't that remarkable?
Let me finish with this because you brought up an interesting point there and that is these missile attacks that we've seen in Israel fired from Iran.
Are you – it seems to me – and listen, I'm not in Israel – but that the defense systems, the Iron Dome, the other types of air defense systems are not holding up as well as they have previously in Israel. Is that what you're saying? No. I mean, some of these missiles are getting through. Yeah. To provide clarity, I mean, I think –
Israelis may be, but all of us are witnessing it. The Iron Dome, which was created to defend against short-range rockets and missiles, Hamas, sometimes Hezbollah. Then they have Arrow Sling, which defends against medium-range rockets and short-to-medium-range missiles. Then they have the
the arrow which defends against ballistic missiles. They'll only own one Israeli system to defend against ballistic missiles. When they fired 200 missiles in October, 40 of those got through. They were all being targeted against Air Force in the Desert and the Mossad headquarters, the ones that got through. And there was only one person killed and not a lot of damage. But the Israelis took note. Look it. 40 penetration out of 200 is significant.
What the penetration is now, because this is different. The Iron Dome gives you a false sense of protection because it's protecting against those lowest level of rockets and missiles. It is easier to defeat those. And as we have seen, it's almost 100%.
But ballistic missiles, I mean, this is something that goes up in space. It's traveling at multiple Mach speed. It comes back in to Earth's orbit with incredible precision. You can put a major warhead on it that can take down an entire building, and we've seen that happen. Ten percent are penetrating. They have fired over 400 and somewhere—
In a neighborhood of about 35, and I don't know the last 24-hour results, have gotten through. But every single day, those ballistic missiles are declining. They've gone from 200 on the 14th to 105 the next day to 15th to 68 to 35 to 30. And now the last 24 hours, I believe, in terms of total ballistic missiles, 24-hour periods, is in the single digit. That's all good news for the Israelis.
So it is getting, they are, I think that's two levels. One, Israel, sort of the capabilities and learning more about it, but that shows a diminished, perhaps, arsenal that Iran has. Oh, yeah. So what the Israelis have done, there's 320 ballistic missile launchers, and they're mobile. So that's a hard target, right? They fire from one location, then they're going to move to another. They've taken down more than half of those. They've gone after the ballistic missile stockpiles. In other words, they're in storage places.
And then they've gone after their supply chain as well and their manufacturing capabilities. So they've gone after the whole enterprise of ballistic missiles that has contributed to less ballistic missiles each single day. And good news for that. And the Arrow system is performing more than adequate. It's not a foolproof system almost like Iron Dome because they're going up against something that's very sophisticated.
A 10% penetration would be acceptable to anybody out there fighting a war like we're fighting with modern weapons.
Obviously, it is a scary time, and there is a lot going on in this region. We will see how the shuttle diplomacy works over the next couple of days as well. General Jack Keane, a retired four-star general, the chairman of the Institute for the Study of War, and, of course, Fox News Senior Strategic Analyst. General, appreciate the time. Have a great weekend. Yeah, great talking to you and your audience. Thank you very much.
Feeling a little stalled in the bedroom? Through HIMS, you can get some gas back in the tank with personalized ED treatment options that are accessible without ever stepping foot into a doctor's office. With hundreds of thousands of trusted subscribers, HIMS can help you find the ED option that works for you.
Hymns provides access to a range of doctor-trusted ED treatments like chewable tablets, Viagra and Cialis, and their generics for up to 95% less. No insurance is needed, and one low price covers everything from treatments to ongoing care. Just fill out an intake form on their site, and a medical provider will determine the right treatment option. If prescribed, your medication ships directly to you for free. Start with your free online prescription.
♪♪♪
President Trump can keep control of California's National Guard, a panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, sided with the administration in a lawsuit brought by California Governor Gavin Newsom. Newsom has challenged the legality of the president federalizing the Guard to respond to anti-ice protests in Los Angeles that turned violent.
A lower court judge agreed and said those demonstrations did not warrant the conditions needed for a federal takeover. But a unanimous three-judge panel disagreed, writing conditions were sufficient to ensure federal property, personnel, and laws are being enforced. California has signaled an appeal.
Florida Republican Ashley Moody, meantime, wants to give states more power to deploy law enforcement in immigration raids, introducing a bill that would allow non-federal agencies to act as a force multiplier for federal immigration officers. She spoke about it earlier this week with Fox News Rundown host Dave Anthony.
So our sanctuary cities, even some of these sanctuary states they call themselves, that's where you're seeing a lot of the crime happening. President Trump said, look, I asked the American people to put me in office so I could restore sanity and safety to this country.
And that's what he's doing. And remember, one of the first things Biden did in his handlers was suspend arrests and deportations of criminals committing crimes here in our country illegally. They just said, we're not going to do it. And that included drug traffickers, sex offenders. I could go on and on. In fact, I was the attorney general in Florida. And one of my first actions against the Biden administration was to stop this unprecedented move of refusing to do their job illegally.
I think President Trump, when you say doubling down, I think he's saying, look, we didn't say this was going to be easy. You have these inept, incompetent, radical leaders in these blue states and cities trying to protect these criminals. It's obvious. And he's going to stand up for the American people. And the American people can watch what is happening on their screens and judge whether or not what these leaders like most.
Newsom and Bass are saying is correct. They are all saying these are peaceful protests. These are peaceful protests. That could not be farther from the truth. And until you have somebody that is strong enough to step in and say enough is enough for the law-abiding good Americans that want their states and their cities back –
We have to do something, and I'm going to deliver on what I promised. And, you know, I think you're going to see a lot of Congress people, myself included, say, you know, the red states like Florida and other responsible states, fiscally responsible as well as states of law and order, are no longer going to subsidize. And that's what's happening. You have citizens in red states that are subsidizing with their taxpayer money this tax.
radical, insane, inept, irresponsible, chaotic leadership in these blue states. You know, they get federal housing money. They get all of these self-proclaimed sanctuary states, sanctuary cities. They get all kinds of federal assistance, even the scam money through some of our health care programs going to illegal immigrants. And I think you're going to see a lot of the red states say enough is enough. On the National Guard and the deployment controversy,
Who do you think will win this fight? Well, I really don't think it's a controversy here, right? Like the National Guard has been deployed throughout history to make sure that federal agents could do their jobs without facing danger or attacks. And what we're seeing now is just incredible that you have...
and almost encouraged in some of these places, folks attacking or putting out information on some of these federal law enforcement officers. And certainly when you see what's been unfolding in California, and compare that to Florida, by the way, we had protests last weekend that were scheduled and organized, zero property damage, zero roadblocks. You can't
You can maintain law and order and comply with the law and also permit free speech at the same time. You just have these out-of-control states and cities that don't care about law and order and don't care about following the law in their books. And if you have to send in the National Guard to protect federal buildings, federal law enforcement officers, that's what needs to be done. And I'm glad we're protecting law enforcement as the wife of a law enforcement officer is.
That has to be done. Yeah. The judge had ruled that the president exceeded his authority with this National Guard and and ordered that they be returned to the control of Governor Gavin Newsom. There's a hearing on this in an appeals court on Tuesday. So you think the law is on the president's side here? I think you're going to see a lot of of laws. Now, remember what we're facing right now.
Anywhere between 11 million and 20 million people were pushed into our country. Some of them, some of the time the Biden administration would mandate quotas of people released into our country, barely vetted people as we're seeing some of the consequences that play out. This is now the largest mass deportation effort in history. And most of those are here illegally and many are committing crimes. We've never had this where we have had to respond to such violence.
intentional destruction of our borders and unleashing of destruction and chaos in our cities. And so you're going to have to use laws that are on the books that may not have been tested in court because we're facing this unprecedented wave of crime and we have the necessary reaction from the Trump administration. So in order to deal with this, you're going to see these laws
tested in these cases, I don't think it's any surprise to anyone that in the lower courts, you're seeing some of the judges rule against the Trump administration, but you're also seeing the Trump administration appeal. And in many instances, those rulings have been overturned. So, you know, I think that this is what our court system is meant to do, ensure that the laws are being applied faithfully and in accordance with our constitution.
Senator, you're pushing new legislation that you're backing in the Senate that would also involve immigration enforcement, but you want local law enforcement to be allowed to also be a tool used in this. How would your bill work? Yes.
Yes, so one of the bills that I've pushed and filed is the Ripple Act, which would allow state and locals to be compensated for so much of the work that they're expected to do to help President Trump and his agenda and getting out those that are here legally committing crimes and cooperating with law enforcement, federal law enforcement. This is another way that Florida stands out from other states. We have every single county in our state
has signed an agreement with the federal government to cooperate under what we call 287G agreements. And it's absolutely going to be necessary if we're going to undertake such a large effort. And again, the amount of people that were let in, unvetted into our country, it's
exceeds the population of 42 of our states. We've got to make sure that other states and cities like Florida's are compensated when they do that because in terms of manpower, the only way to make this a reality is to have them be a part of this process while we're ramping up the federal numbers.
Another piece of legislation you have is Stop Gap, Stop Government Abandonment and Placement Scandals Act. This involves those who are minors in the country, right?
Yeah, so one of the consequences of the Biden approach to immigration was they basically became part of the child trafficking organizations as children were smuggled across the border. Turns out they lost tens of thousands of children. Some were sent to strip clubs. Some were sent to abandoned lots. Many were found in trafficking. And so what
As we clean up this mess and determine what happened and how this happened, we have to put in measures to make sure it doesn't happen again. That is common sense.
We cannot have our government facilitating children being smuggled in to our country illegally and placed in dangerous situations. And so we need the federal government to cooperate with the agencies that deal with child welfare when they are placing children. So this would require the federal government to not only track them, but make sure they're working with child welfare agencies as these children are taken care.
when they come across the border. Senator, I want to switch to the Trump big, beautiful budget bill. The House already passed it. It funds his agenda from border security and other issues to extending the 2017 tax cuts. Your majority leader, Senator John Thune, he said this on Fox News Sunday. If we don't
If we don't act at the end of the year, there will be a $2.6 trillion tax increase on families making less than $400,000 a year and a $600 billion tax increase on small businesses. Now, all Republicans agree on extending those tax cuts and avoiding that, but there is disagreement within your party, Senator Moody, on several things. There are some in the Senate on the right who want...
bigger spending cuts because the bill is going to add to the U.S. deficit and debt. Where are you on this? I wouldn't say there's disagreement. I would think most everyone believes that we've got to take advantage of this opportunity to deliver the best that we can on spending cuts because over the Biden administration, we saw spending increase significantly.
so drastically that if we don't do something now, we are headed for real economic crisis in this country. I think most everyone is on the same page, at least those that I've spoken to, and that is we want to deliver on Trump's agenda. And included in that is those. We don't want tax increases on American families. And his agenda will usher in
an economic boon if we can deliver for this. But we have to make sure that we're being wise in our spending. And President Trump has said he wants this big, beautiful bill to be fiscally responsible as well. And we're trying to help him deliver on that. And I think that's why you're seeing...
So many people rolling up their sleeves, putting in a lot of time to making sure that this is the best big, beautiful bill that we can pass. We want to deliver for the American people just like President Trump. Now, there are tax provisions in this bill. No taxes on tips or overtime. I've seen some senators who want to scale some of that back.
Also tax provision where state and local tax reduction that people can deduct off their taxes, $10,000 in the current law. Republicans in the House passed it for $40,000. Are you comfortable with those things additionally, or do you think that needs to be changed? I think that those senators that I have spoken to want to deliver on these taxes,
promises that President Trump made to the American people. And, you know, we're all on board. And part of working for American families, again, means we're not making them subsidize Gavin Newsom's horrible, destructive, irresponsible leadership in California. And, you know, aside from the Democrats, which I can't figure out
where they want to lead this country. It seems to me they're more on the side of reckless spending and criminals than they are on the hardworking men and women of America. But all of those provisions are meant to make this government work for the people again. And certainly the Senate Republicans are behind that.
mission, and that's why we're working so hard to deliver. I know you want to get this done by the 4th of July. Senator Ashley Moody, Republican from Florida, great to have you on the show. Thank you so much.
Great to be with you. If you used Babbel, you would. Babbel's conversation-based techniques teaches you useful words and phrases to get you speaking quickly about the things you actually talk about in the real world. With lessons handcrafted by over 200 language experts and voiced by real native speakers, Babbel is like having a private tutor in your pocket.
Start speaking with Babbel today. Get up to 55% off your Babbel subscription right now at babbel.com slash Spotify. Spelled B-A-B-B-E-L dot com slash Spotify. Rules and restrictions may apply.
Tomorrow on the Fox News Rundown from Washington. Summer is here and that means the Senate is racing to meet President Trump's July 4th deadline to deliver the one big beautiful bill. Fox News Senior Congressional Correspondent Chad Pergram joins Ryan Schmelz to discuss how realistic that goal is. And New York Republican Mike Lawler is warning senators not to touch the salt, a tax provision critical to winning over support from blue state Republicans.
Until then, thanks for listening to the Fox News Rundown from Washington.
It is time to take the quiz. It's five questions in less than five minutes. We ask people on the streets of New York City to play along. Let's see how you do. Take the quiz every day at the quiz. Fox. Then come back here to see how you did. Thank you for taking the quiz.