Deep Dive
Shownotes Transcript
I'm Shannon Breen, the Trump administration heading into its second 100 days, ramping up the pressure on congressional Republicans to get that one big, beautiful bill to the president's desk. One big, beautiful bill.
Bill, we love that bill. I won't like it if it doesn't pass. Neither will you. House Republicans attempting to deliver on President Trump's sweeping domestic policy agenda while scrambling to find common ground. We'll hear exclusively from House Budget Committee Chair Jody Arrington and Jason Smith, chair of the House Ways and Means Committee. Then...
So it wasn't let go. He is being made ambassador to the United Nations. I think he can make a good argument that it's a promotion. Security shuffle. Mike Waltz out as national security advisor, while Marco Rubio takes on another title. And Democrats gear up to grill Waltz for a new job that requires Senate approval. We'll discuss with Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. And...
Democrats divided over how to best take on President Trump as 2028 hopefuls embrace different strategies. DNC Chair Ken Martin joins us live in his first Sunday show since being elected to lead the party. Plus, Kamala Harris returns to the political spotlight. Everybody's asking me, what you been thinking about these days? All right now on Fox News Sunday.
Hello from Fox News in Washington. We begin with a quick look at some of your headlines. The most exciting two minutes in sports now officially in the books for 2025. Sovereignty bested a field of 18 competitors to win the 151st Kentucky Derby, edging out the heavily favored journalism and overcoming the wet, soggy track conditions at Churchill Downs. Sovereignty's trainer Bill Mott saying the win is, quote, like a dream.
And it is the end of an era as legendary investor Warren Buffett announces he will step down as CEO of Berkshire Hathaway after a nearly six-decade run in which the 94-year-old Oracle of Omaha transformed the company from a failing textile manufacturer into the trillion-dollar empire it is today.
And Israeli officials say several people were hurt after a ballistic missile fired by Houthi rebels in Yemen struck near the main terminal of Israel's Ben Gurion airports after defense systems failed to intercept the incoming missile. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is vowing more attacks in response.
And the clock is ticking here in Washington as GOP lawmakers try to rally their party around that big, beautiful bill to find the president's legislative agenda with a Memorial Day deadline. In a moment, you're going to get the very latest from House Budget Chair Jody Arrington and Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith. But first, let's turn to Matt Finn with a look at the president's latest moves on trade. Hello, Matt.
Hi, Shannon. The president marked 100 days in office this week. It was boosted by a higher than expected jobs report. And in a new interview, the president says he's not worried about recession.
We're in the golden age. You watch. President Trump promising the golden age, but consistently questioned about his tariffs. Are you comfortable with the country potentially dipping into a recession for a period of time if you are able to achieve your long-term goals? Well, you know, you say some people on Wall Street say, well, I have to tell you something else. Some people on Wall Street say...
that we're going to have the greatest economy in history. President Trump says the tariffs are resetting how America is treated on trade. Critics say everyday Americans are paying the cost. Our farmers who import fertilizer from Canada, they're getting hammered.
Our manufacturers that have to get steel and aluminum, they're getting hammered. President Trump's big, beautiful spending bill sits in limbo with a deadline of Memorial Day. I don't think we're on the same page even inside the House, much less between the House and the Senate. Meantime, Trump's proposed 2026 $1.7 trillion spending plan promises more than $160 billion in cuts to non-defense spending.
increases to our border, and decreases to foreign aid. But some Republicans, like Senators Mitch McConnell and Susan Collins and Roger Wicker, say the president is not allocating enough to the Pentagon to modernize our U.S. defense. It comes as the U.S. and Ukraine came to an agreement this week on the long-awaited minerals deal. This is win-win for both sides.
And it's very innovative. Ukrainian President Zelensky now says he and President Trump agree that a 30-day ceasefire is the best approach for a peace deal. Not Putin's suggested three-day ceasefire next week.
And President Trump's National Security Advisor Mike Waltz was expected to work his last day Friday in that role. Secretary of State Marco Rubio now expected to temporarily fill the spot for up to six months. And White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller's name is also being floated for that role.
Shannon. All right, Matt Finn covering the president in Florida. Matt, thank you very much. Joining me now, Texas Republican Congressman Jody Arrington, chair of the House Budget Committee. Good to have you on Fox News Sunday this morning, sir.
Great to be with you, Shannon. God bless and happy Sunday. Okay, let's talk about this. You and I have had conversations in which you are very concerned about out-of-control spending and the growing debt. The combination of that, you said just days ago, is the greatest threat to our country and our children's future. No responsible leader can witness this precipitous decline and defend the status quo.
Yet is what critics say you're doing, this reconciliation package extending the tax cuts from 2017, cuts to other places that are very important. So looking at that, are you convinced, though, that the president, the speaker, the other House chairs, including our next guest, Jason Smith, share that level of concern that you do about the out-of-control spending?
Well, Shannon, I think every Republican says that they share that concern. The question is, will we have the political courage to execute on that and right size the bloated bureaucracy, as was reflected in the president's budget and deal with this war time level debt?
$2 trillion in annual deficit spending that's going to double and interest payments that exceed not only national defense, but Medicare payments. The wheels are coming off the wagon. We can't get to the president's rocket ship economy. We cannot usher in the golden age. In fact, we risk a sovereign debt crisis if we don't deal with the unsustainable deficits and national debt. So, uh,
This is a pivotal moment for our country. It's a generational opportunity to get our fiscal house in order. And that has to be a part of. And in fact, the president has called for us to put our country on a path to balance. That is part of the full America first agenda. And it's reflected in the House budget resolution.
Okay, so let's talk about this reconciliation package because there are a number of skeptics who think it only will explode debt and deficit. Are you convinced that what's been put together, you can tell the American people, is not going to contribute to the concerns that you have? Are there any daylights? Is there any difference between what you and Chairman Smith have come up with? Because there's still a lot of very difficult decisions to be made about this package, the details. Yeah, I'm convinced.
that if we take the cost of tax cuts and defense and border spending and we achieve and exceed our budget targets for offsetting those through revenue to the Treasury as a result of the pro-growth policies,
in the budget reconciliation bill and the deficit spending reduction through entitlement reform mainly. That's health care, welfare, and other programs. If we do that, Shannon, we will bend the curve on debt to GDP and deficit to GDP.
The Secretary of Treasury says we have to stabilize the debt and give confidence to the bond markets. And we have to go from 7 percent deficit GDP to 3.5 percent. So if we follow the framework that we laid out in the budget resolution, then we will restore fiscal health. It won't do it won't get us out of the debt hole overnight, but it is a good first step and a down payment for our kids to
to actually be on good fiscal footing, a sustainable path, and enjoy the same opportunities and freedoms that we have. So the House is going to drive it.
it. If we achieve that framework and those budget targets, we will improve the fiscal health of our country indeed. So one of the things you talk and I hear you saying if a lot sounding as if you maybe are not convinced that this is all yet locked into stone, the place that you would like it to be to see that the math math, as we say, when it comes to figuring these things out on Capitol Hill. But I want to ask you about Medicaid specifically, because the House and Energy and Commerce Committee
has been tasked with cutting $880 billion. Now, they oversee Medicaid, so that's where Democrats think the slashing is going to come. Here is the top Democrat in the House, Hakeem Jeffries. They want to end Medicaid as we know it. They're going to hurt children, hurt families, hurt seniors, hurt people with disabilities, close hospitals.
shut down nursing homes, and people will die. Okay, almost no one thinks that you can slash $880 billion just through waste, fraud, and abuse. So what is your response to the Democrats' warning about the fact that Medicaid may come into play here? Well, you asked me about the if, you know, the if conditional language I'm using. And the reason I'm doing that is because
The question is, will Republicans surrender the opportunity to actually bend the curve on entitlement spending and enact entitlement reforms? Because there is a tremendous amount of waste and fraud. In fact, the government accountability office says upwards of $500 billion over the 10-year budget window just in Medicaid. You've got hundreds of billions siphoned out.
for other purposes than serving the Medicaid beneficiary. There is no work requirement for able-bodied adults like there is in every other means-tested welfare program. And, in fact, Medicaid, because we give a higher federal match to able-bodied adult population, this is the Obamacare expansion population, we actually hurt access to the pregnant, blind, disabled, the most vulnerable, the poorest population.
and sickest among our fellow Americans as a result of the structure of the program. We can save over $1.5 trillion without touching a dime of the benefit funding. So I just, the question is, will we be susceptible to the fear mongering and the false rhetoric that you just heard from the Democrat minority leader in the House?
This is the same tired play they run. And unfortunately, Republicans haven't collectively leaned in and just done the right thing. We will be rewarded because we're doing this for the sustainability of these programs for the most vulnerable, as well as being fiduciaries for tax dollars.
And this moment will not happen in my political lifetime again. So we have to seize it, do the right thing, and go educate and sell what we did to the American people. And the benefits that accrue, I think, will come to fruition by the midterms, and it will go well for our party.
Yeah. Yeah. They're going to want to see short term and long term payoff. And I know the devil's in the details. And like you said, getting out there and selling it once you have this lockdown is another part of the equation. Chairman, we appreciate your time. Thanks for coming on.
Thank you, Shannon. All right. Joining me now, Congressman Jason Smith. He's the chair of the House Wains and Means Committee. They got to figure out all of these tax issues. So, Chairman, great to have you with us on Fox News Sunday. Let me start with the clip we heard from Congressman Chip Roy just a couple of minutes ago. And Matt Finn's reporting, he says that the House is not even the GOP within the House is not even on the same page. Do you think you've gotten there? Because it sounds like Chairman Arrington still thinks there are some ifs built in.
Well, you know, just the dynamics of the House, Shannon, there are some bumps in the road. We have one of the smallest majorities in the history of America. But throughout this process, we've been preparing for this moment to deliver tax cuts for working families, small business owners and farmers. And failure is simply not an option. Will it be bumpy, Shannon? It absolutely is. This is the House of Representatives. But will we get the job done? We absolutely
Absolutely will. Failure is not an option. If we don't, Shannon, every single American will face on average a 22 percent tax increase.
This is the last thing that they need after the last four years of the Biden administration, where they had an inflation tax of almost 21 percent that that resulted in the cost to put food on their table, closing their backs and gasoline on their cars to only go up. So Chairman Arrington mentioned this idea of a work requirement for able bodied adults with Medicaid benefits.
The Kaiser Family Foundation Health News reported that this week, if you do that at the federal level, about 5 million adults could lose Medicaid coverage next year. They say, here's the thing, most adults with Medicaid who can work are already working or have some reason that they can't, such as they're full-time caregivers. Now, you were over at the White House meeting with the president trying to hammer out these details this week. Is he open to a work requirement? Have you talked about that? Would there be exceptions for caregivers? What's the status of that proposal?
So the president has been very clear. He does not want to cut benefits for for individuals on Medicaid, Medicare. He wants to create efficiencies and reforms. He shows an openness to work requirements. He wants to make sure illegals are not receiving public assistance through these benefits.
But Shannon, there's also numerous other things that we can look at. We can we can eliminate bad tax policy and replace it with tax relief for working families. For example, the green new tax scam that the Biden administration move forward. There's hundreds of billions of dollars to eliminate there that could pay for no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, tax relief for seniors. And we're going to deliver on that.
OK, so when we talk about all of these taxes, how they get offset, how they get paid. And I know that Chairman Arrington talked about the revenue that comes in, you hope will offset some of these other costs. Your specialty, again, is going to be trying to make all these tax cuts work. Here is what the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, says about how you are going to get that done. This is his his estimation.
They're aiding and abetting Donald Trump as he cuts taxes for billionaires. They're aiding and abetting Donald Trump as he wants to obliterate Medicaid. They're aiding and abetting Donald Trump as he wants to add $52 trillion to the national debt.
They want to help the richest of the rich while telling the working people to get lost. He says the richest of the rich. Now, our recent polling on when we ask people what bothers you most when you pay taxes, their number one answer is that the rich are not paying enough. So the messaging on that from Democrats is very effective. What's your response? This is the typical talking points of the Democrat Party. What I will tell you right now, if we do not deliver on this tax bill,
Americans who make less than $400,000, $2 trillion worth of tax increases. This is devastating. The child tax credit, which a lot of working families, in fact, 40 million working families depend on, will be slashed in half. It would go from $2,000 to $1,000. The guaranteed deduction, which 91% of Americans use to file their taxes, gets slashed in half.
Every individual tax rate would go up. These are real taxes on real Americans. Unfortunately, the Democrat Party just uses the same talking points. We're going to deliver tax relief for working families, small business owners and farmers. That is our priority. You mentioned people making four hundred thousand or less. There's been there have been whispers here in Washington about allowing some of the tax cuts to expire on upper brackets. Is that a possibility?
Our focus is to provide tax relief for all Americans. But our priority, Shannon, our priority is to deliver for working families, small businesses and farmers. As we go through this process, we have to have a fair balance and we have to thread a needle. But our priority as Republican Party is the working families.
working families, small businesses and farmers, and that's what this tax bill will provide for. Okay, it doesn't sound like you're ruling out then that upper earners may face higher taxes moving forward.
You know, there's no problem to eliminate loopholes that the wealthy have benefited from to make sure that working class Americans aren't paying taxes on tips. Seniors are having reduced tax taxes on their Social Security and we're not paying taxes in overtime. Those are our priorities. And that's what this tax bill is going to deliver. All right, Chairman Smith, we got to go. But does this get done by Memorial Day, the first portion of this?
I've said all along my goal is, is for the president to sign this one big, beautiful bill on July 4th. OK, he is watching and waiting for the action there in the House, as we are as well. Chairman, thank you for your time. Thank you, Shannon. OK, as the House pushes forward with the president's legislative agenda, the White House is catching heat from both sides of the aisle for the president's new budget proposal. Our Sunday panel breaks down how it's ruffling feathers in Washington next.
Today, teens can download any app from app stores without supervision. That's why Instagram supports federal legislation requiring app store parental approval and age verification for teens under 16. Learn more at Instagram.com slash parental approval. The spirit of our age is one of boldness, vigor, ambition, and adventure. And it's exciting to be you and young. Oh, I'd pay you a lot of money to have your age. You have a great future.
So President Trump laying out a vision of what's to come for the graduates of the University of Alabama, a future that may include the impact of his brand new budget proposal, one that's prompting criticism from both sides of the aisle. Let's talk about it with our Sunday group, The Wall Street Journal reporter, Olivia Beavers. Molly Hemingway, the Federalist editor in chief.
Fox News contributor and Forbes contributing writer Richard Fowler and Hans Nichols, Axios congressional reporter and author of the Axios Hill Leaders newsletter. Great to have all of you with us on this Sunday. OK, so let's start here. There was swift response on a number of fronts, but a number of folks on the right who are worried about defense spending in this this package moving forward. Senator Mitch McConnell says this. It is peculiar how much time the president's advisers spend talking about restoring peace through strength.
given how apparently unwilling they've been to invest accordingly in the national defense. Hans? Mitch McConnell wants more defense spending. The president thinks he's already plussing it up. He's going to a trillion dollars. This is the beginning of a negotiation. This is the part in a budget process that congressional reporters like Olivia and myself always say budgets don't matter. They're just opening bids. Directionally, though, this one is exceedingly important because it shows the scope and size of the cuts the president wants to make
and where he wants to take the country. Don't get too caught up in the numbers. Again, just opening bids. But directionally, this tells us something. Well, and often we see these budgets go over to the Hill and get shot down. In the Senate, I think about like 99 to nothing, 97 to nothing. I mean, people have to know this is, as you said, the opening bid. Lawmakers are going to want to make their own decisions about this.
House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said this thing is dead on arrival. He said this reckless budget scheme will devastate our children, family, seniors and law enforcement while causing irreversible harm to our national security. Molly. Well, the problems that we have in our country with just out of control spending, massive debt, massive deficit is a multi-party problem. And what we're going to see here is whether Republicans have curb
courage to actually tackle some of these major problems. What we're doing right now is completely unsustainable. We have to cut some programs. We have to be responsible. And people keep thinking in terms of short term, like, will I win my next election if I do the responsible thing? And there's so much pressure in D.C. to not do the responsible thing. But I think the Republicans really have to show that they are willing to be serious adults in the room. And it would be good if Democrats did that as well, too.
Well, and there's a lot of bickering over how all of this is impacting in the short term. The priorities, as you say, the tariffs, Liberation Day, all of that. A lot of economic news this week. And Politico in the playbook Friday said this. What slowed down? Wages rose 0.2 percent and 3.8 percent year over year, while outpacing inflation. They talk about the solid jobs report overall. Somewhat defied economists predictions that Trump's trade and immigration policies would crimp the labor market.
Richard, they're celebrating two months of now far exceeding the job predictions. Well, thanks for having me, Shannon. Number one, I think that was the good news for the president. He's got some good job numbers this week. But that comes at the sort of avalanche of bad news for the president. This quarter, we saw negative GDP growth on top of seeing negative GDP growth. But we also saw in this jobs report was half, half overworked.
of many of the layoffs that happened across this country are a result of the president, right, and Doge. But his supporters are celebrating that. Sure. They're like, okay, government job's gone. They count that as a net plus. Some of his supporters are celebrating that. I think the folks in Arkansas who got their FEMA requests denied aren't celebrating that. Or maybe the school, the parents in Wisconsin, right, Milwaukee, who thought they could call
call the lead abatement team here in our nation's capital who deal with lead and help states and cities overcome lead. When they called, nobody answered because those folks were laid off. Once again, I think we can make cuts. Many of the things that the presidents are talking about. Can we reform our trade policy? Absolutely. Can we make this government run more efficiently? We sure can. Is this the way to do it?
I think there's a lot of Americans today questioning, is this the way to do it? Well, and one of them is Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. He says the president has to admit failure, reverse course, fire his entire economic team, or else there's more chaos and total incompetence. And, Olivia, that is the word the Democrats are really latching onto is chaos.
Yes. And I think that their messaging is something that they are just starting to figure out as they're kind of coming out of this wilderness from the election. But I do think that they are smart to hit on economic issues because that is something that the voters overwhelmingly did to send President Trump to the White House.
I do think right now the snapshots that we're getting are a little bit premature. We're all looking for Easter eggs. But you're seeing some sort of reactions to before Liberation Day tariffs. Maybe that's impacting the job numbers. Next quarter is where I'm really interesting to see, because then we'll have a very good, clear understanding of where we actually are in terms of the economic impact of the president's tariffs. And a lot of pressure on the president and his team to announce deals that they say will come to fruition during this pause on tariffs.
In the meantime, we had this back and forth with Mike Walsh this week out as national security advisor, but now up for nomination to be U.N. ambassador. Here is the thing that Hans reported over at Axios. He said this instead of a quiet exit, he and his still active use of signal will face Senate Democrats who are craving a chance to show how much they hate Trump. He's going to have to walk through confirmation. This certainly will be front and center.
Look, this is an opportunity for Democrats to litigate Signalgate in front of the Klieg lights. It's going to be a blockbuster confirmation hearing if they go through with it. I don't have any reporting that doesn't suggest they will, but you always have to couch a little bit when you're predicting the future, saying something's going to happen. The larger issue for the president and the United Nations ambassadors is that you go back to the reporting when they pulled Elise Stefanik. You know what the line was from administration officials then? The U.N. doesn't really matter anymore.
Like, the U.N. is not important. This isn't really a serious job. And now this is the prize supposedly they're giving to Mike Walz. Suspect he still wants it. And I suspect we're going to have a contentious confirmation hearing. And Olivia and I will be there. Yes, you will. Molly, what do you make of this? Because it's going to reopen something that had quieted down a bit for the administration. I think it really shows the difference between this term and the previous term. In the previous term, it really was chaotic. The media and other Democrats would push chaos.
You know, they would try to oust different people and it would really cause a lot of problems here. Signalgate, which was where Mike Waltz accidentally put a reporter onto a sensitive chat. A lot of the media tried to use it as a way to oust Pete Hegseth, who they don't like for his efforts to reform the military or Tulsi Gabbard, who they don't like for her efforts to reform our corrupt intelligence services. And instead, the only person is Mike Waltz is moving to the U.N., not a big deal. And it shows a much greater maturity in Trump's handling.
Well, and another job added to Secretary of State Marco Rubio's resume, at least for the short term. OK, panel, do not go far. Much more to discuss coming up, including this. President Trump's executive order slashing funding for public broadcasters, calling them out as biased. But will that survive legal challenges? Plus, the U.S. and Ukraine finally work out that minerals deal. We're going to ask Democratic Congressman Jim Himes, the ranking member of House Intel, how that might impact the negotiations to end the Russia-Ukraine war.
And then we bring in DNC Chair Ken Martin to discuss the Democratic Party's way forward amid some very public squabbles. Hey, what's up, guys? It's Chris Pratt here. I know you're in. Every day, thousands of Comcast engineers and technologists like Kunle put people at the heart of everything they create. In the average household, there are dozens of connected devices. Here in the Comcast family, we're building an integrated in-home Wi-Fi solution for millions of families like my own.
It brings people together in meaningful ways. Kunle and his team are building a Wi-Fi experience that connects one billion devices every year. Learn more about how Comcast is redefining the future of connectivity at ComcastCorporation.com slash Wi-Fi. It's a CEO or a president or a senator. A leader needs somebody who says, no, sir, who's comfortable saying, no, sir, you need to think of these other things. And right now, with the loss of Mike Waltz, I don't see a lot of people in the national security firmament who are going to speak truth.
to the president because they know that it may be their head on the block. That was a top Democrat on the House Intel Committee, Jim Himes, after word that Mike Waltz would no longer serve as the president's national security advisor. But that was before the president announced he would nominate Waltz to serve as ambassador to the U.N. So how is Congressman Himes feeling about Mike Waltz now? Let's ask him. He joins us. Welcome back to Fox News Sunday, Congressman.
Thanks for having me, Shannon. OK, you've referred to him as the adult in the room. You had a lot of praise for him when it looked like he was on the way out the door. How do you feel about him now that it looks like he'll stay? Do you think that voice suggests something to you that the president is open to having Mike Walsh's voice when it comes to foreign policy?
Yeah, that's hard to say, Shannon. What I can tell you is there's a huge difference, obviously, between the national security advisor whose office is literally steps away from the Oval Office and the U.N. ambassador who's in New York, right? You know, and this is not an administration that puts a lot of stock in the United Nations. And so...
No, I think either way. And, you know, no matter what, I think that Mike Waltz is going to be marginalized right now. And kind of what worries me now, you know, I would put Marco Rubio, who I know very well, in the category of also, though I may not agree with him on everything, an adult in the room. What worries me about Marco Rubio's role now is that, you know, Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, both of those jobs are too big for one person to have both of those jobs.
including a bunch of other jobs on the shoulders of Marco Rubio. You know, these are people who actually need sleep if we're going to stay out of wars and stuff. So, you know, I'm a little worried about the, you know, no national security advisor idea. Well, the combo was last done by Henry Kissinger. I think he's the only other person who ever did it. So it is a job for a giant. He's got many jobs now. Who would you like to see as national security advisors there? Anybody in the president's orbit you think is well positioned for that?
Yeah, you know, I'm guessing that nobody wants to hear a Democrat's advice on who should be the national security advisor. I mean, I would say two things. Number one, you know, the Senate hearing on Mike Waltz being U.N. ambassador is going to be about Signalgate. And what Mike did, you know, setting up that signal chat was irresponsible. I think everybody acknowledges that. But what was really worrisome was the secretary of defense putting operational details before an operation on it.
And so, you know, we have evidence of the fact that Pete Hegseth is more focused on sort of communicating in social media and not acting responsibly. So all I would hope would be that the national security advisor is somebody who feels that they've got the strength and the standing to go into the president and tell the truth.
You know, you can't run anything, much less the United States' national security policy, without having people who are willing to put uncomfortable truths in front of the president. And I fear that we have too few of those people right now. So one of the things, obviously, this national security team has to manage is what's happening with Russia and Ukraine, trying to get them to the table for peace talks. This week, the U.S. did finalize that minerals and infrastructure deal with Ukraine. Treasury Secretary Scott Besson thinks that changes the equation. Here's what he said.
I think this is a strong signal to the Russian leadership
And it gives President Trump the ability to now negotiate with Russia on even a stronger basis, as opposed to the daylight that had been previously created between the U.S. and Ukraine. So a couple of things from that. Do you think Putin actually wants to negotiate and deal to end this? Because he's paid a very high price, his country as well. And at what point do you think the U.S. should disengage as some type of mediator?
Yeah, I don't think Putin is interested. I mean, and it's not so much what I think. You know, we've seen he has not said yes to a single deal that has been offered by Donald Trump, who, I mean, let's face it, is probably the most friendly president that Vladimir Putin can expect from the United States. And I say that because, of course, we're in a time of crisis.
We voted with Russia and with North Korea and others in the United Nations, and the whole world watched as the vice president and the president beat up on President Zelensky of Ukraine in a very public way. So, no, I don't think Putin is interested in peace, partly because I think at some point if there is peace, his people are going to say, wait a minute.
We just lost, you know, whatever the number is now, 170,000 dead Russians to get a little tiny territory in Ukraine. I think that Putin understands that that is not a good political outcome for him. And, of course, we have an interest in making sure that that's precisely what the Russian people think about their murderous leader. So I think this is a much more complicated problem to solve than certainly the current White House thinks that it is. I fear that this is a stalemate for a while yet.
I want to touch on the issues of national security. Obviously, you have you're privy to much more intel than I ever will be. There was this issue last term during the Biden administration. Then FBI Director Christopher Wray talked about flashing lights everywhere, worries about terrorism attacks. He specifically cited the southern border.
Now, with the illegal encounters down there, a whopping 95 percent. Do you feel any better about that? Give this administration any credit when it comes to at least minimizing the terror threat that's coming through the southern border. Let me say this. We have never had an attack in this country, a terrorist attack, understated.
by somebody who snuck across the southern border. That does not mean that we shouldn't have a secure southern border. As a Democrat, I will be the first to say we need a secure southern border. And inasmuch as the president has said
worked to secure that border, I applaud that. Now, I wish the president would do that abiding by United States law and abiding by the court decisions that the president should abide by. But the country does need a secure southern border. And, you know, I welcome efforts to make it so because there is always the possibility, obviously, not just that terrorists
but that others, you know, it's not just, you know, terrorists. There's also, you know, folks from all over the world coming in and or were coming in. And I don't want to continue to have an uncontrolled southern border. It is important, however, that the president abide by the law. And by the way, don't sell yourself short, Shannon. You know, you may wind up at the top of the intelligence community at some point when, you know, a former Fox News host can wind up running the, you know, the Defense Department. Don't don't
Don't sell yourself short on that. In America, anything is possible. Congressman, thank you for your time. Good to see you this morning.
Thank you, Shannon. All right. Joining us now is chair of the Democratic National Committee, Ken Martin. Last we talked with you, you were in the running. Congratulations on your election to that post. Thank you so much. One thing I didn't have time to get to with a congressman that I do want to ask you about is this issue of impeachment, because we now have two sets of articles of impeachment against President Trump. He overcame those the last couple of times. In some ways, his supporters will say they draw people to him. What's viewed as something that's
you know whether you want to take it or not as an inappropriate attack or an inappropriate use of democrats political capital do you think members should be wasting time on that look well some members may be focused on that the majority of house democrats and senate democrats are focused on standing up to the excesses and extremes of this administration which is already failing the american people that's where democrats focus are is at right now squarely on making sure
that we stand up for hardworking Americans who are being left behind in this Trump economy, which is already failing 100 days in, right? Look, he promised. Wait, let's just talk about some of this because we talked about this with the panel a little bit. So wages are up. They've beaten two jobs reports expectations. Inflation is down. The market is pretty much settled back to where it was before the tariffs were announced. So this administration feels like they are putting people in a good position. Gas is down. Groceries are down. Those kinds of things.
Well, look, that's just wrong. I mean, the reality is most Americans and most economists believe we're headed toward a recession. But you don't quibble with those numbers as they exist. No, look, I mean, here's the reality. The economy is failing the American people. Donald Trump said he was going to lower prices. Prices are increasing. But inflation's down.
He said that he was going to actually have a booming economy. The economy has shrunk. The GDP shrunk in the first quarter. We actually are seeing a very high likelihood that we're headed towards a recession. Now, look, Donald Trump made a lot of promises to Americans last year. And this budget that he's bringing forward is actually going to increase prices dramatically.
for most hardworking Americans. The tariffs that he's put on for sure are going to increase prices for the hardworking Americans, many of them who voted for him. So the reality is that's where we're focused on right now. This budget he's bringing forward, which is going to cut Medicaid, all to give a tax break to the richest people in this country and corporations. Okay.
and not helping hardworking Americans again. To be clear, and I know people have a lot of concerns, but he said, he told Time magazine, he would actually veto anything that came before him that was a cut to Medicaid. So obviously we're all going to track that because that's a promise made that he has made on numerous occasions. I want to talk about some of the inner party turmoil you're having to referee as the new chair of the DNC. There's this disagreement that's been very public between sort of the old guard, James Carville, the new progressive voice in David Hogg. People can have appreciation within the party for both of them, but that
has been clear there's an issue. As to reports that David Hogg is raising money to primary Democrat incumbents, Mr. Carville called it, and I will quote, jackassery of the highest level. Have you talked to the two of them about ironing this out as you try to get a cohesive message moving forward?
I have talked to both of them. And let me just say this. You know, we're a big tent party, right? We have a lot of different voices for sure. And, you know, I like David Hogg a lot. I think he's an amazing young leader. But for me, you know, this has always been about making sure that no party boss...
ever puts its thumb on the scale in our party primary process, we should stay out. Our job is to be the referee, to call the balls and strikes, to make sure that we actually have a fair and level playing field so all voices can participate, all people can feel like their candidates they support have an opportunity to compete. No party leader at any level should be putting its thumb on the scale, and it's really important to me.
I campaigned on this as I was running for chair. I was the person who brought forward the superdelegate reform in 2017, as well as a neutrality pledge in 2017. It's part of who I am. And so this disagreement right now within the party, it's really not a disagreement. We're going to pass this neutrality pledge because it's a principle that's really important.
to me. Our party has to be completely neutral. Once the primary voters choose a nominee for us, whether it's presidential or otherwise, we're going to work like hell to support whoever that is. But it's not up to party leaders to choose that nominee. OK, I want to talk about this. Ashley Etienne, who used to run an anti-Trump sort of war room for Speaker Pelosi, says they were very effective and she's worried that Democrats aren't kind of
following their policies or some of the ways that the speaker got things done. She said this week that either you or Chuck Schumer or Hakeem Jeffries have to take the reins. She said, take the power and say, here is where we're going. She says you haven't done that. Is she wrong? Well, I...
Let me just say this. I mean, there's lots of people with lots of different ideas out there. I'm not here to win the argument. I'm here to win elections. And that's what I'm fiercely focused on right now is building the infrastructure to do that. Look, we've had 100 town halls in over 45 states just in the last six weeks alone because Republicans have refused to listen to their constituents. Right. And if they're not going to do their jobs, we'll do it for them. I think the reason they're not they don't want town halls is because of all the
pain and the anguish that's being inflicted upon the American people. They don't want people to see that. We're going to make damn well sure that Americans see what exactly is happening to thousands and hundreds of thousands of people's lives throughout this country. And so, no, we've already, we're fighting back. Our party, while we're very diverse, of course,
our party is unified in making sure that we stand up and deliver on the promises that we've made to the american people outlook i've said this multiple times we can't just resist donald trump sure we have to do that but we also have to give people in this country a sense of who we are what we're fighting for and why and that means we give them the alternative we give them a sense of what we would do if we're put back in
power. And we're doing both. We're resisting Donald Trump with every fiber of our being because of this existential moment we're in in this country. And we're also standing up and giving them a sense of what we stand for. I quickly want to ask you before we have to go, Kilmer Obrego Garcia, this has gotten a lot of attention. A number of your members have gone to El Salvador or have
plans to go. And people that I talk to that are not hyperpartisan or hyperpolitical, they at home are having a hard time understanding why Democrats are fighting so hard to bring back somebody who was here illegally, has allegations of gang membership that were verified by a police department, then accepted by two judges, a woman, his wife, who has made numerous allegations of domestic violence against him, this police stop that shows potentially the suspicion that he was trafficking people.
Do you worry that the party has expended so much political capital on that case? Now, we could talk about the legal and we have and I think that's important to debate. But the optics of Democrats so invested in that a lot of folks I talk to cannot understand it. Well, look, I think the question we need to ask is, are we a nation that values the rule of law and our Constitution and due process?
Due process is a critical bedrock principle in this country. So legal arguments aside, because those are important. They're very important. The optics of this particular person. Yeah, well, look what I would say. I don't know much about Mr. Garcia. But what I do know is that Donald Trump has been rounding up grad students and sending them off. He's rounded up...
legal U.S. citizens, two and three and four-year-old kids that he's shipping off to foreign countries. But again, we have to speak factually about that. This was a situation in which the mother who was here illegally was allowed to decide what she wanted. She wanted to take the children with her. They weren't deported. They're U.S. citizens. They can come back.
Let me just say, we have to focus. One thing we probably agree on in both parties is we need a path to comprehensive immigration reform and we need to have strong border security. Both parties agree on that. We need to come to the table in a meaningful way to address this. The way that Donald Trump has approached this has been so haphazard. And, you know, no, I don't think the optics are bad and standing up for our Constitution, the rule of law and due process.
Every person in this country deserves due process. And that's not what's happening under this administration. Listen, if you can broker a deal on immigration, all of Washington would be very impressed. Chairman, good to have you with us. Thank you so much. Thank you. All right. Former Vice President Kamala Harris makes a return to the political spotlight. So how did it go? Well, that depends on whom you ask. Our panel breaks it down next.
When middlemen own it all, you lose.
Visit PHRMA.org slash middleman to learn more. Paid for by Pharma. If Congress fails to do its part, or if the courts fail to do their part, or if both do their part, but the president defies them anyway...
Well, friends, that is called a constitutional crisis. So former Vice President Kamala Harris returning to the political stage this week, taking aim at the Trump White House. We are back now with our panel. All right, here is how Glamour described the speech. It was a fiery comeback that was rousing, uplifting, and made a splash. Molly? That is a very generous way to describe a speech that I think for a lot of people, if they heard it, they just were reminded of the problem they had with Kamala Harris when she was a president. She speaks...
in a flourishing way, but does not communicate much of substance. So this was a big speech for her. That's her first public speech coming back from her devastating loss to Donald Trump. And as she tries to figure out her way forward, probably she wishes she had a better impact.
Well, she had a lot to say. Of course, you would imagine a critique of the first 100 days of President Trump. But the spectator world says this. How can Harris credibly bash the president for higher prices, having overseen close to double digit inflation herself? Is she really in a strong position to talk about truth or honesty when she was deputy to a president whose mental acuity was covered up for years? Richard.
Look, I think this is the problem that Democrats have. But once again, the good news for Democrats here, I like to bring good news on a Sunday, is that the party is, while there are personalities, the party is often times when they're at their best is led by the people. This Thursday, all across the country in all 50 states, there were 1,100 actions where people, everyday folks, workers, teachers, nurses, went out and they took action as part of the May Day protest. One of those things that I found the most unique was in New Orleans, nurses went on strike. Right?
Right. And this is not the first time we've seen nurses go on strike at a hospital. And I think where the party can benefit is if they took a page out of the book of the working class and listen to why. Why are nurses going on strike? Why are teachers going on strike? Why did last summer or two summers ago, auto workers went on strike? And listen to what those folks are saying. Many of them are talking about how do we make ends meet for our family? How do we pay for college?
how to pay for the cost of housing if democrats could have those conversations and figure out some policy prescriptions for working class folks who are collected who are protected by collective bargaining agreements they go very far away and figuring out what's wrong with them in the building behind you well and we just had the d_n_c_ chair on enhance by his own admission a lot of polling shows the democrats are now viewed as a party of the elites of the wealthy and so i don't know how that squares with trying to make sure you get back to the union folks
Well, you also heard it from some of the answers from Jason Smith, where he suggested that they wouldn't. Well, he didn't quite go that far to talk about the billionaire's tax, but he didn't rule it out. And there's this giant passing of the ships between the parties on their bases right now where Republicans are becoming the party of the working class and they want to communicate that. I think the broader question for Tim Walz and the entire sort of Democratic Party, Tim Walz, Kamala Harris,
is how do they move forward from the Biden era? And in 20, let's say it'll be 2028. So let's say fall of 2027, there will be debates and hopefully you host one, Shannon. And one of the key questions is going to be, where do you stand, Democratic candidate on Joe Biden? And they're all going to have to refine their answer a little bit better than Kamala Harris did. OK, so I want to make sure that we get to this because there was an executive order. Yet another one. We've lost count. There are hundreds, I believe.
The president is not wasting any time. He had a plan coming back for term two. But one of them this week is this executive order on public broadcasting funding. It's called Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media. It goes after...
NPR and PBS, essentially. The order says Americans have the right to expect that if their tax dollars fund public broadcasting at all, they fund only fair, accurate, unbiased and nonpartisan news coverage. Olivia. Yes. Well, I think that you're going to be seeing this playing out in court. PBS and NPR are arguing that the stations that are going to be most impacted are rural or ones that speak to Hispanic speaking, you know, Hispanic only speaking people. And
I don't know. It's something that the Republicans have really been beating the drum on, and I think that they're going to move forward with it. But I do also think that we're going to get into dangerous territory if you start being really critical about...
coverage when they say, you know, our coverage is fair and we start getting into the arbitration of that. Well, nobody thinks NPR or PBS. I mean, you have to be pretty far left to think that NPR and PBS put forth anything approaching neutral coverage. But more than that, in our country, we have the First Amendment. There should be no government funding of any media entity.
It's absurd that it's taken this long. And just to say that when this came about decades ago, we had maybe three stations. You remember you do the little tinfoil on the rabbit ears to try to tune them in? You have hundreds now, which I think goes to your point. We've got to leave it there. But hold that thought. You'll get first next time you're back. You got it. Okay. We're going to run out of time. All right, panel. Final preparations are underway for the selection of a new pope as speculation grows about which path the church may take moving forward. We're going to explain the process, look at the contenders. We'll take you live to Italy next.
Of course you love a pint of Ben & Jerry's. But maybe you don't love sharing your pint of Ben & Jerry's. No problem. Now you can share the love with Ben & Jerry's new Scoop-A-Palooza. 28 whole ounces of crowd-pleasing flavor in a single tub. It's an instant ice cream party. And if that means your favorite pint is left just for you, so be it. Ben & Jerry's new 28-ounce Scoop-A-Palooza. Made for sharing in four larger-than-life flavors. See BenJerry.com slash Palooza.
Operations underway in Vatican City. The College of Cardinals set to begin conclave this week. This centuries-old process of electing a new pope. Fox News chief religion correspondent Lauren Green is in Rome just outside the Vatican to talk us through how this works. Good morning, Lauren. Hey, good morning, Shannon. Well, you know, one expert told me that these cardinals understand that electing a new pope is the single most important thing they're ever going to do in their lives.
Workers on Friday installed the most famous chimney in the world atop the Sistine Chapel. The white smoke from this stack signals to the world, Habemus Papam, we have a pope.
Since Pope Francis' funeral, cardinals remained at the Vatican discussing a host of issues concerning the Roman Catholic Church. In his 12-year papacy, Francis convened only two meetings in Rome with all the cardinals. So now, 133 of them, those under the age of 80, who are tasked with choosing his successor, must spend these days before the conclave, making up for lost time. So I think it's important that the cardinals...
really get to know each other, hear each other out, and to pray and to ask for the Lord's direction. The conclave is secret. Only the cardinals know who among them has emerged as a frontrunner. But there's no shortage of speculating. Pietro Perolin, the Vatican Secretary of State, is on most lists, a favorite with progressives, along with Cardinal Matteo Zuppi.
Both Italians and Mario Grech of Malta, who heads Francis' synodality push for changes in the church. Conservatives favor Hungary's Peter Erdo and even the American Raymond Burke. Cardinal Pierre Battista Pizzabala, an Italian who's the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, is a standout for his diplomacy in the war between Israel and Hamas.
And Fernando Faloni, another Italian who feels the weight of their decision. It is always a great emotion, both the last time as well as this time, no matter what. It is always a great emotion and a great responsibility for the church. Now, experts say that the next pope will actually be a referendum on the papacy of Pope Francis. I mean, should the Catholic Church continue in the same path or should she make a course correction?
We'll see you this week, Shannon. We will. Lauren Green in Rome there just outside the Vatican. We look forward to your coverage. Conclave kicks off on Wednesday. Thank you so much. By the way, a new episode of my Live in the Dream podcast is out this afternoon. Check it out wherever you'd like to get your podcast. That is it for Fox News Sunday today. Thank you for joining us. I'm Shannon Bream. Have a wonderful, blessed week. We'll see you next Fox News Sunday.
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 thequiz.fox. Then come back here to see how you did. Thank you for taking the quiz. Listen to Fox News Sunday ad-free on Amazon Music with your Prime membership or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.