Russ Vought

It is amazing. And the reason I love it is, I mean, you... In some respects, this does feel like an intractable problem that we're up against. Yes, yes, exactly. And I don't think it is, but I think it feels that way. And we're bringing people that, you know, are trying to get to Mars.

So I'm pretty sure they can handle, you know, the ability for us to balance our books and run a government that's much more efficient. So I think that the things that I've heard them say are things like really going after or from a deregulatory perspective, all of the recent court cases that have said and chopped at the feet of this administrative state.

So I'm pretty sure they can handle, you know, the ability for us to balance our books and run a government that's much more efficient. So I think that the things that I've heard them say are things like really going after or from a deregulatory perspective, all of the recent court cases that have said and chopped at the feet of this administrative state.

So I'm pretty sure they can handle, you know, the ability for us to balance our books and run a government that's much more efficient. So I think that the things that I've heard them say are things like really going after or from a deregulatory perspective, all of the recent court cases that have said and chopped at the feet of this administrative state.

You know, you don't have the ability to just come up with new major questions, you know, rank agency, rank and file agency. You've got to have actual specific language from Congress. Right. You don't have the ability to get the deference for every position that you've taken just because you're a federal agency. These have been big axe cuts at the administrative branches.

You know, you don't have the ability to just come up with new major questions, you know, rank agency, rank and file agency. You've got to have actual specific language from Congress. Right. You don't have the ability to get the deference for every position that you've taken just because you're a federal agency. These have been big axe cuts at the administrative branches.

You know, you don't have the ability to just come up with new major questions, you know, rank agency, rank and file agency. You've got to have actual specific language from Congress. Right. You don't have the ability to get the deference for every position that you've taken just because you're a federal agency. These have been big axe cuts at the administrative branches.

And so I think what they want to do is to use those as the basis for a massive deregulatory agenda and game on. I also think they want to look for as much that you can do to start cutting costs without Congress or with Congress, but to be really aggressive in some of the areas that I've mentioned. Empowerment would be a huge part of that, the ability to just not spend the money.

And so I think what they want to do is to use those as the basis for a massive deregulatory agenda and game on. I also think they want to look for as much that you can do to start cutting costs without Congress or with Congress, but to be really aggressive in some of the areas that I've mentioned. Empowerment would be a huge part of that, the ability to just not spend the money.

And so I think what they want to do is to use those as the basis for a massive deregulatory agenda and game on. I also think they want to look for as much that you can do to start cutting costs without Congress or with Congress, but to be really aggressive in some of the areas that I've mentioned. Empowerment would be a huge part of that, the ability to just not spend the money.

And so, and then of course, you know, being as radical or aggressive as you can in eliminating and reducing employees, you know, full-time employees, individuals, and going after contracts that may not make sense. So I think that that's where they're headed. And I think it'll be an enormous boon to the country.

And so, and then of course, you know, being as radical or aggressive as you can in eliminating and reducing employees, you know, full-time employees, individuals, and going after contracts that may not make sense. So I think that that's where they're headed. And I think it'll be an enormous boon to the country.

And so, and then of course, you know, being as radical or aggressive as you can in eliminating and reducing employees, you know, full-time employees, individuals, and going after contracts that may not make sense. So I think that that's where they're headed. And I think it'll be an enormous boon to the country.

Well, I think that you, you know, they will be working with the agencies that do this. I think they'll be working with OMB, whoever's in that role. They'll be working with Treasury, who's ever in that role. And they will be rallying the theory of the case. I mean, I think ultimately that's what's most needed, Tucker, is a specific theory of the case about what can be done. That's right.

Well, I think that you, you know, they will be working with the agencies that do this. I think they'll be working with OMB, whoever's in that role. They'll be working with Treasury, who's ever in that role. And they will be rallying the theory of the case. I mean, I think ultimately that's what's most needed, Tucker, is a specific theory of the case about what can be done. That's right.

Well, I think that you, you know, they will be working with the agencies that do this. I think they'll be working with OMB, whoever's in that role. They'll be working with Treasury, who's ever in that role. And they will be rallying the theory of the case. I mean, I think ultimately that's what's most needed, Tucker, is a specific theory of the case about what can be done. That's right.

And then you give it to the people, and hopefully that's been a two-way conversation, but you give it to the people that are on the president's executive team and his administration and they run with it. And then you've got Doge out there providing a political support for what must be done.

And then you give it to the people, and hopefully that's been a two-way conversation, but you give it to the people that are on the president's executive team and his administration and they run with it. And then you've got Doge out there providing a political support for what must be done.

And then you give it to the people, and hopefully that's been a two-way conversation, but you give it to the people that are on the president's executive team and his administration and they run with it. And then you've got Doge out there providing a political support for what must be done.

I mean, we haven't had any spending reductions in like 20 years, right? But we're bankrupt, right? But we're bankrupt. And there's just this notion that nothing can be done about it. We still pass $100 billion Ukraine checks. Even if you thought it was a good idea. You can't afford it. Like you never have the affordability conversation at all. Is that true? That's totally true.