It appears Kendall is questioning the rationale for continuing the F-47's development.
Personally, I'm quite enjoying these ongoing references to the budgetary challenges associated with recapitalizing the nuclear triad, as if those costs are an immutable feature of reality rather than the product of specific choices that were backed across the political and military establishments and endorsed by a weak Obama administration that knew the bill would be Somebody Else's Problem.
In another world, the United States could've retired the land-based leg of its nuclear triad, thereby avoiding the budgetary black hole that is the LGM-35 Sentinel program and associated infrastructure costs. Washington could also have used that prospect in negotiations with both Russia and China regarding the renewal and development/expansion of their nuclear inventories respectively.
Instead, the strategically superfluous LGM-35 Sentinel is crowding out funding for NGAD. Choices and consequences, etc.