2WAY Morning Meeting — Podcast Summary

Episode: Charlie Kirk Murder: Democrats Called Hypocrites for Denouncing Firing of People Cheering His Death
Date: September 17, 2025
Host: Mark Halperin
Co-hosts: Sean Spicer, Dan Turrentine
Notable Guests/Callers: Josh Shapiro (clip), Gavin Newsom (clip), various callers

Brief Overview

This episode revolves around the aftermath of Charlie Kirk's murder and the political and media firestorm it triggered. The hosts dissect Democratic and Republican responses, the coming memorial service, and evolving divisions within U.S. society. They unpack criticisms of both right and left over rhetoric and policy, forecast upcoming political events, and field candid questions from listeners about polarization, perceptions of Charlie Kirk, and broader cultural changes.

Episode Breakdown

1. Setting the News Agenda

[06:12–07:54]

• Mark opens with updates on global and domestic events: President Trump’s state visit to the UK and political meetings.
• Vice President's schedule includes industry visits and a speech highlighting mourning activities for Charlie Kirk.
• Mentioned speakers for Kirk’s Arizona service: President, VP, Secretary Rubio, National Security Advisor Scott Bessant, and others.

"Many of the 60,000 people, I think they're going to fill the stadium, are people of faith. ... This event will have a lot of elements that will be like a church service. But most church services aren't in football stadiums with 60,000 people."
— Mark [15:45]

2. Media Coverage: Will the Networks Air the Service?

[11:40–11:54]

• Sean predicts CNN will cover the entirety of Kirk’s memorial, MSNBC only “dip in and out.”
• Dan believes both will provide segmented, not continuous, coverage due to the event’s length.

3. Tone and Political Impact of Charlie Kirk’s Memorial

[13:10–15:45]

• Debate on whether major speakers will opt for unity or deliver partisan "red meat" statements.
• Dan compares the upcoming event to Paul Wellstone’s funeral, predicting that if it becomes too partisan, it could backfire on Republicans.

"The silent majority of this country doesn't like the politics of red or blue. Right. It's like, real lives are real people. What are you doing for me? And if the Republican Party comes across as just unhinged, I think it would be to their detriment."
— Dan [14:33]

• Sean sees an energized right, predicting the incident has “awoken a movement.”

4. Reactions from Democratic Candidates and Leaders

[17:37–20:36]

• Clips of Josh Shapiro and Gavin Newsom:
  • Josh Shapiro [18:04]: Emphasizes a need for unity, healing, and toning down political attacks. Alludes to possible presidential ambitions.
  • Gavin Newsom [19:21]: Focuses on fundraising for redistricting, rallying Democrats to “hold the line” and defend democracy.

"We've got a lot of healing to do. And if I'm a candidate that can do that, then it’s something that we will take a close look at."
— Josh Shapiro [18:04]

5. Strategizing the Democratic Response

[20:36–23:40]

• Mark observes that Republicans have coalesced around Kirk’s tragedy, leveraging it for political organizing.
• Dan argues the Democratic Party “has woken up,” now more intensely motivated, but worries about appearing hypocritical.
• Both sides accuse each other of hypocrisy, especially regarding reactions to violence and rhetoric.

"All of a sudden they saw what the administration was doing and saying and they just became kind of livid at the just outrageous hypocrisy of Republicans."
— Dan [21:51]

6. How Should Democrats Talk About Violence and Tone?

[26:22–28:06]

• Sean claims Democrats have failed to call out left-wing violence forcefully.
• Dan adamantly rebutts: “Every single Democrat has said violence is unacceptable.” ([26:22])
• Discussion of best messaging for a 2028 Democratic candidate touches on the need for measured rhetoric and denouncing all forms of political violence.

7. Media's Role in Political Division

[28:10–29:01]

• Sean and Dan briefly agree that both mainstream and conservative media have fueled polarization.
• Mark calls for a future episode focused entirely on media complicity.

8. "Rapid Fire" Political Questions

[29:01–33:04]

• Analyses of the economic outlook and election impact:
  • Dan predicts an 8/10 chance the economy drags on Republicans; Sean says 4/10.
  • On U.S.-Israel relations: Both agree Trump will always support Netanyahu (“correct answer: negative one.” [31:09])
  • Shutdown probabilities: Both agree any shutdown will be short, but Mark is slightly less optimistic.

9. Listener Call-In Segment

A. Charlie Kirk's Legacy and Charges of Bigotry

[37:03–44:07]

• Paul, Bradenton, FL: Asks about accusations that Kirk was hateful; says he’s only seen opposing viewpoints, not “real evidence.”
• Hosts respond:
  • Mark: “He wasn't a perfect person...But did he have a pattern of saying things that are on their face objectionable to everyone? He did not.” [39:55]
  • Sean: Criticizes reflexive social media-driven judgments; urges fact-checking.
  • Dan: Acknowledges Kirk offended many but insists that disagreement shouldn’t be conflated with bigotry.
  • Mark underlines the dangerously quick leap from disagreement to labels like “racist” and highlights "internet rumor vs. reality" problem.

B. The “New Right” Generation

[47:27–51:08]

• Cole, North Carolina: Former young Democrat, moved away from party over “wokeness.” Speaks to generational discontent and depoliticization.
• Hosts emphasize Kirk’s role in challenging campus orthodoxy and the rise of “common sense” arguments over party labels.

C. Political Violence and Democratic Reckoning

[52:59–58:16]

• Matt, Marin County, CA: Asks how to channel young men’s anger about Kirk’s death/rising violence, and which Democratic leaders are able to truly denounce left-wing militant groups like Antifa.
• Dan: Challenges premise, notes condemnation is routine among Dems unless “organized violence” is documented.
• Sean: Argues Dems rarely asked directly to denounce violence, sees a persistent “both sides” false equivalence in left-leaning rhetoric.

10. Notable Quotes and Moments

• Political Violence Acceptance
  “Republicans, overwhelmed. I think it hit 60% like a year after January 6th that political violence was acceptable—Republicans.”
  — Dan [58:39]

• On Media’s Role
  “The view of the media … their role in getting us to this point is something that has not been discussed.”
  — Sean [28:10]
  "Both those topics should be a topic for a whole show."
  — Mark [29:01]

• On Generational Changes
  “I appreciated you coming on, Cole, and I think that there's a lot of people. There's a lot of Coles out there.”
  — Sean [50:22]

Timestamps by Segment

• [06:12] — President’s UK Visit and Kirk Memorial Preview
• [09:59] — US Housing and Economic Update
• [11:40] — Will Memorial be covered live by networks?
• [13:10] — Tone of Memorial: Unifying or Partisan?
• [14:33] — Comparison to Paul Wellstone’s Funeral
• [15:45] — Mobilization and the rise of a right-wing “movement”
• [17:37] — Democrats' Positioning: Shapiro, Newsom, Obama
• [20:36] — How can Democrats talk about the Kirk incident?
• [26:22] — Debate: Has the Left Condemned Violence?
• [28:10] — Media Blame and Polarization
• [29:01] — Lightning Round: Economy, Israel, Shutdown
• [37:03] — Caller: Was Charlie Kirk Really Hateful?
• [47:27] — Caller: Are Young People Fleeing the Left?
• [52:59] — Caller: Political Violence and Generational Anger

Overall Tone and Takeaways

The tone is combative but self-aware—hosts are frank about their biases. The show walks the line between thoughtful reflection and partisan banter, with an undercurrent of concern for civility and the country’s fraying social fabric. Several callers provide striking, real-world perspectives, pushing the hosts to wrestle with difficult questions about the limits of debate, the reality of polarization, and the challenge of honest discourse in a media-saturated moment.

For listeners or readers: This episode encapsulates how major flashpoints—like the death of a high-profile partisan—can supercharge political divisions, shape campaign strategy, and challenge the “moderate” majority. It’s also a revealing window into how media figures wrestle in real-time with those repercussions.