"Makes Me Suspicious": Mystery Deepens Over Brown U. Shooting With Killer Still at Large, ID Unknown

Summary

The Morning Meeting (2WAY) — December 17, 2025

Episode: “Makes Me Suspicious”: Mystery Deepens Over Brown U. Shooting With Killer Still at Large, ID Unknown

---

Episode Overview

In today’s episode, Mark Halperin, with guest co-hosts Yemassi and Larry, provides a wide-ranging preview of the news cycle, featuring key political developments, palace intrigue in Washington, international crises, and—centrally—a probing discussion on the unresolved Brown University campus shooting. The conversation traverses White House maneuvers, legislative standoffs, foreign policy dilemmas, the role of media, and the societal climate underlying current violent events, giving listeners critical context and analysis on the day’s most pressing stories.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. White House Agenda & Media Strategy

• President’s Prime-Time Address
  • President to address the nation at 9pm ET, topics undisclosed but possibly foreign policy related (Venezuela discussed as a potential focus)
  • Networks notably covering the address live, bucking a trend of growing selectivity
  • “I'm a little surprised...they're covering it. I suspect part of why they're covering it is because the President's cowed them all.” — Mark Halpern [05:27]
• Media’s Changing Role
  • Discussion about how presidential addresses have shifted in importance and media cooperation over decades

2. Political Intrigue & Trump World Personalities

• Melania Trump Documentary Trailer
  • Halpern and co-hosts react to a new theatrical trailer featuring Melania, describing it as well-produced, potentially humanizing, and sure to provoke public interest beyond Trump’s base.
  • “Her and her son Barron are the two most enigmatic figures in Donald Trump's life who also wield incredible influence over him.” — Larry [11:51]
  • Talk of whether Melania’s portrayal marks a shift in public perception: “She comes off as extremely likable in that trailer. To my ear.” — Mark Halpern [13:15]
• Susie Wiles / Vanity Fair Article
  • The episode returns to the recent story of Susie Wiles, Trump’s influential chief of staff, and her unflattering quotes about colleagues in a Vanity Fair profile.
  • Mark clarifies her cooperation was with author Chris Whipple (chiefs of staff chronicler), not for the "glamor" of Vanity Fair.
  • Discussion of how political context and off-cuff remarks can be distorted: “If I say Larry’s a genius…Larry was late last week…somebody writes an article and says...‘Halperin says, well, Larry was late last week’…of course that’s going to make it seem like I’m negative about Larry.” — Mark Halpern [19:16]
  • The consensus: this story “has no traction outside of a beltway politico circle.” — Yemassi [16:39]

3. Congressional Standoff: Healthcare & ACA Subsidies

• Healthcare Legislation
  • Updates on efforts to extend ACA (“Obamacare”) premium subsidies, including a potential bipartisan workaround (discharge petition)
  • Guest Rep. Mike Lawler shares his perspective:
    “The enhanced premium tax credits put in place during COVID…are expiring. So without the subsidy continuing, insurance companies are raising rates at an astronomical pace. But...you can’t just cut it off cold turkey without a plan to address the spike.” — Mike Lawler [35:06]
    Describes ongoing efforts to broker a practical, bipartisan reform
• Speaker Johnson’s Position
  • Emphasizes that any continuation of subsidies should address underlying healthcare costs and fraud

4. International Crises: Venezuela & Russia/Ukraine

• Venezuela
  • Discussion of U.S. escalating military and economic pressure on the Maduro regime, including oil tanker blockades and broader “psyops”
  • Analysis that U.S. strategy also reflects power competition with China
    “This is part of the whole spheres of influence thing… by the end of his term, China, Russia and the United States are going to have carved up the world into spheres of influence. And he [Trump] wants Latin America.” — Mark Halpern [58:22]
• Russia/Ukraine
  • New U.S. and European security guarantees for Ukraine; speculation over a possible deal emerging soon

5. Brown University Shooting: Mystery & Mental Health Concerns

• Unresolved Crime & Law Enforcement Response
  • Andrew calls in with questions about the ongoing Brown U. shooting case. The hosts note:
    • Lack of details about the crime scene raises suspicions
    • Shooter’s unorthodox escape leaves room for speculation (“We just…we need to get to the bottom of it. I'm not engaging in a conspiracy theory; everything I said is factual, and it's just unsettling under the circumstances.” — Mark Halpern [51:34])
• Connections to Political Violence & Mental Health
  • Mental health crisis in the U.S. discussed in connection with recent mass violence:
    “I'm not seeing the strands of recovery, of unity and of mental health… particularly for young people who've turned away from faith…” — Mark Halpern [46:59]
  • Yemassi underscores institutional responsibility, especially academic preparedness for security threats

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the President’s TV Address
  “If the conventional wisdom in D.C. is this is going to sort of be a combination Queen’s Speech at Christmas time and sort of a valedictory look back at the first 10 months of the greatest presidency our nation has ever…seen—or any nation…"
  — Larry [07:03]

• On the Susie Wiles Article Fallout
  “I don't think anything gets done before Christmas.” — Yemassi [15:37]

• On Health Care Gridlock
  “Doing nothing is not an answer either…why Brian Fitzpatrick signed…why others may…this is such a foolish exercise by some of my colleagues.” — Mike Lawler [38:54]

• On the Brown U. Shooting
  “Look how little we know about what happened in that room. Where did he enter from? How long was he in there? Who did he shoot in what order? How close was he … when he shot them? The news…has not been reported…makes me suspicious.” — Mark Halpern [49:36]

• On U.S. Intentions in Venezuela
  “President's view is: we want oil. The oil that's in our hemisphere, that's our oil. That's not to go to China.” — Mark Halpern [59:18]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [02:00] Show begins: Mark Halpern, Yemassi, Larry set the agenda
• [03:25] White House, Congress, media daybook rundown
• [05:27] Presidential address—media rationale, speculation on topic
• [10:11] Discussion: Melania Trump documentary trailer
• [15:37] ACA Subsidies — Congressional discharge petition, likelihood of passage
• [16:39] Susie Wiles profile — insider vs. public impact
• [21:36] Rubio openly supports Vance for ‘28; Cabinet friendships
• [24:52] Federal Reserve Chair succession speculation—cabinet vs. private sector
• [29:54] Venezuela: U.S. military/psyops; Russia/Ukraine update
• [34:45] Rep. Mike Lawler: health care compromise, fiscal vs. party strategy
• [44:25] Audience Q&A opens—focus on Brown University shooting, mystery, and law enforcement response
• [49:36] Mark Halpern: details lacking in Brown U. shooting coverage—calls for transparency
• [58:22] U.S. moves against Venezuela analyzed as anti-China regional strategy
• [60:27] Show wraps: upcoming guests, programming notes

---

Original Tone & Style

The conversation keeps a sharp, insider-savvy, slightly irreverent edge. The hosts are candid, skeptical of both government PR and media spin, and deeply engaged in the substance and performance of leading public figures. The listener is always treated as an intelligent peer—expected to keep up and connect dots.

---

Summary Value

Listeners gain a rich, inside-baseball forecast of headline events, clear-eyed commentary on intra-party drama, and honest examination of political violence and mental health—framed by the day’s big mystery at Brown University. Political, judicial, media, and foreign policy threads are woven together to emphasize how today’s news isn’t siloed, but deeply interconnected—and in this episode, sometimes, suspiciously opaque.

Transcript

[Mark Halpern]

This is it.

[Speaker Johnson]

The world as you know it is over.

[Mark Halpern]

Completely done.

[Larry]

It's not about to be over.

[Speaker Johnson]

It's over.

[Mark Halpern]

Some of the scientists who helped build AI are now sounding the alarm.

[Mike Lawler]

I was selling AI as a great.

[Larry]

Thing for decades and I was wrong. I was wrong.

[Mark Halpern]

There's a longer term existential threat that will arise when we create digital beings that that are more intelligent than ourselves.

[Robert]

We have no idea whether we can stay in control.

[Mark Halpern]

While others say that AI will usher in unfathomable abundance, I've always believed that.

[Mike Lawler]

It'S going to be the most important.

[Mark Halpern]

Invention that humanity will ever make.

[Larry]

This really will be a world of abundance.

[Mark Halpern]

And among these fears and these fantasies, we seek the story of our future. Listen to the last invention on Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[James Patterson]

I'm James Patterson. I write way too many books. Welcome to Hungry Dogs. The title comes from my maternal grandmother, Isabel Zelvis Morris. Nan used to always say, hungry dogs run faster, James. And I've been running fast ever since. Here's what will be coming your way soon, and this is a really terrific list. I think you'll hear from some incredible people like Stacey Abrams. Yay. BJ Novak.

[Robert]

Yay.

[James Patterson]

Kathy Bates, Dolly Parton, Josh Gad. And Pope Leo. Okay, maybe not Pope Leo, but who knows, maybe he'll show up. Hungry dogs run faster. Thank you, Grandma, for turning me into a hopeless, obsessive compulsive. Listen to Hungry Dogs with James Patterson. That'd be me on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

[Robert]

Foreign.

[Mark Halpern]

Good morning everybody. Welcome. This is the morning meeting on two way. I'm Mark Halpern. Yemassi and Larry are here today, two great guest co hosts. Delighted to have them. Welcome to you both. Thank you for being here. Very grateful to you for spending the hour previewing this day. And it's December to remember a lot of news again today. Things are not slowing down and of course Friday we're expecting the Epstein files, which all indications are are coming out. So it'll be a big a big news week straight through. Thanks to you both for being here. Let me run through the daybook as always, if you want to get in on the conversation, you'll have that opportunity later in the program. Please raise your hand if you're watching on X or YouTube. Think about in the holiday season. The spirit of the season, extending the presumption of grace to all, peace, love and understanding should imbue everything around you. Evan, I don't know what's going on behind you, but that is some crazy bear stuff going on, man. I love that. I don't know how you're doing it, but it's great. All right. The day book the pool today at the White House, big day because the president's giving a primetime address in the diplomatic reception room at 9pm Eastern. Who's in the pool? Newsmax, the secondary TV, NBC, the first TV print, USA Today, secondary print, Boston Globe, New media. Our friends at the Washington Free Beacon and then president and the first lady are going to Dover today. They're participating in a dignified transfer ceremony, the return of the remains of the two Americans who died. Is it two or three? I think two service personnel died. Yeah. In Syria.

[Larry]

An interpreter from a Syrian national interpreter was also murdered.

[Speaker Johnson]

Right.

[Mark Halpern]

So two Americans at 1:15 and the 9:00 clock address the nation. We'll talk about that in a second. It's still a little unclear exactly what the president plans to talk about. Don't know what the vice president's doing today. Lots going on on the hill. 10 o'. Clock. Jack Smith is testifying behind closed doors to Judiciary. Not clear what he'll be able to say under the circumstances because he's bound by grand jury secrecy and Justice Department rules. The FCC chair who has avoided testifying on Capitol Hill for some time, is before Senate Commerce expecting to get tough questions from Democrats. But also the gentleman from Texas, Ted Cruz, may have some questions for Chairman Carr. 1030. The house is voting on the rule for the Republican health care bill. We're going to talk about that as well. Last night the Senate, the speaker, after trying to broker a compromise between moderates and the full conference, was unable to do that and decided to not give the moderates a vote, even a vote, let alone a vote that could pass on extending the Affordable Care subsidies. The Senate continues to grapple with the NDAA. Senator Schumer is holding a press conference at 2:15 about a new Democratic initiative aimed at lowering costs. We'll see what comes of that. Chris Waller spoke this morning at the Yale University at the CEO summit. I'm sorry, at the Yale Club here in Manhattan for their CEO summit. And we'll play a little bit of that for you. He also supposed to meet reportedly, I think he confirmed it basically with the president later today to talk about the prospect of being the chair of the Fed. All right. We're going to talk about all this now. The president's speech brief history in the olden days when there was abc, CBS and NBC and nothing else. If the President United States said I'm giving a primetime address, it was covered. And then there was a period after CNN started where it was generally covered. But sometimes the networks were like, do you really have to do it at 8 o' clock because we got sweeps and could you move it around? But they still covered it. But they knew well, if they didn't definitely cover to be on cnn, then there was a period where the White House wouldn't announce the time. They'd call the networks. This happened in the Clinton years. I think that's when this started. They'd call the networks, they'd be like, if we wanted to do it, would you consider covering it? And if they got a lot of pushback, they wouldn't do it. Of course, a primetime address used to be a massive thing tonight, much to my surprise, it seems like broadcast networks and the cable networks, maybe not Ms. Now are taking the President live. They told Politico that I'm a little surprised he's not told the public what the topic is. Maybe they told the networks and that's why they're covering it. I suspect part of why they're covering it is because the President's cowed them all. If they don't cover it, he's more likely to sue them or take away their FCC license or something. So I'm surprised that they're covering. And let's start there. Yemassi, are you surprised that the survivors on tonight we're talking about reality TV tomorrow they're messing with Survivor. Are you surprised that the broadcast networks are taking this speech?

[Yemassi]

I'm not surprised at this point because I think a lot, even in just the past week from this weekend has happened in this country and abroad and I think the President really wants to level set before everybody goes to the holidays, wants to be the last thing people think about before football and, and whatever folks celebrate. But I'm not surprised because I think this is the most on message he ends up being when he does a diplomatic reception room or Oval Office address. And I think people really do want to hear kind of just a, a grounded speech from the President. We just haven't heard that in a little bit, in a little bit of time.

[Mark Halpern]

So that's well said. Hey, Larry. Yeah. I know the speech won't be about an ode to Rob Reiner, but what do you think it will be?

[Larry]

It's a great question because I am kind of surprised. I mean he is good television. But if the conventional wisdom in D.C. is this is going to Sort of be a combination queen speech at Christmas time and sort of a valedictory look back at the first 10 months of the greatest presidency our nation has ever.

[Mark Halpern]

Seen or any nation or any nation.

[Larry]

Ever in the history of mankind. And. And if that's true, I'm surprised the networks will run it.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah.

[Larry]

That's why I think there's something else going on here. Maybe, maybe it has to do with that extraordinary truth social post that I know that we're going to talk to a little bit later about Venezuela. If there is increased military activity with regard to Venezuela, that's the stuff of Oval Office addresses that the networks would carry.

[Mark Halpern]

And if this were a real network news division morning meeting, some vice president for something would say, I can't. Nobody should repeat this. But the White House has told us on background and for planning purposes that this is going to be a declaration of war against Venezuela. So we can't rule it out. And then it's hard to know how long it's going to be because we don't really know what it's about. But I suspect it won't be particularly long. That's just my sense from talking to people about sort of the planning of it on both the media side and the government side. Yeah.

[Larry]

I doubt he's going to weave off of prompter in this setting because he doesn't have a crowd to play to. So. Yeah, I would suspect 15 minutes max.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. All right, either of you want to say anything more about this? We'll have full coverage tomorrow. I asked the question before the program in the pregame, a parlor game I like to play when I'm at a fancy cocktail party or a dinner party or barbecue or Kiwanis Club or Mason, whatever I'm at. What's the thing you have most in common with Donald Trump? What's the thing? Biographical, attitudinal, whatever it is. Larry, what was your answer?

[Larry]

My non political was. We both love the NFL, but my political answer is I came of age politically during the Reagan era when Mayor Koch was the mayor of New York and then into David Dinkins mayoralship. And it was a perfect illustration of the failures of Democrat leadership in New York City. And I think that that influenced his political leanings as well.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. Missy, what do you most have in common with Donald Trump?

[Yemassi]

Our love for reality tv. Our shared love.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. Okay, so my answer is this, and it's apropos of our next topic. The best way to tell compelling stories is through video that's produced in a cinematic style that is the best way to tell stories, it's what captures people. And if it's about your own life. Donald Trump thinks of his own life as a movie. And it turns out he's not the only member of the family who thinks his life is a movie. This morning dropped the trailer for the new Melania Trump movie, the theatrical release. And it is. No matter what you think of the Trumps or the first lady, this is a spectacular piece of video editing. Play the whole thing. Here we go again.

[Andrew]

You can come in.

[Speaker Johnson]

Don't worry.

[Mark Halpern]

My proudest legacy will be then of Peacemaker. Peacemaker in the fire. Beautiful. Together with like minded leaders, we have a voice. Is it safe? It is safe. Everyone wants to know. So here it is. Hi, Mr. President. Congratulations.

[Mike Lawler]

Did you watch it?

[Mark Halpern]

I did not. Yeah, I will see it on the news. I mean from the end. From the MGM roaring lion. Yes. Comedy payoff line. I didn't watch it. I'll watch it on the news.

[Yemassi]

Savage.

[Mark Halpern]

But I mean, I think we all agree that's a brilliant effing trail.

[Larry]

Yeah, Give him the Oscar now. Just.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, yeah. So, Larry, will this movie, it's a theatrical release, will it, will it be big box office?

[Larry]

I think it will. First, because MAGA loves her, absolutely loves her and feels that she has been rightfully feels she has been been shabbily treated by pop culture, mainstream media, magazine, world, fashion, world, top to bottom. But also, and more importantly, and I think this is why it transcends maga. She and her son Barron are the two most enigmatic figures in Donald Trump's life who also wield incredible influence over him.

[Mark Halpern]

And I'll just say enigmatic, not just in his life, but in the modern history of the White House. They're the most enigmatic figures.

[Larry]

Yes. Considering the influence that they have. And she's a first lady and we still. I know her bio. I know, but I don't know what makes her Dick. You don't hear as much from her. And now, finally, after a decade, we're going to get it. Well, I mean, we'll get it through the lens that they want us to see it, but it still is more than we've ever gotten.

[Mark Halpern]

So you're going to pluck down $21 to go see that thing?

[Yemassi]

I might stream it. I don't know, I might rip it from Napster or whatever.

[Larry]

Imax. Come on.

[Mark Halpern]

How do you think, do you think it will appeal beyond a MAGA audience?

[Yemassi]

I do, because I agree with Larry. There is such curiosity about her as a First Lady. I mean, I know she has the best issues and the little platform everybody gives the lady, but in general, there's just so little known about her. I think the running joke when the East Wing got demolished was that I don't know if she's working in there anyways. I mean, this is really a chance for her to set her narrative and her story. I think we're all really, really curious about her, especially coming from a family where we over index on the rest of them. Like, there is no mystery to me about Laura Trump or Don Jr. And Eric Trump just released a book. The people I really want to know about are Melania and Baron because they are in that immediate familial circle.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. Now, this is a subjective thing and maybe the trailer is over. Is over modulating here, but if that's the portrayal of her, people are going to think of her as extremely likable. Right. Whereas more. Now she's more of a mystery. Right. She comes off as extremely likable in that trailer. To my ear.

[Larry]

I think you're right. And by the way, to be fair, I don't think Hillary Clinton worked in the East Wing either, famously.

[Mark Halpern]

I think she had her staff. Her staff. Her staff did that. And, and you know, she. I believe she had. And I'm sure the President did, too. I think she had final cut on this film. Right. That's been reported.

[Larry]

There was some arrangement there. Yeah. It wasn't, it. Wasn't there an Amazon deal on this as well? Weren't they?

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Larry]

I will say that everybody that I know who worked in the White House has nothing but wonderful things to say about her.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah.

[Larry]

I've never interacted with her at all, but it's, it's very rare you hear any criticisms of her. And when there is a negative story about her, there are people who, who aren't on the payroll who will jump out and defend her because she seems to be a very decent, elegant human being.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah.

[Yemassi]

I don't think this is about increasing her likability. I even think from the cut of the trailer, it's about showing that she's actually involved in a lot of the things that happen in the West Wing.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, I think it's both. I think it's both. I think. I think she, She's. She's never been portrayed as she's portrayed just in that short trailer. Funny, knowing, savvy, smart, involved. Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing it. All right, Susie Wiles, obviously, this thing was talked about. Hold on. There's a little bit of breaking news. All right. Just now reported, Brian. We'll switch topics here. We'll, we'll hold off on Susie. Brian Fitzpatrick just signed the, the discharge position for the Democratic bill that has a three year ACA subsidy extension. He's the first Republican to sign it. They need three more to get the thing to the floor. Now. I don't believe it gets the floor anytime soon because the way discharge petition works, and this comes after last night where the moderates failed, as I said earlier, to persuade the speaker to put some sort of ACA subsidy extension on the floor today as part of the vote on the health care package that they're putting on that isn't going to pass the Senate. So just quickly on this, do we think now do you think three other Republicans will sign and the speaker will once again have been rolled with his moderates going against him?

[Yemassi]

I don't think anything gets done before Christmas.

[Mark Halpern]

No, but do you think three, do you think they'll get this discharge petition eventually to the floor? Because they'll get three more Republicans. They just need three. They'll probably get Marjorie Taylor Greene, they'll probably get Massey and they'll probably get, well, Mike Lawler.

[Larry]

The way Lawler was talking yesterday, it sure sounds like they've got him already. He just signed it.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah.

[Yemassi]

I mean the math. Maths. Yeah.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. Okay. All right, let's go back to Susie again. It was discussed ad nauseam yesterday. Just be forward looking here as we try to be on the program is given the show of support for Susie, given that as far as I know, the reporter, writer, whatever you want to call him, didn't yield any of the audio tapes. So this question of whether this stuff was out of context, I believe I know what happened and I've said so. Public album. I'll repeat it in a second, but here's the CNN headline. Suzy Wiles offered unflattering assessments of her colleagues in Vanity Fair. In return, they showered her with praise. Everybody came out in support for her. So you have to see, is this story done or does it have more beats to come?

[Yemassi]

It's done. I mean, this story doesn't have traction outside of like a beltway politico circle. I mean, I texted my folks back home in the suburbs of Atlanta and they said, susie who? So, I mean, it's buzzy and it's fun for this crop and this and the world we exist in. But I mean, look, Susie Wiles has led the president probably better than any other chief of staff. They have no choice but to support her and anything less would be to acquiesce to Vanity Fair, that West coast liberal Hollywood rag.

[Larry]

So, Larry, there's two schools of thought. Eric Erickson had a pretty interesting take this morning in his newsletter where he thinks Suzy Wells said all the things that Trump would say, but he's instead channeling it through Susie Wiles. And the question is, she's only in hot water if her criticisms, even if they were unflattering, don't mesh with the president's assessment of his Cabinet. I think that's an interesting take. I lean more toward, and this may sound a little conspiratorial, but Susie Wells is not stupid and she's not naive, and she is a creature. Of that Florida Republican, one would say she's the most influential Florida Republican, even more so than Governor DeSantis. And the one person who didn't have an unflattering assessment in that article that I could see unless you saw it, was Marco Rubio. And one could argue that the criticisms of J.D. vance, although he took it in stride, are actually quite damaging because they hit him where he's most vulnerable, that he just supports Trump for political purposes and that he's a conspiracy theorist, et cetera. Maybe, just maybe, this is Susie Wells beginning that exit strategy and the move to promote Marco Rubio and find a lane for him to be able to get that nomination.

[Mark Halpern]

Couldn't disagree.

[Yemassi]

I kind of lean into this. Yeah.

[Mark Halpern]

Couldn't disagree more respectfully. I don't think that's what it's about. And of course, Rubio is quoted in the piece as saying he gives full deference to answer. We'll talk about a second.

[Larry]

That's just what they want you to think.

[Mark Halpern]

Exactly. Here's, here's my view of what happened. I got the same three questions over and over again yesterday. I'll answer them quickly. Number one, why Vanity Fair? It's not about Vanity Fair. It's about Whipple. Whipple is the, is the writer of chief about chiefs of staff. And Susie has great reverence for the position, for the, for that office, and particularly for James Addison Baker 3d, for whom she worked. And I think she just felt cooperating with Whipple was something that chiefs of staff do. So it wasn't about when people say why Vanity Fair was about Whipple. Number two, I believe what happened was she said all those things, but she said them in asides that she didn't think he was going to write. And they're all within the context of broader things. So you say well, she said negative things about J.D. vance. I guarantee you she said a thousand positive things about J.D. vance to the guy. He just didn't put him in the piece of. So if I say Larry's genius, Larry's so nice, Larry's great, Larry's awesome. Larry da da. Larry was late last week when he was supposed to be on the show. And then somebody writes an article and they says, and they say, well, what does Halperin think of Larry? Well, he was. Halperin says, well, Larry was late last week. Well, of course that's going to make it seem like I'm negative about Larry. She now Elon's a different case because I believe there's some negative feelings throughout the White House about Elon. But everybody else in there, the president, the vice president, the head of the ombudsman, everybody else, she says negatively. That's I know for a fact she doesn't feel negatively about them. But he pulled out the negative stuff. And I believe some of those negative asides were off the record and just. But not. She didn't put them off the record. There. There are senior people in this government who will email me regularly and they won't say off the record because they know I play a long game. I'm not going to burn them. They don't need to put in every email to me off the record. If they email me and they say, oh my God, so and so's a pots. Senator. So and so's a pots. They know I'm not going to go on Twitter and said secretary, so and so says senator, so and so's a putz.

[Larry]

Right.

[Mark Halpern]

That's what I think happened. And then lastly. Is she leaving? No, she's not leaving. I mean, the show of support yesterday was comical. Everybody, Don Jr. Everybody really was ridiculous. It's a really unprecedented.

[Yemassi]

We get it.

[Mark Halpern]

We get an example.

[Larry]

It was the scene in Lord of the Rings where everybody lights the fires and they just go down.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, exactly. That's not even real.

[Larry]

I wanted to ask you this.

[Mark Halpern]

Yes, sir.

[Larry]

Because when I read the Vanity Fair article, I thought she came across across actually pretty good. And it wasn't nearly as damaging. It was the New York Times article about the Vanity Fair article that I think was very unfair.

[Mark Halpern]

Correct. And they gave the Times an early heads up and let them break the story about the. That's the Vanity Fair pair of people.

[Larry]

And, and again, that's what everyone was talking about.

[Mark Halpern]

And it's not surprising that Whipple wrote favorably about Susie, not just because he had access because he just as she reveres the Chief of staff position, so does he. That's his, like, that's his beat, the chiefs of staff. So. So that's that. All right, there is this Rubio Vance thing. And just one question on this. And this is not the first time Rubio has nodded to the notion that he would defer to Vance. Yeah, see, I can't think of a precedent. Is three years out. Vance isn't even a declared candidate. Why is Marco Rubio saying this so definitively, do you think?

[Yemassi]

Why is he saying definitively?

[Mark Halpern]

Why is he saying if. If Vance runs, I'm for him and I'll be the first to sign up? Why is Rubio saying that? Why not just say it's too early?

[Yemassi]

Look, they work together. I'll give it to them as somebody who worked in a White House where I sat in the West Wing, and then all of a sudden, the balance of power went across the street to the EEOB when Harris was the person running. It's incredibly awkward when there's this competing tension of political ambition. And I think it's smart for Rubio to kind of play the deference card here and maintain it. I mean, they got to clock in together every single day.

[Larry]

Yep, Larry, I think that's pretty much it. If he wants to keep the peace and get anything done, they can't have that kind of drama. And by the way, I think he's right where most Americans are observing this situation. Obviously, J.D. vance is the vice president, so he's sort of gonna have the inside lane here. And Marco Rubio knows that. And if he were to say anything else, it would be untoward.

[Mark Halpern]

And particularly if Trump endorse Vance, which I still think is the base case. I'll say one more thing. And sometimes people look at me askance when I say this. There are people in politics who are genuinely friends. Right. They're genuinely friends. Not just like the Cheney sisters. Just kidding. They're genuine people. Are genuinely friends. People are genuinely friends. And this Cabinet, you'll see them in public all the time say, oh, we're genuinely friends. And I think people on the left and in the media and even some Republicans roll their eyes. There are a lot of people in this Cabinet who are hostile enemies. Not a lot. There are some, I should say, but they're genuine friends. And Rubio and Vance are genuinely friends. They're genuinely friends. And do friends. Well, okay, do friends run against each other for president? Happens all the time. Happens all the time. But these guys are really close and I think that's part of it. He can't imagine today. You're right, MC maybe in a year I'll feel differently. But he can't imagine running against. If his friend's gonna run as vice president, he's not gonna run. All right, the Fed. There's four possibilities for Fed chair. And this notion of a deadline is ridiculous because people say the president wants to name a Fed chair. They said they wanted to do it two months ago because when it's a shadow Fed chair, it's all crap, that you don't need a shadow Fed chair. It's not going to make any difference. The term, when's the term up? In May, right?

[Larry]

Yeah.

[Mark Halpern]

So I mean, he could name his Fed chair in May. So this notion it's going to be in January, which is what they've teased, is as ridiculous as the president saying three weeks ago, I know who I'm going to pick. And now he's interviewing people. So he doesn't know he's going to pick or if he did, he changed his mind. So it's the Kevin's, it's Hassert, and what's the other Kevin warship? And then there's Waller, and then there's door number four. And I'm telling you guys, I have it on great authority, don't close your mind to door number four, okay? Because when Donald Trump sits on a personnel decision for a while, he usually doesn't say, you know what I thought about this person. A bunch of my friends called and trashed that person, which has happened particularly to Hassett, and yet I'm still going to pick him. He just doesn't do it very often. So, Mr. Mr. Waller, who's on who? Trump is on the Fed, I believe he's not going to pick Waller because Waller's too much like Jay Powell. He's a Fed institutionalist. Trump's not going to go with somebody who's been in the building and breathed in the air. Here's Waller this morning. You tell me if this seems to you to be like Donald Trump's kind of guy interview was on cnbc and again, he's supposed to meet with the president for a job interview later today. Here's Mr. Excitement. Mr. Waller.

[Larry]

The president has said that he thinks he ought to have a.

[Mark Halpern]

Say in interest rates.

[Larry]

I imagine he might say that to you. I wonder if you might share your response to the President if he says he ought to have a say in interest rates.

[Mark Halpern]

Well, I think the president makes himself very clear on true social. What his views on policy and what they should be. I don't think there's any confusion about it. That's mystery political science theater already. Does this seem like a guy Trump's going to make chair of the Fed Already, Already. I hope you have a point of view.

[Larry]

Did you just fall asleep, Mark?

[Mark Halpern]

I did. I nodded off. Waller does that to me. I know in the past, guys, I was fake snoring. I was fake stalling. My point is certain times. But in times of crisis, and this.

[Larry]

Is, see, this is where Hassan has.

[Mark Halpern]

The upper hand because he's better on tv. He does example where you needed a coordinated fiscal and monetary response. I mean, I want to play the whole thing because many of you are hearing Waller for the first time. He's meeting with the President today. He's obviously a serious candidate. And yet this is the second time I've been able to. Unable to watch it. 40 second clip because the guy is not scintillating. Kill this clip out. All right, so again, again, I've reported this before. It's still true. Scott Besson wants someone of stature who can. Who can do the job at a high level of running the Fed. The President wants someone who won't screw him on interest rates. They have yet to find someone who meets both of those criteria. That's it. That's it. Okay. And none of those three, the two cabins and Waller, none of them meet the both criteria. So here's let's Polymarket. Our friends at polymarket have the question up. This is as of just a little while ago, before the show started, one of our friends at Polymarket saying Hassett 56%. Now, the Wall Street Journal for two days in a row two weeks ago had Hasset as a mortal lock. So I'm not surprised he's still at the top. There's a Politico story on on their site now saying everybody's trashing acid, which is True. Kevin Warsh, 24%. Many of the President's friends and business cronies call him regularly and say pick, wash, pick, Warsh. The President's met with them. There's just not the connection there. I don't think that's going to happen. Waller there, Mr. Excitement, 17%. And then Scott Besson, who's not going to take it. He likes being Treasure Cherry 2%. Now, they didn't test door number four. I'm going to tell my friends at Polymarket to add door number four because I'm. Or five if they want to keep Besant on. Yeah, Missy, who's it going to be.

[Yemassi]

I think it goes to Hasset. I mean, the entire, the entire reasoning for punting Jerome Powell is that the president is tired of the back and forth and he would just like a yes man. And I think that sitting on a CNBC interview and talking about the importance of an independent organization is right back in the Powell camp. I mean, this is the person that he's going to have for like, for the rest of his term. And he probably just doesn't want any more headaches, especially since the economy is the number one topic. I mean, from May 2026 to November 20th, that's the key time for any kind of midterm kerfuffle. And so you want to put somebody in there that's just going to be your yes man.

[Larry]

Larry, let me first ask you a quick question. Is door number four somebody who is currently in the private sector?

[Mark Halpern]

Well, I don't know. I have a lot of options. I'm reporting on for to be door number four.

[Larry]

Oh, I thought door number four was a specific.

[Mark Halpern]

No, no. But most of the people are, are people currently in the private sector who have government experience. Those are the door number fours. But I don't know who it is.

[Larry]

I don't know if that's the case. I'd give some hope to door number four as the number two choice. I still think Hassett is the number one choice for a couple of reasons. He's a great communicator and if you look at all of the president's choices so far in this cabinet, they all have that in common. And the resistance that you're hearing and the undermining of him, is it coming from the political world or from the institutional world?

[Mark Halpern]

It's coming from both. Plus, did you read the Politico story? The political story is filled with blind quotes. I'm telling you, I need to be careful in what I say here to protect all equities. There are, there are broad based personal and professional objections to Kevin. Everybody likes him and everybody thinks he's good and everybody thinks he's good on tv. But there are broad based, multifaceted objections. That Politico story was the tip of the iceberg about, about what's going on with him. And I think and again, if it were going to be him, Trump would have picked him because I think two weeks ago when the president said he'd picked it, was Kevin.

[Larry]

Yes and no. I, it depends. I think they might want to time it out as well. Listen, if you pick somebody that it does go through A confirmation process.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Larry]

So why pick it that early? So that they can build up the oppo? Because he is a bit of a political figure in town.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah.

[Larry]

So you can find some oppo on him.

[Mark Halpern]

Well, but again, remember, they wanted to make the pick in November. I mean, they've been wanting. They've been saying. They have been. They've been saying.

[Larry]

Well, that was if they were going to fire Powell, though, right?

[Mark Halpern]

No, no, it was part. It was in part intended to be a shadow Fed person who could, say, cut interest rates. Well, I didn't either, but that's what they said.

[Larry]

All right, the other, by the way, real fast. The other reason why Hassett has the inside track, and I think it's going to be the wild card, is because he's been a part of this year's agenda. He knows what the president and Bessant and the team are trying to accomplish. Just because the Fed is independent doesn't mean it's automatically adversarial. It's independent, but we'll work with this White House and Hasset's the best man to do that.

[Mark Halpern]

Nothing would surprise me, but I don't think it's going to be either.

[Larry]

Kevin.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay, these two stories, I keep saying, I don't understand why we're not getting. They're not getting more coverage. Biggest military buildup in the Caribbean, trying to depose a leader of a country. Seizing an oil tanker. Embargoing and, you know, stopping everything. Here's the latest headline from our friend Mark Caputo. Trump orders oil tankers. Blockade in Venezuela, labels it a terrorist regime. They're amping up the pressure. This is psyops. They're trying to get Maduro to go. Trump talked to Maduro. This is like a movie. He called the guy, they had a conversation and said, you got to go. And the guy's still there. The government still thinks he's going to go. Susie Wiles says in the Vanity Fair interview, one of the Vanity Fair interviews, the smart people in this administration say to her what people are saying to me, he's eventually going to go. They're not going to need to fire a shot. They're just going to keep ratcheting up the pressure. And then there's Russia, Ukraine, which, again, huge development. There seems to now be very significantly more robust security guarantees for the Ukrainians than were in the original deal. And the people in the government continue to tell me the Russians will do this. Here's the New York Times headline. Ukraine plan calls for enhanced military with US And European backup. There's even in the New York Times story, the thing that we thought was off the table, which is European troops stationed in Ukraine, which people say the Russians won't accept. We'll see. So two big international stories getting not nearly enough attention. I didn't lead with them. We didn't lead with them.

[Yemassi]

So, yeah, we have foreign policy fatigue.

[Mark Halpern]

We're talking. That's part of it. So let's just talk about how they're going to end. We'll do Maduro. First question I always ask. Embassy Maduro gone by, let's say Valentine's Day, yes or no?

[Larry]

No. Sooner. I think. Sooner than that.

[Mark Halpern]

Sooner. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Larry]

Listen, I, I've been sort of downplaying how serious things are down there because I think that a lot's going on behind the scenes and they're trying out an asylum for him in Uruguay or something. But the, the, the language of that post yesterday that was reposted on X by Marco Rubio. A blockade is an act of war by definition is, it's a big deal. And the threat of the armada, as he described it, I think he has increased the level on this Venezuela thing.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, but Yemisi, you think Maduro will be there by Valentine's Day?

[Yemassi]

Yeah.

[Larry]

Yeah.

[Mark Halpern]

All right, we'll see. And then Russia, Ukraine. Deal? Just my daily question. Deal. No deal, Larry. Deal. No deal.

[Larry]

I'm more in line with Deal. Again, we haven't heard from the Russians. But based on everything that's out there and I'm assuming that what's been floated and what was throw to Ignatius, the administration said, yeah, yeah, Russia knows about this. If Russia's okay with what's on the table right now, I think Zelinsky's got to take it.

[Mark Halpern]

All right, Speaker Johnson was on squawk box this morning and got a question from Andrew Ross Sorkin about these moderates, these upstart, up, uppity moderates in the, in the, in the conference who oppose him. Here's Speaker Johnson this morning.

[Speaker Johnson]

People had been waiting to see what you would do and you decided to.

[Mark Halpern]

Go with the more conservative part of your party to the consternation of some, some moderates, including Mike Lawler. What happened?

[Speaker Johnson]

What, what made you decide to go this way and what do you do with the moderates who are unhappy with this decision? Well, it wasn't the speaker's decision. It was consensus of the body. We have 220 Republicans here, lots of different dynamics in their districts across the country. This extending of the COVID era, enhanced subsidy, the premium tax Credit has been a big issue around here of debate for months now. We knew that we were coming to the end of the year when it would expire. And remember, the Democrats created this Covid era subsidy. They are the ones that put the expiration date on it. And now they're turning to Republicans as if we should, we should save that in some way. We couldn't find consensus on it with the body in order to pass it. Here's the reason everybody needs to understand there's a false narrative about, out there about these, these subsidies. It's subsidizing insurance companies. And when you do that, you're masking the cost, the rising cost of health care and you're rising, making the premiums rise even further.

[Mark Halpern]

All right, let's go to your questions now. If you want to get in the conversation, please raise your hand. Come in, I'll unmute you, ask you to say where you are and what's on your mind. First, let's go to Mike. Mike's from New York. Mike, welcome in. Mike Lawler, you were invoked there by the speaker and under the rules of debate, you get to. Thank you for being here. Congressman, thoughts on this? Well, let me just ask you first and then Larry and Amosy will get in. Brian Fitzpatrick, your colleague, said this today. He's signing the discharge petition. Will you sign the discharge petition as well?

[Mike Lawler]

I will. We have a rule vote at about 10:30 and then I'll make a determination.

[Mark Halpern]

All right. You won't break the news on that there. Just what do you think of what the speaker said? He says a sense the conference is against you and it's true most of your colleagues don't support your position. So what would you say in response to explain how you differ and why you differ from the Speaker?

[Mike Lawler]

Look, the speaker is not wrong in what he is saying about the challenge here pertaining to health care and costs. Obamacare has not worked and certainly not the way the Democrats told us it would. Health insurance premiums have risen by 96% since Obamacare took effect 15 years ago. The problem here is that the enhanced premium tax credits that were put in place during COVID to help people in the middle of a pandemic are expiring. And so without the subsidy continuing, the insurance companies are raising rates at an astronomical pace. So the speaker is right about that. Now the problem is you, you can't just cut it off cold turkey without a plan to address the spike. Yes, we are putting forth a bill that will tackle some of the, some of the macro issues around this including associated health plans, which I think will help reduce costs. The CBO estimated that it'll reduce premiums nationwide by 11%. And that's actually an extremely positive step forward. But for those that are reliant on this subsidy, going to the insurance companies, just cutting it off without a plan to bring down the cost, there, to me, is idiotic and politically handing the Democrats a victory that they want. By the way, Hakeem Jeffries doesn't want this to pass. He doesn't want a solution. He wants the issue. And so I and a number of my colleagues have worked in a bipartisan way over these past many weeks to actually come up with a compromise bill that extends the subsidies for two years while putting in place conservative reforms. It would be conservative wins, including eliminating zero premium plans and making people pay $5 nominal, you know, you know, premium payment. And so to me, this is foolish. I obviously was very clear about that yesterday on the floor and in interviews. And, you know, that's just the New Yorker.

[Mark Halpern]

If, if I were, if I were writing, if I were writing this up for Vanity Fair, I'd say Lawler calls speaker foolish idiot. But that's just me, Larry. Question for the Congressman.

[Larry]

I believe, by the way, that's exactly what CBS News did after the Major Garrett interview. You did say in that interview with Major Garrett that they need to be moving toward compromise on this. But isn't it true that the fraud that was uncovered in that GAO report that your colleague Jason Smith's been talking about has sort of been a game changer for a lot of the members there on the Republican side? Isn't the compromise that's needed before the subsidies are voted for is you fix the fraud along with the subsidies. Otherwise you're just throwing more money to the fraud.

[Mike Lawler]

Well, this is, this is precisely why we go after the insurance companies in the bill. We put income limits in the bill. I mean, somebody making $600,000 should not be getting subsidized for their health insurance plan. But moreover, we go after the zero premium payments because you have 12 million people that are insured under this, this category that have never had a claim. Frankly, they don't even know. They don't even know that they're insured, most likely. And that's why we're saying there needs to be a nominal fee.

[Larry]

I'm sorry, Congressman, I might not be understanding correctly. So you're saying go ahead and do the two year extension of the subsidies and then your bill that you're talking about will then be entertained because it seems to me.

[Mike Lawler]

No, no, the two. No, no. The bill is a two year extension.

[Larry]

Oh, thank you. With those, with these.

[Mike Lawler]

That's why I've not been open to the three year extension with no reforms because to me that's just unacceptable.

[Larry]

Right.

[Mike Lawler]

The problem here and why Brian Fitzpatrick signed it this morning and why others may is doing nothing is not an answer either. And this is the problem. This is why I'm saying this is such a foolish exercise by some of my colleagues.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. You have a question for the Congressman.

[Yemassi]

You know, Congressman, thank you so much for being here. I was at a talk with Rep. Hudson and Del Bene where they were talking about the political map and the future for 2026. And we know that healthcare is just the number one topic. And so I'm wondering how much pressure do Republicans feel right now to get something done before we turn into 2026 and how much do you think constituents are going to hold Democrats or Republicans feet to the fire if everybody breaks and we come back for the new year without, without something done?

[Mike Lawler]

Look, affordability is, is the top issue, right? And whether it's housing, health care, energy costs, food costs, taxes, that's what people are focused on. We passed a tax bill that is going to provide a very large tax cut for middle class and working class families, especially for instance in New York where the average New Yorker is going to see a $4,000 tax cut, which obviously is a positive step forward. But you have to tackle these other issues. Democrats can sit here and blame Republicans for health care, but this is their agenda. This is their bill that has been in effect for 15 years and has actually driven up the price of health care. Insurance companies have made 2000% increase in profits and people cannot afford health care plans. We in the majority though have a responsibility to offer solutions. And my point is it is dual track. The immediate is an extension of the premium tax credit with reforms coupled with larger health care reforms like having associated health plans. And I'll give you another. I fundamentally believe UnitedHealthcare, the largest health insurance company in the country, should not be owning providers. They should have no ownership stake in providers. That is a conflict of interest and should be addressed. That should be banned. You look at, you know, Aetna and CVS Caremark, that should be banned. PBM reform is critical. HSA expansion is critical. Catastrophic coverage, being able to purchase across state lines. There is a lot of things we can and should do and Republicans are going to be doing that. But I think it is a mistake not to address the immediate issue of the ACA extension.

[Mark Halpern]

There's just tons, tons of substantive ideas there that, you know, can't be considered in the fly but will be considered. And the congressman is amongst a bipartisan group trying in both bodies, trying to get them. We got to let the congressman go because we've already taken a bit off schedule. But announcing now tomorrow's guest hosts, co hosts here on the morning meeting will be Mike Lawler and Ro Khanna. They'll be sitting in Yemeni and Larry's seat. So, Congressman, thank you for making a little time today. Get a good night's sleep because you'll be on for the full hour with us tomorrow with Congressman Khanna.

[Mike Lawler]

Look forward to it.

[Larry]

Don't go out of your way to agree with Roe, Congressman. Yeah, I know your instinct is to do that.

[Yemassi]

Another Jeffrey showdown. That's what I want to see.

[Mark Halpern]

All right, to your questions now. Again, I'm grateful to Congressman for joining us to explain where he is on this issue, although didn't tell us about the discharge petition. So we shall see. Quick word from a sponsor to enter your questions. If you're here on the platform, want to get in on the conversation, please raise your hand. Sponsor. Today, our good friends at Chef IQ. Go to Chef IQ.com use the promo code 2WMM. 30% off the whole site, including their Chef IQ Sense wireless cooking thermometer. Download the app, put the thermometer in whatever it is you're cooking and it will do most of the rest. It's a little bit magical. I've been using it. You can cook anything. It'll tell you when to take it out, when to turn it, how long to let it sit after you take it out. Chef IQ Sense is a wireless cooking thermometer is a gift you can give to anybody on your list can order it today and still get it in time. You can sit around and your friends and family can sit around and socialize and enjoy the holidays rather than hovering over the oven. Again, go to chef IQ.com use the promo code 2WMM. 30% off the thermometer and everything else on the site. All the other accoutrements you need to be able to cook well and easily. It's a perfect gift for every chef on your lift. Again, chefiq.com promo code two WMM.

[James Patterson]

I'm James Patterson. I write way too many books. Welcome to Hungry Dogs. The title comes from my maternal grandmother, Isabel Zelvis Morris. Nan used to always say, hungry dogs run faster, James, and I've been running fast ever since. Here's what will be coming your way soon. And this is a really terrific list. I think you'll hear from some incredible people like Stacey Abrams.

[Mark Halpern]

Yay.

[James Patterson]

BJ Novak. Yay. Kathy Bates, Dolly Parton, Josh Gad, and Pope Leo. Okay, maybe not Pope Leo, but who knows, maybe he'll show up. Hungry Dogs run faster. Thank you, grandma, for turning me into a hopeless, obsessive compulsive. Listen to Hungry Dogs with James Patterson. That'd be me on Apple, Spotify, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

[Mark Halpern]

Thank you for your attention to this matter. Andrew, welcome in. Tell folks who don't know where you are and what's on your mind for Larry and for Yemen.

[Andrew]

Hey, good morning. Wanted to talk a little bit about the, the Brown University shooting investigation. I watched the video. I don't know if you've seen the five minute video the FBI released last night.

[Mark Halpern]

Show seen it, seen it all.

[Andrew]

Yeah. So I can't help it but feel like it feels like the Luigi Mangione investigation from last year with these video pieces coming out, the surgical mask, all these things. Mark, my questions for you, I haven't heard you talk about this in a while, but prior to the election, you talked a lot about the mental health crisis that the US Was going to be facing and kind of looking backwards now, I want to know that the health crisis the country would face, you know, depending on the outcome. And looking back now, what we've seen, just with some of the crazy violence going back to Mangione a year ago, going back to Charlie Kirk, this, other things, I mean, there's, there's, there's a litany of things.

[Larry]

Yeah.

[Andrew]

Do you think that it's manifesting? Is that what we're seeing?

[Mark Halpern]

Well, in terms of Brown, until we know who did it, we don't really, we can't speak to whether it fits into a larger context. I will say on that. Before I answer your question, I continue to say we just, we're talking about this before the show. There are not very many people who walk into a room with a gun, whether it's on a campus or someplace else, shoot and leave. They usually get killed or they kill themselves. There's some examples of Born Atomy Parkland, the Parkland assailant assassin left and was caught, but normally they don't. And so I don't, I'm not saying it was a hit on someone, but I'm saying we can't rule it out because it's an unusual circumstance for someone to get away. In terms of mental health crisis, there's a lot of strands to that. You know, all the things, cause and effect related to fentanyl crisis. Trump, people who are very upset about President Trump's victory, anti Semitism. There's lots of things out of whack in this country. And we've seen Charlie Kirk and other President Trump. We don't know the motive there, but the political violence has become a reality here. Violence has been a reality for a while. I wish we had a president who had the capacity and the inclination to work on this harder than this president does. But I'm extremely worried about it. And I'm not normally try to be optimistic. I'm not seeing the strands of recovery, of unity and of mental health. And particularly for young people who have turned away from faith, have turned to other things, social media, et cetera. I think we need a whole new generation, not just the governmental leaders, but of business leaders and faith leaders and community leaders and parents. Parents. Parents who try to get more of a handle on this. So that's my pessimistic answer. Yemassi, thoughts?

[Yemassi]

Well, I'm just. I was more struck by the story, you bringing up Parkland. I was so struck by the story of the young woman that had survived that and then had experienced another. And we're kind of coming into where people are able to stack up at this point, having these kinds of experiences. And I don't really think anything changes. I've been more disappointed with law enforcement surrounding this. Each press conference has been a complete and utter disaster and mess. I actually saw the president put something out on Truth Social where he criticized Brown University for even their lack of security cameras. I just think in this environment where we are all hyper aware of what can happen to schools at any point, there's gotta be responsibility on academic institutions to protect these students. Every video I see of students were not fully aware of some of the things that were even happening, that there was an active shooter on campus. Some of the students were running out of the engineering building and they said across the street they were running into students who had no idea what was going on. It's like every time this happens, we have a conversation about mental health. We have a conversation about the Second Amendment. Okay, well, now we have to have a conversation, unfortunately for all of our academic institutions, about what are you doing to protect these children that parents are sending out of state when it's clear that they had no emergency preparedness.

[Larry]

Yeah, Larry.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah.

[Larry]

And if you look at articles prior to this shooting, the Students were complaining that there were too many cameras on the campus. They felt like it was one of the most surveilled campus. And they do have cameras, but certainly not in, ironically, the places that they needed to find this assailant. The behavior of the elected officials and law enforcement, Andrew, have been less than stellar. And there's no confidence that they know what they're doing. And it almost appears as though they're withholding information for whatever reason. It doesn't make any sense to echo what Mark was saying, for somebody to go into a classroom, shoot everybody up, walk away nonchalantly and still be at large and then have law enforcement and local officials. They sound like the mayor in Jaws saying, no danger here. Everybody's safe. How can you tell us we're safe when there's an assailant running around unless they know that this was targeted and that the person was targeting one specific person in that classroom? And I don't want to go off in the speculation world, but we all have brains and we're trying to put the pieces together.

[Mark Halpern]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I normally shy away from them. And when I do dabble, I'm usually wrong and embarrassed about it. And then I do a, I do an after action report on myself and say, why did I go down that hole? However, the thing I already said, that the guy walked away, number one. Number two, I'll say again, the, the. Look at how little. I've read all the stories and I've, I've done a ton of research on this. How. Look how little we know about what happened in that room. Look how little we know. Where did he enter from? How long was he in there? Who did he shoot? In what order? How close was he to the two people he shot when he shot them? The news that has not been reported. It's not been reported by law enforcement. It's not been reported by the, by the, by the people in the room. Okay, that makes me suspicious. Usually by now we have more accounts of what happened in the rooms where people were shot. Go ahead, Larry.

[Larry]

But what we do know is that on a campus where only 6% of the student body identified themselves as conservative and in a survey last month said that they feared sharing their political beliefs openly on campus, one of the people murdered was the most high profile Christian conservative activist on campus.

[Mark Halpern]

And I say again, how would the press be approaching coverage of that victim if this were at Baylor University? And one of the two people who was killed was the head of the College Democrats?

[Larry]

We know how they would and they were.

[Mark Halpern]

And that person was from Cambridge, Massachusetts. We know there would be a national thirst in the media to say, how did this happen? How could it be that that person wasn't targeted? I'm not saying she was. I've talked about this before, and people twist my words. I'm just saying the combination of the mysterious circumstances of the guy walking away of one of the two people was killed, of nothing being reported about what happened in the room where people were killed and her identity all adds up to. We just. We need to get to the bottom of it. I'm not engaging in a conspiracy theory. Everything I said is factual, and it's just unsettling under the circumstances.

[Andrew]

Yeah, yeah, I agree. Hey, can I just say, too, on the point about the incompetence of law enforcement that we've seen at least, or the appearance of. Of incompetence, it seems to go right to the top. Cash Patel showing up on the Katie Miller podcast.

[Mark Halpern]

Taped. Taped before.

[Yemassi]

Held it, though. No, Mark, I know that's a pretty.

[Mark Halpern]

Tape, but that's up to Katie. That's up to Katie Miller.

[Andrew]

But she's, like, friendly with the administration.

[Mark Halpern]

Why wouldn't.

[Andrew]

Why wouldn't she hold it, you know, or why wouldn't they act?

[Larry]

It's.

[Mark Halpern]

I mean, I mean, I don't. I. I'm critical of a lot. I'm not critical of that. I mean, they taped it before and, you know, life goes on. I mean, it's a tragic thing, but it's not like people aren't doing stuff. People are watching football games and doing other stuff and.

[Andrew]

No, no doubt.

[Mark Halpern]

But I'm not.

[Andrew]

He's the FBI director.

[Mark Halpern]

I understand. I understand. I'm not Trouble with you.

[Larry]

All right.

[Mark Halpern]

I'm at. I'm at voted. Andrew, thank you. Grateful to you. Thanks for being part of Two Way. Okay, Robert, welcome in. Tell folks who don't know where you are what's on your mind for Embassy and for Larry.

[Robert]

Just again, just to give you some sort of ad hoc reporting from the JD Vance event yesterday in my backyard. I mean, he's another conspiracy theorist, Mark, so don't worry about it.

[Mark Halpern]

He only believes. Like me, he only believes in the true ones.

[Larry]

Didn't he handle that? Magnificently?

[Mark Halpern]

He did.

[Robert]

He did, Yeah, I think so. And I mean, they really just. The press was there and they were just waiting for something to gang up on them. I mean, I. Yeah, I know there was a lot of security there. I'm not sure the security was for JD and Ryan McKenzie or for the press to make sure that they didn't get manhandled by the crowd. But in any event.

[Mark Halpern]

But yeah, J.D.

[Robert]

Vance is our guy for 28. I mean, there's no doubt about it. I mean, I, you know, it'll be vance Rubio for 20, 28 and such. It was encouraging to see him out on the field. I would have to say that from the perspective of the young people that are there, everybody's looking forward to having JD Step up as an evolution of, you know, the Trump agenda. They're looking for a younger face. They're looking for, you know, younger leaders out there. And I think it'll be very invigorating for. For the party and such. I don't know what everybody's hearing otherwise, but JD Spoke very glowingly of Marco Rubio there, and I don't know. So I don't know what everybody's hearing to the contrary, but they seem to be pretty tight.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. Okay, Larry. Yeah.

[Larry]

And listen, I'm the person who floated that maybe there is some sort of strategy going on here. All I can say is there's a lot of game to be played. I mean, you know, you go back.

[Robert]

Oh, yeah, there's a lot of time on the screen.

[Larry]

You know, go back. Go back to one year into Obama's second term, and Republicans were all jockeying, and everybody knew that Jeb Bush was untouchable. He was going to run away with the nomination. So different dynamics, certainly, when you're the vice president, but a lot's going to happen between now and then. And I think that Marco Rubio, say what you will, I think he's a great guy. He's also a very savvy politician.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. Yeah. Would you be more afraid in a general election to run against Rubio or Vance?

[Yemassi]

I think I'm more afraid of a joint ticket.

[Larry]

Yeah.

[Yemassi]

Yeah, Yeah. I think a joint ticket is a strong, smart idea.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah.

[Yemassi]

Gets rid of any multi regional, multicultural.

[Mark Halpern]

And they'd have literally $2 billion in the Iowa New Hampshire.

[Robert]

Experience. Yep.

[Mark Halpern]

Robert, thank you. Grateful to you. Okay, Haley, welcome in. Tell folks who inexplicably don't know where you are and what's on your mind.

[I]

Hi, I'm from Queens, New York. It's a little cold here. First off, I just wanted to say I have a huge girl crush on you. Y. I think you're brilliant and fantastic, and I love every time I see you on here. So, first.

[Mark Halpern]

First that.

[I]

I'm fascinated by, like, the palace intrigue Susie Wiles story, and I just want to kind of like ask a general question. Because for me, I find it fascinating that they would talk to Vanity Fair. I find it like completely wild that they would give them like such a vast amount of time and so many quotes. I just think it's like equivalent to like, I don't know, AOC going to Breitbart and sitting down and having like an in depth. And I just find it wild. So what is the reasoning that like.

[Mark Halpern]

Did you miss the top of the show?

[I]

I might have. I apologize.

[Mark Halpern]

That's okay. I think, as I said at the top, I'm pretty confident in this. It's about Whipple. People are saying Susie wanted the fame and celebrity of Vanity Fair. If Whipple had been writing that for National Geographic or for Breitbart, I think she would have done it. He's the chronicler of chief society.

[I]

So that's what I was going to ask. Is it more about the reporter?

[Mark Halpern]

I don't think they cared about being in Vanity Fair. If anything, they thought it was a negative. And just. I'm sorry, just very. Then before one more thing. And then you. You see in the piece, the vice presidents throughout the photo shoot is like, these people are going to trash us. These people are horrible. It's not like they were. It's like they're ignorant of what Vanity Fair is about. But Whipple was the draw.

[Larry]

Larry Whipple is a draw for CZ Wiles, I think, but for the most part because of the chief of staff aspect of it. But they all posed for the Vanity Fair photographer. They knew they were getting the power shot that they got, which is an epic shot. I don't think they were that reluctant. I think sadly. And Erik Erickson echoes this in his newsletter this morning that I'll plug a second time. Eric, you owe me. Eric says this that Trump and sadly, many people in Washington D.C. still crave that validation.

[Mark Halpern]

Yes.

[Larry]

From the New York Times. But George Stephanopoulos of all.

[Mark Halpern]

But Susie Wiles does that. Susie Wells doesn't. Yeah. Haley, thank you. Grateful to you. Thanks for being part of Two Way. Okay, Alan, welcome in. Tell folks who don't know where you are what's on your mind.

[Larry]

Hello.

[Yemassi]

Hear me?

[Mark Halpern]

Yes, ma'.

[Yemassi]

Am.

[J]

Hi. I am in Scottsdale. Thank you so much. I actually have a question about Venezuela.

[Mark Halpern]

Great.

[J]

I know the narrative seems to be as we're building up the. Our fleet out there are down there.

[Yemassi]

It seems to be about oil. And I was wondering.

[J]

I've read some things about China just sort of being more involved in Latin America. Economically, strategically, whatnot. And I was wondering, is our involved, sudden involvement with Venezuela really more about trying to have our hand in the pot of South America and strategically place ourselves as China inserts itself more into South America? And if so, why is that not being part of the open narrative?

[Mark Halpern]

You're 100% correct. And this is, this is Rubio's theory of the case is you overthrow Maduro and the dominoes fall. And every, every government in the region knows if you don't play Trump, Trump and Rubio's game, you're in danger of losing your power. So this is, this is part of the whole spheres of influence thing. It's what happened. Remember Greenland? Remember we were discussing Greenland a while ago? It's all part of saying in Panama and Panama, this is all part of the President's conception of, by the end of his term, China, Russia and the United States are going to have carved up the world into spheres of influence. And he wants Latin America, Rubio wants Latin America. And they also want these countries to have democratic, you know, reform. They want them to be capitalists. They want to be part of a north, a Western hemisphere trading bloc. So, yes, oil is a big part of it, but that's part of the sphere of influence. Right. President's view is we want oil. The oil that's in our hemisphere, that's our oil. That's not to go to China, Larry.

[Larry]

And specifically, we helped develop that oil. When we had a relationship, Venezuela didn't we reesturiate it. It was our oil companies. We paid for the infrastructure that's keeping Marxist stream live right now. I was fortunate enough in the first term to do a. I was in the new before we called it the new Media chair Buck Sexton. And I got to go on a trip with Mike Pompeo when he was Secretary of State, and we went to Buenos Aires, we went to El Salvador, we went to Bolivia, we went to Mexico City, and we interviewed the secretary, and he said two things that I think ring true to this administration, which is, number one, we've lamentably neglected Latin America in our own backyard for far too long, and we've allowed China to get a foothold there. And I think that Marco Rubio, if Pompeo thought that Rubio thinks it 100%.

[Yemassi]

Yeah, I do love that. It's like pivoted fully from drugs to oil.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, well, drugs is part of it.

[Larry]

Too, but the oil fuses.

[Mark Halpern]

But it's number three. It's number three, all right.

[Yemassi]

But drugs was the whole. The main driver there for a lot of it.

[Mark Halpern]

So as the drugs was how quickly.

[Yemassi]

We forget the fentanyl.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. Ellen, thank you. Very grateful to you.

[J]

Thank you.

[Mark Halpern]

All right. I have a ton of tell every tons to tell everybody about. So please bear with me. Take out a pen because you may want to take notes on some of this. In three minutes, I'll be on Michael Smerconish, my weekly Wednesday hit. Available to you now, my new episode of NextUp, my reported monologue on the biggest media trends of 2025 and what to look forward to in The Media in 2026 my interview with my friend Rabbi David Wolpe about antisemitism and what can be done about it. And my conversation with David Winston, not the most famous pollster in America, but one of the best. Been a pollster for House Republicans in particular and others for a long time. And David and I talk about the central issue in the midterms, which is the relationship between the economy, voter sentiment, independence, the president's approval rating. All that's available to you now on next up. Okay. Noon today, Meghan McCain is on with a new episode of Citizen McCain. Her guest, Colonel Kurtz and reality TV producer Carlos King join them at noon Eastern, 6 o' clock tonight. We've already recorded tonight's episode of Two Way Tonight. So please don't turn on, don't come on the platform. It's a great episode. It's really we convened these conversations about 2028 somewhat regularly, and they're the most interesting conversations, I believe, anywhere about the president. The next presidential campaign guests this time are our hardy perennials, Amy Parnes, Jonathan Allen. And then we're also joined by Jaime Moore and then John Podoritz. And John's father, Norm Pedoretz, a legendary figure in America. Giant passed away. If you haven't read John's tribute to his dad on Commentary, you should. But but anyway, that conversation, you can watch it on YouTube at 6 o'. Clock. It's just a great the four of them are just brilliant. We talked, we ran through all the candidates and Democratic side. We talked about the Rubio stuff with JD Vance, really recommend it to you if you're interested in 2028. Just a spectacular conversation. My colleagues were just so bright. And then Real America with Bridget. She's having a holiday party for all of you on two on Real America at seven Eastern time. So please join her at seven Eastern. Brill America, Bridget Fedisy, Bridget, the invitation. Bring a cocktail. Come and discuss how you feel about 2025 as we close the year. And then finally on the morning meeting tomorrow, as I said, our guest co hosts will be two members of Congress, Ro Khanna and Mike Lawler. So please join for that. We'll have normal format. We'll see if the members of Congress can keep up with larryannemisi and everybody else. And reminder that tomorrow our last programs for both the morning meeting and two way tonight for the year, we'll be on holiday break starting on Friday. So tomorrow the live show. So please come and join us. Larry MC couldn't be more grateful to the two of you and looking forward to seeing both of you more in 2026. So thank you.

[Larry]

Thank you.

[Mark Halpern]

All right, everybody, thank you. Thank you for being part of two way. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year back. Exactly. I'll see you on SmartOnDish in three minutes. They're I'm late so they're looking for me. Have a great day, everybody.