Serious Threat To Zohran Mamdani Amid Reports Adams May Withdraw from NY Mayoral Race, Helping Cuomo

Summary

---

2WAY Morning Meeting – September 3, 2025

Episode Theme:

A Serious Threat to Zohran Mamdani Amid Reports Adams May Withdraw from NY Mayoral Race, Helping Cuomo

This episode, hosted by Mark Halperin, Sean Spicer, and Dan Turrentine, offers a lively and in-depth look ahead at the day in U.S. politics. The main focus is on potential shifts in the New York mayoral race—with speculation around Eric Adams dropping out and the implications for Andrew Cuomo and Zohran Mamdani—as well as major developments in national and international news, including federal interventions in Chicago, the messaging battle for the 2026 midterms, bombshells in the Epstein investigation, and China's global posture. The episode features strong exchanges among hosts, notable guest questions, and engaging community participation.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Federal Intervention in Chicago & the National Guard

[05:25–11:34]

• Discussion centers on President Trump’s inclination to send federal troops or agents to Chicago in response to rising crime, referencing recent legal rulings limiting federal authority.
• Dan: Suggests Trump may send in troops for political theater, expecting crime to dip briefly and leaving after a judge orders withdrawal. He calls local claims that "all is well" in Chicago "insane" ([06:56]).
• Sean: Analyzes the legal and political mechanics, pointing out Trump can send federal agents like ICE, but sending the National Guard or military would face judicial rebuffs unless there’s an "insurrection." He stresses the politics: "If he sends them in and crime goes down, Trump gets to draw a huge contrast" ([07:27], [08:46]).
• A consensus emerges: There is a strong likelihood of federal presence before Monday Night Football in Chicago ([11:09], [11:32]).

2. Supreme Court & Major Legal Showdowns

[11:37–16:14]

• Mark presses urgency for the Supreme Court to expedite politically charged cases, especially regarding the Fed's independence and tariffs.
• Sean: Predicts the Court will take up the Cook case this year, hinging on whether the President met the legal "cause" threshold for firings ([13:21]).
• Dan: Sceptical, thinks tariff issues are more likely to get resolved first; sees political implications dictating Court decisions ([13:13]).
• They debate why a fired official can remain in place pending court review, with Sean explaining ambiguities in statutory authority ([14:18], [15:07]).

3. Midterms Messaging & Democratic Strategy

[16:14–22:39]

• Analysis of a Washington Post story about the Democratic plan for 2026 midterms.
• Dan: Urges Democrats to craft a positive agenda; highlights historical examples like "Contract with America." Notes that "corruption" can work if tied to real life, but the party lacks a clear post-Trump direction ([18:04], [19:19]).
• Sean: Blunt critique—“They have everything problem... leadership, messaging, mechanics” ([20:47]). Argues Democrats lack both a plan and the leadership to unify progressives and moderates.

4. The Epstein Doc Release & Bipartisan Outrage

[22:39–28:10]

• Ro Khanna previews a major press conference revealing new testimony from Epstein survivors, flanked by Rep. Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene, vowing bipartisan pursuit of truth ([22:57]).
• Mark and Sean discuss the impact: the further release of documents, public appetite for disclosure, and how both parties stand to lose, with rumors that more Democrats could be exposed. Dan: Sees risk of the issue dominating news cycles and potential for Trump to use distraction tactics ([27:18]).

5. China’s Grandstanding & U.S. Policy

[28:10–31:34]

• Footage from China’s military parade prompts a discussion on the growing sense of a "twilight existential struggle" with the U.S. and the West.
• Sean: Warns that China's capabilities and intentions are more threatening than commonly acknowledged: “It should send a chill through everybody’s spine” ([29:17]).
• Dan: Would pick Rahm Emanuel (former Ambassador to Japan) to give a major speech on China’s threat, arguing only by uniting with Russia, India, and the EU (rather than antagonizing) can the U.S. counter Beijing ([30:32]).

6. NYC Mayoral Race Shakeup—Adams, Cuomo, Mamdani

[32:20–35:42]

• Mark shares credible chatter that Eric Adams may exit the New York mayoral race, possibly paving the way for a Cuomo resurgence at Mamdani’s expense ([32:20]).
• Dan: Calls this "absolutely massive," predicts the anti-Mamdani vote would coalesce behind Cuomo, making Cuomo the favorite: “Mondani cannot get above 40%. He has not moved in two and a half months... Andrew Cuomo becomes the strong favorite” ([33:38]).
• Sean: Adds that GOP strategists weigh whether it's preferable to have a "socialist foil" in Mamdani or a skilled politician like Cuomo; Mark notes Trump's allies are lobbying fiercely to block Mamdani ([34:06]).

7. Senate Politics: Sununu’s Prospects in New Hampshire

[36:20–38:16]

• Reports that John Sununu is weighing a Senate run. Hosts agree he'd be a heavy favorite, noting bipartisan respect and political acumen.
• Tension discussed around potential Trump interference, but consensus: Sununu's “wicked smart” maneuvering likely means he would only run if the Trump question is settled ([37:24], [37:28]).

8. Community Q&A – Voter Sentiments & State Races

[40:00–57:27]

• Walt from California: Shares his ancestral background, political journey from Democrat to Libertarian to Trump voter—a mirror for many swing voters ([41:02–42:20]).
• Questions whether GOP will invest resources in fighting Gavin Newsom’s redistricting effort, with Sean confirming major fundraising and emphasizing the high stakes for both parties ([45:47]).
• Susan (former Democrat): Voices concern about Democrats losing touch, brings up alternate foreign policy perspectives found on YouTube and wonders if Trump is quietly accommodating Russia over Ukraine ([50:55–53:47]).
• Reynolds from Georgia: Bets Roy Cooper will win NC Senate due to his moderate reputation, despite being unable to pursue a liberal agenda with a GOP legislature ([54:37–57:27]).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Sean Spicer on Democratic disarray:
  “They have everything problem. Leadership, messaging, mechanics... The problem is Hakeem Jeffries doesn’t have the gravitas that Nancy Pelosi had...” [20:47]

• Mark Halperin on NYC Mayoral dynamics:
  “Don’t be surprised if [Mayor Adams] is out of the race before two way tonight. What he’s been promised, why I think that’s in his interest will be much discussed. This is a guy who likes to trade things.” [32:20]

• Dan Turrentine on Cuomo’s odds:
  “Mondani cannot get above 40%. He has not moved in two and a half months... Andrew Cuomo becomes the strong favorite.” [33:38]

• Sean Spicer on China threat:
  “It should send a chill through everybody’s spine what they have and they’re not showing us... They want world domination.” [29:17]

• Ro Khanna on Epstein file push:
  “For the first time since Donald Trump walked down the escalator, we are going to have progressives, moderates, independents and MAGA supporters on the same side demanding truth and justice.” [23:54]

• Mark Halperin on Democratic strategy:
  "The lesson for me is Democrats need to stop hoping Trump is dead and reckon with him alive." [32:20]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [05:25–11:34] — Federal intervention discussion: troops in Chicago
• [12:58–16:14] — Discussion: Supreme Court priorities, Cook & tariffs
• [16:14–22:39] — Analysis: Democratic messaging for 2026 midterms
• [22:39–28:10] — Epstein documents release & cross-party outrage
• [28:10–31:34] — China’s parade, U.S. threat assessment
• [32:20–35:42] — NYC Mayor’s race shakeup, stakes for Adams/Mamdani/Cuomo
• [36:20–38:16] — Senate 2026: Sununu in New Hampshire
• [40:00–57:27] — Q&A with community—swing voter stories, state races, Newsom’s future
• [57:47–59:08] — Preview: Upcoming 2WAY/Sean Spicer programming

---

Additional Highlights

• The episode blends sharp insider analysis with accessible Q&A, bringing real voter perspectives to bear on national issues.
• Wide agreement across political affiliations about the gravity of threats posed by China, dissatisfaction with party strategies, and the volatility facing major city elections.
• The community segment is especially rich, giving voice to ideological migrators and engaging with everyday concerns—from local redistricting to global conflicts.

---

This episode is an essential listen for anyone trying to keep up with the fast-moving currents in American politics—from the fate of NYC and the 2026 electoral cycle to the shadow of geopolitics and legal showdowns.

---

Transcript

[Mark]

It's been so long. How have you been? Hello. I'm doing well, Dave. Why? Why are you talking that way? Please say one for a compliment or two for a question. Yeah, this is weird. I think I'm gonna go.

[Bridget Fedisi]

Talking with an automated phone tree can feel pretty ridiculous. That's why when you call Pacific Source Health Plans, you'll get a real person to answer all your important questions. Pacific Source Health Plans. This is a real person.

[Mark]

How can I help you?

[Bridget Fedisi]

Human service, not automated phone trees. Find a [e-mail] bundle and safe with exp.

[Dan]

You were made to follow your favorite.

[Mark]

Band and from the front row we.

[Dan]

Were made to quietly save you. More Expedia made to Travel savings vary.

[Mark]

And subject to availability. Flight inclusive packages are atoll protected. To the morning meeting with Mark and Sean and Dan. So song goes. Thank you for joining. Welcome. This is based on the Network News Division's morning meetings. We'll run through the day and kick things around a bit and then ask you for your participation. That's the unique O. Henry twist we provide. If you'd like to be part of the conversation here on the two way platform, I'd ask that you raise your hand like Jack has already done. If you'd like to be a first time questioner, we'd welcome you in. Many of you join for the first time, some coming over from YouTube. And if you're watching over on YouTube, don't raise your hand, don't put smack in the chat. And if you're experiencing technical difficulties, thank you for notifying us, we much appreciate it. We'll get to you in a moment. As always we ask and no greater avatar of this principle than Reynolds Saunders. Peace, love and understanding. As Rebecca would say, the presumption of grace to all and for all. There's a lot of topics today that our friends over at the View down the street would call hot topics, which could incite some strong feelings. We'd let all point of views represented here, we try to represent them amongst the three of us, but we'd like you to represent them too. So even if you disagree with say Sean, you can still raise your hand. In fact, Sean would urge hey look, my dad just joined. Hilariously. Sean, I'd like you to urge liberals to join. Join by raising their hand. Please explain why they should.

[Sean]

It's a safe space. You can come on. Dan will help you. He will make sure that you feel comfortable, will give you a safe opportunity to express yourself regardless of your pronouns.

[Dan]

And so join all pronouns are welcome.

[Sean]

All pronouns are welcome.

[Mark]

Dan, I know we don't need to encourage more MAGA participation, but what would you say to Democrats here on the platform? There are many who just don't raise their hands.

[Dan]

You absolutely should. Come on. You should defend your positions with passion. Tell us where you think we're wrong and tell us where you think the party should be going. We're going through this conversation in private and in public. Add your voice to it. We happen to know some people thinking of running for president watch this show they do every day. I think you'll hear about it. Yeah.

[Sean]

Yes. Preview, preview. Somebody very important that I say is running for president is now on the record watching the show.

[Mark]

Well, tell us about that on the record, Sean.

[Sean]

Well, it's going to. It hasn't been officially on the record, but it will be. It's on video.

[Mark]

Okay. Exciting. Additionally, you'll want to watch the end of the program today when I'll reveal which New York City mayoral candidate may be getting out of the race. That's a deep tease. It's Mayor Adams. We'll get to that in a minute. But first, a brief. A brief word from our sponsor. Our sponsor, Cozy Earth. You've heard me talk about them before. Best pants I've ever owned. They're comfortable, they wick away heat and moisture, but they also look great. Cozy Earth. You can get your pants. You can get your bamboo joggers made from viscous. From bamboo. You can get your everywhere pant. Everywhere pant. There's no s on it. I've never will understand that. But that's what they call them. Bedding. Also available. Recommend the bedding. Slept on it all summer. I left them somewhere else. I got to go get them back. Extremely comfortable, softest, most comfortable sheets you have and extremely affordable under any circumstances. But with this discount offer, if you use the promo code morning40, cozyearth.com, you get 40% off. 40% off. Some of you have listened to me and bought the pants and I've heard from you and you're satisfied, happy customers. And you said, mark, I'm so grateful to you for the morning meeting for two way tonight for two way in general. But now I'm forever grateful to you in some way. Like I will give you my firstborn because the pants are the best pants I've ever owned. Again, cozyearth.com 40% off with the promo code Morning40. Built for real life, made to keep up with yours. Cozy Earth. Not my favorite line, but I read.

[Dan]

It Anyway, mint is still $15 a month for premium wireless. And if you haven't made the switch yet, here are 15 reasons why you should. One, it's $15 a month. Two, seriously, it's $15 a month. Three, no big contracts.

[Sean]

Four, I use it.

[Mark]

Five, my mom uses it.

[Dan]

Are you playing me off?

[Sean]

That's what's happening, right?

[Dan]

Okay, give it a try.

[Mark]

@Mintmobile.Com Switch upfront payment of $45 for three month plan. $15 per month equivalent required. New customer offer first three months only, then full price plan, options available, taxes and fees extra. Cmobile.com all right, guys, let's get into it, as they say. Or what does that Chris Cuomo say? Let's get, let's get into it. What does Chris say? Let's get to it. What does he say? Chris has some catchphrase. I don't know. All right, crime, anti crime.

[Sean]

He needs to work on the catchphrase.

[Mark]

If the court of appeals, the district court decision, Judge Breyer's decision, most legal experts believe only applies under the recent Supreme Court decision to his own district. So President Trump would be courting an additional negative decision, potentially from another district court, if he sent troops into forces into Chicago. And yesterday the mayor and the governor were defiant and said, don't you dare do that. The president yesterday said it's coming. And people keep talking about Friday as the day. It doesn't look like they will follow the lead of the mayor of D.C. who said, Great, let's keep going. Dan, what's gonna happen in Chicago this week? Is the president going to send forces there and are they gonna be rebuffed? Are they gonna just sit around for 20 minutes and leave? What's gonna happen in Chicago, given the court ruling and all the posturing, obviously.

[Dan]

I don't know what Trump is gonna have up his sleeve, but if I were him, given his pattern, I would send them in. And if crime goes down for two days and a judge says I have to pull them out, then I would just, you know, you get to laugh all the way to the polls, which is when, when the troops are on the ground, when there are, as Mark, as you said yesterday, when they're on street corners, people are less likely to commit crime. And you look at the headlines that came out of that city this past weekend, you look at the last few years, for the city of Chicago, the governor of Illinois and the party to try to argue that all is well in Chicago and it's not that bad is insane.

[Mark]

Sean, this is not buttering you up. It's just factual. There's almost no one in the country better able to analyze this. You know, Trump, you know, the military, you know, intergovernmental affairs and, you know, public relations. What's going to happen in Chicago between now and when this gets resolved? Will we see National Guard, active military? What are we going to see on the ground defending the Apple Store, on the Miracle Mile, hopefully, because that's what needs defending.

[Sean]

As Chris Cuomo would say, let's get after it.

[Mark]

Let's get after it. That's what he says.

[Sean]

Let's get tip to Chris Holiday in the chat. I do look at it.

[Mark]

Yeah.

[Sean]

So look, I think there's, you hear me say all the time, the politics and the policies. Dan's right on the politics on this. If he sends him in and crime goes down, he then can dress, draw a huge contrast. And I think Trump wants to do this. There's on the politic, policy part of this. Kristi Noem has every right to send in as many ICE agents. They're federal agents. They're eighteen elevens in federal government parlance, which means that they already, they don't. There's no federalizing them. They are federal agents. They have jurisdiction in all of the 50 states in our territories. So that part he's 100% clear on. He can send as many FBI, ICE, DEA, ATF, whatever. And he's 100% solid on that. If he sends the Guardian. And this is what you guys, you know, where we, we've been clear on this. The Title 10 versus the Title 32, the court ruling, while it was limited to that jurisdiction, still is going to, you have to prove that there's an insurrection that you're, you're trying to address. And as much as crime is on the rise and probably, you know, unrealistic for a lot of people to live with in or unsustainable in Chicago, I don't know that it rises to the level of an insurrection. And I think that's where he will get rebuffed. And the one last thing I'll say.

[Dan]

This, but Sean, does he do it almost hoping to be right?

[Sean]

And that's why I said you're right on politics. But the other thing that's got you got to understand about why DC Is working is it's the mayor. Like, they're working hand in glove. So the troops are on one corner the cops can go do. It's actually them relieving the cops of certain things to allow them to go do their jobs. So if, if The Guard shows up and just stands on the Miracle Mile, whether the Apple Store or the, you know, through a bunch of hotels. Yes, you will probably see crime down, but I don't know that it is impactful. So that's the other problem that I think they might have. So I would be careful as to watch what they do, because if it gets messy and you've got ICE agents doing one thing and the guards standing over, it's harder to claim credit. So I think how they execute this is going to matter.

[Mark]

There hasn't been, to my knowledge, a single report of a federal official of any type, military or civilian, shooting somebody or engaged in excessive force in D.C. right. There's also this question of how much they're protecting Apple Stores versus Anacostia, like the double A's there. What if in Chicago, he sent ICE and National Guard to the worst neighborhoods, the neighborhoods with the most shootings? Yeah. What if he did that? That would seem to be both good politics and good policy. Assuming nobody got killed, assuming they didn't overstep their bounds, but if they went really well trained with a really clear mission, wouldn't that be good politics and good policy?

[Dan]

Yeah, yeah. But I mean, I think the challenge is, you said well trained. They're not trained in domestic police. So you are right.

[Mark]

But if all the Guard does is put hardware down, stand on the corner with guns and ICE arrests people there illegally and confiscates weapons, which is, again, the irony is Rich. Wouldn't that be a good idea, Sean?

[Sean]

I think so. I think again. And what's gonna happen is they'll push back and the court will say, you can't do this. And then to Dan's point, Trump gets to throw up his arms and say, look, I tried to keep Chicago safe for 24, 48 hours. There wasn't a shooting, and it was better. And now this is up to Brandon Johnson. This is.

[Mark]

All right, exit question. Will there be National Guard forces on the ground in Chicago by the Sunday? Yes or no, Dan? Yes.

[Dan]

By the way, Monday Night Football, Minnesota is at Chicago. The nation's eyes will be on Chicago Monday night. That soldier SEAL at Soldier Field. So, yes, they will be there. He'll love that.

[Mark]

Sean, what's your clarification sought?

[Sean]

So. So just to be clear, will they have been sent in or will they still be there? In other words, if they go, will.

[Mark]

They be there for any day between now and Sunday?

[Sean]

Yes, 100%.

[Mark]

Okay. I'm not so sure, but you could be right. All right, the courts.

[Dan]

Well, any hold on a sec. Will any. Will every Democrat object? I bet there will be some that will not in Illinois.

[Mark]

Well, here's a Democrat I'd like to hear from on that. Rom. Has anybody heard.

[Dan]

Rom.

[Mark]

Has anyone heard Rahm speak to what's going on in Chicago? Has anybody.

[Dan]

And some of those south siders have. Not in Congress. Have not said anything.

[Mark]

Yeah, somebody call Rahm right now during the program. Let's see what he says. All right, the courts. You got the district court ruling yesterday. We're waiting. Ms. Cook's attorney, Abby Lowell, filed a pretty extensive brief in her case. As I've said many times before, I almost don't like to open my mouth and waste the breath on these district court and court of appeals decisions, because all these things are going to the Supreme Court. And the question is how quickly. I've urged before my friends on the high court do this fast. Don't go by the normal calendar and don't decide these cases in a year because there's big issues, the economy and separation of powers. I wish they would go faster because they can if they choose to. So let's just talk first about the general issue. Sean, do you have any sense that the Supreme Court has a sense of urgency about these cases? They've taken 25 emergency appeals and ruled on them, but that's not on the substance of the cases. Do you have any sense on any of these cases? They have a sense of urgency, I think on the.

[Sean]

I don't know. I don't. But I will say on that particular one, I think that they will. That this.

[Mark]

This is on Cook or posse commitments? Yeah, I think tariffs. Yeah. All right. Do you think, Dan, do you think they'll hear. They'll hear and decide Cook this year?

[Dan]

No, I think they will. I think tariffs is more likely because that. That. That one's got real money.

[Mark]

So you think they'll decide tariffs this year, but not Cook, Sean?

[Dan]

Correct.

[Sean]

I think Cook. I mean, look, here's what I've said before. People have to remember, you don't have to agree. The threshold is cause, and it's not a question of whether or not you agree with the cause or not. Right. I think the court's gonna say, simply put, the statute says X, the president has met the burden of proof, therefore he has the right to do it. They may not say that. They'll make it clear they don't agree with the. They're not weighing in on the merits of it, but they agree that he's met the threshold.

[Dan]

See, I think the court doesn't wanna get involved in some of this stuff and the precedent. And they're gonna hope she's out before they have.

[Mark]

Let me ask this, let me ask this question, though. The Fed is staying out of it. I know none of us are lawyers, and I'm hoping some lawyer raises his or her hand and helps us here. If the President fired her, why does she get to keep her job? I'm not arguing she shouldn't, but what's the law that says she keeps her job until the courts say the president's right?

[Sean]

So that's actually, I asked that question of lawyers on the show the other day, and the answer is that in theory she shouldn't. But it depends. I mean, it's sort of like, it's like any employer, right? So this comes down to does the Fed recognize the President's authority or not? And that's where right now there's this, that's the million dollar question. The Fed saying, we're waiting for the court. We don't even know. I mean, the question is, is she actually going into the office? You know, is she still on the payroll? But this is one where the question, it's like any other firing, right? Do they recognize, is she, is she.

[Mark]

Going to go to the meeting on the 23rd?

[Dan]

That's the question.

[Sean]

That's where I think the question is. I, it's not a question of also does she go? It's a question of does, does Powell allow her to go? Does he allow. Because, yeah, he has said yes.

[Mark]

Yes, he is until it's written.

[Sean]

But, but, but, but, I mean, look, I think things can change between then and between the 23rd and then. The reason I'm saying this is if you've watched Bill Pulte in the interviews that he's given the Federal Housing Director, they have started to shift. I made the case early on that part of the reason that Trump went to the Fed physically to see it was to build that case for cause. Cost overruns, mismanagement, et cetera. I think they've shifted to basically now saying by Powell not recognizing this fraud, he is complicit and therefore we have cause to fire him too. So if he recognizes her, I think that then they pivot and go after him as well.

[Mark]

Well, I'm not sure. It doesn't seem from people, I thought that they plan to fire him until they work this through. I think they will hear both cases this year and decide both cases this year. Well, actually, I think they'll decide the Cooktakes this year. I think they might decide the, the tariff case this year because I don't think they're in a hurry. That's that one to me is just too political and there's really no cost, separation of powers cost to wait. I think the Fed wants I mean.

[Dan]

Aren'T they all purely, they're both purely political.

[Mark]

Well, what, what I'm saying is, what I'm saying is I think they can I think that the real world cost of not deciding Cook quickly is significant. The real world cost of not deciding the Fed case because as we've discussed here, they'll find other ways to do tariffs is, is smaller and Congress is agitating more for a decision on the Fed, I think, than they are on the tariffs because they don't want the tariff thing in their lap, even if they don't like the tariffs. That's my sense. All right. Messaging and the midterms Caroline Levitt, the president's pollster and the president's political chief deputy chief of staff, all briefing Republicans on Capitol Hill about how to message the midterms. There seems to be a shift towards calling it a tax cut for working families bill rather than a big beautiful bill or anything else. Big story in the Washington Post today. I recommend it to you if you pay for the poster can outsmart the paywall 109 please. It's about the process Hakeem Jeffries is leading to try to find a way to message strongly for the midterms. The headline in the Washington Post inside the Democratic plan to Recapture the house majority in 2026. Their effort is running up against harsh political realities, from Trump's efforts to revamp the House map to a tarnished Democratic brand with abysmal approval ratings. It's a little this. The story points out the data is a little unclear. The Democrats aren't doing very well, but they are doing well in the generic ballot question. And of course they have history on their side. The story says that the current template for a message which has been reported before is affordability, health care and then corruption, a process issue that I believe history suggests doesn't usually work, but one that Democrats are super attracted to. So Dan, having read the Washington Post story, how do you feel about the Democrats trajectory? They have over a year to have a workable, successful message to regain the House majority.

[Dan]

Well, I think the bottom line is they are right to recognize they have to have some proactive agenda. Their story references obviously the most best example is Newt Gingrich's Contract with America 2006 Rahm and Emanuel and Chuck Schumer had six for oh, six. In other words, if we get power back, what are we going to do with it? Why should you trust us to give us the gavel back? They don't have a set of answers right now. I would disagree a little, Mark, in that corruption has worked in the last few elections. You go back to 2006 when the party ran on trying to drain the swamp. Donald Trump did the same thing. I'm not saying that we are the best messengers for that and the story points out the problems we're going to have, but the history of that issue of the public thinking everyone's corrupt is there's some traction there.

[Mark]

Well, let me just ask you about that. When it's connected to the real lives of real people, as Donald Trump did, if we drain the swamp, you'll get more special interests, we'll get less.

[Dan]

Correct.

[Mark]

But when they talk about Trump corruption, and I'm not endorsing Trump corruption, but when they say he made $5 billion on crypto or he paid off whatever, are they making the connection between the lives of real people and corruption or are they just saying Trump's corrupt?

[Dan]

Yeah, no. That's why I would not hang my hat on it. I agree with you that there's and there's problems because of the numerous cases within our own party, whether it's Joe Biden or sitting members of Congress whose family are lobbyists, et cetera, that will expose an Achilles. But I think what was the best line in that whole story, which is what the party is still working around both for the midterms and 2028, is we're not going back to the pre Donald Trump status quo. Right. And we've talked about this. There is a new normal now and there's the horizon is out there. We don't have anything to say on that front. And that is where I think the party, the fact that it's out there, Jeffries acknowledges it, members of Congress are saying it, this needs to happen. I would have thought it would have started in the spring, it's starting in the fall. But I'm encouraged that they're having these conversations. I also would just say for those who haven't seen it, Michael LaRosa wrote an excellent piece on FoxNews.com he's been a guest of Two Way Tonight frequently with with Mark. I think he's actually been on this show once, read it and he talks about how you cannot ignore culture, you cannot ignore kind of needing to be engaged on issues Trump's going to go where he's going to go. He's going to dominate the conversation. And if we try to say we're not talking about that, we're talking about inflation, we'll lose. We have to be nimble, we have to be on our feet, and we have to be direct.

[Mark]

Sean, the softest. The softballs. Do Democrats have a policy problem or messaging problem?

[Sean]

They have everything problem. I think the thing that was interesting about that article is that the headline says inside the Democratic Democrats plan. And there's no plan. I mean, to, to, to throw around some.

[Mark]

They have plans, they have plans to make plans.

[Dan]

Right.

[Sean]

But the thing is, you have a leadership problem, you have a messaging problem, you have a mechanics problem. And they don't have any, any plan to solve any one of those because the problem is Hakeem Jeffries doesn't have the, the gravitas that Nancy Pelosi had. So him laying out a plan. It's not like AOC and Bernie Sanders and Ilhan Omar are going to stick to it. And right now, those are the boogeymen, you know.

[Dan]

Oh, they might. They might if they think we're going to take the House back. I mean, John, you know this. No real strategy emerges until you get into the spring and summer of next year. Because you just aren't going to put it all out there now and let the other side shoot at it.

[Mark]

Did I, did I miss any evidence, any mention of policy in that story? Did I miss that? They read it too hastily?

[Sean]

Well, that's what I'm saying, that there's nothing. It's, it's just not there yet. There's not. Right.

[Mark]

Well, but it didn't even say they were developing policies, just that they were.

[Dan]

No, no, it did. It did. It said that they, it's centered around affordability, security, and then as you said, corruption. You know, it's going to have to come. Look, affordability is going to be the number one issue and both sides recognize it. I mean, we didn't talk about it yesterday, but Republicans are seeing the same thing in their polls. Voters do not feel that inflation is getting better. And the middle class and working class is beginning to get frustrated that everyone says the economy is good, they don't feel it, Wall Street's going up. This is the Joe Biden problem. So I think both, the question is which party can get the public to say, we feel, you feel our pain, and we, and we trust you to try to make it better. The risk Republicans run is they keep saying everything's great.

[Mark]

Okay, Epstein, here is Ro Khanna previewing the press conference or the press event? I don't know that they're taking questions. He's doing later today to Mr. Massie to gain support for their discharge position, to demand the release of more documents about Epstein and Maxwell. Roll, please.

[Ro Khanna]

It's going to be a bombshell press Conference tomorrow at 10:30am it's the first time after over a decade that the American people are going to hear from the survivors of the Epstein abuse. And they're going to talk not just about Epstein's abuse and Maxwell's abuse, but about rich and powerful men who abused young girls. Here's the reality. This is about restoring trust in government. This is about protecting America's kids. This is about standing with survivors. Now I want to break some news. Not only is Thomas Massie going to be there, Marjorie Taylor Greene is going to be there. So this is not partisan. This is patriotic. And for the first time, for the first time since Donald Trump walked down the escalator, we are going to have progressives, moderates, independents and MAGA supporters on the same side demanding truth and justice. And this is really a wake up call for the Trump White House.

[Mark]

All right, before you guys comment, I'm a knucklehead. I forgot to do the daybook, which is of course a fundamental to the show. So let me quickly do that. In addition to the 10:30 press event that Ro Khan and Mr. Massie are doing, the president is hosting the president of the Republic of Poland today. And at 11:20, they have a press pool event in the Oval Office which could turn into a long press conference. So we'll see that at 11:20. And of course, if the Khana Massey event occurs on time, there's a good chance the president might be asked about some of that. The first second lady and the vice president are going to Minneapolis today, meeting privately with some of the families affected by that tragic shooting last week. As I mentioned before, Caroline Levitt, Tony Fabrizio, James Blair were on the Hill this morning briefing bunch going up on the Hill today. I'll just mention a couple things. The Republican leadership at 10 o' clock are holding their weekly press conference. Again, that's before but they'll certainly the kind of mass event. But they'll certainly be asked about the discharge petition amidst reports that they have been whipping with the White House's encouragement and maybe help against the discharge petition. And they've made some progress. Hakeem Jeffries has a press conference on affordability and housing at 11:45 and this other discharge potential discharge petition on. On congressional ban on trading stocks. Bipartisan group including Chip Roy and Seth magazine are at 1 o' clock holding a press conference on that. All right, apologies for not doing that at the top. Sean, where are we on the connection between this press event later today and the discharge petition and the release of more documents which last night they released documents that Democrats say was 97% stuff we'd already seen.

[Dan]

Not just Democrats said that.

[Mark]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Sean]

So I think that like, regardless of whether it's a stunt or they're all documents, I think the perception that there's more information out there has taken the political weight off of enough members that the speaker can say, please don't sign this discharge petition or get with it. Assuming all Dems go with it, though, you're pretty close to that threshold. You need what, four probably to sign.

[Dan]

And they say they have three.

[Sean]

Yeah, yeah. I mean, my count, I think you've got Nancy Mace, Marjorie, potentially. So.

[Mark]

So as we, as we know, they can flip them back.

[Sean]

Right. So. So I think, look, I think that they'll, they'll find a way to keep this from coming. The problem is, and I literally had a really fascinating discussion. I didn't. Roger Stone wrote a whole thing on this, which we talked about last night on the show. I just, I don't. There's two things that are happening. One is, I think Democrats, if I were them, I'd be very careful about who ultimately gets flushed out in this because most of these people are going to be on the D side that come out. The Bill Gates is the, the. All the ones that are rumored to be named. I don't know. I've never seen it. But I'm just saying that the potential for disclosure probably hurts Dems more than Republicans, but the Republican hurt comes from not getting, you know, continuing to just let this go. So at some point they need to get some guidance on how do we just put a pin on this. And so far every time it slows down, something happens like this press conference today or the hearing that will keep it going.

[Mark]

Dan?

[Dan]

Yeah. If this press conference does accuse, you know, non public, non elected officials, so, so rich, powerful people, I don't believe.

[Mark]

Any names will be named.

[Dan]

Okay. Well, if they get very descriptive, but short of names, I think the clamor for information. Who are these people? They need to be. It's going to give oxygen again. And at the same time as Sean's saying, the White House is asking people to back off so that Dynamic becomes hard because it could dominate the news. The question is, does Trump try to change the subject here in the next 24 hours so that everyone goes running off in a different direction? If what you hear may be put out there today, it's going to be powerful. It's going to be hard to say. Nothing to see here.

[Mark]

Yeah. All right, China pictures overnight. Today from China you can roll 107 of this parade, including the leaders of Russia and North Korea in attendance. Kind of incredible stuff, show of force and historical anniversary. But really every interpretation is that this is intended to demonstrate China's twilight existential struggle with the United States and the West. Sean, in the national security hallways of this administration, is this just like a, a parade and a pageantry or do you think this is in something that makes them feel like they need to react beyond the present? Mocking posts on social media?

[Sean]

Well, I think from a military standpoint, the former CNO used to have a countdown clock in our office for 2027 and they've actually now, you know, I think we're much more open about talking about it being a now problem. So from a strictly military professional standpoint, I think that the threat is becoming realer and in, in clear view. I don't know from, you know, whether the President is on board on that or not. But, but yesterday was striking for two reasons. The imagery of the people. Right. So you had Xi and, and Putin and obviously that Kim Jong Un. But then also the, the, they, they intentionally laid out all that armory. So you've got some serious weapon systems there. Drones, new tanks, rockets. They did that obviously intentionally to show it off. But if that's what they're willing to show us publicly they have, I think it should send a chill through everybody's spine what they, what they have and they're not showing us. I've said this before, I'll say it again. I, I think every American should understand the real and existential threat that China poses to our well being, not just our military, not just our economy, but like to our existence. They are trying to, they want world domination. And every time that we fail to acknowledge this and realize that they're not hiding it, they do events like that to be very clear about what they want, that we are just putting our head in the sand to a very real problem.

[Mark]

Dan, this is a serious, not a gimmicky question. If you could choose any of the prospective 2028 presidential candidates to give a well covered, widely seen speech about the threat of China, who would you choose and why?

[Dan]

Rahm Emanuel, he was the ambassador to Japan. He's been in that region. I think he understands the Chinese well. He understands what they're up to. You don't live in that region for four years and not get a sense just day in and day out about China's creeping influence. And I think, look, the big issue. And Mark, you've talked about this for a while. If everything is about China, as Sean just said, you've got three major players in addition to us, Russia, India, and the eu. Right. We're kind of at war with each of them. Russia, because they invaded a country and they're no friend of ours. The idea that Russia and Vladimir Putin is going to say, let me be with you, who I have been on record for 40 years saying, like, we want to destroy you and end your dominance goes to India. So now we're in a trade war with India. Go to the eu. We're smacking them around left and right. I've said this for months. I don't get it. If that's your goal, to take on China, it's really hard to court somebody by being a bully and trying to beat them into submission.

[Mark]

Yeah. All right, three quick topics, then we're going to get to your questions. Please raise your hand if you want to be in on the conversation. The president yesterday confirmed he's alive, by.

[Sean]

The way, can I put this out on social. The headline in Politico, literally, and I put it's on Twitter and Instagram if you want to see it. It says, Trump denies he's dead.

[Mark]

Yeah. Like maybe they meant it. Maybe they meant it humorously.

[Dan]

Have you been watching Drug Report?

[Mark]

One. One. One sentence each. One sentence each. Sean, what is the lesson? From the experience of the last five days, what is the lesson? One sentence.

[Sean]

Trump moves at the speed of light and if he stops for a second, people get concerned.

[Mark]

Dan, what's the lesson?

[Dan]

The Internet does what the Internet does.

[Mark]

The lesson for me is Democrats need to stop hoping Trump is dead and reckon with him alive. All right, my world, my inbox is filled with chatter that Mayor Adams is going to get out of the mayoral race. I don't know that it's true. I'm not reporting that he's getting out. I'm just telling you a lot of people are saying he's going to get out. And these are people with some reason to know. We'll see what happens. But don't be surprised if he's out of the race before two way tonight. What he's been promised. Why I Think that's in his interest will be much discussed. This is a guy who likes to trade things, Dan, what are the implications if he gets that?

[Dan]

It would be absolutely massive because you. It would allow potentially another block of voters to move over to Cuomo now. And now the one left, I think, is the easiest one to move. Now, you just say to Donald Trump and the Republican Party and Steve Witkoff and all the people there who seriously don't want Mandani to be elected, you need to find an off ramp for Curtis Lewa. So he may become the ambassador to something. He may get appointed to, you know, some sort of position. But.

[Mark]

And Dan, any doubt in your mind that if it's effectively a one on one race because the fifth guy got out yesterday, if it's a one on one race, who would you make the favorite? Just one on one. Cuomo versus Mondani.

[Dan]

Andrew Cuomo, Because I have said this since. Since July 1st. Mandani cannot get above 40%. He cannot. He has not moved in two and a half months, and that's it. 60% of New York has a problem with him. And the more they find out about him, the more that hardens. So to me, Andrew Cuomo becomes the strong favorite, and I think Mandani, then it's like, what do you do? How do I get another 15%?

[Sean]

Okay, so let me put the Republican piece on this. If I'm a Republican. So as you guys are talking about this, this is what I'm thinking to myself. Would I rather have Mandami as mayor that I can use as a foil for everything that's going wrong in every socialist policy and tag everyone, or do I want a skilled. I mean, I. Andrew Cuomo is not my cup of tea, but he is an adept politician. Why would I want him back?

[Mark]

Mayors, you're forgetting all of Trump's friends and family members. Do not. Do not want to.

[Dan]

I was just going to say that's the real life impact.

[Mark]

Trump hears from people literally daily, as did people around him, saying, you got it. You got to weigh in here. You got to stop. You got to stop this guy from being mayor. John, there's billions, billions of dollars on the line.

[Dan]

Who's a skilled politician.

[Mark]

That's how they see it.

[Dan]

Would he cut a deal with Trump to say, you help me, I'll find a way to definitely help you without it being obvious.

[Mark]

100,000%. And if I could go higher than 100,000%, I would. I'm hard.

[Dan]

Gentlemen, Gentlemen.

[Mark]

Yeah, yeah.

[Dan]

Odds. Let's say it doesn't happen today. Where are you on Mandani's odds of being elected? You were both at 85% with.

[Mark]

With the current field.

[Dan]

Well, just there. There's a swirl is a foot.

[Mark]

No, but, but, but you're saying with Adams in or Adams out?

[Dan]

Well, he may drop out today, but there's clearly something's happening and Adams is at least given consideration. So he may be out in the next couple of weeks.

[Mark]

Mondame is 80, 89% right now, and if Adams gets. If Adam gets out of the race, Mandami is 75%. Oh, okay.

[Sean]

I'm pretty much on board on that.

[Mark]

Maybe. Maybe 70%. I want to see. I want to see the first post Adam polls. Remember, Adams isn't doing that well, and I think Mondami would get some of his support. So I don't know that. Some of it. Some of it. Yeah. Yeah, right. All right. Lastly, again, raise your hand if you want in the conversation Notice. The publication notice is reporting that John Sununu, a friend of Two Way, the former senator, not the former governor, is thinking of running for that open Senate seat in the wake of the retirement of Gene Shaheen. Right. She's the one who's retired. Would Sununu win that seat?

[Sean]

100%.

[Mark]

100%.

[Dan]

Dan, how much is he on board with Donald Trump? He spent been pretty public about where he disagrees. And you would try to square that? I don't know.

[Mark]

Well, Sean, Sean, if. If Trump endorsed someone else in the primary they don't want in the.

[Sean]

I mean, Scott Brown's the only one running.

[Mark]

Right, Right. But what if Trump endorsed Scott Brown because he didn't want to send you?

[Sean]

Well, first of all, I believe there's. There's two things. The Sununas are as close to royalties that you can get. And I mean between John, Chris, Mike, I mean, the whole family.

[Mark]

Yeah.

[Sean]

So I think. And I just. Trump and I don't know that Trump and Scott Brown have made up. And I think the Sununas have done a good job of making it clear where their difference is with the president. I don't know that John has. What relationship John has with the president, but I believe that overall, the Sununas have been very smart politically about how they've dealt with.

[Mark]

Rephrase. Rephrase. The kind of smart they've been, Sean. It's New England smart.

[Sean]

Wicked smart.

[Mark]

Wicked smart. They've been wicked smart.

[Dan]

So you think Trump just buries the hatchet and says, I want to keep the Senate?

[Mark]

I don't think John Cenuna will run. Unless he's figured this out already. I don't think so. But if he decided he wanted to run and Trump endorse somebody else, you know, Trump's record in primaries, as the president will tell you, is pretty good.

[Sean]

Yeah, we'll see.

[Mark]

We'll see.

[Sean]

To your point, I don't think he jumps in without them back channeling that.

[Mark]

And Sean, you think there's a 0% chance he'd lose the general election to the congressman?

[Sean]

Oh, I, I, Yeah, I mean, Chris Pappas.

[Mark]

Yeah.

[Sean]

When you, when you look back, it's because, like I said, this isn't like a. Just because Chris has been governor recently. This is. The synonyms go so far back and are so deep. Yeah, I just, I don't, I don't think it would be a. I mean, I think he'd probably win by seven or eight points.

[Mark]

Matthew Bartlett in the chat. I never read the chat, except I have a special alert for Matthew Bartlett says Trump isn't going to endorse in the primary. Matthew, with all due respect, I don't know how you would possibly know that. Maybe you do. Maybe you have secret knowledge. All right, another word for another sponsor, another new sponsor. We talked about cozy earth making pants so comfortable. Well, if you're having trouble sleeping at night or dealing with the aftermath of being tired, exhausted, dragging around, may we recommend to you CBD from CBD Distillery can make a real difference in helping you relax. Not just sleep better, but also help your body deal with stress, pain after exercise, even mood and focus. For some people, it's very effective. All made with the highest quality CBD clean ingredients, no fillers, just premium cbd. Imagine taking it and waking up as works for so many rested, no more nagging aches and pains. That is the way you win. Over 2 million people trust CBD Distillery. So if you're ready for better sleep, less stress, feeling good during your day, try CBD from CBD Distillery. And here's a great opportunity for you. 25% off all their products go to CBD distillery.com promo code mark. Promo code Mark. Tell them I sent you CB. Cbcdistillery.com Gatorade is the number one proven electrolyte blend designed to hydrate better than.

[Sean]

Water.

[Mark]

So you can lose more sweat and raise your game. Gatorade, is it in you? Thank you for your attention. All right, let's go to your questions and let's start with Walt. Walt, welcome in. Thank you for being part of two way. What is on your mind for Sean.

[Walt]

And Dan, well, it's a pleasure to be in.

[Mark]

Is that Grandpappy McNeil behind you?

[Walt]

That is my great, great grandfather.

[Mark]

Oh, I wasn't too far off. What's his name?

[Walt]

Jack Daniel Fogel.

[Mark]

Tell us about Jack Daniel Fogel, please.

[Walt]

Well, he was an attorney in Lebanon, Kentucky. Graduated from Harvard, I think he was, in the state Senate of Kentucky. That portrait was painted sometime in the 1870s.

[Mark]

Amazing.

[Walt]

And that was one of those things, as they do in those days, they still do it today as a. A trade for legal services. So that was his fee was to.

[Mark]

Phenomenal. Phenomenal. And you look a little bit like him.

[Walt]

A little bit, yeah.

[Mark]

Where do you live, sir?

[Walt]

I live in Grass Valley, North. I almost said North Carolina. Northern California. The true north of California.

[Mark]

And how long. How long have you been a fan of Two Ways?

[Walt]

Almost since you started. Yeah, yeah, I've been watching it. I haven't had a chance to be.

[Mark]

On yet, but we love have. We love having you on. Would Gavin Newsom make a good president?

[Walt]

Disastrous.

[Dan]

Okay.

[Walt]

Absolutely disastrous. And yet, you know, anyone in California can tell you that. But I don't think it has penetrated maybe outside of our borders.

[Mark]

Yeah. Have you ever voted. Have you ever voted for Democrat for president before?

[Walt]

Oh, yeah, yeah. I've swung different ways with the different parties. I started out as a Democrat 20 years ago. I was briefly a Republican. I've settled pretty much on being a Libertarian independent.

[Mark]

How many times did you vote for Donald Trump for president in the general election? You had three opportunities to do that.

[Walt]

Correct. And I did not vote for him the first two times.

[Mark]

Did you vote for Hillary and Biden?

[Walt]

I absolutely did not vote for the Democrats.

[Mark]

Okay.

[Walt]

I, I voted for the Libertarian candidate almost as a protest vote, really. And this last time around, I campaigned for Kennedy in the presidential campaign and stuck with him all the way through till he bowed out, and then I voted for Donald Trump.

[Mark]

Your political journey is like tens of millions of others in how you've approached this. Do you have a preference between the Republicans and Democrats? Do you like one party more than the other at this point?

[Walt]

Well, you know, I lean towards the Republicans because it's the only party that is really debating ideas. I think the Democrats have gone stale in a big way. And the Republicans, even if they have dissension in their ranks at times, they are at least, you know, directly confronting the issues. And the conflict isn't a bad thing. They are trying to address what we got out there and, and do something about it, which is better than what's happened.

[Sean]

Before.

[Walt]

Yeah.

[Mark]

Okay. Excellent. Well, I appreciate answering all those. I think we've all got a miraculous sense of you, from your ancestry to your current points of view, and love to know what's on your mind. For Sean and Dan.

[Walt]

Well, yesterday I was going to talk about Chicago, but I'm switching now.

[Dan]

It's old news.

[Walt]

Yeah, yeah, you covered it in the beginning. Anyway, I'd like to maybe throw a question at Sean. I am in the targeted area of Gavin Newsom's redistricting effort. I'm in district. I'm in Congressional District 3, which is Kevin Kiley's district, and that has, in the new plan, been gerrymandered into something you would never recognize before. And I live square in that district. And my question for you is whether the Republican Party might direct any of its campaign resources into that election in various ways. It can be done without a public face. And I don't think you want to take President Trump on tour in California, but you could put resources into this campaign. And I think what I would, you know, point out is that I think Gavin Newsom is at best, 50, 50 in this election. He has put. He is. He has sort of bet the House on winning this redistricting election, and if he fails, I think it will be a preemptive strike or. Or failure on his part that could derail his. His efforts at running for president.

[Mark]

And.

[Walt]

With the right effort, I. I think he could. He could be beaten on this, because there are a lot of Democrats that are disgusted by the whole tenor of the campaign, the reasons for it, seeing Gavin Newsom campaign for it. And I think if a major effort were put into it, you could literally probably take Gavin Newsom out of the running for the next election.

[Sean]

So there's two things that you're bringing up, Walt. First is, and I'll defer to Dan on this because I'm not the right person to ask about how Democrats react, but I get the sense that Democrats will say, at least you tried. You tried to fight. So, but like I said, I'll let Dan kind of answer that part of it. So I don't know how. Like, I think, considering no one else is doing anything, I think that Gavin Newsom can say, well, everyone else sat on the sidelines. I at least put an effort together to get five seats back and take the House. On the Republican side, one of my guests tonight is Jessica Milan Patterson, the former Republican chair who is working with Kevin McCarthy to raise close to, I believe it's $100 million for this effort. Schwarzenegger is also doing a separate effort. I agree with you. Now we'll see what the campaign looks like ultimately. But I believe California voters have rejected sort of partisan, and that's largely Democrats. But this is going to be a low propensity voter kind of midterm in California. It's just ballot initiatives. So I think it's going to be, you know, it's a tough one because of that. And it's a real get out the vote effort trying to get people who care about this one issue. So I don't know, I think Republicans will defeat it, but I think the people who care about it on the left, Newsom's got a good rallying cry to his base, which is we get to be part of the resistance in the effort to stop this and put a check on Trump. Like if anyone's going to do it, it's us. So that, that's going to be very motivating to Democrats in California. But I think the broader thing that I find fascinating is at a time when Republicans, you know, are we pushing, let's call it $100 million, are we putting $100 million in California when we could have better spent it somewhere else? And you know, again, think about, I've always said this, think about California. In Texas, we would have gotten probably two anyway. So in theory, if we maximize the plan and get the full five, it's a net of three because we would have taken the Vicente seat and the Cuellar seat probably the same cycle. So we, we would have, we're really netting three out of Texas. And then if California were successful, you know, in theory, we could have net lost two. If they pick up five, we would have had two in Texas anyway. And then you have to look at other states. So I do wonder, big picture, long term, if we're going to sit back and say this is a lot of money that we put into an effort and what did we net out of it?

[Walt]

I see your point. I would only say it goes beyond the congressional seats. Gavin Newsom is like a deadly disease that you don't want to let him escape California and get into the presidential campaign because he has a chameleon like ability to have this superficial appeal on the campaign trail. And if he becomes the next Democratic candidate, he's, he's dangerous.

[Dan]

Yeah, sure, of course. Yeah. I mean, you sound like Democrats with Trump a little bit there. You know, I agree with Sean. I think at this point Gavin's going to give props for trying and he's doing something. He's Rallying. Look, you don't want to lose and run. I mean, that's just always an awkward thing. So obviously he'd rather be successful. And if he, we talk about the risk if this fails, if he pulls this off, if he gets this over the finish line, they do net five seats. Holy cow. I mean, he's going to look around and say, what were you all doing? Right? J.B. pritzker, you were defending crime in Chicago. You know Josh Shapiro. It's nice to see you. I haven't seen you in a few years. I mean, he will have a story to tell if he is successful and he'll have a head of steam.

[Walt]

He will. I think he'll be the front runner, such as it is for the Democrats.

[Dan]

I, I'd say right now, if I had to list who were the most in demand surrogates for fundraising, be Gavin Newsom.

[Mark]

Yeah, right now. Well, Walt, thank you for coming on. Grateful to have you a part of two way. Please, please come back and maybe send us a family tree on the in the chat or something so we can learn a little more. Susan, welcome in. Tell folks who don't know where you are what's on your mind for Sean and Dan.

[Dan]

Oh, gotta unmute.

[Susan]

Can you hear me?

[Mark]

Yes, ma'. Am.

[Susan]

Yeah, so I use the Democrat thing just as a hook so you would call on me.

[Mark]

I actually didn't notice that.

[Dan]

So, Susan, are you a Democrat?

[Susan]

Well, I am a lifelong Democrat, but I recently changed to the independent. Re registered as an independent. You know, my heart belongs to the Democrats, but probably the old Democrats because the current ones just, you know, on your show, the group chat, there's, there's some joking about Dina Turner running.

[Dan]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Susan]

So she would be cool, but I mean, I don't expect her to run.

[Dan]

But I'll stay tuned.

[Susan]

She's the kind of Democrat that I would definitely. Well, progressive that I would definitely. Or populist, rather. Off. Anyway, while you guys were on vacation. And again, I'm really glad, Mark, that you went on vacation because you were talking so fast. I thought you were gonna like, pop a gasket before you went on vacation.

[Mark]

Susan, just to be clear, the show was off. I wasn't on vacation, but.

[Susan]

Oh, well, you look calmer.

[Mark]

Okay, good to know.

[Susan]

All right, so that's my little point there. I saw that. Anyway, while you guys were away, I started watching a bunch of YouTube.

[Sean]

Cheated on us.

[Dan]

Susan.

[Susan]

Yeah, yeah. I started watching a lot of YouTube videos about Ukraine done by Europeans. And it was really educational for Me. And I don't know if you're familiar with, like, broadcasts like the Duran or Glenn Dyson, and I'd be really curious if you guys would. I mean, I could send stuff. I. I have a whole thing written, but I don't want to monopolize the conversation. If you would entertain the thought of maybe looking at that from a slightly different perspective, because what I learned, and I assume is true. But again, you know, YouTube has these algorithms where they keep sending you the same people over and over again, and I'd like to see, like, both sides of the conversation, but they basically state that Russia is about to win anyway and that Putin and Trump probably just have an understanding. They don't have an agreement. They don't have a plan for it, but they have an understanding, which might be why Trump is sort of staying quiet right now. And I think Trump might have a better. Again, I use the word understanding of what Russia wants and why they want it. So I would just be really interested in having, like with your father, for instance, being on a show with one of these guys and hearing that other point of view. And they also talked about Europe being in dire financial state.

[Mark]

Yeah. Okay, let's let. Dan, you raised a lot. Let's let them respond. Sean, thoughts on what was raised?

[Sean]

I mean, I'm always willing to entertain other ideas, so, I mean, if there's something specific, I'm glad to hear it. I think Trump has been very clear. He doesn't want this on his record, meaning the idea of a country. He was very proud of the fact during his first four years that there were no incursions or invasions or new wars. So I don't know that he's willing to just accept it. And obviously, he wants the credit for bringing peace to that region. So I don't. On the face of it, I just don't buy that that's really what his motive is. He wouldn't be doing all this if he actually was okay with it.

[Mark]

Yeah, Dan.

[Dan]

Yeah, I agree with Sean on that front. I think where Trump is a little anxious and all US Presidents have been anxious is if you arm Ukraine, you're getting a little bit closer. Like, the more you shove in, which is what I've been advocating you need. The only threat Putin respects is force. And the only way I think he comes to the table is if he knows that that trench line cannot get further. So you got what you got. We're going to kind of erect enough forces with enough firepower that you just cannot get through it. Then I Think he says, okay, I got to try to wait this out. But I don't think to Sean's point, he wants his tombstone to say he lost Ukraine.

[Mark]

Yeah. Susan, thank you, Reynolds. Welcome in. Tell folks who don't know where you are what's on your mind quickly for Dan and Sean.

[Reynolds]

Yeah, so I'm in Georgia. So one thing I disagree with Sean on North Carolina. I used to live in North Carolina for five years. Roy Cooper's never lost. He's going to win the Senate seat. That's terrible to say, but he'll win. I'm willing to put a hundred dollar bet against Sean on that. They'll take me up.

[Mark]

All right. Is there, is there a website? Is there a website or an app that facilitates personal bets?

[Sean]

Yeah. Venmo Reynolds, can I just ask this? I just want to be clear. Look, what I don't. I mean, obviously I hope Michael Whatley wins and I believe that the president, the team will go all in there. But what is it that you disagree with me? What have I said? Just to be clear, because I know we've tangentially touched.

[Reynolds]

So he was considered a moderate, but if you look at, you know, some Democratic governors are kind of blessed, but they have Republican majorities in the House and Senate. So you can't do too many liberal things as governor. So a lot of people consider him a moderate. And so I think he'll run as a moderate even though he's a liberal. But he's got to get checking balances. That's the same thing. Right now in North Carolina, you got a probably very liberal governor, but he can't do anything because the Republicans won't allow him. So he gets to be portrayed as a moderate person. And I think there'll be enough moderate Republicans who are like, you know what? We like Roy Cooper. He's a good governor. Well, he was forced to be a good governor because of the state legislature. So I think for that reason he'll win.

[Mark]

All right, Reynolds, thank you. Real quick, Dan, who will raise more in that race, Whateley or Cooper?

[Dan]

Whatley. And I think the one thing that Reynolds is forgetting is when you run statewide in a state race, you can kind of push the national stuff off because you're focusing on North Carolina. Cooper will not be able to run away from the party brand. And every time Chuck Schumer, aoc, open their mouth, he's going to get asked, do you support that? And that's where it gets really uncomfortable when you run for a national seat.

[Mark]

Sean, will Whatley be a Great candidate. Like in terms of performance.

[Sean]

I think so. I mean, look, he was the state chairman and then obviously ran the national parties. He's met with donors, he's done a ton of interviews and he's got that. And I've said this before, I mean, just to be clear, North Carolina to me is my proxy state. Like, I, I think it's literally the definition of the generic ballot.

[Mark]

Yeah.

[Sean]

And so I, I think the trend in North Carolina is, is moving to the right, as is every state. But, but I think that's fair for nothing else. I agree with that. Cooper is a good candidate and he's presented well himself. Well. But at the end of the day, this is going to the Trump White House and machine is going to come in on this and they will turn every voter necessary. So what is going to win this race?

[Mark]

All right, we'll see this program available as a podcast now. So please, if you haven't already, Apple, Spotify, wherever you get your podcast, please like subscribe. Listen to us there. And some episodes, you may have watched it live on YouTube, but then you want to go back and say, did Dan really say that? Or wow, Sean made a great point. So listen to us twice is what I'm saying. Sean, what do you have tonight?

[Sean]

Actually, we got three guests tonight. So I'm going to talk to Jessica Milan Patterson about this California race, how much money they're going to raise, what they think, what their strategy is. She's aligned with Kevin McCarthy. Then we're going to talk back to school with Ian Pryor in Northern Virginia. There's a case today, there's five jurisdictions where I live, Alexandria, Arlington, Florida, Fairfax, Loudoun and Prince William that are defying President Trump on transgender issues. This is all playing out in the courts. America First Legal is leading in this effort. So we're going to talk to Ian Pryor on that and then Penny Nance is going to talk to us a little bit about the same cultural issues from concerned women from America. So, I mean, this is a packed show.

[Mark]

All right, lots to tell you about. First of all, new episode of NextUp is now available. I talked to Dan about the Democratic Party. We go deep. And Josh Gerstein about everything on the political docket. Legal docket. And then my reported monologue on what's going on in the fall. Megan at noon, Megan McCain, her guest ro Khanna, who will be fresh off just having had his press conference, press event. So Megan will be on at noon. Watch that live on the two way platform, please. Then at tonight, six o'. Clock. I'll be live with Democratic strategist Jaime Moore, who worked with Jamie Harrison and others at the dnc, as well as Elizabeth Pipko. Please join us for that conversation. We'll have full coverage of the Khan Amassi event, the president's photo op with the Polish leader and more. And then at 7, Bridget's back with a show about free speech. Here for a preview of Real America is Bridget.

[Bridget Fedisi]

Free speech is the bedrock of our democracy and it's a right that many Americans take for granted. But free speech is under attack. It's in retreat in Europe and Canada, and polling shows many young Americans don't even support it. Our guests this week, Greg Lukianoff, calls it an eternally radical idea and an ideal we must never stop fighting for. What are your thoughts on free speech? On people being jailed for memes and jokes in the U.K. yes, that is happening. Are you a free speech absolutist or do you believe that hate speech should be illegal? Join me, Bridget Fedisi on Real America, Wednesday, September 3rd at 7pm Eastern, 6pm Central. We will be live discussing this. You can register to join the conversation at 2way TV BridgetZoom, or you can simply watch the episode at Real America Fantasy on YouTube.

[Mark]

And in four minutes, I'll be on doing my weekly hit with Michael Smarkanish on Sirius XM Radio. So see you then. Dan, you got anything coming up later we should know about?

[Dan]

No. I am sadly taking our oldest back to boarding school, so I'll be in mourning.

[Mark]

All right, excellent.

[Sean]

Tomorrow we'll have, I can guarantee now we will have definitely a major endorsement of the show from a potential leading candidate in 2028.

[Mark]

Which party, Sean?

[Sean]

The Democratic Party.

[Mark]

Okay, excited to hear. Thank you all for being part of the two way community again. You can watch us on YouTube live, listen to us as a podcast, anywhere you get your podcast, please, like subscribe, join, share, and if you haven't read Michael Gran Off a Member of the Community, his Substack piece on why he loves two Way, I recommend it to you. Michael Granoff on Substack. Thank you for watching. We'll see you in 23 hours. Have a great day.