"TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE": Trump Slams Iran's Counterproposal as High Stakes Summit With China Looms

Summary

The Morning Meeting Podcast Summary

Episode: "TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE": Trump Slams Iran's Counterproposal as High Stakes Summit With China Looms
Date: May 11, 2026
Host: Mark Halperin (with co-hosts Kevin and Larry)
Platform: 2WAY

---

Main Theme / Episode Overview

This episode unfolds against the backdrop of escalating tensions between the U.S. and Iran, following Iran's "ridiculous" counterproposal for peace. Former President Trump, now President again, is about to embark on a crucial summit in China with Xi Jinping, raising both expectations and skepticism about diplomatic breakthroughs. The Morning Meeting panel dissects the flurry of diplomatic activity, the ferocity of political wrangling at home, and the shifting sands beneath the midterm elections and Congressional redistricting. The tone is lively, skeptical, and often laced with humor.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Trump-Xi Summit: High Stakes, Low Expectations

• White House Strategy: The administration is downplaying the summit. Despite media hype suggesting Trump and Xi will “end the war,” the panel doubts any breakthrough (“Don’t count on that.” – Mark, 01:42).
• Chinese Tactics:
  • China announces summit details at the last minute for maximum leverage and theatricality.
  • Scott Bessant, the president’s point-man, is already in Asia for warm-up meetings.
  • The Chinese “love every detail of the summits announced or worked out privately in advance” (B, 04:36).
• U.S. Domestic Considerations: The panel agrees Trump’s primary pressure point is the upcoming midterms—military or foreign breakthroughs could boost fortunes, but seem unlikely before the summit.

2. Iran’s Stonewalling & U.S. Policy Dilemma

• Counterproposal Rejected: Iran’s response is seen as unserious (“not a counter offer, that’s a bunch of bullocks” – Mark, 11:54).
  • Iran demands sanctions relief and asset unfreezing up front, promises to discuss nuclear issues only after.
  • Trump publicly calls it “TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.”
• Strategic Stalemate:
  • Both sides want the Strait of Hormuz open in the long term but keep it closed now for leverage.
  • Chinese do not seem eager to help end the war; their economy isn’t hurt enough to justify intervention.
  • The U.S. can’t gain leverage without military escalation, but that’s risky and politically costly before midterms.
• Expert Analysis:
  • Kevin: The Iranian regime is fractured and dragging negotiations to maximize pressure; the U.S. should never have paused its pressure campaign.
  • Larry: Skeptical of doomsday predictions—thinks concerns about U.S. “humiliation” are overstated; Trump’s real worry is political, not military or diplomatic.

3. Military and Economic Pressure: What Comes Next?

• Kagan in the Atlantic: Argues failed Gulf war weakens America’s global image and exposes depleted weapons stocks, raising questions about U.S. deterrence (11:50).
• Options on the Table:
  • Economic pressure isn’t working fast enough; renewed bombing is risky but might soon be necessary.
  • Larry, pressed by Mark, insists Trump’s focus is on winning the war, not just ending it, and that bombing might become unavoidable (20:39).
• No Trust in a “Reasonable Deal”: The panel all agrees there’s no “reasonable” negotiating partner on the Iranian side.
  • “There is no reasonable element to the regime. Even the moderates…” (Kevin, 22:25).
  • “They’re lunatic, as the president keeps saying” (Larry, 22:52).

4. U.S. Politics: Congressional Battles, Redistricting, and Midterms

• House vs. Senate GOP Rivalries: Politico piece highlights tension; Kevin predicts a few key legislative successes (reconciliation, housing, crypto), but the rest of the agenda is fragile (23:42).
• Redistricting Wars:
  • Republicans may net up to 10 seats from recent Virginia Supreme Court and related initiatives.
  • Strong disagreement on odds for a Democratic House majority: Kevin says 100% guaranteed, Larry calls it a toss-up, Mark pegs it at 85% (26:57).
• Election “Waves”: Consensus that hyper-polarization has killed off classic “wave” elections.

5. LA Mayor’s Race: Political Advertising Misfires

• Spencer Pratt Negative Ad: A union ad attacking Republican Spencer Pratt accidentally touts his strengths in LA’s current climate: fiscal conservatism, more police, less power to unions. Panel derides it as a “parody” (28:07).
  • "That is an in kind gift to the Pratt campaign." – Kevin (28:33)

6. AOC’s National Ambitions and Rhetoric

• Key Clip: AOC’s speech at Ebenezer church signals no presidential run soon; her focus is on transformative policy, not office (31:29).
  • “My ambition is way bigger than that. My ambition is to change this country... presidents come and go...” – Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (31:29)
• Panel Analysis:
  • Mark sees this as confirmation AOC won’t run for President.
  • Kevin argues new media realities make old-school campaign steps a moot point, but agrees she is not seeking the White House right now.
  • Larry points out rhetorical double standards about religion and politics.

7. Politicians and Social Media “Game”

• Axios Chart: Only Gavin Newsom ticks every “content” box (book, podcast, Substack, merch).
  • Debate on value of podcasts/Substacks: Mark and Kevin see them as adding credibility and outreach, but not without risks.
  • Best positioned for social media/alternative media: Larry backs Newsom (Democrats) and Cruz (Republicans); Kevin gives the nod to Josh Shapiro and Cruz (39:41).

8. User Q&A:

• Redistricting Fallout:

  • Eric from Alabama wonders if aggressive redistricting is here to stay and if Newsom might pay a political price (43:43).
  • Larry: Dems have boxed themselves in on gerrymandering. Republican moves are “catching up.” Race to the bottom may not last forever—demographics and reapportionment will matter most in 2030.
  • Kevin: Black Democrats and white conservatives have long made tacit deals on lines in the South—shifting alliances and new Supreme Court precedents are accelerating change.

• Iran War & Strait of Hormuz:

  • John Carlin notes Iran always had (and practiced) the capacity to close the Strait, but war gave “permission” for a bolder move (48:51).

• Hope and Leverage?:

  • Bruce Director and Larry believe the U.S. and Trump have more leverage than acknowledged, argue Iran’s economic distress may force a deal—but Mark remains sharply skeptical that Iran will ever agree to meaningful concessions (54:12–58:17).

• China Plays Off Iran Talks:

  • With China hungry for U.S. oil and wanting tariff relief, some suggest Trump may leverage this in Beijing talks to sideline Iran further (59:26–60:15).

• Raising Taiwan Fears:

  • Kevin’s concern: in being flattered in Beijing, Trump may make unwanted concessions on Taiwan. Larry and Kevin debate the possibility but agree China’s economy is in tough shape and needs the U.S. (60:18–61:43).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Our job here is not to tell you what ought to be, but what is.” — Mark (02:08)
• “That’s not a counter offer, that’s a bunch of bullocks.” — Mark, on Iran's proposal (11:54)
• “There is no reasonable element to the regime. Even the moderates…” — Kevin, on Iran (22:25)
• “He’s not looking to end the war, Mark. He’s looking to win the war.” — Larry, on Trump’s mindset (21:59)
• “My ambition is way bigger than that. My ambition is to change this country… presidents come and go, Senate seats, House seats, elected officials come and go. But single payer health care is forever…” — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (31:29)
• “That is an in-kind gift to the Pratt campaign.” — Kevin, on negative advertising fails (28:33)
• “The first thing we offer Iran is the right to continue existing.” — Larry, on U.S. leverage (55:57)

---

Key Timestamps by Topic

| Timestamp | Topic/Segment | |-----------|-------------------------------------------------------------| | 01:42 | Trump-Xi summit, White House downplaying expectations | | 11:54 | Iran’s counterproposal “TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE” | | 15:01 | Panel begins deep dive on Iran war strategy | | 23:42 | Congressional infighting/agenda preview | | 26:57 | Redistricting, odds for House majority | | 28:07 | LA mayor's race, ad analysis | | 31:29 | AOC's "not running" speech, discussion | | 39:41 | Politicians’ social media/content “game” | | 43:43 | Listener Q&A on redistricting fallout | | 48:51 | Iran’s capacity to close Strait of Hormuz | | 54:12 | What a hypothetical Iran deal might look like | | 59:26 | Final China-Iran linkage, Taiwan concerns | | 61:43 | Wrap-up and program plugs |

---

Episode Tone and Style

• Lively, fast-paced, and insider-aware.
• The panel mixes wit with historical and political context, frequently ribbing each other while remaining rigorous in policy analysis.
• Willing to take listener questions seriously and engage in detail, including pushback and “role play” argument about diplomatic scenarios.

---

For Listeners Who Missed the Episode

This edition of The Morning Meeting captures the uncertainty and tension of a world where U.S. diplomatic and military leverage appears reduced, adversaries like Iran dig in their heels, and domestic political battles rage over who gets to draw the next generation’s congressional lines. With big personalities, memorable soundbites, and a focus on what matters for the day ahead, the podcast offers both expert assessment and an improvisational, "in the trenches" outlook for those tracking news, U.S. policy, and the machinery of politics.

---

For further detail, find the cited timestamps for in-depth discussion, context, and notable quotes.

Transcript

[A]

Foreign.

[B]

Everybody, welcome to the morning meeting. This is the two way platform. My name is Mark. You'll see on the screen. If you're watching closely, Kevin and Larry, if you're listening to the podcast version, please enjoy. Enjoy a second and a half of silence. One Mississippi. Half Mississippi. Okay, gentlemen, how are you?

[C]

Your moment of Zen right there. Doing great. It's a rainy Monday morning in Washington, D.C. it's true. So it's kind of miserable out there.

[B]

All right, well, did you have a

[D]

great Mother's Day, everybody?

[C]

I did, yes.

[B]

I hope everyone out there do as well. Thank you for being here, everyone. If you want to be in the conversation later in the program you're watching here on the two way platform, please raise your hand. If you've never raised your hand before, today could be the day. What I would consider to be the luckiest, luckiest day. Day. Day of your life. Life. Life. And Kevin, do you.

[C]

We had some new folks last week. That was great.

[B]

We did. Kevin, do you get that reference that I just did?

[C]

The echo in response?

[B]

Yeah, you get that? Larry will explain to you.

[D]

Larry, I believe that was from the. The movie. Oh, what was it called?

[C]

About.

[D]

About the Yankee Lou Gehri. Thank you.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

Story.

[B]

Kevin, I'm obsessed. I'm obsessed with coming up with cultural references you don't. Today.

[D]

Today. Today.

[B]

Today. Exactly. I'm lucky.

[D]

Consider myself.

[B]

Consider myself. Self. Self. Thank you. Right at the end of these. Yeah, yeah, I know you do. I know you. Because you know everything. If you're watching on YouTube, please don't put any smack in the chat. Last week was a particularly dark week for smack in the chat on this platform. I don't know why that is, but anyway, please don't put smack in the chat.

[D]

It's because I undermine you in the YouTube chat. Every time you say no smack in the chat, I immediately go to YouTube and say smack away. We don't care.

[B]

Smack. Welcome. Yeah, smack, welcome. Peace, love and understanding. Extension. The presumption of great stall. Let's do our day book. Ladies and gentlemen, big week. The press will be obsessed with building the entire week's coverage around the XI Trump Summit, as if the two of them are going to end the war. I'm here to tell you, don't count on that. In fact, the stakes are the odds are low, but also the odds are low that anything happens meaningful before then. So it's going to be a wasted week because the summit's not going to be that big a deal. The White House is downplaying expectations, but that's what we're faced with, ladies and gentlemen. Our job here is not to tell you what ought to be but. But what is. And what is is an obsessive focus on somehow Trump and Xi coming out and having a press conference and saying the war is over and here are the terms and everybody's happy. And there's going to be free root beer in the water fountains. Today. The President heads to China. Not today, but gets to China. He's basically in China Wednesday till Saturday roughly. So he's got a couple days here to try to do some stuff. You just saw the White House pool and here's the President's very full schedule today. Executive time, currently a maternal health care event at 10:30 open to the White House press pool. That could be the first time we see the President on camera reacting to the. The. The Insufficient Iranian counteroffer. 1:30 policy meeting. Close press in the Oval, 3 o'. Clock. Signs executive orders. Close press in the Oval, 4 o'. Clock. He hosts the Indiana men's football team. Man, that was a great team. That team is great. I'm looking forward to this event just to see those guys again. I haven't seen them in a while. That's open to pre credentialed media in the White House and so we'll see what happens there. Policy meeting at 5:30.

[C]

The sad thing though about that though is Fernando Mendoza is not going to be on hand.

[B]

Why are you? Kevin?

[D]

Why are you?

[C]

He's already in training with the Raiders. Are you the star quarterback? Yeah, the star quarterback. Remove. I don't think he's going to be there.

[B]

Remove the enthusiasm I previously expressed for the event. That guy's the only. Only player I care about.

[C]

Exactly.

[D]

There's no I in team. My is but.

[B]

And there's no I in Mendoza. Rose Garden club dinner at 7 tonight. Either of you know who's on the guest list for that one?

[D]

Not me.

[C]

I don't. Hope it doesn't get rained out though.

[B]

All right. Yeah. They got umbrellas. They have umbrellas. Umbrella. Umbrella. Umbrellas. Aa don't know what the vice president's doing, but I wouldn't be surprised if he attended some of these things.

[C]

Just don't hand him that trophy.

[B]

Yeah. The Ohio State Buckeyes. They lo. The Ohio State Buckeyes finals. Right. My.

[D]

Remember? No, no, no. The Buckeyes lost in the first round.

[B]

Oh, that's right. To like Al Georgia or Alabama.

[D]

I was beautiful. Go blue.

[B]

Anyway, so who knows if the vice president will show Scott Bessant out in Asia already. He'll be with the president in Beijing. He's the point person. But he's having a couple bilateral meetings on his way to China or maybe three. He's got, he's in Japan today. I think he's going to South Korea and then he's meeting with his counterpart, the vice premier, all in advance of the meeting. The Chinese love every detail of the summits announced or worked out privately in advance. But they like to announce the summits really close to them happening. Do you know when the Chinese announced that the summit was happening today? A few hours ago they put out a press release saying guess what, we're having a summit. Anyway. There's still details. Dr.

[C]

I will say Dr. Scott Bessant, who just delivered the commencement address at USC. Go Gamecocks. And got his honorary degree.

[B]

Is that the first time he's done that?

[C]

I don't know. But he returned to, you know, he's the son of South Carolina.

[B]

He is the son of South Carolina. Maybe we'll pull. I didn't realize that. Maybe pull some video of that for two way tonight. I'd be curious to know what he talked about, what life lessons he might have bestowed upon the Gamecocks. The Senate is back today. The House tomorrow. Congress has a big agenda to work out. We'll talk about that. Cole Allen, the alleged White House Correspondents association dinner shooter is got another preliminary hearing today. That man has more preliminary hearings than you can shake a stick at. If I had a nickel for every preliminary hearing that guy had, I could buy an issue of Mad magazine. I don't know what's the other cliche?

[D]

You got to have one more. You can't just leave us hanging with two. They got to come in three.

[B]

That guy has more preliminary hearings than I have old toothbrushes.

[D]

He has more than the tea in China.

[B]

How's that more than tea in China

[C]

or the pancakes eaten on live on air?

[B]

Exactly. Exactly. Week ahead. Just a few things for the week. Had Kevin Warsh cloture vote expected today. He should be confirmed by the end of the week, which is good and probably not a coincidence because I believe Chairman Powell's term ends on Friday. And and again I mentioned the summit. I'm not going to tell you who's on the late night shows except this. If you were to pick the ultimate Saturday Night Live host and the ultimate Saturday Night Live musical guest who are who by coincidence are playing at the season finale this coming Saturday, who would be the ultimate Saturday Night Live host? Not Tina Fey, maybe Tina Fey, but it's not Tina Fey.

[D]

It's got to be either Steve Martin or Alec Baldwin. Are the.

[B]

Okay, those are great. Those are fantastic.

[D]

Maybe Tom Hanks.

[B]

These are, these are three fantastic guesses. But I would consider the actual hoax to be the ultimate. Kevin, you got a guess?

[C]

I would agree with all three.

[B]

Yeah, look, your three are so good

[C]

in terms of who's in the.

[D]

In the crystal Martin short, it's Will Ferrell.

[B]

Will Ferrell. Can I make the case that he's with Steve Martin?

[D]

Probably be a little more millennial for me. I'm more of a Jedi anyway.

[C]

And then is it Paul McCarthy?

[B]

Yes. Paul McCartney. Sir Paul McCartney. So if you haven't watched all season, it's been a pretty good season. I recommend the season finale. Finale with Will Ferrell. Will Ferrell really can't be in a sketch and it not be funny. That's the beauty of Will Ferrell.

[D]

When I was in New York as still a teenager, I got to see once one time I got to see Saturday Night Live live in the audience

[C]

and it was waiting outline part no.

[D]

I had a friend because I worked for the Schubert, the theater company. So they got me a ticket, right? It was Alec Baldwin as host and it was the B52s as the music.

[B]

Good, Nice.

[D]

Oh, it was amazing.

[B]

Kevin, have you ever gone? I've never gone and I've tried to go many times. It's not an easy ticket even if

[D]

you're not well connected.

[B]

Not an easy ticket. I've never gone. Larry, hats off. Hats off to Larry Mine one of my favorite Del Shannon songs. Anyway, stock futures flat or down slightly. S P500 coming off its 15th record of 2026. Oil has moved up. Gas prices fell slightly. It's all continues to just be a mystery. I was watching on CNBC this Morning at like 5:55am they have right before Squawk Box they have like a little panel of analysts and they were all just flummoxed like, well, can't really explain it. You know, they AI and earnings and whatever. But it as somebody said maybe Becky said on Squawk, she said if you said gas prices and oil prices were up the way they're up, what would you just hypothetically what would you guess the stock market would do? And everybody said, well of course it would be crashing. And instead oil goes up and the market goes up and it just defies the physics of squawk box. But there you have it.

[D]

Either that or they know the smart money knows that it's temporary and there's a resolution coming. And, and the fundamentals of the economy are strong.

[B]

Yeah, they're strong. We'll get to the. We'll get to Iran first. First in a second. Let me get a quick word from a sponsor, our friends at CO the Earth. There's always that one outfit that you keep reaching for whenever you want to put on something comfortable and nice. And whether you're doing some shopping or sitting around with friends or even lounging around the house, Cozy Earth jogger set is the one that I reach for and many others do. If you own it, you know why. They're made viscous from bamboo, lightweight, breathable, and unbelievably soft. Try a jogger set today. For 20% off, go to cozyearth.com use the promo code morning and get yourself one relaxed. It doesn't look sloppy though. It's very neat, very comfortable, tapered jogger outfit. It's got a lot of structure to it, so it feels intentional and you can wear it all day. And same with the clogs. I recommend if you buy the joggers that you get yourself a pair of the clogs, you can wear them again both around the house and out and about everything from Cozy Earth. You see the attention to detail. They're made to last. Very comfortable. It isn't fast fashion homewear. These are pieces you'll be reaching for again and again years from now. Go to cozyearth.com use my code morning or code morning 20% off if you see the post purchase survey. So you heard about it here. Cozy Earth comfort lives here. All right, gentlemen.

[C]

I think, I think I just saw our friend Alan C. Put on his bubble cuddle blanket and he can adjust himself and how comfortable it is.

[B]

It's very comfortable. They're all comfort. Everything they make so comfortable. Oh, you guys think this show is just for humans. I've told you, the bubble cuddle blanket ain't just for humans. Well, same with this show. Number 001, please. Here's a pup watching the morning meeting. Well, maybe not watching, maybe present present during it. But on a bubble cutter.

[D]

The dog could not be any less impressed with this show, actually. Wow.

[E]

I started with one shop. No college degree, no big investors. It was just a willingness to work, work. Over time, that one shop turned into a multi billion dollar business called Crash Champions. All the lessons I learned along the way came from the grind. And that's what my show Pod Crash is all about. We have real conversations with people who've built things the hard way. We talk to founders, athletes and blue collar leaders who kept going when things got tough. You'll hear stories of grit, leadership and growth, plus real world lessons you can take back to your team and your life tomorrow.

[B]

When you get momentum, you step on the gas. That's how you get separation from everybody else.

[C]

I was at Harvard Law School. I was blah, blah, blah.

[B]

I looked up, let me tell you something, there's kids in my neighborhood putting

[C]

in sheetrock that is smarter than you.

[B]

AI is going to disrupt a lot of stuff.

[C]

It is never going to disrupt physical

[B]

blue collar trade skill.

[C]

And the guy just looked at me and he said it's bloody impossible. So I asked him this question.

[B]

I said it's impossible unless

[E]

that's pod crash with me. Matt ebert. Watch on YouTube and listen wherever you get your podcasts.

[B]

All right, we all know the basics on Iran. The Iranians rejected the deal. What the Iranians offered was ridiculous. The gap between the two sides is massive. Basically the Iranians say take off all the sanctions, give us our unfreeze our assets, let us open the straight so we can ship stuff through but control it. And then over the next 30 days, let's talk about nuclear stuff. Ladies and gentlemen, that's not a counter offer. That's a bunch of bullocks. And the President rightly dismissed it. So now the ball is in the President's court. On social media, on the blogs, on the major news sites and on X. A lot of people are dooming what's going on. A lot of people are saying quagmire. And it doesn't mean that US hasn't done well in the war militarily along with Israel. It, it doesn't mean things couldn't change. But in the current moment, here's the piece that people are talking about in the Atlantic 108 by Mr. Kagan. Now, Mr. Kagan has exhibited signs of Trump Derangement Syndrome in the past. But do not dismiss his point of view. He says the American defeat in the Gulf will have broader global ramifications. The whole world can see that just a few weeks of war with a second ranked power have reduced American weapons stocks to perilously low levels. No remedy in sight. He says everybody's laughing at the United States. And he says that this is, he hedges a little bit, but he basically says this is dire for America's role in the world, America's image in the world. Iran continues to control the strait. Iran continues to not show signs of surrendering. And the President no longer has time on his side, some are saying, and as I say before, the Chinese are not going to bail him out. Analysts are mixed on whether the Chinese want the war to end or not. I believe the dominant position is they do not care if the war goes on. It's embarrassing to the president and their economy, while troubled, is not being destroyed by the closure of the strait. And I continue to believe, ladies and gentlemen, in this paradox regarding a settlement, both the US And Iran want the strait open eventually, but in the short term, neither of them can open the strait because if they open the strait, they give up the leverage. The president's only leverage over Iran right now, unless he was willing to restart the war and is military action. And Iran's greatest leverage over the United States now is keeping the strait closed. So neither of them really wants to open the straight when. So people say there's going to be a short term deal that opens the strait, I say phooey. And when Kagan points out that even if there's a deal to open the strait, the Iranians can close the strait now anytime they want, raises the question for me why they didn't do this five years ago. Gentlemen, with that long prelude, Kevin, I start with you. What are the doomers getting wrong? And just to be clear, my position, that's where we are right now. The president's either going to have to find a way to ruin the Iranian economy, which doesn't seem to be happening quickly enough to delay the midterms or bomb again. And as Kagan points out, it's not like bombing again is a surefire solution to regime change or anything else. But I will say this. Finally, the current regime, under the current asymmetrical situation will not make a deal. I feel confident in saying that it will not make an acceptable deal. So Kevin, what are the doomers getting wrong if anything? Or are you dark right now?

[C]

Well, no, I'll pick up where you just left off, Mark number one. And there's a good story out of the Wall Street Journal this morning too, about where the ayatollah is right and the fact that they're generating AI images of him. You don't have a singular force on the other side of the table negotiating. Obviously, the Ayatollah is always that final sign off and has been going back to the war between Iran and Iraq. That position, the fact that again, the Iranians have acknowledged he's been hurt in that first attack that killed his wife and his father and the fact that we haven't seen or heard from him is problematic to Your point in terms of getting an end deal fact that we also waited 10 days for this Iranian response. You know, the administration was saying it's coming, it's coming, it's coming. This is part of their game plan just to delay continually to exert maximum pressure here on the strait. And I think what the president should do and should have done from the get go is not take that pause in terms of escorting those ships through the strait, actually bring them through and continue to mount the pressure campaign that was started when we were doing that, not allow any Iranian flag or allied flags of the Iranians to transit, but actually allow our ships and our allies ships through the strait to continue that pressure campaign.

[B]

Kevin, I listened to everything you said, Larry. Sorry, before you jump in, I'm still not clear, Kevin, are you dark or not about where things stand right now?

[C]

I'm dark in that there's no impetus. And you saw Kevin Hassert this morning. And we can talk about this clip, too, where he says time is on our side, too. If the Iranians think time is on their side, we think time is on our side, then we're not going to see a conclusion to this anytime soon.

[B]

All right, Larry, let's play Kevin Hassett on Squawk. And then I want to know if you're dark or not. I bet you're not because you're cockeyed. Optimist. Play Kevin Hassett from Squawk a little few moments ago.

[C]

And that's a South Pacific show, right?

[D]

Musical theater right there.

[C]

Yeah, yeah.

[D]

Oh, yeah.

[B]

You got it. You got it or not? Guys, I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna sit through this again. Do we have it or not? All right, Larry, are you, are you dark or not on where we are?

[D]

Well, I'm not as dark as Robert Kagan from the Atlantic. Listen, the fact that this effort is annoying the people at the Brookings Institution, I don't think makes a shows up on the radar for the Trump administration. Quick walk down Mr. Kagan's headlines in the Atlantic. In March, it was America is a Rogue Superpower. In January, America versus the World. In September of last year, it was the beginning of the end of NATO. And in June, when we did the bombing run to effect against the nuclear program, his headline was American Democracy Might not Survive a War with Iran. So Mr. Kagan, at least is consistent. But I think that when you said that the Chinese aren't interested in this because it embarrasses Donald Trump. Embarrasses him to whom? This current effort in The Middle east,

[B]

the French said we're being humiliated. The Arabs, the Gulf states are furious at it. Netanyahu is barely containing his own concerns. Putin's laughing at us. I mean, in all honesty, Larry, embarrassing him in front of pretty much everybody

[D]

at this point, I don't see it that way, number one. And number two, I don't think the only pressure on President Trump right now, I believe, would be a political concern over the midterm elections and all the redistricting mayhem that happened that we're going to get to in a bit of that's given him a little bit more breathing room. Plus some of the economic data that we got last week also gives him some breathing room. So I think he's staying the course.

[B]

Name. Name a country, Larry, who thinks that the war is going well for the United States. Name a country.

[D]

I think Israel actually is thinking the war is going well right now. That's just one. But also, I think, I think other than the Strait of Hormuz action, I think that most of our neighbors in the, most of Iran's neighbors in the Middle east are still on our side.

[B]

And our strategy here, well, they're on our side. I don't think. I don't think the Gulf states are happy either with the status quo or, or with the prospect of either the war restarting or with the prospect of a bad deal. I think the gold are outraged and horrified.

[C]

Here's my question, Larry. Do you think the president would be in a better position going to Beijing before the war started, had we just taken that action in Venezuela or now in terms of a stronger position?

[B]

Good one, Good one.

[D]

In terms of our trade deal?

[C]

Not a gotcha question.

[D]

Pending deal. No, I think it's a fair point. I'm not sure I think it's a good question. But I also think part of our discussions with China have to do with America's military strength and military ability to actually, you know, prevent 100%, which was

[C]

on the highest marks after Venezuela, I

[D]

think that they're still on pretty high marks. No, if you look at how effective we were against Chinese vessels and Chinese drones and Chinese missiles against Iran, that message is still loud and clear. And I.

[B]

Let me ask you, let me ask you this question, Larry first.

[D]

Yes.

[B]

Let's say the president said, I watched the morning meeting. He says to his advisors, I watched the morning meeting and I read the Kagan piece with an open mind, because even though he's got Trump derangement syndrome, I know that point of view is getting a lot of Currency. And I've decided Halperin's right. The status quo is not my friend. We need to end this war as quickly as we can on terms that I can accept. Regarding the Iran nuclear program, Larry, what, what would you recommend to do? Do you with the Wall Street Journal and, and Mark Thiessen just start to bomb the hell out of Iran or is there some or, or keep up the economic pressure? Like if the President accepts the premise that that time is not on his side and the status quo is not going to work, what would you recommend?

[D]

I. Well, first of all, I don't think, I reject the premise that that's where the President is what we call the hypothetical. I get it.

[B]

Hypothetically.

[D]

Hypothetically, if he had to make a decision right now to move the ball for down the field it military. It's going to be a military decision and we're going to come right back

[B]

to so Kagan, Kagan says what others say, which is if he starts to bomb, the Pentagon's acknowledge this even though they've downplayed it, Iran still has a lot of military capability. So if he starts the war back up with Israel and they start to hit Gulf state energy assets, do you think we'll, we'll win that war or you're willing to pay that price?

[D]

Well, asking me if I'm willing to pay that price or what the President is willing to pay that price.

[B]

Well, do you think that, do you think it's in the interest of the United States?

[D]

I think we will. I think he, he is trying whatever he can to not continue the military engagement first and foremost because he cares about the lives of the men and women who wear the uniform. But the most important thing about his true social post in my opinion was when he said I've just read the response from Iran's so called quote, representatives that shouldn't be overlooked. I think that the President and his team are still unsure and don't believe that the people he's negotiating with right now are even the actual representatives of the powers that be.

[B]

Totally true. But knowing that doesn't help end the war. In fact, just the.

[D]

No, it doesn't. He's not looking to end the war, Mark. He's looking to win the war.

[B]

Right, Kevin? Larry suggested that the redistricting stuff takes some pressure off of the midterms. Everybody I'm talking to says there's enormous pressure about the midterms.

[C]

Yeah, I think there is. I do think also, you know, to Larry's point, you know, Kevin Hassett, you know that, that clip that we tried to play, you know, the famous, the

[B]

famous clip, the lost clip, he said

[C]

something, you know, similar to like, you know, Iran is facing maximum economic pressure. It's really frustrating that they haven't been reasonable and agreed to our position. And again, we've discussed this, the three of this. There is no reasonable element to the regime. Even the moderates, there's no reasonable element. And they don't. They think of this again for 48 years as on another playing field of negotiations.

[D]

They're lunatic, as the president keeps saying. They're lunatic.

[C]

But that's the inherent problem when you have the president's chief economic deputies out there saying, why won't the Iranians just be reasonable and see this? If that's the thinking, we're not going to ever get to a deal. If they think anyone on the other side is going to reasonably accept anything.

[B]

Totally agree. All right. We'll talk more about Iran. I'm sure it'll come back up. And obviously, if folks want to ask questions or make points about Iran, please raise your hand. Story in Politico today about all the tensions between Thune and Johnson and House and Senate Republicans. Kevin, what's something you're confident that they'll get done? Here's the headline inside the House versus Senate. Riffs threatening the GOP agenda. There's some tart quotes in there from both sides. Kevin, of all the things, a dozen or so things on their agenda, what's something you think they'll pass in the balance of this year?

[C]

I think there could be three things. I think they do pass a reconciliation. I don't think that includes $1 billion for the, the ballroom necessarily, because I think that's a poison pill for that. That only needs Republican votes. And again, I don't discount the speaker's ability to get there and soon again with 53 votes, inability to get there. I do think they do something on housing. That's obviously, they passed different versions of it. Now it's in conference committee. And I do think they do something on crypto as well before the midterms. But certain reconciliations, number one, because again, it doesn't need Democratic votes.

[B]

Yeah. Larry, do you agree with that list they'll get all three of those things?

[D]

I do. I do. I think that there might be a little bit more, too. I was amused at the Politico article. Politico had to come out with something that showed Republicans in disarray considering what a good week they had last week. So I don't think it's quite as dire as you might be reading. But yeah, they need to go to voters this November and say, look what we just did.

[B]

Right. All right. Republicans are gleeful in the wake of Friday's decision in Virginia Supreme Court. And now analysts are saying that Republicans might, there's still some uncertainty in the process here, but they might net up to 10 seats through this mid decade redistricting process that James Blair started. It's certainly not looking as good for Democrats as they had thought after California and after the Virginia initiative passed.

[C]

I was this close to muting Larry and his glee coming out of Virginia on Twitter for that. I needed a little break from him.

[D]

Yeah, sorry.

[B]

Democrats, Democrats reported over the weekend, Hakeem Jeffries in a strategy call, Democrats are talking about like, I don't know, how would they get rid of the Virginia Supreme Court? I didn't really even understand.

[C]

They would, they would lower the, the age. No, no. They would lower the mandatory retirement age.

[D]

So with a D3.

[B]

And that would, that would, that would be for retribution. Would that somehow allow them.

[D]

No. Then, then they'd see the new Supreme Court and have them reevaluate it.

[B]

But they, but they would.

[D]

Maoists.

[B]

They would, they would get R. And then have the. Then, then ask the case to be heard again by a different. Come on. Is that really what they're proposing anyway?

[C]

I mean, this, this is the school of Mitch McConnell. You know, I'm like Democrats, what would Mitch McConnell do?

[B]

Yeah.

[F]

Oh, Kevin.

[B]

Yeah. So come on.

[D]

So raw power, Mouse.

[B]

So it's still, it's still the case. Gentlemen, you agree with me that the base case remains the Democrats win the majority in the House, right?

[D]

No, Correct.

[C]

Even with this. Even with this, Larry. 100%.

[B]

So the cook Political report basically says there's like both sides have the same number of seats. They're likely to.

[D]

And there's 15 toss ups.

[B]

15 or 18 toss ups. And Kevin couldn't, couldn't Republicans win their share of those toss ups? If it's that few and they have all the money in the world, maybe.

[C]

But, but again, you know, Virginia is a great example. We tried to, we tried to go 10 and one, I think was the breakdown at six, five. Now we'll pick up three. We'll pick up three instead of four or five in Virginia. Maybe two in the, with the current lines.

[B]

Yeah, maybe two. All right.

[D]

Yeah. So wait till you see who you nominate.

[B]

Hold on.

[D]

No, no, no way. Every. Can I just say real fast, everyone's predicting how this game is going to be played. And they don't. First of all, we're still figuring out what the field of battle will be as these districts are drawn. And you don't know who the players are on the teams.

[B]

All right, Kevin, a lot of races. What percent chance would you assign to Democrats winning the House majority? What's the percentage?

[C]

100%.

[B]

100%, Larry?

[C]

100.

[D]

Somebody's going to be eating mushu pork cartons.

[C]

Peking duck.

[D]

Yeah, I think. I think the House is a toss up right now. I think it's a toss up. Yes.

[B]

All right. The correct answer is 85%.

[D]

Hold on. Can I ask one. Follow. It's not blue wave. Can we have we set that aside now? There's no blue.

[C]

There are no more wave elections.

[B]

There might be. Okay. Spencer Pratt. I continue to be bullish on Spencer Pratt and people tell me, oh, markets, California, it's la. No, forget how good the ads are. Here's how bad the ads are. This is a. It's a. It's a. Kevin, right? It's a labor union ad. All right, let me set this up. This is how out of touch the unions are. They running out saying, here's all the horrible things about Spencer Pratt. I would venture to say that in today's la, all the things they're saying are horrible about Spencer Pratt in this ad actually would test better than 60, 40 for Spencer Pratt. Roll tape.

[G]

Republican Spencer Pratt is the last thing Los Angeles needs for mayor. Pratt opposes using taxpayer money to build brand new houses for our unhoused neighbors.

[B]

Yes.

[G]

Saying it's time for the homeless to get help or get out. Pratt thinks LA needs thousands more police officers rather than more social workers.

[B]

Republicans.

[G]

Republican Spencer Pratt thinks public employee unions should have less power, not more. LA is on the right track and needs to stay the course. Vote no on Republican Spencer Pratt.

[B]

I mean, Kevin. Kevin, am I missing something? It's like, it's like a. It's like a parody. That ad could be more effective.

[C]

That is in kind. That is an in kind gift to the Pratt campaign. Don't.

[B]

Don't use my tax money to house the homeless. Hire more police officers rather than social workers and public employees. Unions shouldn't be so powerful. What am I missing, Larry?

[D]

I think that the one thing that was effective in there is calling Spencer Pratt a Republican. They did it three or four times and that might be enough in LA county, but even this.

[C]

And I make ads for a living. The music was, you know, inspiring and the voiceover was not scary. It was emboldened. Like, again, the imageries is just, you know, it's a terrible, terrible ad. Call me California AFL cio. I'm at.

[B]

I'm happy to help you out. Kevin will make you a better enemy. I'm sure there are things you could say about Spencer Pratt that would be effective, but those things, I mean my liberal friends who live in Hollywood would be like. Yeah, I don't I calling them that. Unhoused. I mean the whole thing.

[D]

Unhoused.

[B]

Yes, whole thing.

[D]

Did you see Karen Bass, by the way, has just done. She's not going to participate in any more debates. Is she done? Is it.

[B]

Did she rule herself out of all debates or just the next too?

[D]

I think that's all that there is. The primary is the first week of June.

[B]

Yeah. I think there's one more that she has. I may be wrong. I think there's one she hasn't ruled out.

[D]

But do you think she's done Honestly, that's, that's quite.

[B]

What a panic. I think she's still the front runner. I mean, I, I, I pay.

[C]

I mean, I think they both. She's not going to make 50% so we're going to just, you know, adjudicate this come November.

[D]

I don't think she might make the top two. Honestly.

[B]

If it's against that far left candidate, Pratt will win for sure.

[C]

I mean, is there. But the part of this problem is too. We haven't had good polling in a number of weeks too. Taking it into account.

[B]

Yes. These are hard, very hard ways to pull. Is, is, am I right that that there's no group Democrats for Pratt? I'm not trying to run the guy's campaign from Manhattan, but it seems like, like disaffected Dems.

[D]

Yeah, that would be smart.

[B]

Right? There should be like some Hollywood actors and big directors and producers who are like, we're Democrats for. Because, Because I can't, I can't find a single friend of mine who's not for Pratt. All these liberals are for Pratt anyway. Spencer AOC as Call me. Exactly. Maybe we need to get there. Mr. Cole Allen pled not guilty to all the charges this morning in his latest preliminary hearing. AOC normally doesn't do a lot of interviews. She's done a few interviews, public appearances, including one with David Axelrod. And people are hearing what they want to hear from these. I listen to what she's saying and it confirms my suspicion that maybe she'll run for Senate if she can get Schumer to retire. But she's not interested in running for president. That's What I hear from this, you all be the judge. This is Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, the gentlelady from the Bronx and parts of Queens, speaking at various recent events. It's long but worth hearing. 114 please.

[A]

They assume that my ambition is positional. They assume that my ambition is a title or a seat. And my ambition is way bigger than that. My ambition is to change this country. Presidents come and go, Senate, House seats, elected officials come and go. But single payer healthcare is forever, a living wage is forever. Workers rights are forever, women's rights, all of that. What happens to Georgia happens to New York. What happens to Tennessee happens to California. What happens to Louisiana happens to all of us. Ebenezer because this is America. We are not divided by state. We are united by our humanity and common citizenship. Because no man can grant us our humanity. No law can erase it. No king, no system and no president can strip it away. Ebenezer. Because it is not given by man. It is ordained by God. God.

[B]

Larry from now on when I, when I talk to you on the show, I'm just going to say, is this correct? O Conor Yeah, you know, I like that Ebenezer thing. Here's the thing, Kevin. I, I just, I, I know, I know she could raise money. I know she's got name id. I know she's very watchable. But she's not going to subject herself to interviews with Tom Friedman and being, being in the debates with these other folks. That's, that's a lady who's not running and saying, well, I care more about policy than an office. Am I right?

[C]

But I think that's an old school way of thinking about, you know, the Tom Friedman comment. Mark she doesn't need any of that. She's a rock star online. And again, you have to do certain things obviously to go through a place

[B]

like go to the Munich Security Conference.

[C]

Yeah, there you have it. But she, she, you know, she, she's not of the system. Right. She took on the system and thinks that there's an alternative route potentially again and making a play for black voters right in the heart of this redistricting battle where, you know, there's a deficit on the left in terms of that level of engagement. And she could, you know, seemingly do well in South Carolina with a message like that. I mean you play that, obviously that's at Ebenezer in Atlanta at Senator Warnock's congregation, but you play that in South Carolina, that plays really well.

[B]

Markets have opened slightly down. Larry, are you with Kevin AOC 28 or with me. AOC is not running for president.

[D]

Well, she's obviously got great political skills and she has a huge constituency that will raise money. She will be a kingmaker in a lot of these races. But I'm with you.

[C]

When she says in these race. In these midterm races, too, right now.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

When she says there's other places when she says that. Let me tell you something. When a politician says, yeah, there are bigger things than being president, it's their way of rationalizing that they're not running for president.

[B]

That's what I think.

[D]

That's.

[B]

That's.

[D]

You're right.

[C]

That's a good point.

[D]

That said, that last clip there of her speaking at a church. Imagine if a Republican, a conservative Christian Republican, was drumming up the. The crowd in a congregation at a Christian church like that. They'd be screaming separation of church and straight. It always astounds me the Democrats get away with that, number one. Number two, a lot of the things

[C]

at Liberty University by all kinds of

[D]

politicians, that's a university, not a place of worship. But that said, some of the things she said there, I'm happy to hear a Democrat saying that, that our rights are given from God and not granted by kings or governments. Thank you. You're right. I appreciate that. And she also used the word common citizenship. Thank you. Like, only citizens should register to vote and things like that. All right, that's an interesting message coming from.

[C]

Hey, that's how we get you, Larry. That's how we get you.

[B]

All right, I want just one sentence. No colons, no, no commas. One sentence from each of you. Where does the Vance vs. Rubio fantasy football discussion stand, Larry? Where does it stand?

[D]

I think they're enjoying watching everything take place right now. And I have a sense that they've sort of reached an understanding between the two of them. That was one sentence conjoined with an and.

[B]

Very well done, Kevin.

[C]

I think, as you said on your next upmark, they're actually friends. I think they're amused by this. And I think the. The person that's most amused by this is the president, who will continue to fuel speculation. Yeah.

[B]

All right. Raise your hand if you want to get in the conversation. We have one more topic to get to. And then to your questions, please raise your hand. And again, if you've never raised your hand, let today be the day. Let's get at least one.

[C]

We had some good new folks last week. We had some great new folks kicking off season seven.

[B]

All right, Axios did a super interesting Thing they did a chart of how various potential presidential prospects are availing themselves of social media and other platforms and other content creation. Not just social media, because they're all on social media. Here's the chart. Super interesting. So what they looked at is have they. Do they have a book out? Do they have a substack? Do they have a podcast? And do they sell merch? And you'll notice that literally the only person amongst about 10 Democrats and 10 Republicans who hit all four is Gavin Newsom. A few hit three, but most hit only two. First of all, Kevin, what do you notice about an omission on the Democratic list? Who's not on the Democratic list that strikes you?

[D]

Hunter Biden.

[B]

Hunter Biden. Never. Also never been in my kitchen.

[C]

I mean, there's. There's no ROM on there.

[B]

There's no Rom. Why is Rom running?

[C]

He's certainly running and he's.

[B]

And he's Mr. Content Creation. I'm just surprised.

[D]

Rom is fascinating.

[B]

Yeah, here's. Here's who's on here. Nom Bashir, Mark, Kelly Westmore, Josh Shapiro, Kamarus Pete Buddha, JD Pritzker, John Osf, AOC I'm reading it. For those listening to the podcast, Republicans, Tucker, Don Jr. Ted Cruz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ron Desantis, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, J.D. vance, Thomas Massie, and Glenn Youngkin. Do people talk about Massey running for president? Did I miss that? Is that a thing?

[C]

No.

[D]

No.

[C]

I'm surprised Sarah Huckabee Sanders isn't on that list.

[B]

I agree.

[D]

And why is Tucker on that? If you're going to put Tucker on the Republican list, you should put Don Lemon on the Democrat. Don Lemon talks about running for president more than Tucker does now.

[B]

You'll see the only one with the substack on the Republican side is Marjorie Taylor Greene. I'm a huge substack fan. I think, I think anyone, everyone should have a substack even more than a podcast. And all the Democrats have substacks except Bashir and aoc. I'm surprised they don't have substacks. And then very few people sell merch. That's a little bit surprising. And very few podcasts, because podcasts, ladies and gentlemen, I'm here to tell you, are a lot of work. Here's my question for you, Larry. Who's. Who's best positioned if. If there's a primary for these four? Not just. Not just in terms of quantity. In other words, checking the box. I have one. But who's the. Who's the. Who's of one? For each party, who's got the best game potentially, if they want to run, who can best take advantage in the context of a presidential campaign, of a book, a substack, a podcast, and a merch store. Before you answer, I, I don't read the chat. I glance at it. So I say, well, why substack? I saw somebody say, well, why substack? The thing about substack is you can write there and, and it has, it has. You can build community there. And if you're on substack, the. The expectation is your prose is going to be serious. Put the chart back up, please. Prose is going to be serious. It's not frivolous. It's long form and, and rigor.

[C]

Form. Exactly.

[B]

Lyrical. So I just think it, it, it adds a, A, A patina of credibility, of seriousness. Larry, One Republican on the list, one Democrat. Who's got the best game in these combined in these four categories.

[D]

I certainly knew some. If this is the criteria, and I'm not sure that I accept the total premise, but if that's the criteria, then Gavin Newsom certainly. I mean, he's a media machine, and he's married to a woman who was a media executive and as a film director, so obviously he understand.

[B]

What about Republican? Who's the best positioned in these four?

[D]

Well, I mean, first of all, there's one other element of starting a substack mark that you left out, and that is cash flow. Cash. And I think that's why Marjorie's free.

[B]

Substack's free.

[D]

You can also set up a subscription.

[B]

Oh, you mean if you want to make money off of it, yeah, you can.

[D]

And Marjorie Taylor Greene started her substack as soon as she was unemployed and not in Congress anymore. So there may be a money play there.

[B]

Okay, but who's got. On the Republican side, who's got game on these four areas combined? Game in these four.

[D]

I mean, honestly, if, again, if this is the criteria, I think Ted Cruz, his podcast is incredibly effective, incredibly powerful, and he's very good at sort of going over the head of the, of the media and talking directly to voters. So I would give it to Ted.

[B]

Kevin, Larry says Newsom and Cruz, what say you?

[C]

I think Newsom is up there. I think, Mark, you. You make a good point. It's. It's not easy to, to have a podcast. I would posit even farther and say it's not easy to have a good podcast that does no harm. And I think Gavin Newsom's podcast has been effective. But also there's Been critiques. Now, if you're running in a Democratic primary for platforming some of these folks potentially. Right. And him having to change his views, playing into that wishy washy nature of him where he's embracing some of the things that Charlie Kirk was saying, for example, when he interviewed him. So I think it's a double edged sword with that podcast. I will say Gavin's book and you interviewed the governor was very illuminating. It wasn't a standard book. I think Josh Shapiro's book, where we carried the Light, I just finished it and I've read political biographies, autobiographies going back to Tip o'.

[D]

Neill.

[C]

Right. I think that was an effective messaging book out there in terms of where the governor stands playing, going straight into his faith life. Right. Not running away from it in a Democratic primary like a lot of people would advise him to as an observant Jewish. So I think.

[B]

So what are your two.

[C]

I'm up there with Josh Shapiro. Gavin.

[B]

Yeah, I just need, I just need two names.

[C]

Kevin. Yeah. Josh Shapiro, number one on my side.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

And I would say Ted Cruz is effective with that podcast. Hilarious.

[B]

All right, all right. My answer, by the way. Yeah.

[D]

Oh, go ahead. You can become a. A monthly member for Marjorie Taylor Greene for $8 a month annually, $80 or a founding member for 150 a year.

[B]

Just bargain from.

[C]

It's going right to. That's going right to her bodybuilding.

[B]

My answer exactly. My answers are Pete Buttigieg and Don Jr. All right, wow. Quick word from a sponsor and then. And then to your questions. True Work will give you 15% off. They're great clothes, comfortable no matter what the day brings. If you've got stuff to do outside, prefer professional around the house or in Kevin's case, around the working farm. You, you want to wear True Work performance. Work Wear brand that designs technical, durable apparel. Built for demanding job sites and outdoor conditions. This stuff is great in any weather, under any conditions. It allows you to move, bend, kneel, climb. It's water resistant to shed the rain. Pants have been tested and validated for over 10 years by trade professionals working at real job sites. 15,000 5 star reviews. This is just great work stuff. It looks great, it's comfortable and it's not cheap. It works well and it's durable. So go to true work.com that's T R U E W E R K T R U w e r k dot com. Use the promo code two way and that'll get you 15% off. If you got work to do, this Season this spring and you want to, you need to be outside. Use the promo code 2way.com to get 15% off and buy yourself some workwear that feels, just feels different than normal clothes filled with pockets and everything else. Four way stretch. True work.com built like it matters, because it does. All right, ladies and gentlemen, we go to the questions from the community. This is when it gets exciting. This is when Larry and Kevin start to feel the pressure.

[C]

This is why we do it. This is why we do this, why we do it.

[B]

This is why we. This is why we play the game. Eric Hamilton is here. Eric, welcome in. Thank you for being here. Tell folks who don't know where you are and what's on your mind for Larry.

[D]

Nintendo with Zelda.

[B]

Let's go.

[H]

Yeah, I, I'm from Huntsville, Alabama, and I wanted to talk about the redistricting wars.

[B]

Yes, sir. Good times.

[H]

So I, I'm here in Alabama and they're redistricting or, or trying to. And it's because of the Supreme Court decision. But I don't know if there would be the political will to do it this year in Alabama if it had not been for Virginia. And then Virginia wouldn't have happened had not Gavin Newsom kind of nationalized this redistricting in California. And so I guess I have kind of two questions. Will, is that right? And will Gavin Newsom pay any kind of, I guess, political price if the Republicans end up with more redistricting than, than the Democrat than the Democrats?

[B]

And yeah. Is.

[H]

Is this a permanent fixture of yearly politics now, just redistricting, or is there a potential way in which Will this will get resolved and maybe, I guess in mutual disarmament of gerrymandering?

[B]

Yeah, great, great questions, Larry. Take a first stab at that.

[D]

Thank you for this. It's an interesting narrative and I wouldn't be surprised when all of a sudden, dunno, Republicans don't pick that up. Just Gavin Newsom. Because, because I think you're right. I think a lot of the urgency that you're seeing from these states that were affected by the Supreme Court's decision on the Voting Rights act is because of what Virginia did and what Gavin Newsom did in California. And I know Kevin's going to say that was a reaction to what Texas did. But let's not forget Texas did their redistricting because the Biden administration in 2020 block or 2021 blocked Texas from putting in the map that they wanted to in the normal cycle that then was fought in court. They finally had a resolution to it this year, and that's why they went ahead and did the districting they wanted to do back in 2021. That said, I don't think you're going to see this as a regular, a regular routine here unless you see major shifts in the electorate in these states. You know, you need the governor and you need the legislature to be able to draw maps like this and re gerrymander. Republicans really are just catching up to what Democrats have been doing for quite some time. As you can see in those solid blue states, they're frustrated because they don't have much more room to work with. And Republicans have a lot of room because their states are the ones that have those racially gerrymandered districts. So I think once this is settled, I don't think you're going to see this much fluctuation. I could be wrong.

[C]

Kevin I sure hope not, Eric. It's a it's a great question, and it has been this kind of tit for tat that we've seen in a race to the bottom. I think we're not done, certainly not just in this political season, this cycle, but I think there's a lot of ramifications for 2028 because, you know, there's a number of states that have already moved forward. We'll see what happens in Tennessee. We'll see what happens in South Carolina. We'll see what happens in your home state. You know, J Mart was on Morning Joe this morning, I'll just say this, and he had an interesting take on this. For the the longest time before the Supreme Court decision, you had black Democrats working with conservative white Republicans in some of these states with these tacit agreements. You have those districts. We have this district happened in South Carolina. That's how we passed a voting bill with support of the Black Caucus in Columbia with white Republicans. And there's always that negotiation. And seemingly more and more white Democrats were pushed out of that process. And I think that's one of the interesting things that, you know, South Carolina, for example, you know, we we needed, you know, Jim Clyburn on a lot of things when Democrats were in control to save money going into the state. That's the argument that he's making right now, is there will be a Democratic president that won't pick up the phone when any of these Republican members call. So if you take all of us out, that's going to be a huge problem for the state. We'll see if that resonates with voters. But I do fear that it is a race to the bottom when it comes to redistricting.

[D]

One other thing, Eric, though this isn't 2030 is going to be fascinating because the last census in 2020 miscounted a lot of red states. And, and they've admitted that already. They know that that happened. 2030, the new census is going to show such a migration to traditionally Republican states right now that we're going to have to go through a whole lot of reapportionment, which will be the next big step is more congressional seats and therefore more electoral votes in those states where they're currently accounted for in Democrats.

[C]

It's been traditionally Republican. Yeah.

[B]

Right. Yeah. Eric, thank you. Grateful to you. Complicated.

[C]

Great questions, Eric.

[B]

Very great topic. John Carlin, welcome in. Tell folks who don't know where you are what's on your mind for Kevin and for Larry.

[D]

Hi, John.

[C]

Hey, John, Good morning. Oh, you just muted.

[D]

John, you're gonna have to unmute there. John, hold on.

[B]

And boom. No, one more time.

[C]

Come on. There you go, John.

[B]

Sorry. Do it again. Do it again. I screwed it up that time. There it is. There you go, John.

[C]

We got you.

[B]

Welcome in, sir.

[F]

Thank you. Glad to be here and glad to see the team. I'm struck by, by the, by the observation of the premise that starting the war gave Iran the capacity to close the Strait of Hormuz. That's really geography and missiles and drones and it's very hard to put it back in the bottle now that it's been exercised. But it seems to be a weird premise.

[B]

State the premise. State the premise again, you think is weird. I don't quite understand.

[F]

Oh, that. That had there been no war, Iran could not close the Strait.

[B]

Well, they could have, but they didn't.

[F]

But they, but the capacity was still there.

[D]

Well, sure, but they did in 2020 or they tried in 2019.

[B]

Yeah, but why didn't they? Why didn't they?

[F]

I don't know. Well, but, but now politically, it's framed that that had there been no war, it would not have happened. And I just, I don't understand exactly. Is there a way to break that premise?

[B]

I think, I think, I think there's reasons to argue that some of the steps they've taken, they wouldn't, they wouldn't have taken except in the context of a conflict. In other words, if they tried to do it not in the context of the conflict, some, some of their allies, maybe the Chinese even would have said, this is nuts. Like, stop, stop doing this. Like, you know, everything's going fine. So, so you're right. As a matter of logic, nothing about the war itself gave them the technical capability to do this. But I think the geopolitical permission structure only exists because of the war. That'd be my answer.

[C]

KEVIN no, I agree. And John, to your point, we've been war gaming with the Iranian regime going back for 48 years, and number one on that list in terms of what their response would be, would be the straits close. Right. And and again, they tried to do this previously. They they've done it over the years. I think back in the 80s they also did this where or in the 90s. And we escorted some of the ships through previously. But certainly this has been part of the our war game theory with Iranians going back for the the last number of decades.

[D]

Yep. Larry yeah, that is correct. And again, under under 20, if you go back to 2019, Secretary Secretary of State Mark Pompeo at the Mike Pompeo at the time very much engaged in this because there were ship seizures, there was some threats that they would shut it down. So this is something, you know, again, to quote the president and everyone on this show, they're lunatics. And whenever they want to, you know, hold the world hostage, they threaten this or they come this close to doing it, they did under Reagan at one point or when they mined the Strait. So this is the problem and the fact that they're doing it right now is the desperation last thing that they had that they had the ability of doing with what limited conventional forces they have left. They were able to do this with the limited conventional forces after their navy was was destroyed. And hopefully, if we can get through this, they won't be a threat any longer.

[C]

And they're still launching, you know, unsuccessful attacks on our three destroyers, as they did over the last, you know, 72 hours and things like that. So there is still some capacity, but

[D]

they fall to the sea like a wounded butterfly.

[B]

Like a wounded butterfly. JOHN thank you for the question. Let's go to the Old Dominion, ladies and gentlemen, the pride of Virginia, the part of the holy trinity of Thomas Jefferson, Glenn Youngkin and Bruce Director. Bruce, welcome in. Thank you for being here. What's on your mind for Kevin and for Larry?

[I]

Yeah, thank you very much. It's good to be here and a bit relieved after the Supreme Court upheld the Constitution of Virginia last week, because that was the most ridiculous ballot initiative I've ever seen. But actually what I raised my hand about was I just wanted to say that I don't share your pessimism, Mark, about the upcoming visit with Xi and about the situation with the war in Iran.

[D]

Good, agreed.

[I]

I think there's a lot of, Trump has a lot of leverage and there's as I keep saying, I think there's a lot of things going on behind the scenes. The Qatari foreign minister, prime minister, same guy was in Washington last week, met with Rubio, then went down to Miami and met with, I mean met with Wyckoff and Rubio. I met with J.D. vance in D.C. yeah. And that's another back channel. All this negotiations that have been going on has just been through the Pakistanis. And this is where I think Larry's point about Trump making the point about who the representatives are. So there's more going on in terms of the pressure. The economy in Iran. They put out a thing that they're rationing water in Tehran and other places. It's much worse than I think what's being reported. There's a lot of Iranian propaganda which gets picked up by the American press and everything else which has the narrative

[C]

that we're out of.

[B]

Appreciate that. Appreciate that. And again, I'm not dooming to the saying it's, it's doomed forever. I'm just saying on a current trajectory it ain't in a good place. Answer me this, Bruce. What does a deal look like? What's a gettable deal? Tell me what, what each side gets in terms of timing and sequencing and elements. Just the 80,000ft. You don't need to get into the technical details. But what does Iran do on nuclear, what does the US do on sanctions and unfrozen assets? Tell me what that looks like.

[I]

I think Iran gives up the nuclear, the so called dust that either to a third party, to a third country.

[B]

They'll never do it but. They'll never do it but okay, what do we, what do we give them? Let's say they give that up. What does the US give for that on sanctions?

[I]

Well, I think we reduce the sanctions but in the context of US companies going into Iran and actually doing business,

[B]

all the sanctions come off over time. How soon? Because Iran says they have to happen right away.

[I]

Yeah, well that's not going to happen.

[B]

So no. So no sanctions relief until the nuclear materials out of Iran. Is that what you're saying the deal is?

[I]

Well, there'll be a step by step.

[B]

But what's the sequencing though, Bruce, this is impressing you because this is why it's impossible. We haven't even gotten to the straight yet. You're saying step by step how much nuclear material has to come out of the country before there's a dollar of sanctions released.

[G]

Relief.

[I]

Well, I can't tell you the exact number, but it would be something.

[B]

Some sanctions relief be so some sanctions relief before we get simultaneous. So. So the dust comes out and it crosses the border and that's when the sanctions relief comes off.

[I]

Something like that.

[B]

Sometimes the Iranians will never agree to that. They'll never agree to it. Now, what's the Bruce. What's the condition of the straight under this. Under this mythical director deal? What happens to this? What happens to the strait? Who controls the strait? Is it status quo? Pre bellum. Is that what it is? Oh, yeah.

[I]

The strait gets opened and Iran. It's an international watery way back to before the war. Absolutely.

[B]

The Iranians have agreed to it. No further questions, your honor.

[I]

They may not want to agree to it now, but the pressure is going to increase and they're going to have to.

[C]

So.

[D]

So the way. When you say, what does America offer Iran in exchange for that? You say that it's more than just sanctions. The first thing that we offer Iran is the right to continue existing. All right, because. Because when you refer to this as a quagmire, when you refer to this as this ain't going well on a military basis, it's been going very well diplomatically. Okay, well. And that's ultimately what this is as a military endeavor. Negotiations are not going well.

[B]

Mr. Kagan. And I would say the fact that it's going well, milit. You know, total mismatch and they're not the least bit inclined to give in anything on the negotiations suggests it doesn't matter how well it goes military.

[D]

But do we have more to do militarily, Mark? Could we harm them more? Could we devastate them if we need to? It could.

[B]

And then they'll blow up desalination plans. Kevin, what am I missing? What Bruce and Larry think the Iranians are both ridiculously nuts and also open to a reasonable deal. I don't get it. Kevin.

[D]

Yeah, I didn't say they were open to a reasonable deal. We may need to annihilate them. That may be the last thing that's needed. Sorry.

[C]

The important point that Bruce makes is we really don't know fundamentally what the conditions on the ground are. Yeah. And if, you know, in the point about water rationing and things like that, we really don't know if, you know, reports are that are on their knees. Reports are our own CIA estimate estimation that they have many more months to go. I think that is the factor here is that we don't have good intelligence, honestly, out of what is actually happening on the ground in the 33 provinces to dictate when this war will end.

[B]

Absolutely. But here's what we do know. The president threatened to annihilate this country if they didn't make a serious offer. And as best we know, they made a joke offer. They made an offer that's not close.

[I]

So complete joke.

[B]

So, Bruce, I was. I was fauxhearted on you because I think it's important for people to understand. The President, I don't believe, will make a bad deal. I don't believe he'll make a deal that doesn't eliminate the Iranian nuclear program.

[C]

He has.

[B]

Yeah. And I. And I. And I. And not just politically, but I think in terms of the righteous cause that set the war off to begin with. But I don't think that we have any indication that anytime soon under these conditions, the Iranians will give up the nuclear program.

[D]

I think. I think the indication.

[B]

Talk about it.

[D]

I think Mark's right about that, Bruce. But at the same time, I appreciate a president who is trying to go beyond the extra mile and give every effort to a negotiated deal as possible before ultimately, I think what he's going to have to do inevitably, which is further military strikes.

[I]

I don't think it'll happen soon, but I don't think it'll happen, you know, a year from now. I think it's going to happen over the next several months.

[B]

If it doesn't happen before the midterms and gases cost what it costs now, it's going to be a super difficult situation for the President politically here at home. What I got to stop, Blair. I'm going to turn it back to you, but I'm going to go over to SiriusXM where I'll be rolling into our second hour of the morning meeting. Please join me there. SiriusXM, channel 111. It's the greatest channel to be on because with my horrible memory, even I can remember what channel I'm on. But only Kevin remembers the phone number. Kevin, if people want to call me there, tell them the number. Oh, you don't remember?

[D]

Good luck with that.

[B]

I thought you knew the number. Kevin, am I wrong? 8334-4634-9683-3446-3496. I leave you all in the cable

[C]

right on the spot.

[B]

There you go, Bruce. Thank you. You guys end the show as you see fit and I'll see you there and I'll see you tomorrow.

[D]

Thanks, Mark.

[C]

Thanks, Mark. And thank you.

[D]

Thank you, Bruce. Bruce did start that, though, the conversation, framing it within China. And I, if I could real fast, Kevin, if, if the US Walks away with a deal, which I still, I, I disagree with the pessimism here that nothing's going to happen with China. I think that we could have a deal. China desperately wants those terrorists down. If we walk away with a deal where we're, you know, they were going to buy a contract with Boeing, and even more importantly, we have an energy deal where we become a major oil exporter to China, that could really compromise Iran's position here in all of this. China wants, China needs oil. They've got a problem with Iran right now. Trump could go in and say, I got an idea. Why don't you buy oil from us China? That makes us friends, that makes us partners. You need us, we need you. And Iran's left holding the bag.

[I]

Oil from Alaska.

[C]

Yeah.

[D]

Thank you, Bruce.

[C]

Thank you, Bruce. My only fear, and you know, my only fear is what the reporting on Taiwan is that the president, you know, is going to love the pomp and the circumstance of the Beijing visit. He loves to be feted and will have some wiggle room on Taiwan. And that's, that's terrifying to me.

[D]

So I know that that's a narrative in certain circles of political analysis. Is there any moment over the five plus years President Trump has been president where he has fundamentally changed American policy to our detriment and our allies detriment because they gave him a trophy and held a parade for him. I just, I think it's really insulting to President Trump to suggest that he would hand over Taiwan because Xi Jinping threw a party for him.

[C]

No, I think, you know, he does enjoy flattery, as we know, we all.

[D]

You were cozying up to the king, Kevin.

[C]

Yeah, again. And hey, we got those whiskey tariffs down. But my, my, my, my big fear is, and, and maybe it shouldn't be connected to the setting element of it. Maybe it should be connected to Xi Jinping investing way more in his military than his own economy. And then I think you make the right point. Their economy is a paper tiger and is in many ways in shambles.

[D]

They're a third of our GDP, 20% of employment, some report.

[C]

Exactly. But, but, you know, again, Joe Biden got a ton of flack in multiple interviews saying we will intervene if there's an invasion of Taiwan. And I don't think we've seen, you know, and his own people were like, oh, he doesn't mean that. And then Right. Part of the problem was, you know, they tried to control the narrative, his breast shop to a degree that we haven't seen in a long time. And he said no, no, doubled down multiple times saying if they invade, the US Will respond militarily. We haven't seen that out of Donald Trump, the President Trump yet. And that's my fear, is that he has not been as clear as he could be on Taiwan.

[D]

Do you think we might talk about this tomorrow on the morning meeting?

[C]

I think we will.

[D]

I think there's.

[C]

And they set sail tomorrow, I think, and they arrive in Beijing on Wednesday, Wednesday evening.

[D]

But before we get to the morning meeting tomorrow, today at Noon, it's Citizen McCain with our friend Megan McCain, a conservative commentator and FOX News host Rachel Campos Duffy, also the first lady of the Transportation Department.

[C]

That's right. That's right.

[D]

And what a great post. Mother's Day conversation.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, we love Rachel.

[D]

Absolutely. And then two ways tonight at 5pm and you're on your own. Be on the. Oh, and I'll be on my show at noon today. So check it out.

[C]

And then we've got the official after show, Professor Kennedy's official after show hosted today by Alan C. A great community member with his bubble cuddle blanket. So don't miss out on that. And the chat is open there for that conversation that kicks off at 11, obviously. Join Mark right now over on Sirius and we'll see you tomorrow morning.

[D]

Yes. Thank you for all of the great support and all the well wishes you gave us after the announcement last week. We really appreciate it. And thank you for all of the advice you've given us about our audio setup and my ties.

[C]

We are riding high after last week and it'll continue on. Thanks, everybody. Have a great day.

[D]

Bye.