Trump on Iran: "We'll See" Amid Reports of Progress in Talks, U.S. Warnings

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Morning Meeting

Episode: Trump on Iran: "We'll See" Amid Reports of Progress in Talks, U.S. Warnings
Date: May 22, 2026
Host: Mark Halperin and rotating panel (Larry and Kevin)
Platform: 2WAY

---

Overview

This Friday edition of "The Morning Meeting" is a candid, panel-driven, forward-leaning look at the state of American and world politics as the Memorial Day weekend begins. Major issues examined include Congressional disarray in both parties, the latest on U.S.–Iran negotiations under President Trump, fallout from the Michigan governor’s race, the Democratic Party’s 2024 autopsy, and rapidly changing battlegrounds for 2026 midterms. Additional segments dive into AI regulation, shifts in party infrastructure, and reflections on leadership and authenticity in politics. Packed with inside baseball banter and sharp asides, this episode delivers an unfiltered snapshot of the news agenda and political mood.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Congressional Disarray and Party Dynamics

[01:03–03:02]

• Mark poses a quick-fire question: Which party is more in disarray?

  • Larry & Kevin: Democracts, on the grounds of internal rebellion against their own President in both the House and the Senate.
  • Quote:
    • Larry: "It's always easier to be in the minority when you don't have to get anything done." (01:52)
    • Kevin: "I'm all about truth and reality. The report left everything out about why we actually lost the damn thing." (02:09)

• Republicans are also facing notable rebellion, especially around Trump and issues like the "Victims Fund," but current Democratic infighting is considered more acute.

The 2026 Election Landscape & Michigan Governor’s Race

[06:00–10:00]

• Mike Dugan's exit as an independent boosts Democrat Jocelyn Benson’s chances in Michigan, sharpening its status as a major battleground.
• Kevin: "A billion dollars might be spent in Michigan across all these key congressional races... the fear was [Dugan] was siphoning votes off Benson, so that clears her lane." (07:25)
• Panelists debate progressive candidate Abdul El-Sayed’s chances, with consensus that Michigan's swing profile makes it risky to lean left.
• Voter turnout in cities with large Arab-American populations (Dearborn) and reaction in wealthy suburbs underscore the delicate coalition politics at play.

Iran: Trump, Nuclear Talks, and U.S. Warnings

[14:39–22:48]

• Mark recaps conflicting and "ambiguous" reports on Iran talks:
  • Al Arabiya suggests a deal is imminent ("nothing in it is worth anything except they claim the Strait will be open").
  • Oman reportedly intermediating on a possible paid-transit deal for the Strait—panel is skeptical.
  • The U.S. reportedly hesitant to re-engage militarily due to munitions shortages and fears of Iranian retaliation.
• Quote:
  • Mark (citing The Atlantic/Robert Kagan): "Trump may launch another limited strike to look tough and satisfy the demands of the war's supporters, but it would be a performative gesture. Endgame in this case is a euphemism for surrender." (17:21)
• Larry: Defends Trump’s reluctance to strike, favoring peace over war, but disagrees he’s "ruled it out" completely (19:39).
• Kevin: Implies realpolitik is driving Trump administration toward a weak "interim deal" to exit without escalation.

AI Regulation Drama

[22:48–26:59]

• Planned Trump executive order on voluntary AI self-regulation falls apart after tech backlash.
• Kevin: "It is extraordinary for the administration [to] telegraph that this was going to happen, some public signing ceremony... I assume that will just get punted to next week because the importance of this has certainly not gone away." (25:02)
• The administration leans toward a lighter regulatory touch, wanting to avoid EU-style heavy-handedness that might stifle innovation.

Republican "Slush Fund" Debate

[29:34–34:17]

• Extensive debate over a settlement fund (the so-called "slush fund") created in response to lawsuits, with questions of accountability, fairness, and optics (notably, concern over payouts to January 6th participants).
• Larry: "At what point does the government actually have to pay a price for violating people's civil rights? If they can do it to Donald Trump, they can do it to anybody." (31:22)
• Kevin: Stresses that settlements should have Congressional oversight, not be president-directed.

Democratic Party Autopsy & Infrastructure

[34:27–39:50]

• Mixed reviews on how Democrats are handling their 2024 loss:
  • Autopsy report deemed incomplete and overly sanitized.
  • Larry: "Their main takeaway is that they're in denial. They're not facing the facts. Maybe they're doing it privately, but...they wanted to put a public face and try to sort of color blur around the lines about what really happened in 24." (38:50)
  • Kevin and Mark warn that without serious infrastructure build-up, Democrats will face a huge disadvantage in 2028, especially with a Republican nominee like Rubio fundraising heavily.

Texas & Georgia Senate Races – Talarico and Ossoff

[40:45–44:44]

• Democrats are excited about James Talarico (TX), but his progressive stances could be a liability in the general.
• John Ossoff (GA) is seen as a strong Senate candidate, with significant party investment.

Winners and Losers of the Week

[45:09–47:17]

• Larry’s Winner: Ken Paxton ("Despite all the odds and all the smart guys and conventional wisdom, he ends up in the catbird seat." 45:13–45:32)
• Kevin’s Winner: James Talarico (Democrat excitement as he gears up to face Paxton).
• Mark’s Winner: Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins (“...now have a bunch of Republican senators who are part of their caucus of the we hate Donald Trump caucus.” 46:07–46:18)
• Losers: Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) for primary defeats and scandal-driven falls.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On AI Regulation:
  • Mark: "It fell apart hours before the signing, as a top Trump advisor... gave it a thumbs down to a president who didn’t really want to regulate AI in the first place." (23:38–23:46)
• On Iran Ambiguity:
  • Mark: "There’s a hilarious thing in here... It says end to military operations and halt media war. Does that mean the mullahs will get off X? They'll stop sending hostile tweets?" (15:39–15:49)
• On Authenticity in Politics:
  • Kevin: "[W]e will have more success if those authentic folks can come up through the surface... mentioning Talarico’s faith and authenticity." (51:27–52:25)

---

Important Segments & Timestamps

• Party Disarray & Congressional Drama: [01:03–03:02]
• Michigan Governor Race and Midterm Outlook: [06:00–10:00]
• Iran War: Negotiations & Military Dilemmas: [14:39–22:48]
• AI Regulation Saga: [22:48–26:59]
• "Slush Fund" Debate: [29:34–34:17]
• Democratic Party Autopsy & Infrastructure: [34:27–39:50]
• Winners and Losers: [45:09–47:17]
• Audience Participation – Swing Voters, Authenticity: [49:13–54:33]
• Final Reflections: Iran War Accountability: [55:06–59:21]
• Pop Culture: Eurovision: [62:39–67:24] (light note, trivia, and panel banter)

---

Tone & Style

• Informal, fast-paced, plugged-in, with pointed banter and gallows humor.
• Blunt about party weaknesses and political realities.
• Strong focus on insider details, media optics, and campaign mechanics.

---

For Listeners Who Missed the Episode

You’ll come away with an understanding of:

• Why both parties are struggling but Democrats face “next-level” infighting and messaging problems.
• How the Michigan gubernatorial race is a high-stakes battleground, amplifying the blue wave narrative for 2026.
• That the Biden and Trump administrations share failures when it comes to timely diplomatic appointments, affecting crisis spots like Iran and Ukraine.
• Why the Iran situation remains dangerously ambiguous, with panelists putting odds on a diplomatic "interim deal" versus "kinetic action."
• How AI regulation efforts reflect deeper tensions between innovation and oversight in Washington.
• What "authenticity" means for rising candidates—and who party insiders think can really win tough races.

---

Memorable Quote:
Mark (on Iran Policy):
"Trump may launch another limited strike to look tough... but it would be a performative gesture. Endgame in this case is a euphemism for surrender." (17:21)

Larry (on Democratic denial):
"Their main takeaway is that they're in denial. They're not facing the facts..." (38:50)

Kevin (on swing voters and authenticity):
"We will have more success if those authentic folks can come up through the surface..." (52:25)

---

Highly recommended conversation for anyone tracking the interplay between campaign maneuvering, foreign policy brinkmanship, and the future direction of both major U.S. parties.

Transcript

[Unknown/Intro Speaker]

Foreign.

[Mark]

We're talking about Avenue Q, one of the great shows of all time, which. Yeah, Larry, Larry doesn't really like.

[Larry]

It's just. Okay, it's a one joke show. I'm bored.

[Mark]

I disag disagree. Welcome in, everyone. It's the Friday edition of the morning meeting. Thank you for being here. If you want to be in the conversation, we welcome you to do one thing and one thing only. Raise your hand if you're on the platform. If you're not on the platform and you want to be involved in the show, get involved. Volunteer for a soup kitchen, but don't put smack in the chat. If you look at Larry and Kevin, their countenances reflect one thing and one thing only. Peace, love and understanding. And the extension of the presumption of grace to all. Thank you for attention to all those matters, Larry.

[Kevin]

Yes, and a new. And a new fancy haircut for Larry. When we see. When we see each other every morning, you know, you can notice a little something different, a little situation. I got the looks good.

[Mark]

Larry, I want you to just answer this question with full honesty. No spin zone, no partisanship.

[Larry]

All right?

[Mark]

Just today, as a snapshot of the moment of today, which party is more in disarray? The Democrats? The Republicans. Just one word. Just one word. I don't want explanation. I just want one word. Who's more in disarray right now?

[Larry]

Democrats.

[Mark]

Ridiculous. Kevin, get out of here.

[Kevin]

They left town. They couldn't. The House left town. They couldn't do war powers. The Senate left town. They couldn't do reconciliation. You can talk to your cows, come home about this stupid ass autopsy, but who the hell cares about that?

[Mark]

I totally agree with Kevin. I've been fighting with Republicans all morning because I said in my newsletters that both parties in disarray and it's like, yes, but one party's got some old report and a useless chairman. No offense, Kevin. The other party, literally, they're in rebellion in both the House and the Senate against their own president. Like, I don't know how you qualify.

[Larry]

Well, because that's. It's always easier to be in the minority when you don't have to get anything done.

[Kevin]

So Republicans 100%. 100%.

[Larry]

But I'm sorry, if you still can't come to terms with the truth and reality of how you got devastated in 24, then you've got a problem.

[Kevin]

I'm all about truth and reality. The report left everything out about why we actually lost the damn thing.

[Mark]

So just to be no mention of

[Kevin]

Joe Biden God love him being a thousand years old. Monologue.

[Larry]

I got one word.

[Mark]

There's disarray in both. But I don't know how anyone could argue that there's more disarray in the Democratic Party right now. Just as a snapshot of this moment, both parties have a lot of problems. But man, what happened on Capitol Hill yesterday, I know it wasn't good.

[Larry]

It was, I'm not saying it was

[Mark]

good, but let me ask you this. Was yesterday the biggest single day of congressional rebellion, Republican rebellion against Donald Trump? In this term? I think it was in this term.

[Larry]

Sure. Yeah.

[Mark]

Yeah, it was. All right, let me run through on

[Kevin]

both and on both sides of the chamber, too, in terms of the House in Iran and the war powers. And then of course, Todd Blanche and the, the Victims Fund, as Larry likes to call it. No, we're called the Victims fund.

[Mark]

Mitch, Mitch McConnell calls it what I call it. He calls it the Slushman.

[Larry]

So I know, Larry, every single Republican who is not going to be here next term are all calling it that.

[Mark]

Yes. Yeah.

[Kevin]

But when you've lost, and I know what we'll talk about when you've lost, Coach Tuberville, you know where he's saying, I don't know if this is the best idea. You've, you've missed the mark.

[Mark]

They only, they only slightly lost, Coach. But he just said don't, don't, don't give it to the 911 January Sixers. Yeah, but, but I agree with you. There's Tuberville says anything. And the same with Tom Emmer. Tom Emmer was on cnbc and he also was a little bit like, we need to learn more about this.

[Kevin]

Ron Johnson, another loyal.

[Larry]

Yeah, I welcome the opportunity for people to learn more about this fund.

[Kevin]

Same.

[Mark]

Let's please, let's, let's go, let's go to the daybook. The president today starts right now in the White House executive time. Man. That's consistently on his schedule, 8am executive time. And then he's got two events. He's swearing in Kevin Warsh at 11 in, in the East Room. This event normally takes place at the Fed, but because Warsh is a wholly owned subsidiary of the president, he'll be at the White House. So that'll be an interesting event open to the press. So for all we know, we'll have a press conference there and then he heads up as we we previewed with you earlier in the week to an event in Congressman Lawler's district at 3:00'. Clock. So we'll hear from the President twice today as of now and lots, lots on lots of topics he could be asked about. Don't know what the Vice President's doing, although I bet he's at the worship and if he's in town.

[Kevin]

But I think they, they sworn Jay Palette in the Rose Garden. I think I seem to remember because we played those clips a lot when. Yeah. They said where did this guy who appointed this guy? You know with Trump giving him so much grief. I'm pretty sure it was in the Rose Garden. Someone couldn't fact check me on that.

[Mark]

I don't.

[Larry]

I bet you JD Vance will not be there.

[Mark]

Really? Why?

[Larry]

Because if he becomes president and he is at odds with the Fed chair, they don't want to run B roll of him celebrating and becoming the Fed Chair.

[Kevin]

I mean that's what we did all the time. And they're like, you know when Trump was attacking Jay Powell I was like where did, where did he come from?

[Mark]

Exactly. He can go to the event, Larry. He just didn't sit and stand next to him. Secretary Rubio,

[Larry]

by the way, hold on. You missed something on the daybook. The President is giving the commencement address at the Naval Academy today I think as well. I don't know why that's not.

[Mark]

I don't think so.

[Kevin]

He did coast guard. He usually does. I don't think he usually does one academy.

[Mark]

It's not on his schedule. It's not on a schedule. You said that earlier.

[Kevin]

It rotates.

[Mark]

You said that earlier in the week and I pretended to agree with you but I don't think it's the case. Secretary Rubio, in this hour. We'll take. We'll dip in if it happens. As supposed to speak to reporters at the NATO foreign ministers summit in Sweden.

[Larry]

Raising Kane.

[Mark]

Sorry.

[Larry]

General Kane is giving.

[Mark]

Okay, thank you for that. House and Senator out having put their tails between their legs and urinated on the President and left and vivid, vivid imagery. Right. Isn't that. And I'm just going to squeeze this in here. The 1:22. I didn't, I didn't notice this till this morning. It actually happened yesterday. But I'm putting it on the daybook because it's a brand new day in the Michigan governor's race because Mike Dugan, the former Detroit mayor ended his independent bid yesterday.

[Larry]

Yeah.

[Mark]

Making. Making it more likely to be a Democratic pickup by the Secretary of State Benson where Republicans face a five way primary in August. And guys, I continue to say this is an under focused on midterm story. If it is a Blue wave in particular, Democrats could win a lot of governorship. So on election day, everybody talks about House control, Senate control, but if on election day, they're sweeping a lot of these battleground state governorships, and, and they're, you know, they're going to win Pennsylvania, but if they win some of these other ones, it'll be a big deal. And, and Dugan getting out, he's a very talented guy. He said the data, because of the, because of the blue wave building, he couldn't win. He couldn't raise money and he couldn't win. Whereas previously I thought he might be the front runner, even as an independent. So, Kevin, how significant is Dugan's departure both for Michigan and for the national possibility of Democrats sweeping the governor's places?

[Kevin]

Yeah, good points on both fronts. You know, we've got some interesting, you know, you know, Laura Kelly, for example, in Kansas is term limited, so we've got, there's some opportunities, obviously for some Republicans to take back states that they normally win. But Michigan is going to be, you know, I saw, you know, $10.8 billion is forecast to be spent on this midterm election, 2 billion more than four years ago. And they're saying that a billion dollars might be spent in Michigan across all of these key congressional races. Obviously the open Senate race, the open governor's race. So it's going to be expensive. I think Democrats are celebrating the news. Doug is a compelling kind of guy. And the fear was he was siphoning votes off of Jocelyn Benson, the Secretary of State. So that clears her lane for that August primary. So a lot of celebratory drinks are happening. Mimosas at the Democratic Governor's association this morning.

[Mark]

Larry, two questions. One is how do you think a Benson El Saeed ticket would sit with the electorate?

[Larry]

See, that's what I was thinking because is that our voters going to come and split and vote for the Democrat for governor and then reject the Democrat for Senate? I think they, I don't know. It's going to help. I think it will help all Republicans up and down the ticket if El Said is the nominee for the Democrats?

[Kevin]

Oh, for sure.

[Mark]

Couldn't you argue, though? I'm not arguing it. But couldn't one argue that he might turn out the progressives and they'll vote for the Democratic candidates?

[Larry]

I suppose you mean the primary or the general?

[Mark]

No, in the general. In other words, if he turns out. If he turns out.

[Larry]

I don't think you win in Michigan by bringing out the progressives. I think, I think that the counteracting Michigan is a, it's, it's the perfect toss up state. And the conservatives are very conservative in Michigan and I'll say it on the ticket will inspire them more than I think he'll inspire progressives.

[Kevin]

Yeah, but Mark, to your point though, you look at the numbers with Joe Biden in 2020 to Kamala Harris, like Dearborn, Joe Biden won with 65%, Kamala took it with 35%. Huge Palestinian American, Arab American populations in Michigan. So your point? It's a double edged sword in terms of the progressive base firing them up or you know, a more centrist center left candidate. And you're seeing that play out in the Senate race.

[Larry]

What's your source on that? I didn't see that mentioned in the autopsy report.

[Mark]

Kevin, Kevin, Kevin's done his own autopsy report.

[Kevin]

But Dearborn is a perfect example though of that, that issue.

[Mark]

Best, best example the country probably.

[Larry]

You know, I'm sorry, on the other side of that coin, Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, the people who would normally be sort of elitist, intellectual Democrats, they will come out and vote Republican against El said because of his political stance.

[Kevin]

Yeah, no, 100% they will.

[Mark]

I've sort of jumped in my brain to assuming El Said to be the nominee. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think he will be. And you know, all my liberal friends, all my super progressive friends, I should say, they think he's going to win and they think it's going to be a great validation of their vision of the party. But most, I know, I know most, the three of us and most political professionals don't think he's going to win. But it's going to be an interesting case because Michigan is not Manhattan and New York City. And anyway, it's definitely worth watching.

[Kevin]

But Rogers, one more caveat on that 35% of the electorate, the Democratic primary electorate is still undecided, which is extraordinary with the amount of money and attention that this race has gotten.

[Mark]

Yeah, we should take the show to Michigan. All right, quick word from a stay

[Larry]

at my brother's house.

[Mark]

Okay. Where does he live?

[Larry]

Just outside Novi. Oh, I like right on the Oakland Wayne county border.

[Mark]

Yeah, it's a God's country right there. All right, code 030 off everything on the site. Use the promo code morning.com. buy yourself something comfortable, nice and learn about the, the. I wouldn't say it's a cult of cozy earth, but you know, hear people all the time tell you that they can't live without their cozier stuff. Whether it's a bubble cuddle blanket or the jogger sets made viscous from bamboo, Lightweight, breathable, very comfortable, very stylish and all available now to you as a member of our community. For 30% off go to cozy earth.com use the promo code Morning and if you're looking for new bedding, you know you don't want to buy yourself a McMansion or upgrade your entire home, but you do want to make a little bit of a change. I recommend buying some of the bedding from cozy earth 100 night sleep trial. You can return it all if you don't like it and they come to the 10 year warranty which tells you that they have confidence that you will like it. Go to cozyearth.com, use the promo code MORNING for 30% off and in the post purchase survey say Larry sent you.

[Larry]

That's right.

[Eric Gertler]

From the State House to the courthouse, in the emergency room and in the classroom, Americans are losing trust in their leaders. In a 2025 U.S. news and World Report survey, 85% of Americans reported said government leaders care more about their own power than the people they serve. 73% are disappointed in healthcare leaders, 72% in business and 68% in education. But there are still leaders worth believing in. I'm Eric Gertler, CEO and executive chairman of U.S. news World Report. This is the Best Leaders podcast sponsored by the Noble Reach Foundation. On this show we'll go deeper into the stories, challenges and lessons of extraordinary leaders across public service, business, healthcare and education. You can find the best leaders podcasts from U.S. news World Report on YouTube, Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Matt Ebert]

I started with one shop. No college degree, no big investors. It was just a willingness to 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.

[Mark]

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

[Kevin]

I was at Harvard Law School as blah blah blah. I looked up.

[Larry]

Let me tell you something.

[Mark]

There's kids in my neighborhood putting in

[Kevin]

sheetrock that is smarter than you.

[Mark]

AI is going to disrupt a lot of stuff.

[Kevin]

It is Never going to disrupt physical

[Mark]

blue collar trade skill. And the guy just looked at me

[Kevin]

and he said it's bloody impossible. So I asked him this question.

[Matt Ebert]

I said, it's impossible unless that's pod crash with me. Matt ebert, watch on YouTube and listen wherever you get your podcasts.

[Larry]

And I have another brother in Traverse City. Before I get yelled at by him for not mentioning him, I was just thinking of, you know, in the battleground space there. You want to be in Wayne Oakland county. But if we want to enjoy ourselves, there's a chill.

[Kevin]

There's a chill that just went, went through Michigan.

[Larry]

Traverse City is beautiful. Love Traverse City. Sorry, David. Sorry, Dave.

[Mark]

Yeah, dear. Do your brothers watch the show? Larry?

[Larry]

My oldest, the one who lives near Novi, does. Yes. That's Doc. How's it going, Doc?

[Mark]

Doc. Doc. One of the two seven dwarfs whose

[Larry]

name doesn't end in a Y. Denis o' Connor. Doc.

[Kevin]

Is he an actual doctor unlike just

[Larry]

the initial Joe Biden?

[Kevin]

Yeah. Hey, Eddies are doctor. Thank you very much.

[Mark]

Let's, let's talk about Iran. Once again, a lot of ambiguity about what's going on. El Arabia is reporting this, that there's a deal. It's a screwed up deal, ladies and gentlemen. There's nothing in this deal as they're reporting it and they say it could be announced today. There's nothing in it of any significance except they claim the strait will be open. You've heard me say this a million times. I don't see how the street can open. Everything else in it is like, you know, the UN's good and be respectful. There's a, there's a hilarious thing in here. I like it. It's about halfway down. It says end to military operations and halt media war. Does that mean the mullahs will get off X? They'll stop setting hostile tweets? Anyway, no more Lego movies. If this, exactly, if this deal is announced, it's just again, I just don't see how the straight could open. But nothing else in here is worth anything. It's just basically saying give us some more time to negotiate, so we'll see if that happens. On the other hand, there are lots of indications that there's not going to be a deal and that Iran is not serious and that the US does not have leverage. I'm, I'm just going to do this like John McLaughlin and I'm not endorsing these positions, but I'm telling you, it's out there. Item Reportedly Oman is working on a deal with Iran to raise the Money, honey. Straight. To regulate the. Straight. Yeah. To charge people sometimes. Now they're switching it from saying, well, we're not charging people to go through the strait. We're charging them for like, services like if you, if you park your yacht in a, in a, you know, in a boat. Yeah. And, you know, they, they bring you like ice and whatever. Anyway, these talks may not go anywhere but, but there's lots of suggestions that Iran is still determined to end this conflict. Controlling the strait, munitions depletion. There's a couple stories out today that say the US Continues to have problems and that's part of why President Trump is reluctant to go back to military action. There's another story that says that the US Is not destroying sufficiently the mine capability of Iran. Another story that says people are worried about Iran's retaliatory capacity. That if President Trump starts the war back up, Iran would be able to hit a lot of targets and that would potentially lead to World War iii. Let's see. There's one other thing here. Give me a moment, give me a moment, Give me a moment. Give me a moment.

[Kevin]

There was also, Mark, the news about the Ayatollah junior Talking doubling down on the nuclear front, too, that nothing with nuclear materials is leaving the country.

[Mark]

You're right. That report's been disputed, but it doesn't mean it's wrong. And, and then there's this. This is a story in the Atlantic.

[Larry]

Oh, boy.

[Mark]

This. What? I don't see this on my list. Is that Robert Kagan?

[Larry]

Yeah, good old Robert.

[Mark]

Robert Kagan. Robert Kagan has never been. Another essay. Yeah, well, anyway, what. Robert Kagan. Here it is. 1:16. Robert Kagan, as a piece ran put on the web yesterday, which basically says the President can't restart the war and he's just about to surrender and hope nobody notices. So, headline, Trump's endgame is surrender. He seems to hope to slip away without Americans noticing the magnitude of his defeat. And I'll read you a paragraph. The outlines of President Trump's endgame in Iran are now emerging. In a phone call with Bibi, Trump reportedly explained that the United States was negotiating a, quote, letter of intent with Iran that would, quote, formally end the war and launch a 30 day period of negotiation on the nuclear program and reopening of the strait. The purpose and effect of such an agreement should be clear. The United States is walking away from the crisis. Trump may launch another limited strike to look tough and satisfy the demands of the war's supporters, but it would be a performative gesture. Endgame in this case is a euphemism for surrender. Larry, I, I, I, I don't always agree with Kagan, and, and, and I know he's writing for effect to some extent, but it does not seem, and Kagan makes this point, it does not seem the president wants to restart the war despite you and Mark Thiessen and others saying the only solution is to go in and, and destroy them completely. It just doesn't, there's just no data to suggest he's serious about doing it. And if he's not, and if Ron won't negotiate on the current terms, Kagan could be right, couldn't he?

[Larry]

Of course he could be right. I mean, I'm still waiting for him to co author the article with Bill Kristol about how they were wrong about Iraq and about Russia invading Ukraine and all that other stuff, but of course he could be right. At the risk of repeating myself, but I know that not everybody watches every episode of the morning meeting. I agree with you. I think the president, and I want my president to be reluctant to engage in a military strike against a country he is reluctant to restart.

[Mark]

The, the. Well, I'm sorry, I'm just Sorry to interrupt you. Yeah, of course, we know. And his critics don't give enough credit for this. He's a man of peace. He much would prefer to have a peaceful deal. But I'm saying something different, not that he's reluctant. What Kagan's arguing, and I increasingly believe might be right. He's ruled it out. He's simply not going to risk World War III and all this retaliation by he's, in other words, he's actually taking it off the table, is what Kagan is saying.

[Larry]

Oh, I disagree. I don't think that's the case, and I don't think the President has indicated that. And I don't think I haven't hear anything credible from anyone within the inner circles or people who are respected by this administration that have said such a thing. In fact, he says the opposite.

[Mark]

Well, but the, well, he does say the opposite, but the proof is in the pudding, which is he's threatened to restart the war many, many times, and he never does. And I read you some of the reasons why that may be. We don't have munitions and Iran could retaliate, and, you know, it could lead to World War iii.

[Larry]

So I don't think, I think that's overstating the case. How does it lead to World War Three? Exactly. You see a war on five continents. If we resume strikes against Iran. Who exactly is taking up Iran's side?

[Kevin]

If Iran is more successful in striking the nuclear power plant, you know, China

[Mark]

attempt to take China would enter the war.

[Larry]

I'm also suspicious of the story about Oman. Didn't Iran attack Oman after the initial bombings and like 15 people from Oman were killed by those drone attacks at the beginning, beginning of the war. I mean I, I can't see Oman making a deal with them now to open the straits.

[Kevin]

I mean they're actively negotiating seemingly.

[Mark]

Yeah, it's been reported in negotiating a

[Larry]

lot of things have been reported that is true.

[Mark]

Kevin. I looked, I glanced at the chat. Somebody told me China's not entering the war. Folks, I'm telling you, if the Iranians retaliate at the level they're claiming they would, believe me, people are going to choose upsides. Kevin. Kevin, the the president for a time was saying, hey, let's be in business with Iran. Let's charge people for going through the strait together. Let's open up a joint lemonade stand. And now the US Position seems to be just as under no circumstances could there be a deal without a nuclear accord that takes the, you know, eliminates their nuclear program. It seems like the Marco Rubio in particular said they can't control the strait. It has to be what it would the pre war. Do you think that's true? Could the president, would the president sign an agreement that allowed Iran to charge people for using the strait?

[Kevin]

I can't imagine we do that. I think he threw that out there just because it's the art of the deal kind of mentality. Again, you got freedom of navigation of the seas. This is, you know, you don't toll people for traversing any kind of open water going back to the end of World War II. So I can't imagine that's the case. I think the other thing too, and mark you just mention it briefly, was the munitions element. The fact that now it's been reported, especially with the acting Navy secretary on the Hill, Mr. Cout, that that we're holding off on the, the package, the $14 billion to Taiwan because of fears of a lack of munitions, this is now even more it's obviously a geopolitical issue, but again to the pivot to Asia and the check on China coming out of that summit, the fact that this is now also affecting our standing in terms of our military capabilities and the ability to project strength in other regions is certainly problematic. And I think the farther we get away from kinetic activity at the start of this, the more willing it seems like the administration is to figure out some kind of deal to just get out of this.

[Mark]

All right, exit question. Will the next beat in this be the announcement of some sort of interim deal or kinetic action? Larry?

[Larry]

Kinetic action, Kevin.

[Mark]

Interim deal, yeah, I think it's going to be a fake interim deal. We'll see. All right, quickly on this one because we got a lot to get through living. It's Friday, Winter solutions of the week and what to look for this weekend. Yesterday, the President, the White House had invited a bunch of senior AI people to come to a signing ceremony of an executive order that would have put on voluntary restrictions on the AI industry. They said you can submit your new, your new models to the government to look at them if you want. It's not like some heavy hand of government regulation.

[Kevin]

Just share with us, you know, would you just a few months before you release it to the public, give us,

[Mark]

give us a peaksie. And it's, it's reported that, well, here's the Axios headline, Anti Doomer Feedback Derails Trump's executive order. It fell apart hours before the signing. As a top Trump advisor, that's David Sachs and some tech executives gave it a thumbs down to a president who didn't really want to regulate AI in the first place. Certainly the orientation of the president and of the administration and David Sachs has been the Biden people were killing the goose that was laying golden eggs and there shouldn't be a lot of regulation of AI in the last couple months, as I and others have reported, people in the government have been freaked out by both the speed at which the new the models are developing become ever more powerful and the dangers that they have to be able to use for hacking and all sorts of things. And so the, the, there's also a report that Scott Bessant, who's heavily involved, as is the vice president, by the way, in all of these deliberations, that he's been in conflict with the guy who's the head of cyber security because Dustin thinks the US is being insufficiently vigilant about trying to make sure that the country doesn't and humanity doesn't get destroyed over this. Kevin, what's the next beat in this? Will there be, will there be an executive order that's even weaker than that one? Will there be nothing? What do you think the next beat is in this?

[Kevin]

I mean, it is extraordinary for the administration Telegraph that this was going to happen, some public signing ceremony. I'm sure a number of CEOs were in town for it. So I assume that will just get punted to next week because the importance of this has certainly not gone away. It is interesting, Mark, as you note the Scott Bessant angle on this in terms of the pressure he's trying to put that the administration has been behind the eight ball on a lot of this stuff. And then of course you also have what the Department of Defense War is doing in terms of their interactions with some of these companies in terms of their models and the critical threats that they could they pose and the back and forth with anthropic and things like that. But certainly I think you'll see some more activity from this administration hopefully as early as next week. Again Congress also has a role in this too.

[Mark]

Yeah. Although they're slowing the update. Larry, before you answer, being reported now that Scott Bessens announced new sanctions on Hezbollah linked Lebanese officials. So that's interesting about Larry, Will we see an executive order?

[Larry]

I don't know. What I'm hearing is that one of the reasons this got pulled was again they want industry to be a big part of this and they want innovation to be free to move and not have it be very heavy handed like Europe is leaning towards. So I think we will. But they're intent on doing it right because they know how critical it is right now. Sort of like the first real sort of government oversight or regulation into this thing that does need some modicum of, of regulation. But they don't want to stifle innovation so they don't want to get it wrong. I think that's. But Kevin is right. It was extraordinary to see the timing and all of this and sort of the, the, the last second pull out. But I think we'll see something. They just want to get it right.

[Mark]

Yeah. But something that'll be even weaker than what he was going to sign yesterday because he suggested he stopped it because it was too, it was too onerous.

[Larry]

Right. I mean I don't, I don't know. Weaker is the right word but again. But more open to innovation.

[Mark]

Yeah. Secretary Rubio is speaking now on Iran. Let's dip into that as soon as we can, please. The slush fund. I continue to be fascinated listening to Republican senators and, and House members and their objections to it. Here's Secretary Rubio speaking at the NATO meeting live. Matt Whitaker, buddy.

[Kevin]

Matt Whitaker right behind him.

[Larry]

Iowa tight end.

[Marco Rubio]

I think there's going to be some announcements on it later today in regards if it hasn't come out already in the next few days and it'll be a collective product. I Mean they've been working it through the internal systems of NATO in terms of the force postures of what we would be able to supply along with others. Every country has to constantly reevaluate what their needs are, what their commitments are around the world and how to properly structure that.

[Mark]

Mr. Secretary of the Iranian, do you think it's the case for the US to remain its contributions to the post?

[Marco Rubio]

Well, I'll let the folks in the Department of War and over at NATO make those announcements. But this is not a decision that was made on the back of a napkin. I mean this has been an ongoing process involving other countries as well and the contributions they can make. It's not just our force posture, it's what other countries can contribute as well to come up with something that works for NATO and that's realistic and that allows us to force posture, for example, in a true front conflict. So but again this is all technical work that's being done by military people. These are not political decisions.

[Larry]

Mr. Secretary, have you been.

[Marco Rubio]

Sorry, are you from Sweden? Yes. Okay. You have a great country. This is a great country. This is a beautiful place. Wow, thank you. I wish you were here.

[Kevin]

Brand new member of NATO Sweden.

[Marco Rubio]

To me for the weather. There's nothing wrong with this weather. Miami is 95 degrees with mosquitoes and humidity this time of year. That's all right.

[Kevin]

He just lost Florida.

[Marco Rubio]

Yeah, but there's sunrises are way too early. It's like 345 in the sun. Is that what's wrong with these people? It's not your fault the weather.

[Mark]

What are you going to report back

[Marco Rubio]

to President Trump from your impressions of the Hasting board meeting? And also have you got anything reassuring to say about the support for Ukraine that Sweden fear might have?

[Larry]

Anything reassuring to say?

[Marco Rubio]

Well, I mean Ukraine's getting more support than they ever have through the Pearl program that the United States continues to be.

[Mark]

Okay, we'll monitor this. I think we might have missed the Iran part. So we'll, we'll cut out of this and we'll, we'll bring you what he said on Iran.

[Larry]

Senator Matt Whitaker in 28. Gentlemen. What do you think?

[Mark]

Maybe. I think he will, I think he'll run for some replace Grassley. Yeah, yeah.

[Kevin]

But the original question of course about force posture and the reports about Poland and the 5,000 service members either being pulled or now actually going. It's certainly a top concern for, for some of the European journalists there and,

[Mark]

and reassuring to, to those who don't want to see America pull out of Europe completely. The slush fund. I'm so interested in listening to Republican members of Congress talk about their objections. Some are clearly just pissed over Cornyn and Cassidy. Some have principled objections to it. Some seem to think voters really care. So just yes, no question. Are people who think that voters care about the slush fund not, not nobody. But is this a widespread concern for voters to slush fund? Kevin, yes or no?

[Kevin]

Yes.

[Mark]

Yes. Larry. No, I don't think it is. I'd be surprised.

[Kevin]

I think it's breaking through and part of it is the mainstream media coverage of it. I mean, I think it is breaking through. And again, the optics of January 6th, guys, you know, that attack cops, you know, potentially getting some of this money, I think will resonate.

[Mark]

It's the only, the only objection to the flush fund from the voters, the extent that it exists. Is it if they said no one connected to January 6th will get, is there an objection, the objection. Just about that.

[Kevin]

I think a lot of it is couched in that, for sure. And that's what you're also seeing the objections from the Republican senators about that as well. But I think there's also notions of, you know, should our tax. Again, this isn't just created money. This is, you know, funds from taxpayer, you know, monies that have been levied to pay this out.

[Larry]

Yeah, but, but, but where did the fund come from?

[Kevin]

From a settlement. But it's taxpayer money.

[Larry]

Settlement over what?

[Kevin]

A settlement over a lawsuit that the president is on both sides of that suing for $10 billion. Why did he settling with his Department of Justice?

[Larry]

Because, because the IRS illegally, one of

[Kevin]

like 5,000 return 5,000Americans that had one of 5,000American citizens through a contractor.

[Larry]

Kevin.

[Kevin]

And there was a criminal lawsuit as part of that.

[Larry]

Kevin. And at what point does the government actually have to pay a price for violating people's civil rights? If they can do it to Donald Trump, they can do it to anybody. And that's what the whole purpose of this is. And people feel like there's never any repercussions for weaponizing the government against people. And by the way you talk about

[Kevin]

flesh funds and I hear that argument, I'm just going to ask you a question back. Right.

[Larry]

Yeah.

[Kevin]

During the 92 presidential race, the State Department, under my hero James Baker, accidentally released Bill Clinton's passport information in terms of where he traveled. And it was a huge scandal with investigations. Do you think then Governor Clinton should have sued for $10 billion? Because that became a campaign issue and a lot of reports about it and it was a leak that was unwarranted and illegal.

[Larry]

So first of all, did it harm him? Sure, I think he won the election, didn't he?

[Kevin]

Well, no, Donald Trump won the election, too. But that's your argument?

[Larry]

Well, no, actually, he was still harmed by it, whether he won the election or not, but it certainly didn't harm Bill Clinton. But listen, did somebody pay a price? Did somebody go to jail? Did somebody get punished?

[Kevin]

Yeah, there was a huge investigation in 92, I assume some people in 92, James Baker, great guy, was called before to testify and all that kind of stuff. And it was, and it was a blemish. I'll be honest.

[Larry]

If you got to go back, you know, 35 years to come up with an example of how a Democrat.

[Kevin]

Says the guy who brought up the Whiskey Rebellion earlier in the, in the programming here. Mr. Okay.

[Larry]

You know, you all know Mark Caputo, right? Good guy, right, Great guy, the political operative Mark Caputo, right?

[Mark]

You don't mean Mark Caputa.

[Larry]

Mike Caputo. Excuse me? Yeah, Mike Caputo.

[Mark]

Mike Caputo.

[Larry]

You all know Mike Caputo. Yeah, really nice guy, Political consultant, helped Trump win the 2016 election. And for his efforts, he got a job at Health and Human Services. Really nice guy. He got caught up in the Russian collusion hoax. He got caught up in the Mueller investigation. He had to go into debt by tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars. He was suffering from cancer. He couldn't get another job as a political consultant. And do you know how many times he was mentioned in the Mueller report? Like three times about a call he had with Roger Stone that never came of anything. You know, that people got harmed by this stuff. Why shouldn't he have recourse to the government?

[Mark]

He can have recourse, but it should be done with the involvement of Congress and not just a slush fund created by the president using his leverage he got by suing himself.

[Kevin]

Did you spend much time in settling with himself?

[Larry]

What about the Pigford settlement, guys, against, against racism, against black farmers, which was twice as much as this. Did you spend any time talking about that?

[Mark]

How was that?

[Kevin]

There's legal recourse for this, and people get covered for attorney fees all the time.

[Larry]

Yeah, it was created through a settlement the same way that this one's being

[Mark]

created, not by the president suing himself.

[Kevin]

All right, the dnc and settle and settling with himself. And we can just. Yeah, we'll just, we can, we can just move past the DNC thing, talk about that.

[Mark]

We can just talk about the DNC thing.

[Kevin]

Let's keep on this one.

[Mark]

Here's what Ray Buckley, close friend of Kevin, longtime chair, the longest serving Democratic state party chair in the country. Here's what number 111. Here's what Ray Buckley said about.

[Kevin]

And the pride of New Hampshire.

[Mark]

And the pride of New Hampshire. Here's what. Here's what he said about Chairman Martin. I have great confidence in Ken Martin. Not being part of the D.C. establishment is a blessing and a curse, but provides real world on the ground experience and causes the DC elite to feel threatened by someone challenging their control over all aspects of the party. I have great respect for Ray Buckley, but Ray Buckley, this is not the DC elites who are upset. It's Democrats across the country. This thing was botched and mishandled. I don't think we need to relitigate just what a disaster. This is about how poorly the thing was done, how ridiculous it was that the chairman released it. We don't need to revisit all that. Here's my question. He's not going anywhere. He's not going to quit. The state party chairs will rally around him. Not very many people have called for him to resign. I've been surprised at how few. So here's my question. Who's going to do this stuff, Kevin, that needs to be done to, to build the infrastructure for the presidential nominee. Who's going to raise the money? Who's going to do voter file? Who's going to do all this podcast work? That needs to be done. Chairman Martin overlooked in all the coverage. The COVID letter he put out announcing the release was actually spectacularly smart. It said all the right things, said all the right things about what needs to be done. But he can't do them. He cannot do them because he's demonstrated a lack of basic confidence. So who will do these things, Kevin? Or will the Democratic party go into 2028 with no infrastructure for their presidential nominee?

[Kevin]

Well, he can do some of them and he has been doing it. And, and I'm not. Again, we have, you know, I don't have partisan blinders on. Right. This is the dumbest thing ever. I tend to think that these autopsy reports are stupid in general. You know, a lot was made of, you know, Tony Fabrizio's one after, after Trump on the Republican side. Oh, we have a problem with Hispanics. Okay, great. You know, everyone knows why Kamala Harris lost and the fact that the report didn't include anything about, you know, Joe Biden, God love him, you know, a thousand years old, should not have run for reelection. Even though I spent four years defending the guy. So. But, and you made the point a few days ago that the DNC and the RNC institutionally have an incredibly important role, especially when nominees chose. Chosen, and that the kind of. The nominee assumes the party and takes it over because of all the institutional stuff that they've done. And I think Chairman Martin has struggled to fundraise, certainly, and the numbers don't lie, but a lot of those numbers are indicative because the amount of money he has been pouring out into some of these special elections and also, as a former party chairman, putting a lot of resources into the state party. So a lot, you know, not as much money is flowing in, but a lot of money is flowing out to do that work now in terms of hiring organizers and, and, and supporting state party committees, which will be helpful. Don't. Hey, come on. This is all true.

[Larry]

No, this is Burke's reaction. I'm not.

[Mark]

Kevin, Kevin, you said, you said he's doing a great job of spending money, but he's not bringing any in.

[Kevin]

That's part of, that's part of the problem.

[Larry]

I'd be great at that job.

[Mark]

I'm no math.

[Kevin]

That's part of the problem.

[Mark]

Kevin. I'm no math genius, but I mean,

[Kevin]

I was more verbal than math.

[Mark]

The fundraising disparity is incredible. I'm just telling you. Go read the chapter in my book, how to beat Trump about 1990 to 1992. Paul Tully and Ron Brown spent two years building the infrastructure without which Bill Clinton could not have won. And if I'm right, advancer Rubio is going to be the de facto nominee, raising billions, billions with A B in 2027 and 2028. And the Democrats are going to have a long running, vicious, expensive nominating process. You better believe that the Democratic nominee who wakes up in June of 2028 is going to say to the DNC or somebody, where's my infrastructure? And if, and if it's not there, it's really going to be. I don't care how much of a disaster the Trump presidency might be by then, it's not going to matter. They won't have a chance to win. Larry, what's your main takeaway?

[Kevin]

You're right. And it matters on the margins, too, in terms of the voter file and, you know, and organizing capabilities. For sure.

[Larry]

Yeah. I mean. Oh, sorry.

[Mark]

Go ahead to your main takeaway from the autopsy.

[Larry]

I think.

[Mark]

What's your main takeaway from the autopsy?

[Larry]

Their main takeaway is that they're in denial. They're not Facing the facts. Maybe they're doing it privately, but they wanted to put a public face and try to sort of color blur around the lines about what really happened in 24. If you ask anyone on the street, they know what was the problem for the Democrats.

[Kevin]

Yeah, 100%.

[Larry]

And I also think that if you don't actually take it seriously as a party and try to fix some of the institutional problems that you've got and some of the policy problems you've got, you're not going to fix the problem in the core of it. Say what you will, but Reince Priebus and Sean Spicer, after the 2012 loss of Mitt Romney, they did a very thorough job and they found a big, big, big gap in infrastructure funding, data, research. They fixed it and it helped Trump win.

[Kevin]

That's a great point. I mean, Ryan's Priebus and I spent a bunch of time with him on Fox, was one of the best RNC chairs in a long time. Same with Terry McAuliffe, you know, in terms of building and, to Mark's point, building the infrastructure that then, you know, power the party, to say nothing of building a new headquarters and things like that.

[Mark]

Yeah. All right. I'm throwing some topics off the slate because we got to get to winners and losers, but I want to do two things. These are two stars in the Democratic Party, two young men in a hurry who Democrats are investing a lot in. One is James Talarico, the party's nominee in Texas. And the other is John Ossoff, their incumbent nominee in Georgia. One running for a Senate in Texas, one in Georgia. And we showed this video of the Talarico video, this from a super PAC supporting Ken Paxton last night on two Way tonight. But I'm so desperate to see what you guys think of it, because as you know, I have long said. I have long said. How, how, how challenging Democrats don't seem to see someone like Talarika, who is not a. Not a moderate, someone this liberal, how challenging it would be for him to be elected in Texas. If you haven't seen this, ladies and gentlemen, brace yourself. This is not the last ad like this. You'll see, but it is devastating. This is again from the super PAC supporting Ken Paxton.

[Larry]

Kevin, you take it a big swig at tequila.

[Kevin]

You know how President Trump is really good at branding. We want to test.

[Mark]

No, sorry, not this. Not this. Sorry, sir, not this. Not this. That's not.

[Larry]

It's the super.

[Mark]

Take that down, please.

[Larry]

Lone Star Super Pack.

[Mark]

Yeah. Do we, do we, do we? Not have that. I thought we did. Guys, do we not have that? It's. We don't. It could be my fault. No, Mark. Sorry. All right.

[Larry]

Anyway.

[Mark]

It's devastating. It's. It's. It's. Well, forget it. Forget I brought up that. Let's talk about osof. Here's a. Here's a video on Os behalf that I think it shows you once again how high the Democratic party is on this guy to win every election, but also to. To maybe run for president. Here's the. Also Pro Ossoff video 115, please.

[Unknown/Intro Speaker]

The devil went down to Georgia. He was looking for a soul to steal. He was in a bind because he was way behind and he was willing to make a deal when he came across this young man Sewing on a fiddle and playing it hot. And the devil jumped upon hickory stump and said, boy, let me tell you what, I guess you didn't know it, But I'm a fiddle player, too. And if you care to take a dare, I'll make a bet with you. Now you play pretty good fiddle, boy? But give the devil his due. I bet a fiddle of gold against your soul? Cause I think I'm better than you? The boy said, my name's Johnny and it might be a sin? But I'll take your bet you're gonna regret? Cause I'm the best that's ever been found a mountain Run, boy, run. Devil's in the house of the rising sun. Chicken in the bread Pedal picking out door. Don't fight no child, no.

[Larry]

Oh, did we lose, Mark?

[Kevin]

He's a frog's frozen again. But good old Charlie Daniels band. Yeah, right there.

[Larry]

Where is the Charlie Daniels estate? Screaming, you can't use our song for political purposes. That's a good ad. It's a good ad, but honestly, objectively speaking, I think it made Trump look a little too cool. Actually, in the beginning there, he's sort of sitting around and looking sort of, sort of badass.

[Kevin]

I mean, any video with him in that saber?

[Larry]

Right?

[Kevin]

You know, when he was cutting the cake from the armed surface, Armed services ball. Pretty legit.

[Larry]

We'll see if that works. I don't know. I. I listen, the. The response to the negative telo Rico ad is always going to be, but Ken Paxton. Wait until they start attacking Ken Paxton. And that's fair. It's fair game.

[Kevin]

And. And Cornyn has spent $80 million doing just that in terms of driving up negatives.

[Larry]

That's right. So I don't know if it will work. I mean, the problem with the Talarico stuff is it's not personal attacks against him because all of the stuff that he has said, yes, it reflects on who he is and sort of what a wackadoodle he is, but he also then applies those wackadoodle ideas to policies, whereas the attacks on packs.

[Kevin]

I mean, he's not necessarily a center left kind of guy. You know, he's a, he's a fairly progressive. He is a guy in terms of what he's done in Austin and some of the views that he's espoused. And I think he, you know, he effectively talks about faith and you know, we don't have that many guys that can go on Joe Rogan or gals for that matter. I think Joe Rogan afterwards said it was a good, you know, good conversation in terms of authenticity and things like that.

[Larry]

But on Ossoff though, I mean, listen, he's a strong candidate, but I also think that they're going to, they're going to go after him about, you know, his, his background, where he came from and that he's sort of we'll see. It's going to be, it's going to be urban suburban Georgia versus rural, you know, down home Georgia. And we'll see in part of it

[Kevin]

too is also and again we talked about this with, with Michigan is what does that ballot ultimately look like, obviously without the presidential line on that, you know, president's not on the ballot, but the governor's races in both those states will have an outsized effect too. And again, if that self funder billionaire who's willing to spend a fortune is the nominee, then I don't think you would.

[Larry]

I think Collins will be the nominee. Collins can actually fight against Ossoff and call him a rich, spoiled trust fund baby who's just trying to advance himself. Dooley can't do that. Is his name Dooley? I forget his name. Anyway, I think the fact that both Republicans and Democrats have to defend Texas and Georgia means it'll end up being a wash and the incumbents will probably went well in Texas. Incumbent, but the incumbent party. Yes, sir.

[Mark]

I'm sick of my, I'm sick of my technical difficulties. So let's do this. Larry Winner of the week.

[Larry]

Winner of the week. I had a lot to choose from. I did. But I decided to go with Ken Paxton. Through it all, he, he ended up with the endorsement. The polls are showing he's going to win. Ken Paxton is in the catbird seat now. Despite all the odds and all the smart guys and conventional wisdom, he Ends up the winner of the week for me.

[Kevin]

And I give you a lot of credit for saying it's going to be Paxton the whole time.

[Mark]

Absolutely.

[Kevin]

The Republican nominee. You've been saying that for four months. Funny enough, my winner is James Talarico of the week because the President endorsed Ken Paxton. I was just in Texas the last two days and Democrats are, you know, salivating at the chance to potentially take on Paxton in the general. The guys raised $27 million and he's a compelling guy. And Beto only lost to ted Cruz by 2. 2 and almost 3 points. So we'll see.

[Mark]

My winner of the week is Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins. It's a tie because they now have a bunch of Republican senators who are part of their caucus of the we hate Donald Trump caucus.

[Kevin]

The party of the willing. The coalition of the willing.

[Mark]

Exactly. Or the polish. And maybe of the unwilling.

[Kevin]

Of the unwilling, yes.

[Mark]

Larry, Loser of the week.

[Larry]

Again, a lot of options, but I went with Thomas Massie. You can't ignore how he went down in flames in that primary fight. And he went out as classless as he began this campaign with some anti Semitic tropes and it was sad to see.

[Mark]

But he's the loser of the week 100%.

[Kevin]

We're in agreement on that front in terms of the anti Semitism at the end of just poor form and disgusting. But my loser of the week is Bill Cassidy. Again, an incumbent senator to not make a runoff and come in third with all the powers of incumbency was pretty extraordinary.

[Larry]

God, I forgot that was this week.

[Mark]

Yeah, technically. Technically, it was Saturday, but this is

[Kevin]

our first this week. This is our first time being able to talk about it. Yeah.

[Mark]

Yeah, you're right. It's a good point. I agree with Larry.

[Kevin]

It's.

[Mark]

It's Massey. I mean, this guy was riding high with Ro Khanna. It's like their tag team of, of opposing Donald Trump and, and you know, again, it's hard to beat an incumbent and they just took him on. And the guy, the guy who beat him, I mean, I'm not saying a worthless candidate, but he did not lose. A powerhouse candidate. Larry, what are you looking for this weekend?

[Larry]

I'm looking for the Memorial Day acknowledgments in Washington, D.C. it's the best city to be in on a holiday like Memorial Day with all of the incredible ceremonies that go on. If anyone's ever been to D.C. or if you're going to be to D.C. try to get there on Memorial Day one time at 8am at all of the war memorials along Mall. They play tap simultaneously in unison. It's chilling and incredible. It's going to be a parade. It's going to be a lot of great stuff for Memorial Day. And it's a great day to stop and thank those who sacrificed ultimately for our freedoms.

[Mark]

Beautiful. Thank you for that, Kevin.

[Kevin]

Amen, Larry. And especially too, if you haven't been if you're in D.C. and haven't been to the Memorial Day concert right in front of the Capitol, it's a beautiful thing. My friend Mary McCormick is co hosting it for the first time with she's been a long time, but co hosting it with Gary Sneeze. And it's a beautiful tribute, super patriotic and a beautiful reminder of this country and everyone that fought and died to make it the way that it is. But in addition to watching that, I'm driving back down to Charleston tomorrow and I'm going to be watching our new true crime podcast on T way as I drive to Charleston. And the first episode is about Alec Murdoch with all the news about a retrial. So that's what I'm going to be watching. It's going to power my drive down 95.

[Mark]

Yeah, it's a great episode. If you haven't watched it, I recommend it to. You can watch it online now. But it's a great, great first episode. We look forward to it. Secretary Rubio is still talking, but he's mostly talked about NATO stuff, not about Iran. And what he said about Iran has not been particularly amazing. I'm looking to see does not appear the president's going to his son's wedding. It's supposed to be at Bedminster. So I'll be looking to see if he's playing golf at the exact moment his son is getting married or the

[Kevin]

wedding's in, like, the Bahamas.

[Larry]

Yeah.

[Mark]

Maybe to watch a live stream. Yeah, yeah. The president's going to be in Bedminster. Yeah. Okay, I'm going to need help here, folks, because I'm technologically challenged today. So I'll ask Paul or someone to help me. Let's start with Matt. Unmute Matt and we'll bring him in. Matt, tell folks who don't know where you are what's on your mind for Larry and for Kevin. Foreign.

[Maddie Stew]

Hey, guys, how are you? It's, it's Maddie. Stew. I'm just stuck on my work Zoom here. So I got three names I want to give you that I've heard you guys kind of bash or support this week on, on this show or on different shows as well. Spencer Pratt, Marco Rubio and James Talarico. These are three names that actually speak to the independence. Now I'll say Tall Rico might not be the centrist that we love, but I'd rather the party go that direction of faith, common sense and bringing people together than the opposite of a Syed or something else like a Graham Platner so much rather than go in that direction. Yeah, the Democrats lose a lot of ground when they say to me, hey, support Karen Bass over Spencer Pratt. You haven't been to Los Angeles then. So bashing Talarico is the same as supporting Karen Bastomy and then getting behind this J.D. vance. You know, Larry, you said to Batya you don't trust those who support Rubio over Vance. I would not vote for Vance. I'd vote for Rubio in a New York minute.

[Larry]

Right. So I didn't.

[Maddie Stew]

Hold on, let me be clear.

[Larry]

I didn't know she specifically said Democrats and the media love Marco Rubio. That's what I don't trust about it, that that's what makes me nervous. But yes, I understand your point.

[Maddie Stew]

I just think those three names are the names that they might not be perfect, but bashing them loses credibility with the independence. And I think, you know, again with Talarico, he, he might not be the centrist we love, but I'd much rather someone of faith and bring in that direction versus the opposite of a Platner. And I love where Spencer Pratt kind of just brings common sense to Los Angeles.

[Mark]

I hear you.

[Kevin]

Yeah, Matt, you make a great point. And I think overarching kind of with all these different individuals is the notion of authenticity. And I think Democrats have struggled for a long time in terms of just using poll tested lines and all this crap that doesn't actually resonate and the American people and high gloss ads and stuff like that. Actually the most effective thing is often to camera. Right. I mean, that's why aoc God lover, progressive as hell far left, is so beloved in a lot of different arenas because she comes off as authentic former waitress. It takes on a long time incumbent and I think we will have more success if those authentic folks can come up through the surface. Mentioned again, Tal Rico on that Joe Rogan podcast for an hour and a half, holding his own, talking about faith, talking about his family and all that kind of stuff actually resonates with people. Same with authentic Republicans. Spencer Pratt, incredibly authentic. Right. And that's. He's clearly striking a chord right now in terms of. In terms of LA.

[Larry]

Yeah, no, 100%. And listen, what's funny is all the attacks on Spencer Pratt actually make him look better and sound better and elevate him. So it's sort of funny. Every single attack they've made on him, actually, he's turning into, like, a reverse kryptonite thing. So I agree with you. We need to encourage politicians like that. And I. I'm sorry if some of my jokes came across as bashing Marco Rubio. I have great respect for the Secretary of State, and one thing I keep saying is don't make me choose between both of them, because I'd be happy with both. On Talarico, I got to say, I agree with you. I embrace Democrats talking openly about their faith. I think that it's been a real problem for Democrats that they in some way have seemed negative about those of us who.

[Mark]

Who believe.

[Larry]

So I. On that end of it, I like the fact that he's not shy about invoking God in his religion, not to get into a theological debate, but I don't know if his perspective on faith necessarily resonates with most voters, because when he professes his Christianity, it sounds very foreign to a lot of us who look at Scripture and look at our faith a little differently. I'm trying to be as kind as possible.

[Mark]

I'll say one thing about Rubio, which I'm sure Larry will spoil that. I spoke yesterday to about 90 Canadians, and, as you know, Canadians in general, not huge fans of maga, although there were some pro Trump people in the room, and I asked them to show of hands. If you were American citizens, how many of you. And you were voting for president? And in the Republican primary, how many of you would vote for Vance and how many do you think would vote for Rubio? Okay, Larry, of the 90 people, what do you think? The breakdown was Canadians. These are very sophisticated.

[Larry]

I would say all 90 probably said Ruby Rubio.

[Mark]

Kevin, what do you think?

[Kevin]

87.

[Mark]

89 to 1.

[Larry]

1. Yeah.

[Kevin]

89 to 1. So, again, it's a.

[Mark]

It's a.

[Kevin]

It's a.

[Mark]

Exactly. It's not.

[Kevin]

It's not.

[Mark]

Obviously, it's a unique sample, but it's just kind of interesting because. Because they, in my experience, Canadians, sophisticated Canadians know more about American politics than most Americans do. And.

[Kevin]

And the one was Usha. The one was Usha, Vance's brother.

[Mark]

Exactly, Exactly. But I asked them, I said, shout out adjectives. Shout out adjectives by Rubio. They were exactly what you think. And then. And then shout out adjectives about advance. And they're just Scathing, just scathing what they think of Vance. Not as a split in their view as Larry is. We haven't heard from Daryl in a while. Daryl, for those of you who don't know, is not a big fan of.

[Kevin]

Thank you. Thank you, Maddie.

[Mark]

Thank you. Yeah, Mattie. Thank you, Daryl. You too, Darryl. It's me, too. Grateful to you, Darrell.

[Kevin]

Welcome in.

[Mark]

Tell folks we don't know where you are and what's on your mind.

[Daryl]

Good morning, everybody. I'm Darrell from Philadelphia, outside of Philadelphia. You know, just wanted to comment on the Iran war, as you probably predicted, Mark, you know, when are people going to realize that we lost this thing? Like, I think you painted a pretty good picture this morning, Mark, that the options are extremely poor. And basically all Trump can do is make some kind of deal and get out of this thing. That restarting a conflict is going to have major repercussions that he doesn't want to have to deal with. And, you know, along with the idea that people are going to start realizing that we lost this war, what about people who shamelessly promoted and repeated ridiculous things like you, Larry? Like the leadership was totally decimated. 90% of Iran's missile launchers were destroyed, their oil storage is going to explode. They're not going to be able to pay salaries for all the people in the government. Like, is there going to be an accountability? I mean, I already know the answer is no, because there never is. But, yeah, those are my two questions. When are people going to realize we lost this thing and is there going to be any accountability for people who pushed it?

[Mark]

Okay, Larry.

[Larry]

Well, first of all, I reject the premise that we've lost anything at this point. By every military standard, this has been a military. There are two tasks at hand in Iran. One is a military objective and one is, at the moment, a diplomatic or negotiating perspective. The latter is still up in the air and still being worked out. The former, the military one. I think by every measure we have done what we attempted to do and wanted to do military militarily. And I don't know anybody who understands military that would dispute that. I know that there are reports that they actually have better capability than they have, but we haven't seen them use that capability. And I don't necessarily trust those reports. All right? That said, I'm dealing the same way any other commentator or analyst is dealing with this story, which is we read the sources that we trust, we hear from people who are connected, and we relay what we believe has been is valid and correct. And I still stand by pretty much everything that I've said about the military endeavor here. Based on most reports, their economy is in freefall right now. They have a horrible situation, and the IRGC is the only leadership that's still there. I've never said the IRGC has been devastated. I said that their political hierarchy has been devastated, which it has been. We don't even know who's calling the shots and running things.

[Daryl]

Well, can I stop you, Larry? Because.

[Mark]

Sure.

[Daryl]

You say this line like we destroyed their leadership. I mean, we didn't kill their president, we didn't kill our prime minister, we didn't kill any of, any of the civilian government ministers. So when you say we killed their leadership, like, who are. Can you give me some.

[Larry]

Well, because the leaders in Iran weren't the prime minister and the president. They're all puppet factions to the, the theocracy, to the mullahs and the, to the ayatollah.

[Kevin]

Yeah, yeah.

[Daryl]

Well, I think that's very dismissive. That's sort of a dismissive way to be. Like,

[Kevin]

it's a.

[Daryl]

It's sort of. I'm sorry, it's sort of.

[Mark]

Daryl, Daryl, I'm just going to remind you the ethos of the platform here. We love hearing your perspective and you do speak for tens of millions, but just remind you to be respect, please.

[Larry]

Oh, I don't think he's being disrespectful. I just, again, I, I think the military.

[Mark]

Disrespectful.

[Larry]

The military has been. The military continues to be incredibly successful with the blockade right now. It's what's keeping Iran on hanging by a thread right now. So this has been an extraordinary situation where we see these negotiations sort of play out in real time. I can't remember a military engagement or a war, if you want to call it that, that's ever had this sort of situation where we have a ceasefire and then every single day we're supposed to get progress reports on where the ceasefire negotiations are and whether it's been resolved or not. It's just an extraordinary circumstance and unlike anything we've ever dealt with before.

[Mark]

Kevin, who's right, Daryl or Larry?

[Kevin]

They both speak for tens of millions of Americans.

[Mark]

There you go. I'm gonna, I'm gonna jump over to SiriusXM, apologize for my technical difficulties. I blame. I don't know who to blame.

[Kevin]

I.

[Mark]

Yeah, could be. Could be the slush. Anyway, I'll be on SiriusXM. Join me there in a bit. And, and I'll be back at five tonight. Former. Two former members of Congress to join me on two A Night. I'll let Larry tell you about that. Gentlemen, great spending the week with you. Look forward to seeing you soon. Have a pleasure.

[Kevin]

Thank you.

[Mark]

And to you guys, I want to

[Kevin]

do a point of personal privilege before we bring on Haley for our pop culture moment and see if we can bring on Andre real quick. The chat has been clamoring to get him on and there's some great Ukraine, great updates in terms of what's going on with Ukraine and the incredible position.

[Andre]

Keep it brief because I'm, I'm just back for the first time after a week. So I was.

[Kevin]

Welcome back. Welcome back.

[Andre]

Frankfurt. Yeah, a very good time in Ukraine. And I raised my hand earlier because there is a seven byline, kind of the kind of story Mark likes. Seven byline story in Reuters today about the unraveling of U.S. diplomacy. And I'm just getting hammered in all my news requests because the former US Ambassador Bridget Brink is mentioned in there about how there's no interagency interaction. No, no ambassadors are talking to the NSC because there's nobody at the nsc. But that's a good article if anybody wants to read it. That just dropped late last night with seven bylines and then like five other people at the bottom of it to figure out what the hell's happening with US Foreign policy right now on the ground in Ukraine. Every.

[Kevin]

And, and Andre, to your point there, there, there was also a news article too. Just all of our ambassadorial positions, you know, are, you know, we've got some major ones, obviously

[Andre]

if you watch the, the Senate hearings and on C Span, you know, both the Republicans and Democrats are going to say why do we still have over 100 noms not put up in front of us? We don't have an ambassador to Russia or Ukraine and we're trying to resolve this. We don't have ambassadors for half the countries that we normally have ambassadors. So it's just a big issue. And the fact that we also defunded the national security a council. We have, we, we used to have hundreds of people. We have a couple of dozen now. And then those people aren't interacting. So there's a lot of confusion about what's happening on the ground in Ukraine. The, the US Ambassador and, and, and

[Kevin]

again, objectively it was a problem under Biden too. For whatever reason, we, we screwed around in terms of not having a lot of these posts early on in the administration too, and people vetted and appointed in a timely manner. So it's not just obviously Trump and again, it's a problem writ large for our national security and foreign policy arenas again with the backdrop of China going full throttle on their diplomatic posts and staffing and things like that. So that's it.

[Andre]

I don't want to take Haley's time, so just wanted to say hi and

[Larry]

I'll be around shiv you. Thank you, Andre.

[Kevin]

Thanks, Andre.

[Andre]

And if anybody wants to join me in Ukraine, I'll be back next month,

[Larry]

dude, I would like to do that. So sometime we got to take this show.

[Kevin]

Call me, call me, Larry.

[Andre]

Call me.

[Larry]

Let's, let's, let's get to it, Haley.

[Kevin]

Thanks, Andre.

[Larry]

And the pop culture report here at the end of your Friday.

[Kevin]

There she is.

[Larry]

I've been watching her all morning. She's been sucking down the cigarettes one after another.

[Kevin]

She's got a little fan going too to get the hair going, you know. She's not outside. This is a green screen. Oh, Haley, we can't hear you.

[Larry]

You've muted your phone. Haley, you've muted your own phone or your laptop. There we go.

[Kevin]

Yes, we can hear you now.

[Haley]

So it's great that you brought Andre in because it really does connect with my topic of the week, which, if you guys didn't know, last weekend was the Eurovision. It was 70th annual Eurovision. And as an American, before I moved to Israel, I had no idea that it even existed. But now I'm going to educate a few Americans on the Eurovision. We're going to have a little trivia test.

[Larry]

Oh, God.

[Kevin]

All right, the answer is abba.

[Haley]

There are a few.

[Kevin]

And the follow up is Waterloo. And the follow up is Waterloo.

[Haley]

So I'm gonna delete that question. Okay, so, yeah, this is why people think.

[Larry]

Yeah, okay, go ahead, say it, Kevin.

[Kevin]

That we're. We are both happily married to our spouses. Yeah.

[Larry]

Not to each other.

[Kevin]

We're just soulmates.

[Larry]

And only one of us is gay. But it's up to you in the chat to say who you think it is. Go ahead.

[Haley]

I don't think you want that so much, Larry. Anyway, Saturday was the Eurovision gonna do a little point of personal privilege for. For Israel too, because we came in second.

[Kevin]

Right. Israel came in that great singer, good looking guy too.

[Haley]

Bulgaria was in first place. They did win. But Israel did manage to take second place. And third place went to Romania. It was a fantastic song. It's called Michelle. Everybody should listen to it. And also the Bulgarian song was really good too. Bangarenga is what it's called if anyone wants to listen to those two. Bangaranga but yeah, it was still a family show.

[Kevin]

Hayley, we gotta call it.

[Mark]

I don't know.

[Larry]

I like these backup dancers. Let's go.

[Haley]

Eurovision. If anything, if anyone has ever seen, you know, clips or anything, they are weird and fabulous, that's all I have to say. So let's do a little pop, you know, pop quiz. Do you guys know which country has the most Eurovision wins?

[Larry]

Sweden.

[Haley]

Sweden and Ireland both tied at seven.

[Kevin]

Hey, in Ireland, okay, you already got.

[Haley]

Which Swedish pop group won the Eurovision before becoming world famous? ABBA. And for Waterloo. Absolutely. Former 1. Eurovision in 1988 before becoming a global superstar.

[Larry]

Ooh, is it that violin player?

[Haley]

No, Celine Dion.

[Larry]

Oh, Celine Dion.

[Kevin]

I was gonna say Celine Dion.

[Larry]

I thought she was Canadian.

[Haley]

That's not your entry for Switzerland. So she was world before she became the world famous superstar. And which non European country regularly competes in the contest?

[Larry]

Israel.

[Kevin]

Israel?

[Haley]

No, Australia.

[Kevin]

Oh, Australia.

[Larry]

Also non European, but sure, the 80s.

[Haley]

They've been in every Eurovision contest. And two last questions. Who was the UK's entry when ABBA won in 1974?

[Kevin]

74.

[Larry]

74. Campy.

[Haley]

Elton John, Olivia Newton John.

[Larry]

Oh, but she's Australian.

[Haley]

Okay, but she was for the UK anyway.

[Kevin]

Part of the Commonwealth.

[Haley]

And as a trick question. Last question. Our very own two way community member and my bestie, Andre. His cousin represented. Which Eastern European country for the first entry in 1993?

[Kevin]

Ukraine.

[Larry]

Gotta be Ukraine.

[Haley]

Trick question. Estonia.

[Larry]

She even said it was.

[Kevin]

We love Estonia too.

[Larry]

Thank you, Haley.

[Haley]

Well, thank you guys for letting me educate you on little European extravaganzas. And yeah, thanks, Haley.

[Larry]

Have a great weekend. Nice work.

[Kevin]

Love it, Haley.

[Larry]

Very good.

[Kevin]

I did so much.

[Larry]

Eurovision version. Can I tell you, my kid. I have my. I have four kids. They're all. They're weird because they're my kids, right?

[Kevin]

And the ones that I met are perfectly lovely little weird.

[Larry]

And so One summer, my two oldest daughters got hooked on watching old YouTubes of Eurovision. For some reason, they were just going from YouTube to YouTube watching these Eurovisions and you've gotta find. It's from 1984. The song is called Digiloo. Digolay.

[Kevin]

Also, it's still a family show. Still a family show.

[Larry]

Three brothers, Pear Lewis and Richard Harry. The artists, they're called the Harry's. And they sing about wearing their golden shoes. It's golden boots. Excuse me. It's just. It's the most cringe mid-80s Euro trash thing you will ever see.

[Mark]

It's hilarious.

[Larry]

So I highly recommend it.

[Mark]

That's awesome.

[Larry]

Yeah. The problem See, my problem with Eurovision, Kevin, if I can just boil it down into one, it's too European.

[Kevin]

I feel like, you know, day in and day out, you become more and more like Andy Rooney in front of me, you know. And another thing, at least I trim my eyebrows. I know. Me, too.

[Larry]

Those bushes that he had today with my. Is the hair. It's too short, isn't it? Well, my, one of my midshipmen that I sponsor at the Naval Academy, class of 23, is getting married this weekend down in Madison, Virginia. And so I thought I'd look a little bit more marine core than I would.

[Mark]

So that's why we got to take it. Looks good.

[Larry]

Also, to reiterate what Mark said about Canadians liking Marco Rubio, that you don't have to go to Canada. I had an event Sunday night for my listeners On WMAL in D.C. we had 500 listeners there. All these are conservative radio fans. And I asked them, all right, who do you like in 28, Vance or Rubio? And it was about three to one Rubio.

[Kevin]

Wow.

[Larry]

And they ain't Canadian, I promise you that.

[Kevin]

Yeah, it's kind of wild. Well, we got some. We got some great stuff going on.

[Larry]

We've got to promote the show. All right, here we go.

[Mark]

Yeah.

[Kevin]

A great conversation released yesterday. Mark's latest next up with a great monologue about campaign surprises, warning signs of both parties, and why Republicans and Democrats are entering a new stage here in terms of volatility. And then he was joined by former, the pride of Charleston, former Congressman Joe Cunningham and fan favorite Beverly Hallberg for that conversation as well.

[Larry]

And then you want to talk about 28 tonight at 5pm we will also hear from, once again, former Congressman Joe Cunningham of South Carolina, talking about what appears to be the new redistricting plan there that will eliminate the seat currently held by Mr. Clyburn and also former Congressman Garrett Graves of Louisiana.

[Kevin]

And they've been paired up before. And those have been fun conversations. Two really good guys, former members, great senses of humor. So you won't miss out on that. Yeah.

[Larry]

And we'll be dark on Monday in recognition for Memorial Day. So we hope you all also take some time and remember those who have fallen for our freedoms. And we'll be back Tuesday morning with the morning meeting.

[Kevin]

We'll be back Tuesday morning. And then, of course, join Mark over on Serious right now. Serious right now. And then you've got the official after show. And Friday is always a lot of fun with the gang with Professor Kenny and Bob and Alan as co hosts. That the chat is open for that. And it kicks off at 11. And then. Are you on at noon, Larry?

[Larry]

I am. I'll be on at noon. And then I'm heading down to Virginia, so get out of my way. Everybody on the expressway. And it really is a little too tight on the side. This is going to have to grow in.

[Kevin]

It looks good. It looks good.

[Larry]

After a haircut. It's not good.

[Kevin]

I know. It'll grow a little bit.

[Larry]

All right. It'll fill in.

[Kevin]

Everyone have a great and. And meaningful Memorial Day, and we'll see you all back here on Tuesday by.