Trump vs Schumer and Democrats on Showdown as Mass Firings Loom; FBI Surveilled GOP Senators

Summary

2WAY Morning Meeting Episode Summary

Episode: Trump vs Schumer and Democrats on Showdown as Mass Firings Loom; FBI Surveilled GOP Senators
Date: October 7, 2025
Hosts: Mark Halperin (A), Sean Spicer (B), Dan Turrentine (C)

---

Main Theme

The episode delivers a lively roundtable spanning the day's leading political stories: the ongoing government shutdown standoff between Trump and Schumer/Democrats, looming federal employee furloughs, the shutdown's real-world impact (air traffic delays, paychecks), pressure points for resolution (ACA tax credits and health care), and freshly reported news of the DOJ/FBI surveilling Republican senators in connection with January 6 activities. The team also covers Israel-Gaza ceasefire talks, the political import of gubernatorial campaigns, voting access and illegal immigration, as well as a scattering of listener Q&As reflecting voter anxieties, media coverage, and appropriations stagnation.

---

Key Discussion Points

1. Government Shutdown: The Political Calculus and Critical Pressures

• Timeline & Mechanism (03:50–07:57)

  • President Biden's mixed messaging on negotiations.
  • Air traffic impacts: critical lack of Burbank controllers, forecasts for broader airport delays.
  • Initial signs that missed federal paychecks may become a "forcing mechanism" to spur resolution.
  • Quote - [07:57] “What Democrats have been saying, which is a lot of red families are not going to like the Republican position and the Democratic Party ironically is kind of trying to help bail them out.” (Mark Halperin)

• ACA Tax Credits and Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Break (09:45–15:00)

  • Greene’s public opposition to her party on Obamacare subsidies drives internal GOP tension.
  • Sean and Dan dissect the mechanics, noting GOP lacks a unifying healthcare alternative after years promising one.
  • The Democratic approach links ACA credits to red-state interests, exposing an intra-GOP dilemma.
  • Quote - [11:48] “You found $20 billion for Argentina in a shutdown, but you can’t find money for health care.” (Rahm Emanuel, relayed by Dan Turrentine)

• Who Will Cut a Deal? (15:16–17:05)

  • Speculation on who can break the impasse. Hosts float J.D. Vance, Schumer, Senate “gang,” and specific centrist names as possible coalition-builders.
  • Consensus that reopening will require a short-term deal and agreement on an ACA vote.

2. Political Strategy in Real Time

• Biden vs. Schumer/Democrats: Who's "winning"? (17:05–18:29)

  • Both parties gain what they want: Dems get leverage through visible shutdown pain; Republicans maintain tough posture.
  • Dan suggests Dems risk “overreach,” possibly eroding their advantage.

• Israel-Gaza Ceasefire Negotiations (18:29–19:47)

  • Talks shrouded in secrecy, generally interpreted as a positive sign.
  • Discussion on whether Israel can use any resolution to improve global PR, with consensus that US—especially Trump—holds most of the diplomatic initiative.

3. FBI/DOJ Surveillance of GOP Senators (19:48–25:17)

• Facts and Political Spin

  • Reports emerge that Special Counsel Jack Smith pulled metadata on seven GOP senators and a congressman linked to January 6/fake elector scheme.
  • Debate: Is this a shocking abuse of power or due diligence in a probe of unprecedented events?
  • Sean is disturbed by overreach toward less-involved senators. Mark insists on waiting for facts, noting past precedence.
  • Dan emphasizes the historical severity of the “fake electors” plot.
  • Spirited exchange over whether investigations are being timed to disrupt Trump’s candidacy.

• Quote - [22:00] “We have to start with the fact that that was batshit crazy. They tried to literally run fake electors to overturn an election, full stop.” (Dan Turrentine)

4. Trump’s Messaging and Pardons

• Maxwell Pardon Moment (25:39–29:03)
  • Trump’s evasive, unrehearsed responses to queries about pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell stuns hosts; considered “bonkers,” possibly fodder for future GOP attack ads.
  • Both Sean and Dan agree his vacillation is classic Trump “bob and weave.”
  • Dan gives odds above 50% Trump would issue a pardon if politically expedient.
  • Quote - [28:54] “Would you say you put the odds that Trump pardons her...at above 50%?” “Yes.” (Mark and Dan)

5. Congressional Races, Political Violence, and Media Coverage

• Virginia AG Scandal Fallout (30:02–32:12)

  • Weighing the repercussions of Democratic candidate Jay Jones’ controversies.
  • Democrats reluctant to publicly urge resignation; Republican criticism that Jones is dragging down the ticket.

• Political Violence/“Both Sides” Debate (32:48–33:43)

  • Sean argues Democrats fail to denounce violence in their ranks, Dan counters with examples of Trump instigating violence and mutual escalation.

6. Immigration & Voting Integrity

• Listener Q&A Segment – Illegal Voting Narrative (46:28–54:00)

  • Intense back-and-forth over narrative that Democrats enable illegal voting. Mark repeatedly presses for evidence.
  • Dan tackles the political reality: "If the plan was illegal voting to benefit Democrats, it isn’t working; Republicans are gaining among Latino voters."
  • Sean asserts, “one side encourages it,” Mark and Dan counter with calls for hard evidence.
  • The tension exposes key divisions in public discourse.

• Quote – [49:51] “If this is our great...Soros trap, are going to literally ensure they keep the House of Representatives. So if that was our plan...boy, did we screw this up.” (Dan Turrentine)

7. Appropriations and Governance Gridlock

• Broken System (43:44–45:57)
  • Listener asks if endless continuing resolutions ("eternal CRs") are the new norm.
  • Sean: “We just keep kicking the can...with all due respect, lawmakers don’t see the full impact.”
  • Dan: “Both parties are getting really, really frustrated with what is happening.”

8. Media & Leadership Critique

• Why Isn’t Shapiro an A-list candidate? (34:45–35:52)

  • Hosts dismiss Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s national prospects: too bland, lacks intensity for the moment.
  • Both critique his ad as “vanilla.”

• Podcast Community Banter (54:00–55:44)

  • Callers buoy Mark for a Sunday political talk show; the three riff on media personalities, Mark’s qualifications, and audience organizing power.

• Canada-US Meetings & Bondi Hearing Headlines (55:44–56:39)

  • Hosts preview expected news cycles, injecting dry wit ("Canada agrees to commonwealth status.") and forecasting fault-lines for Pam Bondi’s congressional hearing.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On GOP Health Care Stalemate
  “[Republicans] should be leading on health care reform. We’ve had years and years to do this...and we still have nothing.”
  —Sean Spicer [12:21]

• On Investigations
  “I’m not defending Jack Smith...but a priori, there’s...nothing wrong with a special counsel investigating members of Congress, is there?”
  —Mark Halperin [20:54]

• On Political Realities
  “You got to deal in reality, the world as it is and you’re not going to come up with [a GOP health plan] in the next two weeks.”
  —Dan Turrentine [14:26]

• On Illegal Voting Claims
  “I will find you plenty. Hans von Spakovsky at Heritage, it's an entire list.”
  —Sean Spicer [52:00]

  “Everyone who votes illegally is an injustice. But unless it's being done on a mass scale, it doesn't, it doesn't affect the outcome.”
  —Mark Halperin [52:52]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [03:50–05:41] – Government shutdown impacts; airport staffing, Democratic and Republican pressure points
• [09:45–14:39] – ACA tax credits debate and intra-GOP schism
• [19:48–25:17] – DOJ/FBI metadata surveillance scandal reaction
• [25:39–29:03] – Trump on Ghislaine Maxwell pardon, hosts discuss implications
• [30:02–32:12] – Virginia AG controversy and effect on Democratic ticket
• [32:48–33:43] – Political violence “both sides” debate
• [43:44–45:57] – Listener Q: Are “eternal CRs” the new appropriations norm?
• [46:28–54:00] – Call-in: Illegal immigration, driver’s licenses, and voting—debating evidence and party narratives

---

Tone & Language

The hosts maintain the show’s unscripted, egalitarian style—debating with frankness, sharp quips, and pointed pushback. Discussions are seasoned with dry humor, informed skepticism, and partisan jabs but underpinned by an insistence on facts and firsthand reporting.

Listeners hear knowledgeable media and political operatives—often exasperated, sometimes sardonic, but always prioritizing exposure of intra-party tensions and establishment dysfunction.

---

Conclusion

This episode of 2WAY Morning Meeting offers a dense, debated-rich snapshot of American politics in October 2025—a government at loggerheads over shutdown, parties struggling with core policy fissures, and distrust over investigative powers. The panel’s (and callers’) open skepticism and cross-examination provide listeners with not only the “what” of today’s headlines but also the “why” boiling beneath the surface, making it essential for those looking to understand both the facts and the atmospherics of contemporary American power politics.

Transcript

[A]

Welcome to the morning meeting with Mark.

[B]

And Sean and Dan.

[A]

If you should think of a question, all you do is raise your hand with the presumption of grace to all peace, love and understanding during the call.

[B]

Welcome to the morning meeting where the.

[A]

Best politics is at with conversations like no other. But don't put smack in the chat.

[B]

Those of you watching are listening rather to the podcast version. Missed out. Dan, tell them what they didn't see.

[C]

Well, three dancing babies that I guess us, you know, 40, 50, 60 years ago and handsome, good looking and ready to go.

[B]

I gotta say, the AI captured what I looked like as a baby. I don't know about you guys, I.

[C]

Didn'T have glasses as a kid. Nope.

[B]

All right.

[A]

I gotta say, best, best video open. I'm not, I'm not there on the audio. Best video open though.

[B]

Yeah, pretty good. If you want. If you only listen to it on the podcast, I recommend you go to the YouTube version. You're gonna want to see that. Welcome to the morning meeting with the adult versions of Sean and Dan and myself. Thank you for being part of the two way experience. This is the program for October 7, 2025 commemorations around the world for the horrible massacre that took place in Israel two years ago. We'll talk about that shutdown continues and we'd love your participation to talk about that and anything else on your mind. So if you're here on the two way platform you want to be in on the conversation, we'd urge you to raise your hand. We'd love to get three new people in today. Let's try for that. If you've never raised your hand before, I see plenty of new people I've never seen before. Welcome in. Thank you for being part of this. Raise your hand if you're watching on x or on YouTube. Remember this is based on the Television Network News division's morning meetings like they have over at CBS where Barry Weiss on Monday will take over. Don't put smack.

[C]

Monday, huh? Not today.

[B]

I think it's Monday.

[A]

I would want a few days to get ready. Yeah, I got 100. You got to spend a little of that 150 million.

[B]

Yeah, it's not all going to hurt. Don't put smack in the chat. Peace, love and understanding to all. Remember this is a different kind of platform. We've. We have people on with all sorts of views and if you hear something you don't like, rather than being furious and sending me a nasty email saying you'll never listen again because someone spoke and said something you didn't agree with, maybe thank me, maybe say, you know, I learned something new today. I learned something that tens of millions of Americans agree with that I don't. But now I've heard it and had had it kind of laid out with Dan and Sean. So that's what I'd recommend you do. I'm tired of answering those emails. This platform is for everybody. Welcome in. Dan, all dressed up, not wearing fairway and green this morning and I'm not either because for a variety of reasons. But Sean, tell them what you're wearing and why.

[A]

Well, Mark, I'm wearing one of the lovely polos from Fairway and Green. But as I've said before, all products on fairway and green, every one of them on the site site wide is available at our 20% discount by going to Twoway TV Fairway 2way20 being your key discount there. And today I'm wearing a non branded shirt, just one of the beautiful polos that they happen to put in that box. So I, I was just excited and again it's just more proof that you, you should get a morning meeting shirt to show your support. But if a holiday's coming up that you want to share a fairway and green shirt with someone, you're not limited. That's the beauty of this. You can get any item.

[B]

I'll tell you one more thing you can buy. We haven't talked about it yet. Literally they're the best boxers I've ever owned. I've replaced all my underwear with fairway and green boxers. Dan, you don't know about this, do you? They're incredible.

[C]

But I do wear underwear.

[B]

Yeah, they're literally the best boxers I've ever owned.

[A]

So take a look at the shutdown, please.

[B]

Yeah, let's go to it. Here's the daybook for you. The President United States is at the White House today and will be spending much of his day with my college classmate Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada. Greets him at 11. Still text, I can't comment. Greets him at the stakeout at 11:30, 11:45, White House pool covers a bilat. They'll talk about all manner of things they talk about. Kids in the hall. May talk about Second City, may talk about Fred Willard. You just don't know what will come up. Fox News this morning. Spotter spotted the PM taking a morning jog, I think on the mall because he's already in town. In any event, photo op at 11:45, then a closed lunch in the Cabinet Room 12:15 and then at 3:00', clock, the President's meeting closed Press, at least for now, with Eden Alexander, one of the Americans who was held hostage by.

[C]

By the way, do you think it's a coincidence it is here on the day the NHL season opens today?

[B]

No. Yes, yes, yes, it is. All right. J.D. vance presumably will be around that meeting today. Excuse me, Pam Bondi, who has a trail of controversies. I didn't realize how long the list of controversies was, but somebody in a curtain raising piece this morning listed all the things that have come up on her watch that have caused consternation not just for Democrats, but often for Republicans. Her first testimony as AG on Capitol Hill today, 9:00am at this hour, as they say, we may dip into that before Senate. Judiciary House remains out. Senate is going to vote on some nominations. Then at some point, another test vote. But no one expects them to break cloture to open the government back.

[C]

They lose a vote.

[B]

Yeah. They lost one yesterday, right? Angus King.

[C]

No, he did not. No, but he's threatening to.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

By the way, at what point do we start having a serious conversation about, you know, what they refer to as the nuclear option?

[B]

No interest. Dunes. Not interest.

[A]

I know, but that's my point. Why? There is sort of. I. Right. Why are we not talking about that?

[C]

Dune just thinks someday you'll be in the minority.

[B]

He's from the McConnell School. Speaker of the House Press conference at 10. The votes on the resolutions are supposed to be this evening. And then the House Democrats are meeting again, angry that they're not in session, but they'll meet again at 6 o' clock tonight. Supreme Court hears arguments in a couple cases at 10 o', clock, a Colorado ban on conversion therapy for LGBTQ people. And at 11, a case on Double Jeopardy in Egypt, Jared Witkoff. Steve or Jared Kushner. Steve Witkoff continued to be part of ceasefire talks. Not a lot of coming out of what's happening in the talk. So it's a little bit of a black box there, which is probably a.

[C]

Good sign, to be honest, that there is nothing coming almost always.

[B]

It's a good sign. I agree. All right. Again, if you want to get on the conversation, particularly if you've never raised your hand on this program before, please do. We'll get to you in just a bit. We've got some topics to race through though. Ladies and gentlemen, here we go. The president yesterday confused the world, saying there were talks with the Democrats, then the Democrats said there weren't. Then the president suggested talks could occur before the shutdown was over. Then he went on social and said, no, there has to be an agreement to open the government before there could be talks. And so that I think sound inferior, signifying nothing really. But here's what is happening. The air traffic controllers in a few airports weren't in full force and Burbank in particular mostly shut down. And that along with the paychecks. Here's the New York Times headline, flight delays begin as air traffic staffing shortages worsen that this air traffic issue. And then the paychecks that are going to start to be snagged seem to be, if there's any forcing mechanisms out there, out there, that might be it. Here is Sean Duffy, Secretary of Transportation, former reality show star and Wisconsin Congressman on Fox and Friends where his wife is the weekend host.

[D]

So the controllers yesterday, we actually have to think about working six days a week and then do I go and take an Uber job and try to make extra money to put the food on the table, all because Chuck Schumer is trying to have this political fight instead of saying, let's do a clean cr, let's open the government up, let's have a conversation about what Democrats want to talk about. But, but do that over the course of the next several months. Don't shut it down and affect our airspace, our controllers. And again, it's a huge problem. And again, Burbank 0. Controllers came to work. I don't support that. They should, they should come to work. They're supposed to come to work, but this is a paycheck yet.

[B]

So why aren't they coming to work?

[C]

I mean, it's only been six days, so.

[D]

Well, the paycheck, the pay, the pay cycle ended yesterday.

[C]

Right.

[D]

Their paychecks come next week and they see what's on the horizon.

[B]

Brian Abbottabad, Abbott, here's, here's Bernie Sanders being relatively optimistic last night on CNN about where things stand. No. 5, please. You want to throw 15 million people off the health care that they have, you're going to destroy a broken health care system. We may not be able to recover from that. I think Trump understands that. The Republicans understand that. And I wish that the speaker of the house, Mr. Johnson, had not given his members a vacation, taking them out of Washington in the middle of this crisis. They're not here. That's pretty pathetic. All right. But perhaps the most significant development that might lead to some sort of solution comes from perhaps a surprising quarter. The gentle lady from Georgia, Marjorie Taylor Greene, took to Twitter, AKA X, to express some mixed sentiments about everything that's going on I shall read this in full, including the barnyard profanity for versalimitude. Here we go everybody. Marjorie Taylor Greene Tweet I was not in Congress and all this Obamacare Affordable Care act started I got here in 2021. As a matter of fact, the ACA made health insurance unaffordable for my family and after it was passed with skyrocketing premiums higher than our House payment, let's just say as nicely as possible, I'm not a fan, but I'm going to go against everyone on this issue because when the tax credits expire this year, my own adult children's insurance premiums for 2026 are going to double along with all the wonderful families and hardworking people in my district. No, I'm not towing the party line on this or playing loyalty games. I'm a Republican and won't vote for illegals to have any taxpayer funded health care or benefits. I'm America only. I'm carving my own lane. Dan this puts in sharp relief what Democrats have been saying, which is a lot of red families are not going to like the Republican position and the Democratic Party ironically is kind of trying to help bail them out.

[C]

That's exactly right. Those tax credits were designed for red states that did not expand Medicaid under Obamacare. So the party worked with Republicans to backdoor subsidies to them under the radar so that they could continue to rail against how much they hate Obamacare but get their health, their citizens health care. Donald Trump knows this, which is why yesterday was one of the great Trumpian days of the little wheel in his head said, we got to actually do something on this. Then his own leaders called and said, no, no, no, no, no, no, that's not our position. So he backtracked. And I thought the greatest line of the day was Rahm Emanuel. God bless Rahm. We all talk about how smart he is. We talk about his understanding of sound bites. He said, because we haven't talked about it here. You found 20 billion for Argentina in a shutdown, but you can't find money for health care. It's a great sound bite.

[B]

It's reminiscent of we should stop building.

[C]

Firehouses and in Baghdad and build them in Ohio. Yep.

[B]

Sean Spicer, what do you think of Marjorie Taylor Greene, Canary in the Coal Mine?

[A]

I'm, I'm a little confused by this. So first of all, I don't think it's great to start an argument by saying the only reason I care is because my adult children's premiums are going up. It's either good policy or bad policy saying that.

[B]

Well, she said, she said her constituents too.

[A]

I know, but if you lead with my own, adult children's premiums are going to double.

[C]

All politics is local.

[A]

Yeah, very local. But I still don't understand her point here. She doesn't want to vote for illegals. The sequencing has always been the issue, which is open the government up. Then we have the conversation. So that's completely consistent with the Republican policy right now. Number two is, and I agree with her on a second point, which is the system is broken and we are, you know, just basically doubling down on a broken Obama system, which is horrible. The Republican Party should be leading on health care reform. We've had years and years to do this, to talk about it, and we still have nothing that is horrible for our party that we don't have that. But I will say that just saying, well, because it sucks, I want to open it up and double down on stupid to me isn't a great strategy and really just continues to flush good money after bad. There are serious problems with just a plain out extension of the aca. And so there should be a serious negotiation about the waste, the fraud, the inefficiencies that exist, the hospitals that are getting reimbursements that don't need it. I mean, this is a horror. This was a Covid thing. We're just throwing money at a problem.

[B]

Somebody, somebody would have to lead the way on that. I think what, I think the significance of the Marjorie Taylor Greene tweet is this. It's the mirror image of Democrats on crime. When the Democrats are talking about crime, they're like, yeah, yeah, maybe crime's a problem. But the real issue is Trump's overreaching and we don't want the National Guard. And the Republicans are saying, yeah, yeah, maybe there's some issue with health care Democrats want to deal with, but you know, illegal aliens. Like, like, if you think, as Marjorie Taylor Greene does, that this is something that needs to be addressed because people's premiums are going to go up. Speaker Johnson should be screaming from the rooftops. They should. The President, we're determined to make sure people's premiums don't go up. You either, you either believe that or you don't. Marjorie Taylor Greene saying she believes it. Does the president, Speaker Johnson, do they want people's premiums to double?

[C]

I don't know. Trump does.

[A]

And that's why I'm saying, I think.

[B]

But he's not saying it.

[A]

Not saying, no, no, I 100% agree. I think the problem is that we are actually setting ourselves up for failure, which is open the government, then we'll talk about it. We should be messaging at the same point right now. Here's what we'll do about it. Because it is a broken, flawed system.

[C]

And you don't have a replacement. That's agreed. So you got it right. So you got to deal in reality, the world as it is and you're not going to come up with one in the next two weeks.

[A]

No, no. And 100% you're right.

[C]

This is the plan. And, and by the way, this is what we plan to run on in 2026. And seeing cracks emerge now tells the party there's something there.

[A]

So this to me is like the appropriations process. It's, we see the problem and we go, wow, there's a massive problem. Let's wait and deal with it in months. We have been talking about healthcare for 10 years, probably 15 as a party and here we are again knowing that this is going to be right around the corner. If in fact we open the government up, we give ourselves a seven, seven week window and we no unified solution. This is a problem.

[B]

Last night Bacha said predicting the end of the shutdown in terms of timing and method was a boy thing. I'm not sure she's right. But let's do the boy thing. Dan. When and how does, when and how does it end?

[C]

I mean, I still think it's, it's the solution's obvious. I think it's sometime now, I'll say next week because we're going to get near the pay, the pay period. And there will be a deal on that, on the Obama tax credits.

[B]

But who, who, but who, who's, who's in the room either physically or metaphorically to strike the deal.

[C]

Well, I forget who it was. Who was on two way tonight the other day, who worked for Pelosi and whatever, who mentioned J.D. vance. I hadn't thought of that. So I know you've talked about it ever since. Maybe it's J.D. vance and Schumer.

[B]

Okay, I've got a new answer. Sean.

[C]

Okay.

[A]

I mean I maintain what I've said all along, I think that we, we agree on a shorter term reopening of the government, a guaranteed vote on ACA extension once it's reopened, get five or six. And that was one of the things.

[B]

By the way, who makes the deal?

[A]

So I think that right now JD gets in the room, we make it. And this is where I think the problem. The when the president was talking about Democrats, what I thought wasn't necessarily talking about Hakeem Jeffries or Schumer. I think they're trying to break a deal with four or five of those other Democrats in the Senate and say, hey, if you agree with us. So it's J.D. it's, it's probably, you know, Gary Peters and Maggie Hassan or a couple of those guys and saying if you do this, we'll give you a vote on X. Susan Collins.

[B]

Yep. Early next week. And it's Johnson and a Senate gang who do the deal. Johnson and the Senate bipartisan Senate.

[A]

My gang. So look, Olympia Snow. Yeah, I mean, sorry. Susan Collins, hating yourself. Gary Peters. Gary Peters.

[B]

Margaret Chase Smith. All right, guys, we got to pick up the pace. That's one topic and we used half our time. So let's pick up the pace. Here we go. Trump in the states still waiting to see what happens with the suits in Oregon. The court of Appeals, as far as I know, still hasn't taken it up. The judge in Chicago stayed the objection of Illinois while waiting for I think a Thursday argument. So that, that, I think that operation, I think it's Thursday. Pretty sure it's Thursday. In any event, here's a map from The Washington Post, 107 of National Guard deployments in place and, and coming you see there Portland, Louisiana, Memphis, Chicago, D.C. couple three locations in Louisiana. Let's just talk about the the politics of this. Democrats are suddenly big 10th amendment people, big states rights people. Rather, Sean, today as a snapshot, just binary who's winning politically this fight, the White House or the Democrats politically, who's winning today?

[A]

I think it's a push. I think the Democrats are getting what they want out of it and the Republicans are getting what they want.

[B]

Sean. Correct. Dan. Sean's right. What do you think?

[C]

I think Republicans were winning it. I think Democrats are now. I think it's overreach.

[B]

Yeah. Okay. That could be true too. All right, moving quickly here. Israel again second anniversary. The talks are a black box. Not a lot coming out which we agree is a good sign. Will will Israel around this Here's a CNN headline. Gaza sees fire talks underway as Israel marks anniversary of October 7th attack. Will Israel around the discussions about a deal, whether there is a deal or not is this got a good how good a chance does this have, Dan, to improve Israel's PR standing with the world?

[C]

Well, now's a chance if there's a real deal and the people of Gaza are allowed to ultimately return and something is built and the there's a sense that the Palestinians are being treated humanely, let's say. Then I think Israel has. If Israel is seen as playing a constructive role, I think it could help. Although there's so much damage, it would take a while.

[A]

Sean, I think Israel gets a participation trophy on this. To Dan's point, they were there. They didn't lead the way on this. This is President Trump and his team leading the way. Israel, I don't think, gets a lot of credit for solving this. And to your point about priority, they're not doing much to improve their standing of their image. They're just going along with the process, and that's a problem.

[C]

All right.

[B]

It was reported yesterday by Senator Grassley and others that Jack Smith pulled the metadata of seven Republican senators and one Republican House member around the activities around January six. And here's the Politico headline, Biden Era. FBI requested Senate Republican phone records. Lawmakers say so. This came out on the eve of Pam Bondi's testimony. It's sure to come up before the Judiciary Committee. And some cynics would say it was. They've known this for a while, but they put it out now so the Republicans would have something to talk about at the hearing besides Epstein and some other controversies around Pam Bondi. Members of Congress get investigated all the time. I'm no defender of the deep state, and I don't know the facts here, but just the notion of that a member of Congress was investigated is being treated by the Reds as some unprecedented act of violation of separation of powers. Sean, you know, again, I'm not defending Jack Smith and every investigative decision he made, but a priori, there's. There's nothing wrong with a special counsel investigating members of Congress, is there?

[A]

I think in general, of course, there's nothing wrong with investigating members of Congress. When you look at the list and say, like, why is Dan Sullivan. Why is Marsha Black. I mean, like, what did they do to necessitate anything? They weren't leading this effort. So to suddenly be tapping their phones. There's a.

[B]

They didn't. They didn't tap their phones.

[A]

They pulled their metadata.

[B]

Pulled the metadata.

[A]

My point is, I think there is a problem. You have a separation of powers, and if there's not a reason, these guys weren't involved in the planning or orchestration of any kind of events.

[C]

So we don't know. We don't know.

[B]

You don't. You don't know. But I mean. But I mean, they needed probable cause for that. I mean, you know, again, I'm not. I'M not, I don't know the facts and neither did any of us. But I mean, you know, the Justice Department's investigating Senator Adam Schiff. William Jefferson was investigated. Tons of members of the House have been investigated by the Justice Department. This could be, this could be an egregious abuse of power. But I'll say again, it is not, it's not just on the face of it an abuse of power for independent counsel or the Justice Department to investigate a member of Congress. Dan. Correct.

[C]

Well, yeah. And I want to add that the report is that he was looking at them over the fake electors scheme. We have to start with the fact that that was batshit crazy. They tried to literally run fake electors to overturn an election, full stop. So they were checking out to see who might have been complying with that. This wasn't like, I mean it's on history on that issue is going to be so unkind. It's crazy. Crazy.

[A]

Look, knowing the people that are listed on that, there are some serious questions that need to be answered and I think that it is concerning.

[B]

Again, I'm not saying it's not concerning and I'm not saying I know the facts and I, I'm against abuse of power and for all I know this is deep state run amok. I don't know. All I'm saying is you can't just assume that there was done inappropriately. Let there be an investigation and figure it out. You can't.

[A]

We are a country where you're innocent until proven guilty. So.

[B]

I know, but, but, but John, just because they pull your med. They didn't indict.

[C]

They didn't indict some others would have been.

[B]

They didn't indict them.

[A]

They just didn't. They didn't pull the executive.

[B]

They are, they aren't random. They pulled the metadata of, of people who presumably they suspected or at least potentially they suspected. They didn't pull the metadata of every Republican. They chose some, presumably they had some theory of the case. I'm not giving them the benefit of the doubt because I never give prosecutors the benefit of the debt. All I'm saying is I want more facts about it and I hope they investigate it thoroughly. And if people violated their, their rights, I hope they're prosecuted.

[A]

Considering the track record that, that's the one last thing. I don't think the Biden doj, the Biden FBI has a strong track record.

[B]

As compared, as compared, as compared to this doj.

[C]

I mean I'll say this Joe Biden, when he Pressured Merrick Garland, he told him to go F off, and nothing happened. Yeah.

[B]

Merrick Garland allowed Jack Smith to say, I'm going to prosecute Trump in the election year and not say it explicitly, but I'm going to do everything I can to get him prosecuted, indicted before the election and to trial before the election. And. And Merrick Garland stood by and did nothing about it.

[C]

So he was investigating the attempt to overturn an election.

[B]

He was. But he timed it to try to keep Trump from winning.

[C]

No, no, no, no, no. That's not true. That is.

[B]

Oh, it's 100% true. It's 100% true. It's unexpected.

[C]

They tried to wrap it up before the election to render a verdict. Oh, they didn't want to.

[B]

Yeah, they did.

[C]

But you could read that two different ways, which is, they come out a month after the election.

[B]

No, because. Of course. But if you're an honest prosecutor, you do it based on the normal standards and the rights of the accused, and.

[C]

You don't try to rush.

[B]

Trump had rights. Trump, you could see it different ways in terms of that one calculus, which is what's right for the electorate, but you also have to take into account the rights of the accused. Trump was an accused, accused citizen, and the prosecutor broke every rule to say, I'm going to try to prosecute the judge to agree to this trial. Not under the normal schedule. Not in the Florida case. No, Dan, in the Florida case, there was gray mail involved. That case would have taken a normal circumstances, years to reach trial.

[C]

But, Mark, was the Trump strategy to try to. I mean, that they.

[B]

Of course it was.

[E]

Of course. Of course it was.

[C]

This issue of this. What their whole game.

[B]

Of course it was. But he's accused. He's not the government. The accused has better rights than the government when you're trying to send someone to prison.

[C]

All right, again, great legal strategy. I tip my hat to the Trump.

[B]

Supposed to be forward looking. My fault. All right. Yesterday, Donald Trump asked repeatedly by Kaitlan Collins about pardoning Maxwell, basically said over and over again, yeah, I might pardon Maxwell. We got to play it because it's. It's bonkers. If you haven't seen it.

[C]

You.

[B]

You read this and say, if you think Donald Trump is considering pardoning Maxwell, roll the confession.

[F]

Say it.

[B]

The Supreme Court is back and rejected today an appeal by Ghislaine Maxwell to overturn her conviction. That means her only chance of getting out of prison is a pardon from you. Is that something you're.

[F]

Who are we talking about?

[B]

Ghislaine Maxwell.

[F]

You know, I haven't heard the name in so long, I can say this that I'd have to take a look at it. I would have to take a look. Did they reject that she wanted to.

[B]

Appeal her conviction and what happened? They were not going to hear her appeal.

[F]

I see. Well, I'll take a look at it. I'll speak to. I will speak to the doj. I wouldn't consider it or not consider. I don't know anything about it, so. But I'll speak. I will speak to the doj. I don't know. I may not have to speak to the doj. I'll look at it. I'll. I have. A lot of people have asked me for pardons. I call him Puff Daddy has asked me for a pardon.

[B]

She was convicted of child sex trafficking.

[F]

Yeah, I mean, I'm going to have to take a look at it. I have to ask doj. I didn't know they rejected it. I didn't know she was even asking for it, frankly.

[B]

Okay, Sean, I'll play Caitlin Collins. You play Donald Trump. Ready? Here we go. Hey, President Trump, thank you for calling on me. CNN's Caitlin Collins here. Would you consider pardoning Maxwell?

[A]

You know, Caitlin, I'm so tired of the fake news. CNN's fake news. You're a bad reporter. In fact, you're a horrible reporter, and you know it.

[B]

And.

[A]

Okay, I don't even know why you're here, Caitlin.

[B]

Okay. Hi. What's the name of that guy Trump loves to call on?

[A]

Brian Glenn.

[B]

Brian Glenn. Hey, Mr. President. Brian Glenn, thank you for calling on me. For the 18th time, would you consider pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell?

[A]

Brian, I just want to say, first of all, thank you for calling attention.

[B]

John, I did get rid of the blue tent. Yeah. Okay. Why. Why is Donald Trump not just saying, of course I wouldn't pardon her?

[A]

So here's the way I look at a lot of things that Trump says when he's caught off guard with an issue or a topic, he will sort of just keep his options on it or whatever.

[C]

And.

[A]

But that, to me, and it's like everybody yesterday, what was the other thing that he said that everyone freaked out about? With federal employees, it's one thing for him to make a declaratory statement at the top of something in scripture when he's responding to a question. A lot of times it's that playful banter, and I don't put that in the same category. So yesterday was, I'm going to look at it. I don't know, I didn't. I mean, listen to what he said over and over. I don't know anything about it. Did this just happen? So he's kind of doing it in the moment. That means nothing.

[B]

Okay, Dan. In the spirit of the McNeil Lair NewsHour, they used to always ask questions of the second guest. They did. Like this. Dan, is that how you see it?

[C]

What do you call it? What does Trump call it? The bob and the weave. The weave. The weave. That may be exhibit A. Yeah.

[B]

So, Dan, would you say you put the odds that Trump pardons her or commutes her sentence at above 50%?

[C]

Yes.

[B]

Yes.

[C]

And I'm waiting for a big event, whether it's a peace deal or something. And at like 11:59pm they're going to do it and try to.

[A]

The one thing I'll say is that aside from everything else that I think about this just on the consistency of what he has said, where he has said over and over again, why is everyone talking about Epstein? He's an e loser. This is a Democratic hoax. The bottom line is he has. He will have a trouble. His own folks are going to tell him. If you were to pardon her for whatever reason, who knows? I don't understand what that would be. You will. That will inject it back again. You can't say it's anymore because now you pardoned her.

[B]

Right.

[C]

Well, by the way, one of the reasons that people think that this house is staying out is when they come back, they have the vote for the discharge position.

[A]

By the way, I don't under. What I don't get is, okay, so the ones with their gaval, once she gets sworn in, she signs a petition, they get to ADA, then all they do is tell DOJ, send us what you have DOJs.

[B]

Well, they don't. They don't even do that because it's not going to pass the Senate.

[C]

Right.

[A]

This is. I don't.

[B]

Nothing, nothing happens.

[A]

I find this whole thing so silly because it's going nowhere.

[B]

This morning, Tim Kaine was asked by Manu Raju about the Attorney General candidate. And he said, you know, what he said was not acceptable. But I've known him a long time. This was out of character. Did not unendorse, did not urge him to step down. And this continues to be a story not particularly covered by the media, including in Virginia. Sean's criticism of the incumbent Republican AG's campaign for not getting a video out on Sunday was met yesterday by putting two videos out. They're pretty good, I thought. And driving the issue. So, guys, just one question on this. Sean, first, will, you know, early voting's underway, so getting him off the ballot, super complicated. And it doesn't seem like Democrats want him off the ballot. So, Sean, will any, will. Will anyone, any statewide elected official or candidate call for him to get out of the race?

[A]

Well, just to be clear, when you say statewide, because every constitutional office in.

[B]

Virginia or The two senators. Two U.S. senators.

[A]

No, absolutely not. But, but I will say this. There's two things that are happening right now. So one, there are more comments that are coming out on earth where Jay Jones is talking.

[B]

Alleged. Alleged.

[A]

Well, no, they're coming out. Whether or not that's there.

[B]

There's some, there's. There's some that have been alleged that are not right.

[A]

But, I mean, but, but talking about how he, he wants police to be shot, maybe if a few died, that we could move on. That's.

[B]

I don't, I don't. Yeah, it's alleged. I don't think that's documented.

[A]

And then there is the other incident of him doing his community service by working for his own pac. I think that he is a house of cards about to collapse. And here's the problem for Democrats. I don't think that. Kaine. I mean, first of all, no one really cares what, what Cain or Warner. I mean, honestly.

[B]

Manu. Raji.

[A]

Well, yeah, but my point is, until Abigail Spanberger Spurnberger does anything, it's not going to matter. And look, this guy is the Terry McAuliffe of this cycle. He is a weight on them. Right now, we're. When Virginia reelects all three of these folks, they will thank Jay Jones for doing this. He is the anchor that is taking the entire Democratic ticket.

[B]

Dan, if you were the DNC chair and asked about this, what would you say?

[C]

I think you look at the two state senators. I mean, when something like this happens, you look at your own coalition and you say, do members of the coalition agree that he should step down? Very few candidates will go against all the components of their coalition. Coalition members are not calling for him to step down. Therefore, I think what you're going to hear is they're going to condemn it, but they're not going to call. And I think Democrats, I wouldn't say it's about to collapse. He is collapsing. And I think they're just going to look past it and try to get Spanberger through.

[A]

All right, last one, last point, if I can.

[B]

Mark.

[A]

For two, three weeks, we heard about both sides have violence, Both sides need to take temperature down here was the Democrats opportunity to denounce this thoroughly. They chose not to. Yesterday JB Pritzker said that he wants gnomes thugs to get out of Illinois. The thugs being federal agents. Here we go again. Once Charlie Kirk's memory is in the rearview mirror long enough, the Democrats are back to the same old rhetoric that's causing this problem to begin with. So the both sides story is completely bs. The bottom line is one side excuses it, one side doesn't.

[B]

All right, Dan, Dan, Dan, go ahead.

[C]

Find that ridiculous. This was four years ago. I mean this is did different four years ago.

[A]

It didn't matter.

[C]

Ridiculous.

[A]

Assassinate people four years ago.

[B]

All right, last Donald Trump said let's.

[C]

Kick the crap out of someone in a rally. Like that was 10 years ago. If you want to keep going, let's play the game. Come on. It's ridiculous.

[B]

One of the mysteries of 2028 to me is why Governor Shapiro of Pennsylvania is not being talked about as an A level candidate. I have some guesses as to why, but here's a new ad he did on behalf of some state Supreme Court justices. The state Supreme Court in Pennsylvania is up for grabs. So this is a big high stakes election. Here's a new ad that Governor Shapiro cut on behalf of the liberals on the court here in Pennsylvania.

[E]

The threats to our freedoms are very real. That's why we need to keep our.

[B]

State Supreme Court standing up for what's right. I hope you'll join me in voting.

[E]

Yes to retain Justices Donahue, Dougherty and Wecht.

[B]

They've proven we can count on them.

[E]

To protect a woman's access to abortion and birth control and stand up for all our freedoms. Vote yes for a Supreme Court that protects us.

[B]

All right guys, two, two questions for each of your quick answers. Dan, why? How do you rate his perf in that ad?

[C]

Vanilla.

[B]

Vanilla.

[C]

Just very, very vanilla.

[B]

Sean, concur. Okay, Dan, give me the main reason why he's not talked about as a top tier candidate.

[C]

His personality and style is just not a fit for this moment right now. It's just not. He's so cautious and he's so go along to get along. It's then you see Trump and Stephen Miller and you just think he's mincemeat.

[B]

Sean.

[A]

Yeah, I, I, we're concur again. I mean that was just, I felt weird.

[C]

It's just so, I mean, show some passion.

[A]

Care about. That was the lamest hat I've ever seen.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

Honestly, I felt like get out there and fight. Be like we're under attack. Donald Trump is doing. I could have written a better ad for the guy.

[C]

Well, but, but, but his problem is he can't because his appeal is the MAGA voters like him. So if you go after Trump and Trump is terrible and like you get intense, then he loses some of that appeal. And so it's just like Mark we talked about in 2024 when he was being attacked in the VP vetting and he just took it.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

He didn't do anything.

[B]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Dylan, can you unmute? I've asked you repeatedly. And there you go. Dylan, welcome in. Thank you for being part of the two way experience. Grateful to have you here. Tell folks who know where you are and what's on your mind for Dan and Sean.

[G]

Hey, good morning, gents. And I am in Virginia, Northern Virginia. So very closely monitoring the, the election news, obviously, but you guys kind of covered it. I, I had a couple questions I was going to ask and that was one of them. So we'll, we'll move on to the next one. So this is mostly for Dan. So I don't know if it was Monday or Friday, but you had, you Hegseth got brought up again. Secretary Hegseth. And you had mentioned that you think that history is going to look unkindly on him. You've used some other colorful language as well to describe him. And I just kind of wanted to kind of put it, I guess maybe understand one why you think that and then kind of put into perspective how I think all secretaries of defense previously, now secretaries of war are kind of measured, which isn't really about the person themselves, but what happens under the administration while they're overseeing the military. And so my counter to you would be retention is the highest it's been in I think six years. Recruiting is the highest it's been in over four years. And you know, barring some insane global conflict that we get involved in and we just absolutely, you know, fail to meet the moment. I guess I'm a, I'm a little curious why you think that historically he's going to be considered such a trouble summer failure, you know, leader of the military, given all of the, the data we have today. And there's a lot of time I recognize but yeah, Dan.

[C]

No, no, it's a great, a great, a great question. Great, great kind of counterpoint to what you're saying. And that's real and that's by the way, that's great for the US Military that retention and recruitment are up. It's something we've struggled with for the last several years, particularly coming out of the Biden era. So you're right. And I'm not sure how much of that is him versus Trump, like the inspiration of Trump and Trump having your back. I think the counter to that would be at the leadership level. There is a huge churn. Some of it is people he's brought in, then he's moved out. He seems to be moving people out not because of performance, but some of it is insecurity. Some of it is this focus on, you know, he says, oh, they're dei. They're, they're, you know, and the facts seem to show that these are incredibly accomplished people. The other thing is, in my opinion, he's kind of like a YouTube influencer secretary, which is there's so much performative kind of machismo. Rah, rah. And I think that thing last week was like the ultimate example of this. That to me, he doesn't come across as sober and serious to lead our military. You ended your statement by saying if there's a conflict, fingers crossed that all were to go well. But the incredible churn at the leadership level and half of these are people he brought in. That does not speak well of one as a leader.

[B]

Dylan, any, any follow up?

[G]

Yeah, no, I, I mean, so I, I kind of, that, that was the start of my statement. Right. Is I think, personality wise, very different. He was, he was selected because he's different. I think that that was very, made very clear.

[C]

Yeah.

[G]

And a very early point that the administration wanted to make was that they had seen this negative correlation between the number of senior leaders in the, in the department and the, the overall effectiveness and readiness of the war fighting capability of the military. Right. So I don't think the military was.

[C]

Was, was, was ready.

[G]

Say that again.

[C]

You think the military's war fighting capability had been severely weakened.

[G]

Well, I mean, that, that's not just, that's not my opinion. That's the, the actual readiness, you know, results studies. So I mean that the Navy, I think for, and, and Sean, no apologies here because as an Air Force guy, I can't root for the Navy. But the Navy has failed to meet like every readiness, you know, measure for about a decade. Right. And it's not just them, it's other services too. So I think the point was we're trying to find a new way to tackle some of these challenges. And again, it remains to be seen if it's going to be effective. I just was more so I think that it's Less about the personality and again, more about the results. And I think so far in the last nine and a half months, the results kind of speak for themselves in terms of the data we have. I guess is. Would be my counterpoint.

[C]

Yeah, they're good points.

[B]

Yeah. Dylan, thank you. Grateful to you. Thanks for coming on, Dylan.

[A]

By the way, the Air Force is a completely acceptable alternative to serving in the military. I think. I appreciate your serving the country in that way.

[B]

Nothing I like more than jibes between people from different branches of the service than press release wars between the comms directors of the DCCC and the nrcc. Very comparable. Very comparable in their ritual tribal, juvenile behavior. Kyle, welcome in. Thank you for being part of Two Way. Yeah.

[H]

Morning gentlemen. I'm from live in southeast Alabama, originally from Shreveport, Louisiana.

[B]

Kai, what's that thing on the wall?

[H]

That's a total. Let's.

[A]

Yeah, let's go, baby.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

Best.

[H]

Best thing I've ever bought. I can't recommend it enough.

[B]

That's handsome. Did you mount it yourself?

[H]

They won't let you. If you want to keep your warranty, they have to come do it.

[B]

Got it. All right. Well, that's a beautiful piece of equipment.

[H]

Yeah, it's expensive socially. But now two quick things on my. On my side, Mark, you've made me hyper aware about why the news doesn't cover certain stories. And I was curious if y' all have seen the Kyron Lacey story that's kind of bubbled up here over the weekend, which is the LSU wide receiver from last year is a top 10 pick projected in December of 2024. He was charged with negligent homicide, a felony style hit and run and a reckless driving charge of sorts. He was canceled, obviously. And then in April he actually sadly committed suicide because of the pressure from the negative press and everything. And this weekend his attorney actually released footage showing it was finally released, but he was 76 yards behind the crash. And there was also footage that the state police had kind of worked witnesses a certain way led to certain things. So anyways, the story that came out this weekend, I was. It just blew my mind that it seems like in 2020 that would have been heavily covered, but just a crazy story all around. So it blew my mind. It wasn't on the major news this weekend just for the severity of something. So sad that has a justice issue to it.

[B]

So. Yeah.

[H]

And anyways. But on the appropriation side, more on the topic piece. So I'm actually going to D.C. next week. My company is decently involved on the agricultural side and was really surprised there wasn't more muscle moving this week weekend on the shutdown. Just thought there'd be more movement there. But curious knowing that this seems like it's stretching out and there's a ton of wood to chop when it comes to appropriations kind of all around. Do you all kind of have the vibe that it's going to be kind of an eternal CR type of thing moving forward? I mean, certainly it depends on 2028 elections, but we really haven't even got to the conference piece of a lot of the appropriation side. So it just doesn't seem like there's ever going to be any real movement going forward with any type of new appropriations or changes in appropriations.

[B]

Brilliant question, Sean.

[A]

Yeah, look, I was three years at the Budget Committee as a spokesman and we used to talk about there's a lot of chatter about biannual appropriations and the need for that. And at that time we were very anti I don't know what the full answer is, but the system is broken. And yes is the answer to your question. We're going to keep kicking the can. Short term CRS policy fights within the extensions, but it is no way to govern and we have a problem. So I, I, I, it is, it is a problem. It's like so many other things. We just keep going, let's kick the can, let's buy a few more months. Same thing with healthcare, same thing with technology. We, we don't want to deal with the big problem. So I think it's a problem for a million reasons how we do business because it has real implications on people's lives and the ability for us to be prepared on a million fronts. And we, we're not, we're not taking it head on. And I think frankly a lot of lawmakers just don't fully grasp that, with all due respect to them, just because they don't see the full impact that having a lapse in funding, especially at the beginning of a fiscal year, there's so much stuff that doesn't get done in October because every year we spend the first four weeks not doing stuff. So anyway, I think it's a great question and it's a big problem.

[B]

Dan.

[C]

Yeah, I, I think there's enough there is boiling frustration in both parties about how broken the appropriations process is and the executive branch kind of taking some of this power away from them. I'll be curious to see what happens when we get through this shutdown because both parties are getting really, really frustrated with what is happening. But look, appropriations Requires trade offs. And that's in this environment, like agriculture is a great example. Democrats would support certain provisions in exchange for Republicans supporting food nutrition programs in urban cities. It was kind of one of the great trades that happened to grease the wheel to get stuff through. It's really hard now to go home and say, yeah, I horse traded with Democrats that, you know, have food nutrition programs in Chicago.

[B]

Kyle, thank you. Grateful to you. Hey, dip into Fox News for a second, please.

[C]

I think it's in a commercial.

[B]

Really? All right. They must have just gone. Never mind. Tom Cotton was on. He dumped back out. I just want to see what Cotton was saying about the insurrection stuff since he's Scott standing there. All right, let's go to Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones, Mr. Jones, unmute, if you would. There you go. Tell folks where you are what's on your mind. For Sean.

[A]

And he's in New York. He's in tech. In New York. In tech.

[E]

I'm not, I'm not a finance bro. Sorry. Oh, I know the Patagonia the best.

[A]

I swear I thought I nailed that.

[C]

The glass is the best in the dress.

[A]

I know.

[E]

Yeah, I know. No, I am just north of Charlotte in North Carolina, as many of our community is seems to be in North Carolina. So three things, One comment. And Sean, I just want to honor your articulation of the political violence context and perspective. I really wish for my Democrat friends that they would kind of figure out that the both side is an argument. It just doesn't pass the smell test. It just doesn't. And I wish they'd figure that out. First question for you. I've got two. So we've had this Iowa superintendent story where the guy's an illegal alien. We've got these commercial driver's license stories. Tens of thousands of illegal aliens getting commercial driver's licenses. And on the road, where are the stories in the media about illegal aliens voting? Like going to vote doesn't require anything. You show up and you vote.

[B]

Yeah.

[E]

To get a job, to get a cdl. We know what the DMV is like. I don't, I don't understand where the story is. Like, why is the story not out there that somebody's at least trying to figure out what's happening with the voting? Whether it's happening or not, I don't know. But there's no story in the media about illegal aliens voting.

[B]

First of all, every day I think maybe we should do the whole hour on that Des Moines school superintendent, because that is a incredible story and it's A gee whiz story. But there's also tons of accountability questions, not just for the Des Moines system, but for the places he was previously for the search firm that recommended him. I mean, it's an incredible story. Now, Christopher, no one thinks people in the country illegally should be allowed to vote. Many Republican prosecutors at the state and local level have looked into it. I'll say something similar to what I said earlier in the program. It's possible in our power, it's possible citizens of this country kill that. It's possible that's happening in such vast numbers that it's impacting elections. And if it is, that would be a horrible thing. And I hope someone would uncover it. But I will tell you, there's no evidence of it that's been presented. So the reason the press isn't writing about it, besides bias, but that's not the only reason is there's no evidence that it's happening. And you think about it just as a practical matter, if you're here in the country legally, do you really want to vote that badly and risk being discovered? People on the right, people on the right can say all they want that this is, this is why Democrats let people in and that they, they shuttle them from the Mexican border to fake IDs and voter registration until polls. You can say it all you want, and if it's true, it shouldn't be happening. But literally there's no evidence for it and no one should be out there making the accusation without something we call evidence.

[C]

And look, there's two parts to this, which is one, this is part of the issue with a lot of illegal immigrants. They don't walk around with a, you know, eye on their forehead for being here. Illegal. You don't know who they are in a lot of instances. And two, I'll just say this. We lost Latino voters.

[B]

So the scheme, the scheme is not working perfectly.

[C]

Exactly. If this is our, if this is our great. By the way, Republicans want to, they are redistricting in Texas, right, Because they want to try to pick up House seats. Do you know where they're trying to redistrict the Rio Grande Valley, where they think that the Latinos moving to the.

[B]

They'Re falling, they're falling right into the.

[C]

Soros trap, are going to literally ensure they keep the House of Representatives. So if that was our plan. And by the way, it's not, it's ridiculous. But if that is our plan, that's the theory on the right. Boy, did we screw this up.

[E]

I'm not, I'M not, I'm not trying to make the conspiracy argument that this was planned. I'm simply saying we have two cases where processes should have stopped an illegal alien from doing something. One of those cases is tens of thousands of people getting driver's license. And we all know what it's like to go to the dmv. Voting does not require any of that. It doesn't pass logical sense.

[C]

But Christopher, we know people are here. Think about the business community that hires people in all sorts of industries, right? Like this is why the issue is so salient for so many people. There's so many people here, there's so many instances of them kind of getting through the nets of society. And you, you know, you can ask yourself why, but it's such a broad spectrum of issues.

[B]

Christopher, we know, we know why people would want driver's licenses, right? There's a reason to have that. Why would they want to vote?

[A]

Because one party's telling them, we're going to kick you out. And one party is telling you, we'll stay and give you a bunch of stuff.

[B]

Go ahead and find, go ahead and find me. This is what I said to Carl Rove and others in 2020 when they said, or 2000 rather, when they said people here, Florida called for one candidate and then they get out of the line in California. And I said, find me, find me one person, okay? Find me one person who got out of the line because the price was projected. And then I'll launch a full scale investigation. Sean, find me someone in the country. Find me someone in the country legally. Find me one who voted. Find me one. Find me one.

[C]

I will.

[A]

I'll find you plenty. Hans von Tziporahski at Heritage. It's an entire list. Here's my question for you. Why if. Let's just stick with the, the superintendent. So first of all, you come into this country illegally, right? And then of course, you're not going to break any other laws because you can, you would never want to risk getting deported. But, but you take an illegal handgun and carry that around when you apply to be the. I mean, so again, but that we don't.

[C]

We have. Should we have gun controls then he.

[A]

Registers to vote in Maryland. Why would he register if he wasn't? Why risk it? Why go through that?

[B]

Sean, I don't doubt that there are people in your neighborhood whose homes are being cleaned by people in the country legally either. They're, they're integrated into the economy in all sorts of ways. That's different. That's different than mass voting.

[A]

That's different than last voting.

[C]

This country would collapse. Look like land, hotels, restaurants.

[B]

Sean, everyone who votes illegally is, is an injustice. But unless it's being done on a mass scale, it doesn't, it doesn't affect the outcome.

[E]

Yeah, okay, that's so, so I'm super appreciative of the conversation. And Mark, you've, you've segued us nicely to my second point.

[A]

I just said one side encourages it. This is the.

[B]

No, Sean, Sean, show me, show me one Democrat who encouraged people to vote illegally. Show me one.

[A]

Okay. His name is Joe Biden. He literally brought a ton of people into this country.

[C]

Didn't encourage them to speaker one because we lost.

[B]

Now, now the answer. Now the answer. Well, no, the answer is there are some jurisdictions that want to make it legal for people in the country legally.

[C]

But that's.

[B]

But, but they're Tacoma Park, Maryland. Correct, but they're correct, but they're going through the system and saying that should be our law. That's different than finding any Democratic official. And I'm not saying they don't exist. I'm just saying find me one who's got a secret plan to encourage people to, in violation of state or federal law, vote illegally in an election. Find me one. I'm not saying they don't exist. I'm just saying find me one.

[A]

I'll find plenty. All right.

[E]

So. So, Dan. So, Dan and Sean, I think you will support me in this. My third point. I wrote Barry Weiss yesterday. I also wrote Mark. I don't know if you read it. I encourage us to start a campaign. Mark is the heir to Tim Russert's seat. He should be the Face the Nation guy. We should be advocating for him to take over that Sunday show tomorrow.

[A]

Well, you want Meet the Press or Face the Nation? I can with either one.

[C]

We got to go with what's available.

[E]

Barry's got charge of Face the Nation.

[C]

Doesn't have Meet the Press. Studio's on the west side. Mark's on the west side.

[E]

I mean, come on, Mark. Yeah, come on, Mark.

[C]

Face the Nation, baby.

[B]

Come on, Christopher, if you make it happen, I'll check my schedule.

[E]

But I'll be your agent. I'll be your agent. Come on, baby.

[B]

Let's lead the two way community. Whatever. Whatever the community wants, I'll serve.

[A]

I could spend an entire.

[E]

Everyone, it's Barry Weiss. Is barry.combarry the FP.com?

[C]

Not, not anymore.

[A]

But now it's very underscore wise news dot com.

[B]

Christopher, if you. If you can get 3,000 people to email, I'll engage. How about that?

[E]

Let's do it. Let's do it, people.

[B]

Copy Christopher on it. I'll check my schedule. Thank you for your kind words, Christopher. I appreciate it. Always wanted to host a Sunday show. Thank you.

[C]

Thank you for your attention to this.

[B]

Grateful to you.

[F]

Yeah.

[B]

Thank you for your attention to all matters. All right. It's Tuesday, right. So, Sean, what do you expect the headline to be? Out of the US Canada meetings about trade or Trump embarrassing or first day of the NFL, NHL season. What do you expect the headlines to be? Out of the meeting?

[A]

Canada agrees to commonwealth status.

[B]

Yeah. Dan, what do you.

[A]

51St state just.

[B]

Dan. Dan, what do you expect the headline to be?

[C]

Well, I am wondering if there's going to be a deal in Israel because the symmetry of that would be unbelievable if it happens today with can. Some sort of progress. Some. Some sort. I think Carney brings something and they try to lower the temperature.

[A]

Did a good job, by the way.

[B]

Again, pregaming.

[A]

Well, he salted. He salted it.

[B]

Well, he's not, he's not a knucklehead. What will the headline be out of the Pam Bondi hearing? Dan.

[C]

Did Sharp partisan differences. Yeah, I mean, it's, it's sparks fly. Yeah, there you go. Perfect.

[B]

Yeah, sparks fly. Okay.

[C]

And by the way, there'll be sparks that, you know, the Democrats will point to and sparks the Republicans because of.

[A]

Leak and everything though, again, how these guys handle. We talked about this. Someone had a hearing a few weeks ago. They handled it really well. They went on, I, Cash Patel, I think, went on offense. How. How does, how did they handle a female? Right. You got a lot of people like Adam Schiff. Are they going to go over the top? I mean, the optics matter in this stuff and that's what I think will be interesting.

[C]

Is she on TV tonight? I bet she is.

[A]

She's already booked at Hannity.

[B]

Yeah, for the full hour as Larry. Okay. We got to preview some stuff for you. Sean, what do you have tonight?

[A]

Well, we've got a lot of time. I mean, you mentioned that FBI stuff. We're going to talk to Eric Trump tonight on the show, get his take on all fair that's happened with him and his family. I might get some crypto tips, too. I don't really know a lot about crypto. So I'm going to ask Eric what I should buy.

[C]

He has a new book too, right.

[A]

It's Under Siege.

[C]

That's it.

[B]

All right. Dan, do you got anything you want to share?

[C]

Nope. Nope. I mean, I got. I'm got nothing.

[B]

Got nothing. All right, gentlemen, yield tonight. Tonight at 6pm Eastern Time on Two Way tonight, we've a fabulous pair. I don't think they've ever been on anything together. Democratic strategist Jaime Moore, who's really one of the smartest Democratic strategists around. Super smart, interesting guy. And then Isabel Brown of the Daily Wire will join us together to talk about all the day's news. I'm so looking forward to that, I can't tell you. And then on the Moynihan Report, seven Eastern time here on two way, Michael. I don't believe I know who Michael's guest is. Does anyone know who Michael's guest is? Don't know. All right, tonight, seven o', clock, Moynihan Report. A surprise package. Join dropping later today. Next up, a couple things coming up on Next up, First of all, Doug Sosnik. Speaking of brilliant, Dan, do you know any Democratic strategists smarter than Doug Sosnik?

[C]

Nope.

[B]

No.

[C]

All due respect to all the other.

[B]

Yeah, here. I didn't say exactly. No one's smarter. The thing about Doug Sosnik is Bill Clinton listened to his political advice for many, many years. Still does. Probably. That's how smart he is that Bill Clinton listened to his advice. So Doug will be. Doug will be on with, with me. And then, uh, I'm going to do my reported monologue on Barry Weiss and what it means not just for CBS but for the media. I've had so many interesting conversations with people. It was. We've known this is coming for a while. So I've been talking to people for a while. But it's kind of incredible how some people are dumping on this decision and saying it's a bad idea and talking about how, oh, how could you ruin CBS by hiring Barry Weiss? First of all, Barry will make CBS better. But folks, there's nothing to ruin.

[A]

That's the, that's the takeaway, right?

[B]

Cbs. CBS has been liberal and lousy for a long time. So join me for my report of my life that'll drop later today on, on Next up on YouTube and on this podcast. So stay tuned for that. And the three of us will be back in 23 hours for another edition of this program.

[C]

Dan, I was going to say if you have. For the person who asked about appropriations, I'm as firm cornerstones, one of the best in town. So, yeah, fire up your approach questions.

[B]

Yeah, bring. Bring your approach questions. Anyway, I'll see at 6. Sean will see at 6, and then we'll see you tomorrow morning. Have a great day, everybody.

[C]

Take.