Kimmel Suspended as Media Power Shifts, DHS Sec. Noem, and the Golden Age of Comedy, w/ Noam Dworman

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: "Kimmel Suspended as Media Power Shifts, DHS Sec. Noem, and the Golden Age of Comedy"

Next Up with Mark Halperin | MK Media | September 18, 2025
Guests: Kristi Noem (Secretary of DHS), Noam Dworman (Comedy Cellar Owner)

---

Brief Overview

This episode dives into seismic shifts in American media and politics following Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension by ABC/Disney after controversial remarks on the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Host Mark Halperin delivers a detailed monologue unpacking the political, regulatory, and corporate dynamics at play. He is joined by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem discussing security, immigration, and the legacy of Charlie Kirk, then by Comedy Cellar owner Noam Dworman for unvarnished insights on free speech, comedy, and the Trump-era power realignment in American culture and media.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Kimmel Suspension and Media Power Shift

[01:02–26:32] Mark Halperin Monologue

• Backdrop: Jimmy Kimmel suspended after on-air comments linking Charlie Kirk’s killer to MAGA, leading to widespread debate over speech, corporate pressure, and government involvement.
• FCC Involvement: Brendan Carr, Trump-appointed FCC Chair, publicly pressured ABC/Disney, invoking broadcasters’ obligation to “serve the public interest.”
  • “They went from being court jesters…to being court clerics and enforcing a very narrow political ideology. We at the FCC are going to enforce the public interest obligation.”
    – Brendan Carr [08:34]
• Affiliate Pressure: Major station owners like Sinclair and Nexstar (mostly center-right, red-state) threatened to pull Kimmel’s show, making its continuation a distribution liability.
• Political Fallout: Widespread backlash from Hollywood unions, Democrats, and media figures, decrying a chilling effect on free speech. Republicans and Trump allies cheered the move as recalibrating longstanding liberal dominance in media.
• Corporate Balancing Act: Halperin suggests Disney CEO Bob Iger suspended Kimmel not out of personal offense but business and regulatory pragmatism.
  • “No one thinks Bob Iger was actually offended…They all think he was responding to pressure.” [04:10]
• First Amendment Nuances: Halperin and veteran journalist Brit Hume agree suspension by a private employer isn’t a First Amendment matter—until government regulators signal consequences for “wrong” speech.
  • “It's not right for democracy…But when the government gets involved…that sends a clear signal. I'm not crazy about that.” [09:05]
• Media Realignment: Ongoing wave—Elon Musk buying X (Twitter), David Ellison’s acquisitions at CBS (and potentially CNN), and Trump allies poised to reshape platforms, including TikTok.
  • Halperin: “Donald Trump wants to change the balance of power…They left a lot of stuff in place…Now they're using the leverage they have.” [17:40]

Notable Segment:

• Brit Hume’s Twitter Reaction:
  • “The First Amendment does not protect performers like Jimmy Kimmel from being canceled by their private sector employers…I would have liked the outcome a lot better if the chairman of the FCC had not involved himself in it.” [09:09]

---

2. Kristi Noem on Security, Immigration, and the Legacy of Charlie Kirk

[26:32–53:35] Interview with Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem

On Charlie Kirk’s Legacy

• Personal Tribute: Noem characterizes Charlie as bold, exceptionally knowledgeable, and earnest in engagement even with detractors.
  • “He was still Charlie. Over the years, no matter how big Turning Point got…everybody felt like they knew him.” [27:50]
• Commemoration: Emphasizes ongoing storytelling and support for Kirk’s family and vision, especially Turning Point's mission to educate future generations.

On National Security and Civil Liberties

• Event Security: Memorial event elevated to National Security Event (Seer1) status—“we deploy more resources…all our different components”—[33:47]
• Balancing Accessibility and Safety: Learning from Kirk assassination, Noem underscores adapting to new threat environments while not walling off political leaders from the public.

On Immigration Enforcement

• Impact of Enforcement: Asserts that aggressive policies (including ad campaigns abroad) have led to 1.6 million voluntary departures, plus an additional ~2 million deportations.
  • “That sent a clear message to everyone that the boss has changed…hundreds of thousands…have decided to go home.” [37:30]
  • Ad campaigns explicitly directed by Trump.
• Policy Priorities: Focus on criminal aliens, those with final removal orders; acknowledges some discretion regarding nonviolent, “law-abiding” undocumented immigrants.

On Media & Personal Sacrifice

• Media Scrutiny: Calls coverage of her “petty and sexist,” lamenting doxxing and threats but standing by the administration’s policies.
  • “They've doxxed me. They've exposed myself to threats…put me in very dangerous situations.” [48:33]
• Life In the Bubble: Noem misses ordinary life as a rancher but considers the sacrifices necessary.

Quick Takes (Word Association, Fun/Personal Moments):

• “Mount Rushmore…Missouri river…come to my house and I'll cook you dinner.” (On South Dakota must-sees) [51:21]

---

3. Noam Dworman: Comedy, Free Speech, and the Trump Era

[56:12–73:29] Conversation with Noam Dworman

On Kimmel Suspension & Free Speech

• Manager’s Perspective: Draws parallels to running a club—ultimately, comedians must serve the audience. If a host continuously offends or indulges at viewers’ expense, suspension is justified, but outside regulatory pressure is toxic.
  • “Anytime you get on the stage…you're there for your audience…if you're indulging yourself, you're on shaky ground.” [57:22]
  • On FCC pressure: “That pollutes it. I mean, that's bad.” [58:47]
  • “Disney…obviously has the right to do whatever they want. But we all have a civic duty to protect the spirit of the Bill of Rights.” [60:47]
• Broken Windows Analogy: Warns against cumulative “erosion” of tolerance for unpopular speech; advocates that principle, not expediency, should guide institutions.

On Trump and Threats to Democracy

• Short-Term vs. Long-Term: Dworman distinguishes Trump as a “singular, shameless figure” whose tactics (e.g., using government pressure) may erode civic norms, but who doesn’t represent a systemic, lasting threat.
  • “I see him as a kind of singular…figure…we’re going to see a reset…Short term, he’s using intimidation…that's dangerous.” [64:34]
  • Methods like “causing self-censorship by…blizzard of lawsuits” undermine democratic norms [66:10]

On Comedy’s Golden Age

• Boom in Talent and Reach: Affirms we are living in a “long golden age of comedy”—levels of skill, staying power, and diversity of comedians are unprecedented.
  • “The average level of the comedian at the Comedy Cellar now compared to the 90s is three or four times higher…every single comedian is extremely funny.” [68:04]
  • Viral social media presence helps spread talent but doesn’t replace craft honed in clubs.
• Business Wisdom: Dworman says his true focus is on service and creating the best environment for both audiences and performers.
  • “My father used to say, you don’t need to speak the language to know who’s funny. You could just watch the audience.” [73:14]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Brendan Carr, on FCC's role:
  “We at the FCC are going to enforce the public interest obligation. If there's broadcasters out there that don't like it, they can turn their license into the FCC.” [08:34]

• Mark Halperin:
  “You should not want to live in a country where the government uses its power to intimidate people…Let the market decide.” [24:08]

• Kristi Noem, on Charlie Kirk:
  “No matter how big Turning Point got…he was still Charlie. And everybody felt like they knew him.” [27:50]

• Noam Dworman:
  “Anytime you get on the stage…you're there for your audience…if you’re indulging yourself, you’re on shaky ground.” [57:22]
  “There’s a broken windows-type erosion of our respect for free speech and the notion that we’re supposed to tolerate things we don’t like.” [60:47]

---

Timestamps for Major Segments

• Mark Halperin Monologue: Media Shifts & Kimmel Suspension – [01:02–26:32]
• DHS Secretary Kristi Noem Interview
  • Charlie Kirk’s Legacy – [27:16–30:29]
  • National Security/Lessons Learned – [30:29–34:36]
  • Immigration & Voluntary Departures – [37:01–41:15]
  • Media Coverage & Personal Impact – [48:33–50:14]
  • Rapid Fire/Personal – [50:14–53:35]
• Noam Dworman Interview: Comedy & Free Speech
  • Kimmel, Free Speech Principles – [56:44–62:24]
  • Trump, Democracy, Civic Erosion – [64:03–67:38]
  • The Comedy Boom – [68:04–73:29]

---

Summary Tone

The tone is direct, analytical, occasionally wry, with both guests providing candid views. Halperin maintains an “insider” angle, deconstructing power, policy, and the unseen currents shaping headlines, while both Noem and Dworman combine personal perspective with big-picture cultural commentary.

---

For listeners who missed the episode:
This edition gives a thorough inside look at the shifting tectonics of U.S. media and politics, the struggle between market and government on speech, the real-world impact of security and immigration policy, and why the stand-up stage is more vibrant—and perhaps more consequential—than ever.

Transcript

[ExxonMobil Narrator]

When it comes to reducing carbon emissions, the heaviest industries face the toughest challenges. That's where we come in. ExxonMobil is investing in technology to help American industry lower its emissions, including in our own operations, all while empowering businesses and creating job opportunities. It turns out that fewer emissions can mean a stronger economy. Exxon Mobil, let's deliver.

[PACT Brand Voice]

Your skin should never come second. That's why PACT makes everyday essentials from the purest organic cotton. No toxins, no harsh chemicals, just softness you can feel good in. Because wellness isn't just what you put in your body, it's what you put on it, too. From the first layer to the last, getting dressed should feel like self care. Visit wearpacked.com and use code dresswell for 15% off your first order packed. Dress yourself well.

[Mark Halpern]

It's Thursday. We're back. Nexters, thank you for returning. Whether you're listening to us, watching us showing up in your inbox, it's Thursday. Another episode of this program. Next up. I am Mark Halpern, editor in chief of the live interactive video platform 2way, and your host, here to bring you my exclusive reporting and analysis of everything that's going on that matters most and to address again, try to clue you in on what's going to happen next with us today. Next up after my monologue, Kristi Noem. She's the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, former South Dakota governor. We're going to talk about how America thinks about security and safety at a time in the wake of the execution, the assassination of Charlie Kirk. And then it's an all gnome episode. From Kristi Noem to Noem Dwarmin, my friend who owns the Comedy Cellar, a staunch thinker and First Amendment advocate. We're going to talk about what's going on with First Amendment rights and whether there is a threat to liberty in America. Now, Noem is the owner of the Comedy Cellar and also he hosts his own program called Live from the Table. So a pair of gnomes coming up in just a moment. But first, my reported monologue worked on this late last night and overnight in the wake of the firing or not firing, the suspension by Disney and ABC of Jimmy Kimmel. Kimmel made remarks, you all probably have heard them by now on his program on Monday night, suggesting that the killer of Charlie Kirk was MAGA and that MAGA was trying to deny the fact that he was part of maga. It was a silly thing to say at best. And it offended some people and it offended the head of the fcc, very aggressive man whose place in the world in this administration is really, as I said, aggressive. He does not believe that liberal media, particularly those that have federal licenses like abc, should be able to be biased. And he's been pretty clear about that. Since this Kimmel suspension, there's been no word, at least as we speak to you right now from Kimmel, no real explanation from ABC and Disney about why they did it, but an outcry from some network affiliate owners. And like that, Kimmel was not allowed back on the air. Democrats are really upset. The Hollywood unions are upset. A lot of Democratic politicians are upset. This has become a post Charlie Kirk assassination stress test of sorts for our culture, our corporations of questions of government power. It's an incredible case study. The core issues are pretty basic in the modern era at least. Who controls speech? What kind of regulatory pressure can the administration put on people? What kind of leverage do network affiliate owners have? These big companies that own ABC affiliates, in this case all over the country. And I think maybe the biggest project here is Team Trump's attempt to crack liberals hold on Hollywood and entertainment. This is a massive issue and one that even before Charlie was killed, even before this Kimmel thing was a clear project, both of Team Trump and their associates. Let's be clear, the left thinks this is horrible. They think, once again, ABC has caved. Huge backlash from, as I said, the Hollywood unions, Gavin Newsom spoken out, Ben Stiller, the American Civil Liberties Union. A lot of comedians are starting to come out. They don't like it. They consider this the basic First Amendment issue. Let's take them at their word. This isn't about Trump derangement syndrome or hatred of Donald Trump or it's, or even Kimmel himself. For a lot of these people on left, if you take them at their word, they don't like to see the FCC chair out there saying this is what Kimmel said was inappropriate and that something needs to be done. And they don't like what they consider to be a chilling effect. They don't believe that Bob Iger, the head of Walt Disney, suspended Kimmel because he was truly offended. And by the way, this is a rare confluence of people on the left and the right. I talked to, talked, emailed, texted with so many people since about 6 Eastern time last night and into this morning. What did they see? People in maga, people in Hollywood, and no one thinks Bob Iger was actually offended or that Bob Iger suspended Kimmel because he thought it was, quote unquote, the right thing to do. They all think he was responding to pressure. People on the right say, great, glad you responded to the pressure. As I said, people on the left think this is horrible. And, and one of the most high. Prof. High profile signs that the Trump project of putting pressure on Hollywood and the media to act in a way that they didn't in the past is working. So what does the White House say? The White House says these companies should police themselves. We don't need to play a role. This is all happening because the market is speaking. These affiliate ownership, Sinclair and nexstar, they're owned by folks who are not of the far left. They're right or center right. And what they said is we're not going to air the Kimmel show. We're so offended. Our constituencies are offended. Their stations are not exclusively, but a lot of them are in red states and more rural places, not big cities on the coast. And they said we're not going to air it. That's, that's a distribution problem for ABC because Kimmel doesn't air on the ABC network. It goes from the network to these local stations. And if these massive owners of local stations say we're not going to air it, that's a PR problem. It's also a distribution problem. And the relationship between the affiliates and the networks has changed dramatically over the last several decades, but it's still the case that that's where a lot of their distribution comes from. The FCC commissioner, he's Brendan Carr, he's an interesting guy. He's one, to me, one of the most fascinating people in the Trump administration. He's previously worked at there at the fcc. He's now the chair and he's outspoken. He's got a history of saying things on social media and at events that, no, the government should not be deciding what kind of content private companies do. But he's always made a distinction, and this is a distinction rooted in the law between places like this program or the New York Times that don't have federal licenses, places like ABC have licenses. That's the way our system works because they have broadcast needs to get access to the airwaves using the spectrum. And that means they've got an obligation to serve the public interest. Now for decades, the left said, well, the public interest is served by doing left wing news and left wing entertainment. And what been the case throughout the 10 years of Donald Trump dominating the national stage, but particularly in this term is the right is no longer saying, yeah, that's fine, we'll play on an unlevel playing field where comedians on TV and late night can generally be biased against Republicans. We'll play in an unlevel playing field where abc, CBS and NBC will be biased, they're saying, just as they are with universities, just as they're saying with law firms. We're not going to sit back and just be suckers and let these liberal institutions that tilt away from us dramatically and in some cases they believe decisively do whatever they want. So here is Brendan Carr on Fox, on Twitter on Wednesday night after the decision was announced that Kimmel was going.

[FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr]

To be suspended to these market forces. And a lot of these affiliate groups said, to your point, we're tired of carrying this stuff late night shows. Something's gone seriously awry there. They went from going for applause, from laugh lines to applause lines. They went from being court gestures that would make fun of everybody in power to being court clerics and enforcing a very narrow political ideology. We at the FCC are going to enforce the public interest obligation. If there's broadcasters out there that don't like it, they can turn their license into the fcc. But that's our job. Again, we're making some progress now.

[Mark Halpern]

So public interest obligation. As a journalist, I love this story. It's fascinating. As a citizen, there's two competing equities here that I'm really concerned about, how they interact. On the one hand, you've heard me say it before. The bias of Hollywood, the bias of big dominant media, it's not served the country well, it's not served them well as businesses in the modern era, but it's not right for democracy. On the other hand, I don't like the thought of a government regulator using the power of the federal government, the rhetorical power in the case of administration. Not shy about using power to threaten regulatory action one way or another. I'm not crazy about a government regulator saying what Brendan Carr is saying. And I got a little backup from my point of view, from Brit Hume. As you all know, one of the people I respect the most in media and someone who thinks a lot about these complicated equities, Brit tweeted this morning, thinking about these same issues. He said the First Amendment does not protect performers like Jimmy Kimmel from being canceled by their private sector employers. I agree with that. But then Britt also wrote. But I have liked, I would have liked the outcome a lot better if the chairman of the FCC had not involved himself in it. I couldn't agree more. The private sector can speak. And their customers and their partners like their affiliate owners like nexstar, they can speak. They can balk and say, no, we're not going to, we're not going to air this program and we don't think you should, you know, and then suspend a guy, maybe not even bring him back. But when the government gets involved in saying, as Carr said, it's in advance on with Benny Johnson in advance of the suspension, when he said ABC can do this the easy way or the hard way, that sends a clear signal. I'm not crazy about that. I'm not crazy about the FCC commissioner. And again, I find the guy to be fascinating. I find him to be brilliant. I find his willingness to engage in the public dialogue. He does lots of interviews on TV and at events and on social. I find all that great. So I'm a fan of his style, I'm a fan of a lot of his point of view. But telling a network, in effect, we don't like this speech, we don't like this exercise, the First Amendment, when the guy made an ill informed statement, an offensive statement to many. That's what the First Amendment's for, That's what it's for. This is not going to be a big courtroom challenge. This is not some case that's going to go to the Supreme Court. It's about regulation, about intimidation and it's also about corporate risk management. The institutional power in this country has shifted rightward. Some days I think, I think it's never going back. Other days I try to gauge how much has shifted. But there's no doubt that places like abc, cbs, even the New York Times and Washington Post, they are not where they were even a year ago. And whether they're reacting to fear of the right wing mob, whether they're reacting to their sense of consumers, whether it's the business model where they say we need to appeal to people in the center and the right. I've said this to so many Democrats. If you think of all the reasons Donald Trump won two out of three elections, if you think of all the reasons people voted for Donald Trump in big numbers, even those who don't like a lot about him, I think the number one reason literally might be hostility towards what's been so apparent to tens of millions of Americans, this one sided point of view in our big media. Take ABC, okay? For years now, every day at 11:00 Eastern, the View every night, 11:30 East, 11:35 Eastern. Kimmel, right. These are two shows, a daytime talk show, staple of, you know, television convention, a late night show. Those shows for years have alienated millions of people because they're liberal shows. And in the age of Trump, they're hostile to Trump. And so for tens of millions of Americans, they say, why should ABC's daytime talk show oriented towards women? I don't know what percentage of the viewers of the View are women, but it's a lot. And why should the evening comedy show, why should they be hostile to Donald Trump? What about appealing to people who just want a talk show or people who just want a late night show? Maybe people who don't live on the coasts, Maybe people who are not connected to that point of view. Why don't they have a show with that kind of distribution? The clout now has shifted. And Bob Iger as a CEO, he's my former boss, I have huge respect for him. He's got to navigate this. And whether he's making these decisions because of consumers or the affiliate pressure or regulatory pressure from the FCC and the White House or whatever it is, maybe it's because Kimmel's ratings aren't that great. Whatever it is. And even if they bring Kimmel back, the decision to suspend him is a watershed moment because he said something that would have passed unnoticed by most people, except that the head of the FCC brought it up and then the affiliates were offended by it and Bob had to act. Bob had to do something. And the context for this is the change that's occurring. Okay, we've seen some of it already. Maybe the first big move was when Elon Musk bought X. Okay. X Up until that point, like most of the west coast based social media, massive social media platforms were liberal. Their employees were liberal. Mark Zuckerberg liberal. And, and although conservatives were on Facebook and on Twitter, they were really dominated by liberals. And, and the ownerships and the employees were liberal. And, and so when the question was, well, should we suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story? Yeah, because we want to hurt Donald Trump, we want to help Joe Biden. They wouldn't have done that the other way around. Right? So now the first big piece Musk buys, Twitter, calls it X. Now it's controlled by someone who's pro Trump. Then you have David Ellison buying cbs. Okay? Now we don't know yet how he's going to change CBS and whether he's going to make it conservative or center right or try to just make it actually bounce, we don't know. But what we do know is now you got a guy whose family is very close to Trump, President Trump, and wants to change the thing, talking about bringing in Barry Weiss, who's not biased, maybe some say center right, but just not liberally biased for a big role at CBS News. So that takes Twitter and CBS News and moves them from part of the liberal dominated firmament of new media, major player, new media, major player in old media and says we're not going to be liberally biased anymore. Okay, now TikTok. President Trump is trying to negotiate a deal in part for national security reasons to take TikTok away from the Chinese and give it to some American company or companies to better keep the Chinese from using it to spy on America and have the algorithm maybe not serve as chicom propaganda. And the companies that are said to be in line to help manage and Run TikTok are again, people associated with President Trump. Are they going to turn TikTok into the RNC? No. But is TikTok going to be leaning more to protect conservative voices than it otherwise would? Yes. And now David Ellison's talking about buying CNN to own both CBS and cnn. Same thing. Dan Pfeiffer worked for Barack Obama. He's part of the Pod Pod Save America, fellas. He wrote in his substack today how alarming this is. Did not write with much of a sense of irony. How alarming. He said that you now now have CBS and X in control of Trump allies and maybe soon coming TikTok and CNN. Can you imagine one party having to fight out things in the town, national town square and political elections? If big media organizations were controlled by the other side, can you imagine how painful that would be? Yes, you can, because that's what conservatives have dealt with now for decades. It's an incredible moment. And don't think this stuff's happening by accident. Donald Trump wants to change the balance of power and there are people around him who I've been talking to to report out on this. They don't call themselves suckers, but they do look at the first term and say, man, we left a lot of stuff in place. Media, universities, law firms, corporations, we let a lot of stuff in place where we were, we were fighting with one hand or both hands tied behind our back. And now they're using the leverage they have. I don't love some of this, but if you're just talking about raw power and you're talking about fairness, these Democrats like Dan Pfeiffer who are concerned that their side is losing control of some of these organizations, they're right to be concerned, but they would do better. They want to have the trust of the public to acknowledge that they benefited from this exact thing overwhelmingly and for a large part of their monopoly. There was no media. There was no digital media. So when they controlled abc, cbs, NBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Time and Newsweek, they controlled a lot of stuff. Their power is diminished. But we see, and we see with this Kimmel thing, it's not just about news, right? It's also about Hollywood entertainment. It's a big business, right? The jawboning by the head of the fcc, by the president. Again, I caution you, it's dangerous. You should not, regardless of your political views, you should not want to live in a country where the government uses its power to intimidate people, to coerce them to take certain views, or to pay a cost if they don't take a view the government likes. That's not good. It's not good. It's, it's, it's, it's antithetical to what we think about the First Amendment. Let the private sector have it at. If Jimmy Kimmel is not funny or Jimmy Kimmel is offending people, let the market take care of it. Let the affiliates say, we don't want to distribute that show. Nothing more influence influences the networks than big affiliate owners who own a lot of stations saying, we don't want that joke. We don't like that show. Let the, Let the viewers say, let the ratings go down. Kimmel's ratings have gone down. Probably should have thought about canceling the show before this. Respect the audience. Let the audience make the business decisions. Let the market decide. This is an unprecedented moment. I don't know if Kimmel's coming back or not. I don't know if the left, you know, cheered on by Dan Pfeiffer and others, will figure out a way to have the empire strike back and maybe keep control of CNN in the left's hands. But what is going on now? We've seen lots of other examples, but this Kimmel thing is maybe one of the biggest ones. What is going on now is unprecedented. Donald Trump's reelection started this process in a big way, and they're doing things to try to change the environment. And people in Hollywood have noticed now, you know, at the Emmys on Sunday, not a single mention of Charlie Kirk. And to the extent they alluded to politics or alluded to the national environment, it was typically liberal. Stephen Colbert got two standing ovations, one when he came out and introduced a segment, and then when he won an Emmy. And there's no doubt that people on the left are going to rally around Kimmel. They've rallied Duran Colbert. And there are important issues there as I've said, there are First Amendment issues where I think they're in the right, but for a lot of them, it's not about defending the First Amendment from government intrusion. For a lot of them, and I've talked to them last night when the Kimmel thing happened, a lot of them are, we can't let Trump win. Kimmel going means Trump wins, and they don't want that. Kimmel may come back. But the reason I know there's going to be more upheaval, the reason I know that people who run news and entertainment entities are going to face us more as Bob Iger has, is because of the winds of change and the fact that you can no longer get away, not ever, but in many cases with doing things that are offensive to the sensibilities of people who are sick and tired of being offended by the unfairness of it. Charlie Kirk's assassination has given people on the right a sense of determination, a sense of feeling, like asking themselves the question, what would Charlie do? What would Charlie do about this situation? And amongst the things Charlie Kirk would do is to say, let's change it again. Whether you agree with the guy or not, one of the most impressive things about him was he said, everybody says, you know, most prominent example, everybody says the Republican Party's never been going to be the party of young people. Young people are always going to be for the liberals. We need to get our votes from middle aged people, older people. And Charlie said, no, we're not. We're not going to accept that. We're going to figure out our ideas are better. He would say, we're going to figure out how, get our ideas in front of young people and we're going to change the paradigm. That's what's happening here with this Kimmel thing, which again, I'm not saying it's going to be linear in that direction, but if you had said, you know, before Donald Trump's rise after he lost in 2022, late night hosts are going to lose their jobs and in both cases, low ratings, lower ratings, but also pressure on them because of their orientation to be virulently anti Trump. In the case of Kimmel, he may survive this, but he's never going to be the same, at least not during the time Donald Trump's in office, because Donald Trump is being relentless. But the other thing that's happened, and again, this is the, I don't even call it coincidence or irony, but Kimmel's suspension came over a remark about Charlie Kirk. But it also came because of the pressure from the right over the determination to live up to Charlie's memory. Charlie Kirk's gone now. He's not fighting these fights himself, but his mission, his determination is going to be continued through others. The drive for change and the ultimate irony of this is Charlie Kirk's capacity to change America in the direction he wanted it to go may be more powerful in his death rather than he was alive. Because the determination, the mantle, the baton, has been picked up by so many people who want to make sure that his vision of America is realized. So you're going to see more of this. Whether Kimmel comes back or not, you're going to see more of it. It's an extraordinary moment in American history, at least modern American history, to see all these liberal institutions in Hollywood and in newsrooms all of a sudden look up and say, we've been representing 50% of America, and if we're going to be in business, we ought to think about representing 100. All right, next up, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Christy Noem. That's next up, everybody. Let me tell you a story now. It's about a guy named Leo Grillo. He was on a road trip and he came across a Doberman. The dog was severely underweight, clearly in a lot of trouble. So Leo, he rescued that Doberman. He gave him a name. He called him Delta. Sadly, though, Delta was just one of many animals that needed some help, which gave Leo an inspiration. He started something called Delta Rescue. It's the largest no kill, care for life animal sanctuary in the world. Over the years, they've rescued thousands of dogs and cats and horses from the wilderness, providing all of them with shelter, love, safety, and a good home. This dedication and everlasting love for animals, it's Leo's mission and his legacy. It's important to know Delta Rescue relies solely on contributions from people like all of us. So if you want caring for these animals to be part of your legacy, speak right now with your estate planner. Because there are tax savings and estate planning benefits for giving as well. You can grow your estate while letting your love for animals live well into the future. Check out the estate planning tab on their website to learn more and to speak with an advisor we call a dogman's best friend for a reason. You can help those who need it most. So please, right now visit deltarescue.org to learn more. Again, go today to deltarescue.org what if.

[ExxonMobil Narrator]

We could reduce carbon emissions and strengthen the economy? At Exxon Mobil, we believe Both are possible. As a global leader in carbon capture and storage, we're empowering industries to reduce their emissions all through technologies that are creating job opportunities in America. How's that for a win? Win? Exxon Mobil. Let's deliver.

[Mark Halpern]

Joining me now, next up, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem. It's a massive department created after 9 11, combining a lot of different departments that have been spread around. Is it difficult? Complicated job in any White House, any administration, but particularly hard in this one because of the demanding agenda. And so many of the president's top priorities flow through the department. Madam Secretary, very grateful to you for making time.

[Kristi Noem]

Oh, thank you, Mark. I appreciate you sitting down and visiting with me. It is an important department, and it's one that is incredibly important to the security of our nation. So the more people have an opportunity to learn about what the Department of Homeland Security does and what we are doing to pursue President Trump's agenda, the better informed they are.

[Mark Halpern]

Appreciate that. I want to talk mostly about the department's agenda, but it seems like longer. But for a week now, I've been doing what I can, my small part, to educate the whole country, not just people in red America, about Charlie Kirk. And I know you've talked about having a text from him the day before he was killed as specifically as you can. Could you explain to people who didn't know him why he was so important to so many people in this country? Not just the traits, but what did he do specifically that made him so exceptional for so many.

[Kristi Noem]

You know, I think that when I first got to know Charlie, he was so young and he was so bold. So that always is what I think impressed people. At his age, not only was he vulnerable, bold and outspoken, but he also was incredibly knowledgeable. His love for this country and his love for our history and the rights that we have as individuals was inspiring. I know it was to me personally. And then the fact that he went places that. That other politicians and other people involved in government didn't necessarily go. You know, from the time I was growing up, I was taught that you can learn something from everybody, that even if somebody was criticizing you or had a differing opinion, that you still needed to listen and to spend time with individuals and talking. And that's exactly what Charlie did. You don't see that in politics that often, but Charlie went and talked to people who disagreed with him and then did his homework, knew the. The knowledge behind the facts that he was speaking, and. And that was super impressive. He was a friend of mine, and not only the larger his organization got and his movement got, he still kept that personal touch by texting people, calling them, and that was incredibly special. So I think that's why this rests so heavy on people, is because he was still Charlie. Over the years, no matter how big Turning Point got or how many people he got to know or how important he was to the President, the most powerful person in the free world, he was still Charlie. And everybody felt like they knew him.

[Mark Halpern]

What would be for you a fitting way to commemorate his life and to allow his legacy to live on? What are some of the things you'd like to see Turning Point do the country do to make sure that his commitment to public service is realized even now that he's gone?

[Kristi Noem]

I remember when my dad passed away. I think one of the greatest fears that I had was that people would forget him. It helped to when people told me stories about him, when they told me about his life and how they knew him. So I think continuing to tell Charlie's story is incredibly important and for us to continue to reflect on what he stood for and his boldness. So praying and supporting his family is something that we shouldn't be doing just in the short term here. We should continue and commit to them that will walk alongside them in the years ahead and that these little kids and kiddos of theirs will be supported and loved, but also that we will continue supporting Turning Point and what they're doing and focusing on educating our next generation of Americans and how special it is to live in this country.

[Mark Halpern]

I've been a student of your department since 9, 11, when really one of the great legislative achievements, I think in the modern era where members of Congress and both parties and the president came together to say we have too many departments, too many agencies spread out that really are part of Homeland Security, including the Secret Service, which younger people may not remember or know, used to be part of the Treasury Department. It made no sense. You now have a lot of the agencies committed to Homeland security under your department. So I want to ask you about what lessons you draw. We try to balance civil liberties and national security in this country. We also try to balance people like Charlie or you or members of Congress and governors you were governor. Access to the people. You don't want to have people all behind glass and in bulletproof vehicles. You want some interaction. So I still don't have a good explanation of how he could have had. He did have security that day. It obviously wasn't up to the task. Not to blame people, but just to ask the question with some, your responsibility includes figuring out how to protect people in this country who are leaders. What lessons are you thinking about?

[FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr]

What.

[Mark Halpern]

What concerns do you have in the wake of one, apparently one young man, not a professional killer, able to do this? What lessons do you draw? What things are you thinking about from that horrible day?

[Kristi Noem]

Yeah, I would say from this incident, we are evaluating it and looking at what more could have been done, what more we can do to help support college campuses when they're having events like this, what we can do to help train individuals. We had Department of Homeland Security employees from four different states respond to that incident that day and be there and help with the investigation. And that is our job. So many times the mission of the Department of Homeland Security is to secure the homeland and the authorities that we have under the 23 components touch every single person that lives in this country if they're coming in or leaving, every single product or good in this country that would come in or leave, and also anything on the Internet, what is said or sold or done or communicated. So the authorities that this department has are very far reaching and it is a national security agency. So giving that kind of insight and wisdom to folks on the ground there that we may have and what we may learn from this and then helping to train and support that kind of security measures is. Is what we do. And so we are learning more and more. And it's not our job necessarily to always fill in every single security apparatus for every single event that is conducted, but. But we do have a responsibility to be there and to do what we can to provide a more secure environment in the future.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, no doubt you're not in charge of private security and you can't be, but we don't want to live in a society where we can't have people like Charlie doing. He was extraordinarily open. The whole point of these events was to be open to people. Sunday in Arizona, we're going to have many senior people in the government and 60,000 souls inside a football stadium. How does something like that now, again, in light of what happened, how does something like that get protected so people can enter and not wait in line for three hours and not miss the event?

[Kristi Noem]

Yeah. We have declared this. The Department of Homeland Security has declared that event on Sunday, the celebration of Charlie's life as a national security event. It's a Seer1 event, which means we deploy more resources there. We've got virtually all of our different components, have a role, as well as coordinating with state officials and law enforcement and local officials as well, to make sure that that event is secure. So it is elevated to the highest level because the president of the United States will be there, the vice, a lot of the cabinet members and many, many governors and leaders and thousands and thousands of people. So we are doing due diligence to make sure that we're as prepared as possible for that event, but also knowing that this is a dynamic that we haven't seen for a while.

[Mark Halpern]

Getting control of the southern border is obviously for not just experts, but for many citizens is, you know, stakes, table stakes, to say protecting the homeland. You can't have a porous border, allow people to come in, not just Latin American immigrants, but people from all over the world, including potentially terrorists. This is still an extremely open country. And since 911 people have said, what's to keep someone from walking into a mall in Nebraska or South Dakota with, with an explosive device? We're such an open country. Are we, are we, are we open to or vulnerable to another 911 type attack, a mass attack on the homeland? Or have we learned so much and spent so much that we're now much safer than we were on September 11, 2001?

[Kristi Noem]

Well, every day we get up and focus on making sure that we're anticipating as much as possible and prepared for a situation like that. I do believe we're safer than we were on 9 11, so many years ago, 24 years ago. But we always have more that we can do and more we can learn and more that we can work together and cooperate. So you know that that open border allowed an invasion of individuals into our country, where there was hundreds and hundreds of known and suspected terrorists that were allowed to come directly into this country, that we had cartel members and gangs that were extremely dangerous, that were allowed to come in and ignore our federal laws. So we are doing the work to remove these individuals, the worst of the worst. But at the same time, we know that every day they were here, they were recruiting more and more members. They were not just proliferating violent crimes on our people and our citizens, but they also were out there doing damage to our communities because of those crimes and making people feel less safe. And we work every day to allow these communities to get these individuals to consequences, to justice, get them out of our country so that people can experience what it's like to be free again to walk their kids to school, to go to their jobs and not have to worry about being victimized, murdered, raped or have their children trafficked or drugs taking out their kids that's our job is to make sure that while we had those four years of open borders, those thousands of individuals that came in that have been detrimental to the safety of our communities are brought to bear and brought to consequences.

[Mark Halpern]

Your job, your department's so immense, but a lot of the public facing stuff you've done involves going into urban areas with your teams and dealing with the arrest and then in many cases, deportation of people who've come to this country illegally, in many cases who've also committed other crimes. Is that serving as a deterrent for people to voluntarily self deport before you find them? Do we have any sense of whether that's happening in significant numbers?

[Kristi Noem]

Yeah, absolutely. I would say that by us being so aggressive and the president being so clear that he's going to enforce the law and that there's going to be consequences and that we're going to get these dangerous criminals off our streets, that has sent a clear message. It sent a clear message to everyone that the boss has changed. There's somebody new in the White House that's very different than the last president. And this president cares about safety and security. And we have had hundreds of thousands of people that have woken up and have decided to go home on their own. In fact, the last number that was reported was 1.6 million people have voluntarily left this country since President Trump has been in office. And if you add that to the number of people that we've deported, almost 2 million people have left this country that were here illegally. And that is something that, as I've traveled to Central and Southern American countries and talk to their leaders and their presidents and the numbers that they've given us, that they have helped us with that communication message. I think, Mark, you've probably seen the commercials that we've run across this country, but also in other countries that have said, you know, if you don't, if you're in this country illegally and if you don't leave on your own, that if you wait until we have to deport you, you may never get the chance to come back to the United States of America. And people overwhelmingly have listened to that message, recognized that they will go home on their own. And so they have the opportunity to maybe come back the right way someday rather than to wait until we deport them.

[Mark Halpern]

You might be in a cabinet filled with great communicators. You might be the most famous TV ad star. You did it as governor of South Dakota to promote your state, and now you're doing it with a different kind of message. And I Know from talking to your colleagues in the administration, people are super impressed by those TV ads and, and think they're very effective. Just talk about the use of ad advertising in an era of free media, earned media on social media. What is it about a 32nd or 60 second ad that still is so effective in getting messages across?

[Kristi Noem]

Well, this was something that President Trump told me he wanted done before he even gave me the job as Homeland Security Secretary when he first was going to nominate me for this position. He said, christy, do you remember those ads that you ran in South Dakota, the ones about your state? And I said, well, yes sir, I do. It spread our message and recruited a lot of people and businesses to our, our state and we grew because of that. He said, I want you to do those for the border. He said, I want you to run commercials talking about the fact that the border is closed and if you're in our country illegally, we're going to deport you and remove you from this country. And I said, sir, we can do press conferences, we can, you know, tell people that we have other things that we can. He said, no, we're not going to let the media spin this into something that it's not. He said, we're going to put out commercials that tell people clearly that our border is closed so they get the message. And he said, I want you to run them in other countries too, the countries that people are coming here from illegally. I want you to run these ads internationally so them and their families get the message and tell their individuals that they may know in America to come home. So he, he knew what he was doing. This was a specific direction from him and it worked. From all of our intelligence and analysis, the number one reason why people were leaving this country voluntarily and going home was because of those commercials, was because of the videos that we've been able to put out of the fact that, that if you are a criminal in this country that we will remove you and you'll get a one way ticket home. But if you leave and participate voluntarily, you may get the chance to come back and be a part of the American dream.

[Mark Halpern]

I always find it humorous when people will say, who are critics of the administration policy, say, well, these people came to the country illegally, but they've broken no laws. And I say, well, no, their first act on American soil was to break a law because they came to the country legally. Still, there are a lot of people, including some in your party, who say if people came here illegally, but they haven't broken any other laws and in fact, they are part of their communities. They have jobs, they pay taxes, they are part of a peaceful life that they shouldn't be deported. And as you know, some allies of the President are particularly concerned of the economic impact in things like tourism, hospitality and agriculture. Is the administration policy clear? Is everyone eventually going to be deported if they came illegally or, or not not a priority or maybe ever for people who are. Have been law abiding since they got here illegally?

[Kristi Noem]

Well, our focus is on criminal, illegal aliens that have committed acts of violence, you know, murder, rape, assault, drug trafficking, human trafficking, and then also those with final removal orders, those individuals who have been notified over and over again and gone through the judicial process and due process and have a final removal order that they have been directed to leave. So those are our focus and we'll continue to do that. We've got so many individuals in this country still that we're targeting that are endangering communities and endangering families. We'll do that. But the President wants everybody to know that when we have someone come into this country and cross our border and ignore our law, they have broken the law. And that there has to be consequences for that.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, even in South Dakota, one of our reddest states, there are Democrats. I know you study people in the party, really want your best good faith explanation of something I find so confusing. I'm from Maryland originally. I consider myself a Maryland man. This, this fella, Abrego Garcia. Can you understand why the Democratic Party has turned, turned themselves into the champions of him? They say I am, I am him. Their allies in the press call him a Maryland man. He's at a minimum, has committed some crimes and maybe not adjudicated by the courts fully, maybe some really serious crimes. Why. Why have some people in this country turned into champions of this so called Maryland man?

[Kristi Noem]

I don't, I don't understand it, Mark. I wish I did. Because this man was a human trafficker, a child trafficker. In fact, he was so perverted that some of the other criminals that were with him told him to, to stop drawing so much attention to them on how he was hitting on the individuals they were trafficking and, and looking at nude photos and things like that. So this man was not only an MS.13 gang member and a member of a foreign terrorist organization, he also was perpetuating crimes on children. And to have the Democrat party defend him like they do and to stand with him and to fund him and his efforts to avoid any kind of consequences for his crimes is still shocking to me. I know, it's been going on for months, but it's still shocking to me that they have the ability to do that and be okay with themselves. And I don't believe the American people support them in their defense of Abreco Garcia. I believe the American people see through it, and they'll face consequences for not getting elected and for not representing truly what the families in this country care about. And that is about law and order and defending our law enforcement officers, protecting them, and making sure that Americans are the priority over criminal elements that come in and do such horrendous things like Abrego Garcia has.

[Mark Halpern]

So you're telling me you don't even have a guess, an educated guess, I.

[Kristi Noem]

Guess, as to what their consequences will be?

[Mark Halpern]

Well, why? Why? Why? They've adopted this guy as the. As their poster child, their poster boy for. For saying, this is who we're going to defend.

[Kristi Noem]

I think they're so opposed to President Trump, they're just blinded to everything else. If President Trump said anything, they take the opposite view of it right now, and that's going to be a huge challenge for them in getting elected or getting anything done, because that's just not where the American people are every day. President Trump is fighting for the average American citizen. And to have Democrats opposing Trump so much that they're supporting criminals and terrorists over law enforcement officers, I've just. I haven't seen that before in this country. This is new territory that they're plowing, and it's dangerous.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. Governor is a big job, and I spent some time in your state with one of your predecessors as governor of South Dakota. And even as governor, you can travel around, you can go to restaurants, you can live a kind of normal life, go to the supermarket. You're now in a job where you can't do anything like that. I'm wondering how you feel about that, how your family feels about the sacrifices you're making. To some extent, they have to make, whether you're home in South Dakota or in Washington or as you travel around the country. I know public service is important to you, but what do you miss doing? How do you feel about the bubble that you have to be in now for security and protocol purposes?

[Kristi Noem]

Yeah, I would say it's been a challenge. It's been a big adjustment going to this position. I knew when I took this job that it would be one that would be controversial to some. I knew I would be picking a fight with the cartels, that I would be picking a fight with known and suspected terrorists, and that that would put me in their crosshairs and that they would not like someone who was enforcing the law and coming after them and targeting them and speaking boldly about their crimes that they're committing and what they're doing to this country. But it, you know, there are lots of changes then because of the threats that we face. I, you know, I don't get to go out typically and sit at dinners and be in public as often in South Dakota. Wonderfully. The people there are fantastic, and life feels a little bit more normal when I get the chance to go home and, and spend time with our family there. But it's very different everywhere we go. And, you know, as a farmer and a rancher, you're raised to be pretty independent, drive your trucks and tractors and, you know, be able to just live your life and do things for yourself. And that's a little bit of a challenge now. But I appreciate all the men and women who helped me do this job, because without them, it would be impossible. And it takes a team here at the Department of Homeland Security to do exactly what the President has charged us to do.

[Mark Halpern]

You did go out to dinner once, famously, and got robbed in Washington. So you got at least one. You got at least one dinner. I've only known, I was thinking this morning as I was preparing to talk to you, I've only known two cabinet secretaries in my career that I can think of who got really favorable press coverage from the media and knew it, like said, yeah, I get really good coverage. You've done things like for security purposes, move into a Coast Guard facility, pay rent on it, and yet be criticized for that. People scrutinize what you wear, what you say, how you say it is. Is this going to be the state of the way you're covered as long as you're in the Cabinet. Or do you think that it's important to, To. To change your image? Or how do you just. How do you view the fact that I would not put you as the number three cabinet secretary who gets favorable coverage?

[Kristi Noem]

No, no. There is a lot of criticism, but I think. And a lot of it has been, I think, just because they're opposed to what I'm doing or myself. I would say, you know, when they didn't just criticize me, they've doxxed me. They've exposed myself to threats and to criminal activities. They've released where my apartment is, the inside of my apartment, what it looks like, where the windows are so that the. These cartels and suspected terrorists have all that information and can target me. They've put me in very dangerous situations, so. And also, you know, while we've. I've moved temporarily and paying for it as well, you know that they've made the media and their criticism has created real security concerns, and they do that for other members of the Cabinet as well. But I would say the way they come after this position, it's because we're hurting their business model. We have dramatically impacted their ability to make money and profit off of drugs and crimes and trafficking and how aggressive I've been. So I expect the criticism to continue. But I. I don't enjoy it. You know, my personality is. I want people to know that my heart is here to serve and to make this country safer. And I'm doing it for our kids and our grandkids. I want my grandkids to be able to have the same opportunities in this country that I had. And I knew it would be a tough job. But these security concerns are significant. And the media coverage of me and their focus on. On what I look like, how I talk, how I do the job, I think is petty and sexist.

[Mark Halpern]

Petty and sexist. Two good words, I think. Good explanation, Sue. All right, we'll close just a couple minutes with a little fun we do with all the Cabinet secretaries. Two word. One or two words, Word association. Here we go. Secretary Rubio.

[Kristi Noem]

A rock star.

[Mark Halpern]

Secretary Besant.

[Kristi Noem]

Oh, man, he's a genius. And he's funny. That guy's got a great. I'm sorry. Supposed to use one word, but that's all right.

[Mark Halpern]

You could say genius and funny. That's fine. Pam Bondi, Attorney General.

[Kristi Noem]

Oh, she's tough. Tough lady.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. How about Sean Duffy?

[Kristi Noem]

Oh, you know, he's charismatic and a decision maker.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. How about the vice president?

[Kristi Noem]

Oh, I think he's so intelligent. Intelligent and caring. We really got to see his heart recently with the way him and Usha took care of Erica and their family.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, no question. How about Pete Hegseth?

[Kristi Noem]

Oh, warrior.

[Mark Halpern]

If somebody's visiting South Dakota for the first time, what are the three places that are can't miss?

[Kristi Noem]

Oh, well, you got to go see Mount Rushmore. Then you have to go see the Missouri river and the open plains around the state capitol. And then I would say, you better come to my house and I'll cook you dinner. I'm really, really good at lasagna and mashed potato hot dish. So.

[Mark Halpern]

Very South Dakota, Carby. You know, I went to Mount Rushmore, and. And as much as I loved Mount Rushmore itself, the road To Mount Rushmore. Those who haven't been is filled with extraordinary attractions, including a thing with bears. You've been to that thing with the bears?

[Kristi Noem]

Yes. Bear country is always famous. Bear country is filled with bears that you will get up and close and personal with.

[Mark Halpern]

Up and close, personal and. And I should have known this, but bears run really fast. And I learned that at Bear Country. I didn't. I didn't get out of the car. I didn't get out of the car, but I watched a bear run across a field and up a tree. And it was. It's indelibly in my mind. It's one of the things I most associate with your state.

[Kristi Noem]

Oh, that's funny.

[Mark Halpern]

I love Bear country. Lastly, what do you want to accomplish between now and the end? Are you going to stay all four years in the job?

[Kristi Noem]

I serve at the pleasure of the President. I will serve as long as he feels like I'm doing a good job and I enjoy working for him. You know, it's been a long time since I've worked for somebody else. And it's so wonderful to have a president that gives you direction on what to do and then lets you go do it. He's fantastic. So I'll serve until he decides there's a change.

[Mark Halpern]

What's the thing about the president? You think the public doesn't really understand or doesn't see that you know, how.

[Kristi Noem]

Much he loves people. He is a people person and caring. He's always asking how everybody is doing, how their families are doing. He really is serving at such an important time with the people on his mind and in his heart.

[Mark Halpern]

Madam Secretary, so grateful to you for making time. You're a busy person and under a lot of pressure and able to stay with us and smile throughout and very sorry for your loss of Charlie. I could tell from how you talk about him how much he meant to you. And grateful to you for sharing your recollections there as well.

[Kristi Noem]

Yeah. Thank you, Mark. I appreciate it.

[Mark Halpern]

All right, that's the Secretary of Homeland Security. Next up, the other Nome, Noam Dwarman. My friend, a genius. We're going to talk about the balance between sanity and insanity on all sorts of things, including Jimmy Kimmel. That's next up. Attention everybody 64 years or older. This is an important announcement. The Department of Justice recently sued three major Medicare brokers for claiming they were unbiased while allegedly pushing people into plans that got them the biggest kickbacks. It's true. So many insurance agents, they can't be trusted. But you can't necessarily rely on government resources either. So what to do? Here's what I recommend. I want to tell you about a group called chapter. CHAPTER was started by people who went through this experience personally after their own parents were pushed into the wrong Medicare program by an agent who is more focused on commissions than on good care. Chapter has a very simple mission. They want to give every American the honest, straightforward Medicare advice that they need and that they deserve. And here's what makes them different. They're the only Medicare advisor that compares every plan across the country, not just a handful. That saves their clients an average of $1,100 a year. There's really no reason not to call. It's quick, it's easy, and and they can review your options in less than 20 minutes. If you're already in the right plan, they'll tell you that. But if there's a better plan, they'll help you make the switch. This could be the most important call you make this year. Dial £250 and say Chapter Medicare to get peace of mind. Again, that's £250 and say the words Chapter Medicare.

[PACT Brand Voice]

Your skin should never come second. That's why Pact makes everyday essentials. From the purest organic cotton. No toxins, no harsh chemicals. Just softness you can feel good in. Because wellness isn't just what you put in your body, it's what you put on it too. From the first layer to the last, Getting dressed should feel like self care. Visit wearpacked.com and use code DRESSWELL for 15% off your first order pact. Dress yourself well At Designer Shoe Warehouse.

[Noam Dwarman]

We believe that shoes are an important.

[PACT Brand Voice]

Part of, well, everything from first to to first dates. From all nighters to all time personal bests.

[Noam Dwarman]

From building pillow forts to building a.

[PACT Brand Voice]

Mud for all the big and small moments that make up your whole world. DSW is there and we've got just the shoes.

[Mark Halpern]

Find a shoe for every you from.

[PACT Brand Voice]

Brands you love at brag worthy prices.

[Mark Halpern]

At your DSW store or dsw.com Next up joining me now, Noam Dorman. He owns the Comedy Cellar. I call it the world's most famous humor venue here in Gotham City, a number of clubs and he is also the host of his own program called Live from the Table. He's a trained attorney and one of the smartest people I know. I like to tout your legal expertise.

[Noam Dwarman]

It's so long ago. Don't ask me anything about the law.

[Mark Halpern]

Oh no, I'm not going to ask you about the law. But you think Like a lawyer. Sometimes that's a good thing to do. Do I. I want to talk about everything with you. And we don't. We only have, you know, two hours, so let's dig right in. Now, this Jimmy Kimmel thing, you. You. You own a comedy club, and, and so you love comedians, and you're. You're a pretty good guy on the First Amendment. Right? I know. I know that. So leave aside the. The FCC commissioner's role in. In. It's kind of set this off. How do you feel about a comedian being suspended and maybe canceled for saying anything, or does it matter what he said?

[Noam Dwarman]

Well, you know, it's funny. I had an incident like this at the club the other day where this pro Israel emcee bragged to me that he said something on stage about how, you know, Israel this and why are you defending Hamas? And I said to him, and what was the punchline? Meaning that, okay, but you're on there for a particular purpose, which is to entertain the audience. And this is not just comedy. This is music. Anytime you get on the stage, your show, I mean, you're there for your audience.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah.

[Noam Dwarman]

And when you indulge yourself in a certain way, it's not about politics such that it's more about you and pleasing yourself at the expense of your audience and the people employing you, you are on shaky ground. You know, I. I don't know if this should be what his whole history is and how often he's done this. I don't follow it that closely, but there's a business going on there. I mean, Johnny Carson would have never intentionally made a remark that he knew would offend, you know, half the audience, the half of the audience that actually carried the popular vote in the recent election. That's how I feel about it.

[Mark Halpern]

So there's lots of crosscurrents here. Right. Bob Iger has to be concerned what his affiliates think. And two of the big station owners, you know, are looking for regulatory approval, so they don't want to be across cross odds with the administration. The fact that that pollutes it.

[Noam Dwarman]

That pollutes it. I mean, that's bad. Yeah.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. So. So if Bob Iger had said to you, called you last night and said, I think I'm going to put the suspend Kimmel because what he did crossed the line. I'm facing all these business pressures, would you have said, don't suspend him? Or it's more complicated than that, or you think suspending him is fully. Bob's right.

[Noam Dwarman]

I could see from another side saying, Listen, do not suspend him. Cuz we do not want to look like we're buckling to Trump and the pressure, we want to stand up for principle here. And I don't, to be honest, Mark, I'm not that informed on what's going on in that universe. So yeah, it's a bad look to look like you might have buckled to a chill of free speech coming from the President. So I would defend them if they're standing up against that, but in a different time, just if there was nothing else to worry about. You don't need a guy like that going on the air indulging himself. That's how I feel about it.

[PACT Brand Voice]

Right.

[Mark Halpern]

And, and you think, you know, they think they'll put him back on or you think the show's done. What's your gut on that?

[Noam Dwarman]

My gut, which is not very reliable on this issue, is that they'll put him back on.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, I'm torn. I, I, I, I think, I think if they don't put him back on, they're going to get a lot of complaints. But show doesn't is not doing that well. And he recently mused, you know, maybe, maybe he wouldn't sign a new deal. His deal's up relatively soon. So I don't know, I don't know which way we'll go. But I do know as, as I mentioned earlier in the program, as Brit Hume said, and I agree with Brett, a lot of the time Disney has the right to take him off. But it's unfortunate that it came only after the FCC basically said, you know, you guys better consider what you do here and objected to remarks. I don't think having the commissioner of the fcc, Fascinating guy, very aggressive guy. I don't think it's great for him to basically be saying we don't like content and you need to consider your options.

[Noam Dwarman]

Listen, Disney can obviously has the right to do whatever they want. I'm a little corny about this stuff. I feel like even in my own world we all have a kind of civic duty to protect the spirit of the Bill of Rights. I've been saying lately that it's kind of like a broken windows erosion. Broken windows theory of crime where the windows break and you get used to it and worse and worse things happen. There's kind of a broken windows type erosion of our respect for free speech and the notion that we're supposed to be able to tolerate hearing things that we don't like. And Disney collapsing at this particular moment is a cost to our society. I'd be happy if they stood up for the principle and even expressed it as a standing for principle, because the principle is very, very important. And Kimmel is really making it difficult for them because he probably does deserve to, to be let go.

[Mark Halpern]

That's because. Because what? Because what he said was not a joke. It was a political statement.

[Noam Dwarman]

You know, it's not just that it's a political statement. It's just that he. It's because it's offensive to people, because it's indulging himself. It could have been about something that wasn't political. You know, it's just, he could have just gone out there and intentionally not been funny. But the point is that they, the whole enterprise is based on pleasing an audience and performers lose sight of that. His job there is to entertain.

[Mark Halpern]

Right. But so thinking about your stage here in Gotham City, if a comedian says something super offensive to many, but it was intended to be a joke, was intended to entertain, is there any line that that would be crossed that you'd say, sorry, you're out of here, you can't play my club anymore, as long as it's attempting to be funny? Is, is there a line?

[Noam Dwarman]

Well, that's interesting because. And this is, this does apply to Kimmel. So if a comedian does something and it falls flat the first time, second time, I won't say anything at all, no matter how offensive it is. Because usually the comedians self correct, they realize, oh, that that went over like a lead balloon. There have been like a handful of cases where somebody just keeps at it, keeps at it, keeps at it, where I've had conversations with him. I've never had to suspend anybody. But Kimmel, as I kind of glean from this, does not seem to be self correcting. This has been a problem that's going on. And he seems to be just like doubling down on it in some way. And yeah, by the way, it was a totally unfounded theory. Like, he also looks dumb in a certain way by staking his career. Kind of not his career, but his reputation on an outlandish theory that's going around on Twitter. There's no evidence for the fact it was a griper who killed Charlie Kirk.

[Mark Halpern]

Right. One of the things I respect most about you and love most about you, as my friend, is you're so iconoclastic. You're so open minded in your thinking. You have no sacred cows on the left or the right. You're just looking for truth and to hold everybody accountable and for consistency and principle. You too, Mark. You too.

[Noam Dwarman]

Thank you.

[Mark Halpern]

I appreciate that. Thank you so maybe that's why we get along. So on this general question of is Trump a threat to democracy? Right. In this case, some people say he's a threat to democracy. He's using his handpicked head of the FCC to intimidate Disney. Where are the threats that you see them right now? Are there threats that Donald Trump and his administration are doing things that you say this is a threat to democracy? Is there anything that false rises to that level?

[Noam Dwarman]

I don't see him really as a threat to democracy long term. Two things. I don't think the courts are going to buckle to him when things get really hot. And I see him as a kind of singular and I have my affections for him in certain issues, but a singular, vulgar, shameless feeling figure who will do things that I do not think it's likely we're going to see from future presidents, I actually think we're going to see a reset. Having said that, in terms of long term threats to democracy, yes, short term threat to democracy may be an overblown way of putting it, but, but short term, he's using intimidation to get results from government that he's not supposed to be able to get in that way. And it's a very hardball effective way. And sometimes we may even take the fruits of expediency over principle. Like we are happy to see the border crossings go down to almost zero, even if at the same time we're aware that some of the methods that he's using there are over the line and some of them are intolerable, like sending a guy back to a El Salvadorian prison. So, you know, he's effective in a certain way and some of the effects are good, but some are eroding in the short term, I think how democracy is supposed, how the Bill of Rights is supposed to operate. So that's, that's my answer.

[Mark Halpern]

It's not what's, what's an example of the la. Of that last category of something he's doing that is eroding.

[Noam Dwarman]

Well, if, if he's, if he's causing self censorship by, by a blizzard of lawsuits.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Noam Dwarman]

Yeah, yeah, that's, that's my example. Then, then, you know, then he's, then he's, he's, he's accomplishing something that the President, United States is not supposed to be able to accomplish.

[Mark Halpern]

I was speaking to someone yesterday who's pretty pro Trump, not anti Trump for sure. And he was, he was very adamant that President, what President Trump has done with the going after law firms and Going after universities. He was very troubled by that. Did those either or both of those two things trouble you?

[Noam Dwarman]

Absolutely. I don't like to see the President in a peak going after anybody. I mean, the opposite side is true too, which is that these universities been running roughshod over everything and the hypocrisy has been just absolutely rank. And then they pretend it's free speech speech when obviously they don't really care about free speech. They would have never allowed, you know, anti pro life demonstrations or anti trans demonstrations. So I, I, he's righteous in his anger about certain things, but democracy is supposed to be a slow, creaky process and he's short circuiting that. And that's dangerous, you know, and even if you like this particular result, if it were to become normalized, which I don't think it will be, it becomes dangerous.

[Mark Halpern]

Right. Let's talk a little bit about the comedy racket, the comedy dodge, the business. You've done so well in three clubs here in New York. Fourth opening soon a club in Vegas. The clubs here do extremely well. They sell out pretty much every night, 364 days a year. It's quite impressive as a business. Are we in general in the golden age of comedy in terms of the quantity of stuff available, in terms of the quality or not?

[Noam Dwarman]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. We've been in the golden age of comedy now. It's a long golden age. It, it's, it reminds me of like the late 60s and early 70s in music, where it's just like a perfect storm of tremendous talent and comedians actually don't become less marketable or less commercial as they get older, so they even have a longer staying power. Rock and roll was always associated with youth and it just, I mean the, the average level of the comedian at the comedy seller now compared to where it was in the 90s is three or four times higher than it was. It's, every single comedian is extremely funny. Whereas in the old days one comedian would be funny. It was just normal to see people bombing or struggling and just not that funny. And you know, you have Louis and Chris Rock and Dave Chappelle and Seinfeld and Andrew Schultz and Shane Gillis. I mean, just goes on and on and on. Nate Bragazzi is one after another after another.

[Mark Halpern]

And does that have something to do with YouTube and the ability of people to break through? Like what's driving the golden age?

[Noam Dwarman]

Yeah, I think part of it is, yeah, in the same way that John, Paul, George and Ringo, you know, met in Liverpool, I think there is A certain fluke to it. I mean, you would know better than me. But there's been these things in literature and, and in painting. There's. There's certain times that just for some reason, everything flourishes. And a collection of the greatest talents ever are just around at the same time. And they, Maybe they, Maybe they, they. They spur each other on in some way as well.

[Mark Halpern]

I think it's in part because you take Nate, right? Nate. Nate was like. He had some weird job. I forget what it was. He's like inspected electricity meters or something, right?

[Noam Dwarman]

I don't know. Something like that.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, yeah. So then I've heard him tell the story. He says, well, my friend said I was funny, you know, So I tried it out. Like now if you want to try it out, you can go on TikTok or Instagram or YouTube and try it out. So I think, I think maybe there used to be a lot of very funny people who could make it in. The businesses just didn't have. The barriers to entry were higher. Like, if you were funny before the Internet, before social, you know, what were you going to do? Go to open mic night. Now you can buy. Low cost, low risk.

[Noam Dwarman]

Just so you know, a lot of those people who do well on social media bomb at the clubs. I don't know many of them who used the pipeline that you're describing. And I would also say that the golden age, I was calling it a golden age. YouTube existed already. Excuse me, but prior to YouTube being so dominant in comedy. So I don't think it's that. But what it does do. What it does do is allow the people who are coming up at the clubs to go viral throughout the nation and this increases their ticket sales and that creates a positive feedback loop.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, I know there are lots of people who don't make it that way. I guess all those guys, again, they get to practice, they get to be. And gals, they get to be more popular. As you said, it just spreads wider and I think there's just more opportunities not only to practice, but to catch on. All the people you named on YouTube, there's just hours and hours of their work. Again, before all that stuff existed, unless you saw somebody do a set on one, you know, on the Tonight show, you just didn't have that much of an opportunity to get familiar with their work and for them to reach a big audience. Yeah, something to do with it.

[Noam Dwarman]

This is for music, comedy, for political commentary. This is for everything.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, yeah, I know you don't need my help selling tickets because you do sell out pretty much every show. But if people are interested in coming to New York City and seeing a show, where do they go?

[Noam Dwarman]

They go to comedyceller.com and try to make a reservation.

[Mark Halpern]

Good try. And I'll say Gnome is the Danny Meyer of the comedy business. Danny Meyer, commitment to excellence in service. And if you go to any of Gnomes clubs, there's a little, little code on the table, says if you're not getting the service you want, scan this here and let us know what we can do better. And I've been to other comedy clubs where, let's just say, the attention to customer service is not quite as high.

[Noam Dwarman]

Well, respond to that. Are we wrapping it up? I have a comment about that.

[Mark Halpern]

Yes, sir.

[Noam Dwarman]

So you know people. I get interviewed from time to time about comedy, and I'm always a little embarrassed because I don't know that much about comedy. I mean, I know my little world of comedy, but it's exactly what you say. So much of my attention at the club is in making sure that the sound is right, that the lights are right, that the comedians have the best atmosphere to perform, and that the customers are happy. Anytime somebody leaves a bad survey, I get a text message. And, and this is really what I spend my time doing, not perusing YouTube to see who the next Louis CK is. So I'm always like, yeah, although, although.

[Mark Halpern]

You always play down your knowledge of comedy. But I, I, I feel you. You're pitch perfect on knowing who's good, which is not a bad trick.

[Noam Dwarman]

My, my father used to say, you don't need to speak the language to know who's funny. You could just watch the audience.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, it's a good clue. Noam Dwarman, owner of the comedy seller, attorney at law and podcaster, extraordinary. Thank you, my friend. Thank you for making time.

[Noam Dwarman]

Thanks, Mark.

[Mark Halpern]

All right, next up, something we called. Last up. One final thing I want to tell you about before we go. The question is, what's in a name? As a kid, I was fascinated by two major league baseball players, both hall of famers, and how short their names were. Just six letters combined. First name and last name. Mel Ott, the hall of famer, and Ty Cobb, Six letters. And I was sure this is pre digital age. And chat GPT. I was sure those were the two shortest names ever. Well, it turns out, no, doing research for this segment. Turns out there's some ones with five letters, like a guy named Ed Ott who played for the Pirates, or Ed Hug who played for Brooklyn High Bell, who played for the Cardinals. There's, there's others with just, just a few close to or even fewer than Ty Cobb and Mel Ott. So why was this on my mind this week in Minnesota, a special election, pretty critical one for the state legislature. Because the legislature had been tied in the lower house, Republicans took the advantage when the woman who was the former speaker of the Minnesota House was tragically killed. Special election held to replace her and it was won by this guy. Hello, my name is XP Lee. Now technically Democrat XP Lee. That's not his full name. His name is Xiang Pal Lee, but he goes by xp just five letters in his full name, first and last name, at least as he goes by it. We're on the hunt. We're looking through American history. We want to see if there's anybody who's ever had the same number of just five or even four. But for now, until somebody brings forward evidence the contrary, we're saying that XB Lee is the holder shortest name combined first and last in American state legislative history. That's your last up and that's it for today's show. We'll be back on Tuesday with a brand new episode. That'll be after the memorial service for Charlie Kirk in Arizona. Love to hear your thoughts about today's show. Send me an email. Send it to nextuphalperinmail.com you can always find this program. We're on X Instagram and TikTok with the handle @nextup Halpern we'd love for you to like subscribe, do everything you possibly can on whatever platforms you love. And of course if you want to watch the program and not just listen, you can do that on YouTube, our channel YouTube.com nextup halperin like subscribe and share share there as well. We'd love for you to be part of being in the nexter community listening or watching so you always know what's coming next up.

[PACT Brand Voice]

Your skin should never come second. That's why Pact makes everyday essentials from the purest organic cotton. No toxins, no harsh chemicals, just softness you can feel good in. Because when wellness isn't just what you put in your body, it's what you put on it too. From the first layer to the last. Getting dressed should feel like self care. Visit wearpacked.com and use code dresswell for 15% off your first order packed. Dress yourself well.

[Noam Dwarman]

Possibility means you have a chance.

[Mark Halpern]

Passion opens the door to all possibilities.

[Kristi Noem]

When I feel like anything's possible, I feel, I feel kind of giddy. I want to be an astronaut, an.

[Noam Dwarman]

Artist, an actress to visit another country.

[Mark Halpern]

All I need is a backpack and a pair of shoes, and I'll find a way.

[Kristi Noem]

I'm able to do anything I set my mind to.

[Noam Dwarman]

I've never felt like more things are possible than right now. In the right shoes, anything's possible.

[PACT Brand Voice]

DSW countless shoes at bragworthy prices.

[Mark Halpern]

Imagine the possibilities.