Why Trump is Facing a Critical Moment for His Legacy

- Hey everybody, welcome, my mum, Mark Calprin.

This is next stop on the Editor-in-Chiefs of two-way live video. Platform hand to the host here of the program. Next up, glad to hear with us. Thank you for being next to us and being part

of this community. Two great guests today, my friends, and my co-hosts on two-way on the morning needing everybody through Friday, Larry, O'Connor, and Kevin Walling will be here.

We're gonna talk about this fight between John Oshoff and the president and the president supporters over Natalie Harb. But we're also gonna talk about the way the media covers women in this white house

with an enormous double standard that extends well beyond this Natalie Harb issue. So we'll get to that in a minute.

But first, my report in monlogged on something

that is extremely important to the president, extremely important to the country,

“which is the question of how's he gonna do in this term?”

When all is said and done, when we get to January of 2029, how will the president be seen? A lot of that story is told unfortunately by biased people. He won't find a more biased group of people than the media who doesn't like President Trump,

except for historians. You look at these surveys of historians and you'll see things like Joe Biden was a more successful president than Ronald Reagan. You cannot rely on that.

I said during the by-nears that Joe Biden's mental decline was not as bad as the Republicans said it was, but it was a lot worse than his democratic defenders, including in the media said. It's the same with the Trump presidency.

Okay. If you look at Donald Trump's presidency, Heather Cox Richardson and other liberal and historians will say it's a disaster. They'll literally say it's the worst president of all time.

And what will the president say is the best president of all time? I approached it from a different point of view. I don't think he's the best president of all time, but I also don't think he's the worst president of all time, but my job is to kind of chronicle not just what he does,

but have to do people feel about it. And what I'll hear to tell you today is with the clock ticking, the Trump presidency, the Trump legacy, the Trump record of accomplishment, I think it hangs in the balance.

There are some things he's already accomplished, like shutting down the border, like remaking the relationship with NATO, like changing some of the cultural and social issues here in the United States. He can bank those. I think those are accomplishments that will stand the test to time.

Not everybody will agree with those things, but there are things that he promised to do and he's done them, and continues to work on them. Okay. So he's got some things done,

but a lot of things hang in the balance now.

“And that's what I want to talk about today,”

because it's not too soon to be anticipating what's going to happen. At the end of a presidency after the midterms, particularly after a poor midterm, and this is shaping up right now, to be not a great midterm for the president, maybe,

about a one-third chance, it's a disastrous midterm.

The focus is going to be first on, okay, how's the president going to deal with the new Congress? And then before too long, happens to every president in their seventh and eighth year, the focus is going to be on the next presidential race.

Now Donald Trump commands attention more than any president, Bill Clinton did a pretty good job of commanding attention. And as I covered the end of the Clinton administration, I saw the shock, a concern, desperation on the part of the president and his team

to try to continue to get coverage of a presidency. You know, you fight so hard to get elected president. You expect to have a four-year term, not a two-and-a-half-year term. But that's what this president faces. And so his chance of accomplishment goes down,

“particularly if he loses control of Congress.”

Now, could he work with Democrats in Congress? I talk about this all the time. Could his legacy be improved because with the Democratic House, and maybe a Democratic Senate, he works across the out-of-the-get things done?

I suppose I could happen unless bullish on that is a possibility that I was because he's built up such hostility on both sides at built-up hostility. It's hard for me to see Democrats as they fight to win the White House in 2028 working with the president,

but it's not impossible. But let's review, where do things stand for the big ticket items on the Trump agenda? And it starts not just for the midterms, but for legacy with the economy, OK?

Donald Trump's record on the economy is mixed. The record on the economy is mixed. He could your dad and history as the person who launched a generation or generations of American economic supremacy because of how he's treated AI.

That hangs in the balance. But the initial idea of a very laser-fair attitude towards AI-- it's changed a little bit. Public opinion has the nature of the development

to move towards thinking about more regulation. Communities are demanding, more regulation on the data centers. This could end up being handled perfectly.

“And I think if it is, it'll be a big part of his legacy.”

A president who presided over the birth of what could turn out to be the most historic technological innovation in human history, if he navigates between regulation and deregulation, between safety and economic growth, that'll be an extraordinary legacy.

And I think he might be able to do that. And if he does do that, the economy could grow a lot. If the economy grows and taxes are roughly where they are, tax rates are where they are, the deficit could be reduced. This week, the shocking news about the explosion

and the debt, the failure to deal with deficits. Every president can find an excuse and most have the exception of Bill Clinton to not reduce the debt and deficit. It's easy for Donald Trump to say, well, I had to deal with the extraordinary conflict with Iran.

And not deal with the debt and deficit. And Scott Besett, the Treasury Secretary, has said they're going to do it. But honestly, there's no sign they're going to do it. And so whether the president gets a better record

on the economy than he now has, particularly if he can end the Iran conflict, I don't believe there's any prospect of significant deficit and debt reduction in this administration. I don't see it.

Maybe I'll be proven wrong. That would be a blight on his record. But not one, I'm not sure the president cares about. The president's attitude towards this, and I told you this before,

he's never going to do anything politically

deleterious to his interest if another president's done it. And other presidents have failed to control this and made up excuses. So you look at his job record. Now Joe Biden had a very strong record on job creation.

“But a big part of that was who's coming out of COVID, right?”

So jobs were coming back. But if you look at the Trump job creation record in term one and now in term two, it's not good and it's not gotten better. It's gotten more disappointing. So debt and deficit, I don't think he's on track for a great legacy.

Building a great economy, he says it's the greatest economy in the world already. You know, it's not. And part of that is the Iran War that he chose to start. But that hangs the balance as well.

And then of course, what's the level of popularity? Presence would love to leave office as Bill Clinton did with the high job of approval rating. He's not on track to do that right now. Does he have time after the, I don't think his job approval

is going to go up before the midterms. So does he have time after the midterms when he may suffer from significant losses to raise his poll numbers, don't know? But it's unlikely. And the appeal that Donald Trump has had, politically and economically,

has been the same from the very beginning,

from the first campaign to his unsuccessful

reelection to his reelection in 2024. It's been the same. It's about reaching people in a way that other politicians have an intensive millions of Americans have felt the reality of their support for Donald Trump

warts and all has been based to some extent on his capacity to stand up to what they consider to be an establishment political order that hasn't served them well. There are lots of illustrations of this. Here's a good one.

Tucker Carlson, who's understood the Trump project as well as anyone in journalism for a long time. Here's Tucker in 2020 talking about the appeal of Donald Trump. Millions of Americans sincerely love Donald Trump. They love him in spite of everything they've heard.

They love him often in spite of himself. They're not diluted. They know exactly who Trump is. They love him anyway. They love Donald Trump because no one else loves them.

The country, they built. The country, their ancestors fought for over hundreds of years has left them to die in their unfashionable little towns.

Donald Trump in other words is and has always been

a living indictment of the people who run this country. Trump rose because they failed. It's as simple as that. If the people in charge had done a halfway decent job with the country they inherited, if they cared about anything,

other than themselves, even for just a moment, Donald Trump would still be hosting celebrity apprentice. And so you're looking at a guy, again, AI is a big variable who may be presiding over high debt, high deficit, relatively mixed to negative economic numbers

and a range of various low poll numbers. Now, what could turn all that around, or at least some of that around is Iran. As we sit here today to talk about it,

“will Iran be a positive on his legacy, on his record?”

Well, if the war ends, if the straight is not controlled by the Iranians and Iran's capacity for nuclear, missile terrorism, if all that is degradated substantially,

Are we on track to that today?

We're not. So that hangs the balance as well. And I think that's a big one.

“And it's particularly big not just for the legacy of that issue,”

but if the conflict continues as a stalemate, as something that's a drain on America's military capacity, as a strain on the President's bandwidth, and as a symbol of a war of choice that failed, that distracts from a lot of other stuff as well.

So that's another big variable we don't know how that one's gonna end. The two big international variables that undergird everything, including the entire President of China and Russia, particularly China, the President and his advisors entered this administration saying their legacy

was going to be to end the Russia Ukraine conflict and to develop a relationship with China that did not diminish the capacity of the United States to do other stuff.

In other words, to not have all of our military,

diplomatic, geopolitical, economic bandwidth, be taken up by the existential fight with China. And whether that's beating China in various ways, like an AI, or cooperating with China in various ways, like trade deals that she and Trump workout,

the goal was to make the relationship one

“that is not drained down the United States.”

That's still the goal. Iran has gotten in the way of that, because Iran is an ally of China, and the President has had to put bandwidth on it. There's a summit coming up.

He's meeting she, several times this year alone, probably will next year. That is a big legacy item, and that hangs the bounds too. I can't sit here today and tell you based on all the conversations I've had,

that the President is on track to achieve his mission

with China to make the relationship less of a threat, less of a drain. He could still do it. And I would put the China piece up there with solving Iran, booming economy, managing AI.

As the big things, Russia, Ukraine too, but probably subsidiary, big things. I'll say again, managing the relationship with China, and ending the Iran conflict, managing AI, and finding it a way to have a booming American economy.

Those are, I think, the things, more than anything else that'll shape the President's legacy, and all of them are hanging in the balance,

“and honestly, today, with the midterm's approaching,”

they're very negative. I don't see negative or neutral, maybe, you could say. But none of them are on a jet lift off, rocket lift off to clear success. Then you've got some other international issues.

Obviously, dealing with Israel and Gaza, the Abraham Accords, those would all be extraordinary, resolving Greenland and the favorite of the United States, resolving Cuba, okay? Now, then there's another big one that I've been,

I've been heartened to hear from a lot of conservatives and Trump supporters in the last couple of weeks. Which is, you've got corruption, you can call it a personal enrichment, but this is an extraordinary blight

on the President's record in legacy. I don't know why he and its advisors who've enabled him, and his family, I don't know why they've chosen to get rich off of the office. I'm not saying he's broken a single law,

though he might have. I'm not saying other presidents haven't done it, but the scale and scope, and particularly the thing he just did, where you can buy access, early access

to treat social posts. This is not me talking, this is conservative Republican Trump supporters who say that this will be a blight on the President's legacy. And there's no sign that he's stopping.

He entered office as a billionaire, he will leave office almost certainly as a richer billionaire, but it is, it is, it's gonna be part of his legacy. And I suspect, if Democrats do take the majority,

this is gonna be one of their priorities, unlike reporters that got subpoena power, I suspect you're gonna see more about just how close and access was between the presidents, use of the office and getting rich.

Okay. Tax cuts, closing the border, changing the culture of work, in Europe, changing the culture of work at home. These are all extraordinary achievements

from the president's things that he promised to do. But he clocked is ticking. He's going to lose the spotlight. He's going to have a different calculus. Republicans will almost certainly lose the house.

They could lose the Senate. Sure, there's some scenarios where they keep both. But no matter who controls the Congress, the presidency, the clock, the capacity to get things done at home and abroad,

narrows after the midterms. And if he has a bad midterm and right now he would, if things are shaping up, he will be even more constrained. His approval rating won't look good.

through a prison by a lot of Americans as negative.

So what I'm here to tell you is, this is not the worst president ever. This is not the best president ever.

“This is not a president whose legacy is clear.”

But he does have his eye on the prize, growing economy, managing AI, managing China, and Russia, and dealing with the Iran conflict. He's focused on those things. I know he focuses also on buildings and everything else.

But he wants a great legacy. He wants to be seen as a great president. His mindset, his public rhetoric suggests he already thinks he is. But he knows full well he's got a lot of unfinished projects. And it's difficult in year seven and eight.

For any president, even ones more popular than this one is right now to finish their legacy projects. It's difficult. But that's what he faces. That's the challenge for Donald Trump

if he wants to be considered a successful president, not just by himself and his own mind, not just by his biggest supporters, but by the American people and by history. That's what hangs in the balance.

All right, let me know. Let me know if you have things a fairer appraisal of the Trump legacy information. Want to know what you think, send me an email. My email address is next up at devilmakeairmedia.com.

Send me an email and let me know. Did I get that right or not? Next up at devilmakeairmedia.com.

“All right, a quick break and then a delight,”

a treat, a special moment. By two two way colleagues will join me from the morning meeting. Larry O'Connor and Kevin Walling are next up. (upbeat music)

I'll talk about life insurance. We all know we need it, but many of us put it off because it feels complicated, expensive, and like something that can wait. We'll stop waiting.

Take care of it today with select quote in just 15 minutes. High quality coverage can be secured to fit any life and any budget.

And here's what makes select quote different.

They're in licensed insurance agents work for the consumer, not for the insurance companies. They compare options across multiple trusted carriers to find the right coverage at the absolute lowest price. Unlike other brokers who push policies

that pay them the most select quote agents actually shop around. With nearly 40 years of experience and over 2 million families already helped, this is expertise that you can trust.

Truly, even with health issues like high blood pressure diabetes or heart disease,

“their agents know exactly which carriers”

will provide the best rate for those who are on good health. Same day coverage is available with no medical exam required. Don't delay peace of mind.

Select quote, they shop you save. Get the right life insurance for you for less at select quote.com/mark. Again, right now go to select quote.com/mark today to get started.

(upbeat music) All right, next up and joining me now, my close friends and colleagues from the morning meeting on 2A area of Conor and Kevin Walling every Monday through Friday.

We gather on the 2A platform at 90am Eastern Time to do a conversation like no other gentleman welcome. It's like a three-way date every morning. It is like a three-way date. It is like a three-way date.

It is like a three-way date. It is like a three-way date. We're closing in in our hearts. We're closing in on our closing in on a hundredth episode. Kevin got a very nice write-up today

and trade publication. Kevin, you've done a lot of media as it's Larry. Well, how is the morning meeting in terms of reaction you get for folks? How is that different than other media?

If at all. - I see, you know, a number of times, I guess co-hosted to five and would get tweets and stuff like that in DMs. I had not received more feedback either

through my video website, through direct messages, from community members that truly enjoy the conversation. We're not yelling at each other. It's an hour of actually talking about issues and the uniqueness of bringing folks live on screen,

not hiding behind tweets, not hiding behind comments, but you see them physically. And they make comments, ask questions. There's something really friggin special about what we do every morning

and the community's growing and I hear from it from them every single day. - Yeah, Larry, you sent a text the other day that made me almost cry. Almost, you said, I freaking love this show or whatever.

He said, same question. How is the reaction compared to the other media? Do you, which is all great, too? But how is this different? - It's fat, you know, I've been doing talk radio in DC

for 15 years now and I have never gotten the reaction

to that show that I've gotten from just doing, what have we been doing in the six months now? We've been doing the morning meeting. And I figured that would be the case in DC because it's a very plugged in, well placed audience.

But I was at a wedding in the Midwest. Meredith and I were going into the church right before this ceremony and a guy tapped me on the shoulder. He lives in Kansas and he said, "Love you on morning meeting.

"Love watch in the show." And I said, "Oh, well, thank you." And he had no idea anything else that I did. He doesn't know any of the other platforms I'm on. So it is incredible to reach the show has.

a few weeks ago, some of you message on Instagram. He's a friend through Alex, my husband,

“and said, his father at one point at the dinner table said,”

"Do you have any no Kevin Walling?" And he said, "Oh, God, in what context." - Oh, that's kind of a random thing. And he said, you know, I'm a lifelong Republican, but I love the conversation.

I love that they can discuss issues without getting hyperpartisan, actually delving it to things. He's married to a Democrat, himself, the guy's father. So they have it at home in terms of a bipartisan relationship

and just loves the exchange that we all feature every single day. - Again, it's so grateful to you both for being part of the show, obviously. And welcome everybody to join us, Monday through Friday, 9 o'clock.

And then at 10 East on, on Series X, and now we're gonna show our winners, gentlemen, we'll have a normal conversation like we do every Monday through Friday on two-way here on next up.

And a focus always relentlessly forward-looking

as we try to be, John O'Sough, I still am confused. When he invoked Natalie in one phrase

“in a long-stum speech, Kevin, what was he trying to do?”

What was the goal of invoking a presidential aid, Natalie Harper? - It's a good question, and I think it's changed over time. Obviously he wanted a viral moment. He's a documentary producer. He has these scripted moments with high gloss imagery,

flagged or deflagged flying. So clearly he wanted to telegraph something. I don't know to your point, Mark, and you made this, whether he anticipated the furious backlash if he's actually enjoying that.

He hasn't doubled down on the comments to actually explain why it is that he's doing that, but he's also raised nearly $100 million. And we know that from our Kelly's experience others, when you become Trump's number one foil

on the Democratic side, that is a recipe for raising a lot of money. I suspect that was likely behind by him wanting to needle the president on that front. - Yeah, Larry, again, if you would be sitting with John O'Sough

backstage, if right before he went out, he showed you that speech text, and it was in the text, he didn't add a little bit apparently. Would you have been able to predict the reaction that's coming from the White House and from you and from others?

- No, no, I think I am a little bit surprised only in that it was festering on social media for about 12 hours before a big response came from the White House staff that people who work with Natalie Harp. I think Senator Ossoff thought this was going to be

an innuendo that would attack or sort of draw attention to President Trump but it really ended up focusing as an attack on this young woman

“who didn't deserve it and I think that's why there's been such a reaction”

because she's sort of seen as collateral damage here and you don't treat people that way.

- Just have a good faith conversation as we always try to do

and this has been raised by others. I've said, Senator Ossoff should have been more careful. Regardless of his intent, regardless of the anti-spay of the reaction, his words could have easily, he should have foreseen the reaction and the failure to be careful with someone's reputation.

But all he said was the President likes to travel with her. He didn't say anything else towards his statement. - True statement. - We should say true statement. - Oh, that's true statement. - And he could have said, he could have said he likes traveling around on Air Force 1 with Stephen Miller.

- Right. - Which he does? That would have been true too. - It's also true. And Larry, we all know the President has said, way worse, way more offensive things to and about women than what John Ossoff said. So I'm not ever in touch with him. - I'm not in touch with him. - But isn't it hard to understand just how ferocious the reaction has been,

which John Ossoff said, in the context of the grieved parties tolerate President Trump of saying offensive things to women for decades? - Yeah, I've got two responses to that. The first is, if you look at the montage that CNN played famously this week of things that President Trump has said to other women,

it's always in response to that woman either asking a question it doesn't like

or being rude or something that he doesn't like. And again, I'm not defending his behavior. I'm just saying, it's in response directly to something that that young woman did. Not only have didn't do anything to Senator Ossoff. All right, so that's the first answer. But the second answer is,

if the Democrats argument, if Senator Ossoff's argument is listen, I'm just doing what Trump does. Well, that's fine. Go ahead. But my understanding was that Senator Ossoff and Democrats have told us that Donald Trump is beyond the pale, he's not worthy of the office. And their hope with their next candidate is that they are going to put that all behind them.

And they're going to transcend the era of Trump. And instead, they're basically saying, yep, I can do just what Trump did. I don't know if that's a winning message.

- Yeah, I mean, nobody does it better in terms of getting down in the mud

than Donald Trump. And he's singular in that way. And anyone on the right and the left, and there's been provocative tours on the right, elected or otherwise, that tried to capture that same kind of pugnaciousness fail, because Trump is singular in that front to Hillary's point. I also think it's just gratuitous and Larry mentioned CNN.

“I mean, to have the strange brother on, I think it's just indicative of where we are.”

And I think that I think CNN has fueled a lot of the focus on nowly art because of the relationship with the president. Beyond what just Senator Ossoff has said, and I think it's now it's getting to a carnival level because of what you're seeing specifically on CNN.

And we've talked about the clip with Scott Jennings from the other night, as well, where this just seemingly is nonstop coverage. As it was with the Kevin Cart on CNN. - I'm not a babe in the woods when it comes to the media. I've been in the media business a long time.

I'm really confused by the indignity that Kevin, you just suggested,

and many Republicans have about having the brother or a strange brother on.

Why is that? And again, I'm not saying this. I'm not defending it. I'm just really confused. Why are people so indignate about her strange brother being booked on? What am I missing?

- Kevin, again, they're not in touch. He was sharing stories of fur from back in the day, and her quasi-obsession with the president,

“and I think her obsession with President Bush as well.”

- Again, to Larry's point, this is, you know, White House staff, each should not have the price secretary. She's very close to the president, so there are a number of stories about senior White House AIDS, but again, I think it's silly season to some degree.

- Yeah. - I mean, I can't hear her. - He didn't write anything. The brother doesn't know anything, though. I mean, the only pictures they could show was with Tigger, when they went to Disneyland,

but they were eight years old, but Larry, if you and I watched the 24 hours of cable news, we'd see a lot of guests who don't know anything. Like, that's fair enough. - That's not our morning show, not our morning show.

- Not our show, but to me, so my point is, sure, would I have booked the brother probably not? Did I think he was a value-add guest, I didn't, after watching the segment, but there's this moral indignation of adbooking and that I keep hearing.

And again, I'm just expressing, I'm truly just asking the question, I don't have to answer. - I can answer. - Yeah, because the moral indignation has to do with again, the target was Natalie Hart. What has this woman done other than be a loyal deputy

to the president and do her job with President Trump? Why then the focus was not on Trump? The focus was not on something that Trump has done. The focus was on Natalie Hart, so let's bring her a strange brother who hasn't talked to her in a decade on.

That's the problem, because they're targeting her. - All right, I consider this, I'm risking, I'm risking trouble by bringing this up. People would say, sexist of a man to leave the toilet seat up in a shared bathroom, right?

And I'd say, why is that sexist? Why should we be catering?

It's like, let's say women and children first off the sinking boat.

I treat women as equals. They can raise and lower the seat just as easily as I can. They can survive on a sinking boat just as well as I can. Natalie Hart is paid for by her tax dollars. She's very close to the president.

She's got a publicly documented relationship with the president that's unusual. If it had been Stephen Miller, if John also up at said, he'd love to travel around with Stephen Miller, I don't think anybody would have batted in an eye, right?

- Right. - So because the insinuation was that there was a sexual relationship. - Except he didn't insinuate that. And again, he should have been more careful. But my point is, isn't there a little bit sexist to say,

she can't her brother shouldn't be interviewed. She's just a civilian. She's not a civilian, she's a senior government official with extraordinary access to the president and extraordinary relationship. Shouldn't that be scrutinized away?

It would be whether she were is a woman or a man? - No, only if there's a suggestion that it's improper or illegal. Otherwise, I think it's obvious what Senator Osaf was doing.

“And that's why you heard the reaction in the crowd.”

And that he was dwelling on that sort of blue sky rumor mongering that has been out there that people won't talk about because it's just a rumor and he made it a news story. And so now it gives permission to CNN to do three days worth on it. - I agree their coverage is excessive.

And I agree I wouldn't have booked the brother. But Kevin, I'm still confused. Why she's being treated like, I understand she's a cancer survivor and she's a young person. And she doesn't like the spotlight.

But if you don't like the spotlight, don't could be a senior advisor to the president. - Yeah. And I think part of this too is you have folks in the White House operation, obviously a lot of them came to her defense.

But there have been some concerns raised about their closeness, right? And her obsession with the president. President, obviously likes people around him

And she plays a vital role in fueling that for him. And I think there are questions necessarily about, and he has told people, when you all leave me, when I'm out of office, she's going to be the only one that cares about me. He has fueled some of this speculation just about her obsession.

I'm not at all saying there's an improper relationship there. And I don't think there is. But there is some strangeness. I think we can all agree with that. - Well, she's not Korean John Pierre.

She's not, you know, Susie Wiles. She's not like devoted to the guy sleeping on tots to be next to him at Bedminster.

“- And all honesty, even if you want to say there's nothing”

quote strange about it. Even if you want to say there's nothing improper about it. There's change of notes, et cetera. Two things are definitely true. One is, it's a very interesting and important relationship

for the president of the United States.

It's an incredible story.

Here's a young woman who wasn't connected to politics, who had a appreciation for the president, helping her get access to light saving drugs. Now devotes her life to helping him day to day. And it's so important to him that he took her on Air Force One

in the laundry truck. I mean, that's an incredibly interesting and important story. And number two, again, documented fact, there are people around the president who do not like this relationship, who do, who think there's something off about it.

And that's an incredibly interesting and important story, too. - So in March to your point, White Matters to all of us is, she's an incredibly important gatekeeper to the president. She processes a lot of the information that goes to him. - Yeah.

“- You know, in the paper flow, she's in charge somewhat of his social media.”

So this is a person, obviously, White House staff or staff. But this is in a person with a lot of day-to-day things that affect my life, layers of life, your life, in terms of the direction of this country, that is worth conversation, and some degrees scrutiny.

- Hi, I won't necessarily disagree with you, but that's not why Senator Ossoff raised her name. Okay, so let's just be real on this. - Agreed, and let's so, I'm sure someone will take some of this stuff. I'd set out a context, particularly about the toilet seat.

But I'll just say again, just say again, he should have taken more care with what he said. - The toilet seat is a heard rail of Paul. - All those things you need to do. - And that's one of the reasons why I'm married to a man

is we don't have to quarry about it. - It's leaving up.

- I never get you all thanks for that imagery.

- In the spirit of the morning meeting. - Far in our direction. - Let me ask you, Mark, because you've been around a lot. That if there was something un-tored, I don't think you would have seen the White House come out as well.

They would have loved to have seen this just go away. If there really is something inappropriate. - Yeah, I disagree. - I disagree. - I'll see, to me, the fact that the White House was ready

to defend Natalie Harp in her reputation and to me, that told me that she was wrongly being dragged into this. - Oh, the president kind of brushed it off though. - Yeah, he did. - Yeah, he did.

“- See, I think there's been, we gotta take a break,”

but there's been insufficient attention. If you're just wanna analyze this as a media story and as a press management story. The president was good cop. The president was like, yeah, he's P.V. Herman, let's move on.

For some reason, that posture was not matched by his aides who went after it hard. So I think it was you think of that cop. - Yeah, you think he did that and then he went it as soon as they cleared the overlap as he said, released the hounds.

- I think so, that'd be my guess, but I'll say again, even if there's no physical relationship with them or romantic, whatever word you wanna use, there is a relationship between them that is unorthodox and that people around the president don't like.

Those are just true facts. And so they may have wanted to move forward on it and try to both stifle the comments and penalize us off and have the president downplay in order to move past it because I don't think they want

a lot of scrutiny of the relationship regardless of what it is. - I know we're taking a break, but I'll just say, if I were the president of the United States, especially after surviving the first term that he did

where he had hardly anyone in his office that he could trust, I would want someone like Natalie Harp to be my executive assistant. - Yeah, well, absolutely, absolutely. All right, take a quick break, then next up,

three guys are gonna continue to talk about women in the White House and the double standard, the double standard of coverage of Trump and Biden, women and high office, Larry and Kevin, more at Larry and Kevin next up. Make sure you subscribe to next up's Instagram page

where you can get bonus content, best moments from the show. Follow us on Instagram, please at next up, Alpern, if you haven't already, and of course, you can listen to the show as a podcast, subscribe to next up with Mark Alpern, wherever you get your podcast,

make sure downloads are turned on, blah, blah, blah. Make sure you tell everybody about the show and that they can listen to it that way,

so you and they can always get all my fresh reports,

a minute they drop, only on next up. (upbeat music) - There's a question that runs under everything we do on this program, no matter what we cover, the question is,

who's just looking at for themselves.

“I want to ask that same question now about something,”

a lot of you are dealing with immediately, your Medicare coverage. Two Medicare plans, they can have the exact same coverage, the same doctors, and still wildly different prices, the same benefits, but a different bill,

and unless somebody goes looking, you'd never know it.

Chapter, a company of independent Medicare advisors, found exactly that for someone in this audience just last month, same coverage, three different carrier options, and switching just one, put a couple thousand dollars back in her pocket over the life of the plan.

That's the whole idea, chapters the only Medicare advisors who compare every plan from every carrier nationwide. Their advisors are in paid to push one plan over another. If you're already on the best plan, they'll tell you that, but if not,

they'll help you make the switch, a real conversation with a real person that's free and done in under 20 minutes. Folks who switch with chapter last year, get this saved an average of $1100.

“So give my friends over a chapter or call,”

their nice folks, that's 262-454-0503. People who check, tell me the same thing all the time, they wish they'd made the call sooner at 262-454-0503. [MUSIC PLAYING] All right, next up, more with my colleagues from the morning meeting

on 2A, Larry O'Connor, Kevin Walling, gentlemen, let's continue. We talk all the time, I do. Larry does Kevin does less, less, less, less, and enthusiasm about the media double standards for Republicans and Democrats.

And even now, even as the Trump team Trump has spent a decade trying to convince the press to cover everything equally. They don't. And the example I want to talk about today is implicated in the Natalie Harp stuff, Natalie Harp is an incredible story.

As I said in the last segment, she should be the subject. If this were, if she were, had the same relationship with Barack Obama or Joe Biden. She would be featured in Glowing Profiles in the New York Times and Women's Magazine and on television.

What an incredible story. Cancer survivor, spoke at the convention. So dedicated to the president. Then you've got, you've got Caroline Levitt. You've got Susie Wiles, Susie Wiles.

All these people, and just go back to the Biden administration. Not the most glamorous administration in the history of the world. I think that's it. They know. I mean, I'm just saying, you were glamorous, but you know what I'm saying.

It's like Joe Biden, he'd been vice president. It's like nothing new in fresh and exciting. And the women of the Biden administration were covered like they were celebrities. And we'll put up on the screen just a bunch of examples

of profiles of the press secretary and profiles of other senior women. And of course, the first lady, the current first lady,

never on the cover of Vogue Ridiculous.

Here's a headline, Business Insider. Me 24 women in prime positions to sway the Biden White House. You just don't see, for finally 29, need six young women who'll be keeping the White House running. Again, these are all Biden era glowing pieces.

White House press secretary, Green John Pierre, has made history and waves of in Vogue. A story after story like that. Kevin, you're an analyst, a student of this. How do you account for the discrepancy

between how successful women are covered in this administration versus in a previous Democratic administration? Yeah, I remember during the Biden administration,

“Green's up here, had some kind, I think,”

maybe before the correspondence and or someone like that, had a hard film crew following her around for some documentary, having just been on the cover of "Banity Fair" or "Vogue" or something like that. I think, you know, and she was a failure as a press secretary and now she did some independent.

And no, by the way, she wasn't good at her job either. She wasn't good at her job. Me, probably because she spent a lot of time trying to get her own press, a part of this, and these covers, as vanity exercises.

So I've got a great deal of grief that I give to those folks that go out of their way to become the story. That has all shifted now that politics is all about pop culture and things like that. You have so many staffers, and you see, with Congress,

why folks run for office now is not to actually work in markups and committee hearings that they're to get social media likes and things like that. Same with the White House staff, it used to be not too long ago that White House staff were really not supposed to be the focus of any attention. It was all the principal, same with the Senate and the House and when you go for a governor.

And now they chase their own stories and profiles. And it's mostly on the Democratic side. There's no question that there's a supply side issue that Democrats may well make themselves more available. But they'd be writing stories about the Democrats, even if they declined to participate.

Kevin, before I ask Larry for his explanation,

how does Vogue decide we're never going to put,

How does the Washington Post style this section say?

We're never going to write a favorable profile of Caroline Levitt or Susie Wiles.

How do they decide these things? Is there the elites, right? And they decide, and I think they also cater to an elite crowd that I think would react negatively based on their readership. If they saw the first lady Melania Trump on the cover or Caroline Levitt talking about

being a mom now of two and balancing work in life and Susie Wiles now a cancer survivor, battling cancer while being the first woman chief to staff. Again, I'm a liberal, right?

“And that's why, also, the morning meeting has been so constructive to me and instructed to me,”

based on these kind of conversations where Avail has been lifted on a lot of this coverage because of that media bias that you see. Larry, how does this happen? They sit around and say, we're not interested in Melania Trump because we don't like her, or do they say this Kevin suggested, our audience doesn't like her.

How do they reach these conclusions? Because the disparity in how successful women are treated between democratic and Republican administrations is just massive.

I have a hunch, I've never been invited into their editorial rooms.

I'd love to, though, once, but I think it's the same phenomenon we're setting out. I couldn't find anything funny about Barack Obama or Joe Biden, where, you know, in my circles, we found a lot of things to joke about about them.

“I think the part of it's obvious because of their political ideology.”

They're not the right kind of women and they're not working for or supporting the right kind of president. And I think a lot of it comes down to abortion, honestly. I think that that's still sort of the third rail of liberal female politics and those, those women who run these publications, that sort of their number one issue and they're never going to celebrate a woman who was, it was the same thing in the Bush administration, too.

Dana Perino was fantastic, but she didn't get a whole lot of attention until afterwards in her post White House career. But also, I just, I think you're pretty close when you say they don't make themselves available. I think the president Trump for the most part doesn't like to bring in people to his inner staff who then have their own PR agencies. They're there to serve the president.

And so I don't think you see Susie Wiles or Caroline Levitt doing a big push and pitching themselves for these stories like you did see in the Biden White House. Aside from that piece with that gatekeepers author, Chris Wipple about Susie Wiles, that was a profile. Right, but I think, and I think that was fair, I think that was fair. Yeah, that was fair, but again, that was a one-off. That's a one-off.

Yeah. And it was only an exchange for Susie Wiles telling, "Oh, a lot of stuff off the record that she claims she didn't know was going to be published during the presidency." Remember, she said, "I thought this was for the book after the act." Yeah. And private conversations implicitly private that he chose to use. I have to say, this morning on the stairmaster, as I was thinking about talking to you guys about this, I thought,

could I craft the New York Times-style profile of Susie Wiles? First female chief of staff doing the job with cancer involved in managing Donald Trump and, and as much as he's still just an out-of-control, you know, renegade of a force, she really does manage him. She really does manage the schedule. Again, it's impossible to control completely. And I just thought, if this were about a democratic president who led a movement and but required management,

who had had previous chiefs to staff, none of whom survived in the job, all of whom were at

their welcome with Trump. This is this incredible story. I could even write it for the New York Times

and make it and make it rhyme with the way they normally would cover a successful woman. Yeah. And yet they don't. They just don't do it. Well, in the case of the New York Times, I think that you mentioned the readership, and I think, yeah, the New York Times, they'll hate that. Their readers hated. But if if if if Vogue put Melania Trump on their cover, if if they really did care about

readership, that would probably be the best selling addition of Vogue in two decades. And that, that example, of course, Kevin is particularly glaring and no offense to the previous first ladies. But the current first lady is is a certified beauty. I mean, she, she could be on the cover of Vogue if she were not the first lady. And the first ladies are all lovely women. But there's no maybe a lot. She's no maybe eyes an hour, and she's no one's from that's for sure.

Yeah. You know what I'm saying? Like I agree. And absurd. It's absurd. She should be on the cover of everything. Well, I think the first lady at the United States, she could be a model. I just, I just love the Kevin grabbed maybe eyes and how or is he? Yeah. We've maybe a legendary. Yeah. Very good. But listen to, you know, there should be some curiosity about the inner workings and mechanics of this operation to your point about the New York Times profile. Even if you

“don't agree with any of the policy, you get an understanding. That's why the Natalie Hark”

story is so fascinating to me. Let's do the personalities of the mechanics of how powerful this

interesting curiosity in Susie Wiles as well. Not just her personal story or father coming up in Florida politics, falling in and out of, you know, relationship, friendship with Ron DeSantis, navigating all of that. Yeah. Incredible. It's an incredible story. And to understand how this White House operates from a tactical level should be of interest to everybody, including New York Times's leadership, which you obviously live role. And you know, that's something, again, to bring

it back to the morning meeting and something that Mark has done such a good job of trying to create. It's, again, you don't have to agree it or not to celebrate, but just to understand what's going on on the other room. There's, as a conservative Republican, I feel like there's been this other ring here. We talked about it after Charlie Kirk was assassinated that all the Sunday shows

that we can acknowledge that he was one of the most important, if not the most important, influential

voices in the White House and in the conservative movement. And yet they had never invited him on as a guest on their shows. They only talked about him after he was murdered. We feel like we don't

“have a seat at the table oftentimes. And that's why I think there's a lot of misunderstanding and”

division in this country. I want to talk about Caroline Levitt, who's ostensibly leaving her position as press secretary, though I still think the president's going to try to get her back. Leave aside, how you feel about Trump, leave aside ideology. Just in terms of the mechanics of doing the job of press secretary, Kevin, what is she good at? That if you were becoming the White House press secretary for Democrat or advising a Democrat, like what are the mechanical things

that she does well? Well, the public facing role in terms of being part of justice in the whole job. Yeah, and in support of the president from the podium, that's it with the president likes. They have a closeness. She's also a senior advisor, which you don't often see with the press secretary of potentially, a lot of press secretary's are kept at arms length, right? Not brought into the room.

Some of the first term, like Sean's Picer maybe potentially others, were in the room, but then

also not a senior advisor actually directing some of the operations, and policy operations,

“of the White House. I think that's unique in that position. I think she's also incredibly”

effective behind the scenes. And you talk about the relationships that she builds even with hostile to this White House reporters. That's part of the job as well, and some of the best press press secretary's, like Sarah Huggby Sanders as well, built those relationships behind the scenes with reporters in a level of trust. Even the most anti-rabbit anti-Trump reporters still built that relationship, like Sarah Huggby Sanders, like Caroline Love it. I still joke. One of the worst

nights in my life was the Biden Trump debate. Caroline and I were the one, the two folks booked on Fox afterwards to talk about she from our logo, me from the New York Bureau. I still joke about it was the worst time in my life that she was part of, and she's been very kind to me because I'm just half terrible that that debate was just a number of years ago. Larry, why is she so popular with the manga base? I know it's sort of obvious question,

but they love her. Why did they love her? They love her because she's so masterful at the podium. And to reiterate what Kevin was saying, everyone knew that she'd be a rock star at the podium, and everyone knew that she would be great in defending the president's policies and stay on message and do it in a very telegenic way, and she's very tough when she needs to be tough, when she feels that a question is unfair, or being, you know, if she's being attacked

or the president being attacked, but what Kevin just said, what what people did not expect is what she does that we don't see. Apparently I'm told that she is masterful and massaging the people in the press, or press pool after the president goes hard on them. Apparently she goes out of her way to to bring them in and say, I know the president said this to you. I know the president, even with Caitlyn Collins, even with some of the other people who the president can be really

hostile with, she's really good as good as she can be at least in trying to repair those things behind the scenes. Do you guys think that she's run for Congress in New Hampshire? She lost, but do you guys think that she's got a future like Sarah Hockby Sanders did in being a principal

“in public life if she wants it? But, actually, if she wants it, I think, you know, and we'll see”

the Chris Pap. You know, she ran against Chris Papas for that house. We'll see the dynamic against Nelson, New New Papas. New Hampshire, you know, the way that it's trending, I think it was one of the closer states, obviously, for Joe Biden in 2020 and then Kamala Harris in 2024. So again, I think there is some potential there. If she wants to move back into an electoral or appointed position. We've talked about Natalie Harp, we've talked about CZOiles, we've talked about

Carolyn. Name each of you name another woman in the Trump administration who you think is a super star and why, Larry. Oh, um, oh, a shoot. Her name is escaping a bit, the secretary of agriculture, actually, has quietly been wrong and he really is wrong. You think the word down in my mouth? Yeah,

I think she's dead and she's also very good with the media. And if you remember the very first,

which was an issue that he inherited from the Biden administration, that ship very quickly. And that was all her policy and all of her PR. I like Brooke Collins a lot. Kevin, you want to just take that same Ron, who's got a difference. Oh, Brooke Collins. Yeah, I was going to see the same thing. You know, she came up in Texas politics. I think work for Rick Perry previously. She ran different public interest groups down there. She's a policy person. And I think she's a very effective

target for the president and kind of one of the more behind this obviously agus huge, but one of the more behind the scenes people there in the senior admin. And I think the biggest and most impressive office in all of Washington. You guys been in the agus. Yes. Oh, my gosh, it goes on and on and on when you drive past it, every other building down there on the other. No, but the secretary's office. Yeah, I'm not been in her office.

Yeah, it's an incredible. It's an incredible. It's an incredible. It's one of the brightest

in my first show. Let's go. We'll be going to show Larry. Let's have a show. Larry, do me a favor, so I can rest on rest of my entire eyes promote the show. Our morning meeting, when does it air? Why should people watch it? The morning meeting every day, 9 a.m. Eastern. It's your best morning show that you're going to see other than my radio show. Of course, it's on every streaming platform where you like to watch your streaming shows. But join us actually in the in the

“two way a community go to 2way.tv. So you can actually be a part of our show because that's what makes”

this difference. After we talk about the issues when we give our opinion, we ask you to give us your opinion. Wouldn't you love to pick up the phone or click a button on your camera and tell Anderson Cooper why he's full of it? Well, you can do that with Mark Halpern. And you can tell Mark Halpern why he's full of it. That's what makes us today. We're Larry. Larry Conner Kevin Walling, Monday through Friday morning meeting gentlemen, great to see you have a great rest of your day and appreciate you

always making time for us here. Watch Larry and Kevin and myself every Monday through Friday,

9 a.m. Eastern time on two way. Next up after a quick break, I get to read some of your incredible feedback. That's right. Ladies and gentlemen, one of your favorite features according to all the market research. Mark the mailman is next up. You hear it all the time, everybody. They're talking about weight loss injections because the results can be so dramatic. They work by lowering blood sugar and reducing appetite. So what if you're looking to lose weight, but not interested in painful

weekly injections, especially when you hear about it and when you see what can be pretty intense

“side effects? That's why doctors create a weight loss supplement. It's called lean and the results”

are remarkable. This studied ingredients and lean have been shown to lower your blood sugar burn fat by converting it into energy and curb your appetite and cravings, so you're not as hungry. But listen, lean. It's not for everybody. It's not for the casual diet or with only a few pounds to lose. The doctors at Brick House Nutrition, they created lean for frustrated diaries who have 10 or more pounds to shed. So let's get you started if you fit that category with 20% off

and free rush shipping. So you can add lean to your healthy diet and exercise plan right away. Visit takeline.com and enter next up for your discount. Again, that's promo code next up at takeline.com.

All right. Next up one of my personal favorite segments. I ask you always to send me emails

to tell me what you think. And then the responses come in and we get to sit around and read them and laugh and cry and celebrate and ponder and wonder about your brilliant questions, thoughts, comments and occasionally criticism. So let's get to the mail bed. Letters, we get letters. We get lots and lots of letters. And here's one from Janet who writes in about one of my favorite topics, which is the Michigan Senate race between Dr. L. Sad and Mike Rogers. Here's what Janet says.

Hi, Mark. I wanted to comment in some of the things you said about L. Sayod. First he made a huge deal out of A. Lee Stevens, accepting a pack money. He didn't make a speech for that mentioning at least 10 times. You're right that he is too smart to officially join the DSA, but for all intents and purposes he agrees with their platform. Otherwise he wouldn't campaign with the Noxious Hassan Piker. As a former Democrat now independent and to Jew, I'll be voting for

“Mike Rogers. The first Republican I voted for in decades. That's how much I fear L. Sayod. You are”

the company. You keep sign Janet. Janet, again, you speak for millions in Michigan and the Rogers campaign is counting on that at a state that's been largely democratic. Although Donald Trump won it in a state that in a year that's trending blue with a very talented, politically talented, Democratic candidate, Mike Rogers and his team are counting on folks like Janet to say it's a bridge too far. And you see it in the polling. You see it in the election results. And you won't find

too many Democrats, Janet and Michigan who will or national Democrats who will confidently say we're going to win this race. They know they're in for a tough battle and it's going to be as it is now. One of the most fascinating races in the country. Janet, grateful to you for sharing that and again, that's a point of view I hear a lot, but you stated it well. All right, let's go now

the response to quote affordability is to create middle class jobs full time, 60 K per year with

“health benefits, a bedrock of the economy available to non college graduates and a bedrock of the”

American dream. It's easy. Scott says to imagine the system is raged to benefit big business profits over the working middle class central. It's the appeal of both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. They are disruptors who promise change if non college graduates. He says they're 70% of voters. See the system is raged and the disruptors fail. Why not try socialism? The voters have nothing left to lose. Scott brilliant analysis and it dug tales with a lot of how I thought about the last few

years. The social issues get attention for sure and they're important to plenty of people, but there's issue of just a good paying job with health benefits, available to folks where they go to college or not. That is a center of the case Donald Trump made. It's the center of the case of Bernie Sanders made and somebody's going to have to deliver on it. The socialist want to chance to deliver on it, particularly the ones who like Sanders who prefer to focus more on the

economy than some of these other issues. It's really going to be up for grabs in 2028 and the spin on it now, the twist on it is AI is such a big part of it. Does the AI world Scott mean that

“more jobs that are full-time 60K a year or better with health benefits are there more of those jobs?”

In AI, a short-term medium-long term or fewer and doesn't matter if you've got a college degree or not, this central is central questions to our future and you framed it super well Scott. Thank you for that. Lastly, Andrea writes in about the president of 2028 presidential topic I focus on, and Andrea lives in Napa, California. She says, Mark, hi Mark, I would vote for Josh Shapiro, the governor of Pennsylvania, even if Marco Robio was his opponent. I think it's a pipe dream to

think that the Democrats would nominate him, but I'm all for it and will help wish it into reality. Anything to knock Newsome out of the top spot, trust me, you do not want him to get the nomination. I do believe we end up with a progressive Democrat or a phony moderate, like Joe Biden's nominee, Newsomer Harris, could be the phony moderate, whoever gets the nomination will govern to the left of his or her platform if they win. Andrea, again, speaking for tens of millions,

because Joe Biden historically had been a moderate at times. He'd been more progressive at others.

He basically went with whatever the wins of the party were. He clearly governed to the left of

what people, many people thought he would. And now the Democrats a lot are looking at Josh Shapiro and saying, that's a guy who might govern the way he talks, but they wonder whether he can be nominated. I've talked about it here in my monologue. I still think Josh Shapiro might have the skills to navigate the Democratic nominating process, but we shall see. And I hear from

“lots of folks, Andrea, like you, who say they want him to win. I think if he does run, he's going”

to have to prove to people that he can win the nomination. Once he went and if he can get over that hurdle, what Barack Obama had to do in 2008, a lot of more people come on the bandwagon who are reluctant to support somebody who they don't think can win. All right, that's my mailbag, Mark the mailman has delivered. Once again, for you, the great community of nexters, thanks to Janet and Scott and Andrea and all the other folks who have written in, keep the cards and letters coming.

We love getting messages from nexters and opportunity to be featured in the next segment. Mark the mailman simply requires sending me a letter at next up at devilmakeairmedia.com and get a chance to be featured as Andrea and the others were today. That's it for our program today. Back on Tuesday with a brand new episode, ask you all again as we do. Please subscribe to next up, whether you listen to us and watch us on YouTube or listen to us wherever you get your

podcast. Be an extra, be part of this community so you always know what's coming next up.