Greg Bluestein (4:34)

Glad to be here.

Nicole Wallace (4:35)

Marjorie Taylor Greene is so different from any other republic, different from the Georgia Republicans, from Kemp and Raffensperger, and the Republicans who seem to have some normie instincts. She is totally a creature of this MAGA movement, and she is not just leaving, but describing it as certain that they'll lose, certain that she'll be asked to defend Trump from impeachment.

Greg Bluestein (5:02)

Yeah, we see her as the living, breathing embodiment of MAGA in Georgia because she rose to power at the height of the MAGA movement. Right. She WINS Election in 2020, running on Donald Trump's imprimatur, his very brand. And then when she gets to office, she runs as she competes as his biggest defender, the most loyal that MAGA can be. Even when she veered away from some of his stances, she cast it as, oh, he's just getting bad advice. It's not he did anything wrong. He's just getting bad advice from the wrong people around him. And yet the last year we've seen this one after another, they really heightened, not just doing the shutdown showdown, but also, of course, over the Epstein files. And now the question that we're asking in Georgia, and I know is being asked around the country, is what does she do next as well?

Nicole Wallace (5:48)

What does her district think of the position she staked out on the economy, on healthcare and on Epstein?

Greg Bluestein (5:54)

Yeah, I was there yesterday and interviewing voters in the kind of the rural heartland of her district, and I couldn't find many who criticized her. Most of those voters, that is anecdotal, but most of the voters I talked to were standing by her. Most of the party activists I've talked to are standing by her. To find critics, really deep critics of her, you have to kind of go outside the district to see MAGA Republicans. That doesn't mean she would have had an easy road to reelection. But I do think had she decided to run for another term, she would have been the odds on favorite.

Nicole Wallace (6:21)

And what do you understand about the threats that she and her family faced?

Greg Bluestein (6:24)

Well, you can't underscore those. Right. You cannot underplay that impact of, you know, she said publicly that she was facing threats, but the amount of threats that might have that she's holding back. Right. That she's keeping private must have had a big, big factor in her decision because we see it with rank and file Republicans and Democrats all the time. Just imagine someone as high profile as Marjorie Taylor Greene and the threat she faced and her family faced. I mean, unfortunately, this is all too familiar in Georgia where we saw the Republicans who stood up the Donald Trump in 2022 face dire threats to their own lives.

Nicole Wallace (6:57)

Yeah. I mean, we ended the last hour with Senator Mark Kelly talking about the threats he faced. Alyssa Slotkin said security rushed to her right after Trump started calling the six members who put out a simply telling people to only follow legal orders to protect their lives. Tim Miller, your thoughts on this moment for Donald Trump and Marjorie Taylor Greene.

Tim Miller (7:23)

Look, you laid out nicely in the beginning how this is similar to how some have in the Republican Party have spoken out against Trump and then retired in the past. And we're seeing that trend continue, which at some level shows that he still has a hold over the party. I think the element that's different that is the most interesting interesting is the language that she used in stepping aside and you know, I'll leave it to Greg through his reporting and to psychologists to like determine what is happening in her brain and how serious she is about this and what exactly motivating it. But it just taking the language at face value, she is basically saying that I wanted to do work on behalf of the MAGA base that Donald Trump had promised, you know, he was going to work for. And I couldn't do it because Congress was never in session and because the elites within the party, you know, have succumbed to, you know, the influence game of Washington to the deep state, to the tech elites. Right. Like that's essentially her argument her that you know, you always heard from the populace, from the MAGA populace. One common critique was that there was this uni party in Washington. Democrats, Republicans might disagree on certain issues but at the end they were on the side of the rich. They were on the side of the, you know, military and the security state and, and they were on the side of corporations. They weren't the side of you. Well now Marjorie Taylor Green is saying that's Donald Trump. You know, he had promised you that he was going to be different. He's me an outsider that was going to go after those institutions but he's been co opted by them and he want and he likes partying with them. So she didn't use him by name. But like in the statement that's very clear what she's talking about and that is powerful and that is very different from the other people that have separated from Donald Trump in the past because she's coming at him from the place of his core base of support and his core strength. And if even 5% of the Maga base agree with her, if more do you know, even better but like if even 5% or 10% agree with her, that is crippling to Donald Trump's power. That is the first time that he would actually lose the, the people that that powered his rise. And so in that sense I think it was a powerful resignation statement. I think probably would have been more powerful. She was making that argument from within the halls of Congress. But the interesting thing to be watch will be other people start to echo that message.

Nicole Wallace (9:49)

Tim, are we bearing the lead here? She speaks about it as a foregone conclusion that Democrats take over the House and that Trump is impeached.

Tim Miller (10:00)

Well, the impeachment would end up being I think a political judgment by the Democrats, but we probably are bearing the lead as far as a lot of Republicans on the Hill have already basically conceded the midterms. And there's super interesting reporting today from Punchbowl DC which is kind of a Capitol Hill insider outlet. And bas basically a number of Republicans were calling them after Marjorie Taylor Greene's letter came out saying essentially, I might not agree with her on all the particulars and she might have these, you know, various unique issues. But like, the core of her argument is correct. Like, we are doing nothing. We are not serving people. We are about to be in the minority. And I'm annoyed, too. And essentially that was the message. There were a lot of that there will be maybe more Republican retirements coming because Republicans on the Hill see the writing on the wall that, that, that the Democrats are going to win next year. And, and you know, it's worth it to stay in Congress even if you're in the minority, if you feel like you're fighting for something, if you feel like you're doing something. And I think that a lot of Republicans on the Hill don't feel like they're doing anything. They're just ornamentation to Donald Trump's authoritarian takeover. And if it's going to be another one year slog to their own defeat, well, then maybe others will follow her to the exits. That that was what Punchbowl is reporting. And that I, I think seems like a reasonable assessment of where we are. Things could change. And I think that things are looking very bad politically for the Republicans on Hill.

Nicole Wallace (11:19)

Here's that Punchbowl reporting, Molly, quote, more explosive early resignations are coming. It's a tinderbox. Morale has never been lower. Mike Johnson will be stripped of his gavel and they will lose the majority before this term is out.

Molly John Fast (11:32)

Yeah. You know what I think is so interesting about this is like House Republicans gave up their power. They said they let Donald Trump do what he wanted to do with the pocket rescissions. They let Russ Vaughn take away the power of the purse. Like they went along with all of this. He acquiesced again and again and again. And now they're salty because he did what they let him do.

Nicole Wallace (11:57)

You know what they're like? They're like those prisoners who when they go in to rescue them, the rescuers are like the door wasn't locked.

Molly John Fast (12:04)

Yeah.

Nicole Wallace (12:04)

Like they could get out of their political prison today at any time.

Molly John Fast (12:08)

And that's what I don't understand.

Nicole Wallace (12:09)

It's like they're so lame.

Molly John Fast (12:11)

It is. And Mike Johnson, by the way they, you know, Donald Trump installed Mike Johnson because he was willing to just go along with anything. And now they're like, well, he's not so good at politics because, you know, they're passing all of these.

Nicole Wallace (12:23)

It's not even. Mike Johnson isn't so good at having a spine. Mike Johnson goes on a podcast and says, yeah, I think they should release the Epstein files. Donald Trump burps or belches at him the wrong way, he shuts down Congress. That doesn't look strong. That doesn't help anybody. In the end, it doesn't even help Donald Trump, who signs legislation to release the Epstein files.

Molly John Fast (12:43)

I mean, the reason Mike Johnson has that job is because Donald Trump felt that he would, would serve his purpose.

Nicole Wallace (12:48)

But why not have someone that has the job? I mean, look at, I don't want them to do anything that is more popular than the things that are so unpopular that Marjorie Taylor Greene made a video saying, we're going to be in the minority and Trump will be impeached. But the idea that they have to be this lame and impotent. They have chosen to be lame and impotent, no question.

Molly John Fast (13:06)

And a great example of this is the discharge petitions. Right now, another discharge petition is coming. These are signs that the speaker of the House is not controlling the ship. The fact that these discharge petitions, these bipartisan discharge petitions are moving along to him is a sign that he can't control the Congress. And look, you know, just the idea that they're victims of Donald Trump when in fact they are technically. I mean, they've sort of given it up, but they're technically a co. Equal branch.

Nicole Wallace (13:32)

I mean, it all ties together. We started the last hour with Jim Comey talking about how the judiciary is the only leg of a three legged stool that still functions. And that's true, but I feel like everyone is nodding along like that's how it has to be. That's not how it has to be at all. I mean, there could be in Congress who decide to do their jobs on tariffs, on the Pentagon, on the Department of Justice. They could impeach any one of those cabinet officials. What is your sense of what the people of Georgia want? On inflation, on the economy, on the military.

Greg Bluestein (14:06)

Yeah, look, people are frustrated. They're worried about the economy. We had an election in Georgia just a few weeks ago where Democrats flipped two Public Service Commission seats and they won by 26 points. Now, we figured Democrats would win that seat, but 26 points was a route. Right. The common theme was affordability. Every Republican candidate for Governor and every Democratic candidate for governor all said the same thing. This election was a referendum on affordability. They have very different views of what affordability means. But people are upset about the direction of the country and the way things are going and they want change. Now House Republicans could bring about that change and maybe Marjorie Taylor Greene's decision, which by the way comes after she did not even tell House leaders that she was stepping down. And so that erodes their power even that much more and they're clinging to an even thinner margin of control. But maybe that is one of the biggest, when we look back at this in a year, it could be one of the biggest seismic fractures in the MAGA movement and in the US House.

Nicole Wallace (15:06)

I mean, Tim, how. I know we've had this conversation about Marjorie Taylor Greene and you and I are sort of, you know, battered ex Republicans who will take anyone to come in the boat and row toward democracy that we can get. But David Frum is skeptical and I just want to platform his critique. Gullible as Greene was about crackpot theories and her political associations, she seems to have been clear eyed about her own direct personal interests. Marjorie Taylor Greene was one of the most active and successful stock traders in Congress in a number of cases betting for or against companies about which she likely had advance information. She timed her resignation to take effect two days after her congressional pension vested. She's Mr. Smith Goes to Washing. Only if the cinematic Mr. Smith had returned home to Montana hugely enriched by timely speculations on land holdings near the Boy Ranger camp he championed. But she never did get the joke on the biggest joke in town, the joke that MAGA is about anything more than manipulation, exploitation, corruption, lust and cruelty. She seems to have sincerely believed the lies that shrewder players merely mouthed. She gained her own millions without appreciating that her allies were scheming for billions. What do you think? Fair?

Tim Miller (16:18)

I think. Oh well, sure, it's a fair critique of Marjorie Taylor Greene. She deserves to be critiqued. I guess the one place where I would part ways a little bit with David is that line that he says where, you know, that. That she was surprised that other people didn't believe what she sincerely believed. If that is true, that is important in itself, right? I mean, she could be somewhat corrupt at a small scale compared to the Trumpian corruption and she could be conspiratorial, sure, opportunistic and all those things. But it is telling that if somebody that earnestly believed in the populist part of MAGA populism and was a Genuine part of the movement. Like genuine to such a degree that like she was a MAGA conspiracy poster on Facebook before she went to Congress. I mean like that, that is as core of a MAGA as you could be. Right? I mean she was like for Trump back in the primary when everybody else was against. If somebody like that, that can go to Washington, be on the inside of the MAGA movement, look around and say we're not actually doing anything. And you know, maybe I got a little bit of mine and maybe I also got some attention, but I also believed this stuff. I like, I believed the populist right wing stuff and none of you guys do. That's important. Like that's important. Even if she is opportunistic, you know, that is important. If she's also corrupt, it's still like a very meaningful departure. And, and the fact that, that it seems like being David agrees, she sincerely believed it, I think is why it's politically success significant.

Nicole Wallace (17:47)

I also think that to, you know, for Democrats to defeat the opposition, you have to respect and study the opposition. She offers. I think she's holding a flashlight up down in the caves about what are in the tunnels or wherever the sort of movement gets its energy from. She's holding up a light to where the weaknesses and their arguments are. And I want to play you the arguments she's making to where she feels that MAGA is betraying her constituents on the economy, on inflation, on health care, on aca. I have to seek in a break, I'm going to show you her critiques of her own movement on the other side and talk about how someone who wants to beat them at their own game would use those. Also ahead, what Marjorie Taylor Greene's resignation means for the rest of the year, for the rest of the session. We're also going to to turn to Trump's very public efforts to strong arm Ukraine into giving up land sovereignty and security to end Russia's war. It's a so called peace plan that experts say reads like Moscow's talking points and worry will only lead to more Russian aggression. We'll have that conversation later in the hour. Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere. Rebecca, Tim Mulling and Greg. So she's not just leaving. She is shining a light on all the places where she disservices, agrees with Donald Trump and where she thinks he's failing. Let me show you what she has to say about all of it.

Molly John Fast (19:22)

The president says there's virtually no inflation and that grocery prices are going down.

Nicole Wallace (19:26)

Do you agree with him on that?

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (19:29)

No. I go to the grocery store myself. Grocery prices remain high. Energy prices are high. My electricity bills are higher here in Washington, D.C. at least my apartment. And they're also higher at my house in Rome, Georgia, higher than they were a year ago. So affordability is a problem. It's not just ACA recipients whose premiums are going to skyrocket very soon. It has been a disaster for many Americans across the board. And cost of living is so high now, many of my constituents, many of my friends, and even my own children are finding health insurance to be extremely unaffordable and something that they are having to go without. And as a conservative and as a business owner in the construction industry and as a realist, I can say we have to do something about labor, and that needs to be a smarter plan than just rounding up every single person and deporting them just like that.

Nicole Wallace (20:30)

So.

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (20:30)

And I'm going to get pushback on that. But it's. I'm just living in reality from here on out.

Nicole Wallace (20:37)

I mean, she's living in reality. She's moved from. I mean, this is where I do think this is seismic. She has left Earth 2.0. She has relocated herself in Earth 1.0. She is who she is. She lived a very public life as someone who adhered to conspiracy theories, but she's just as loudly banging the drum on where all the Trump stuff is, to quote Bill Barr bullshit.

Molly John Fast (21:01)

It does feel like she's positioning herself. And when you watch that video and read the fourth page of her resignation letter, it does feel she's positioning herself as the real maga. You know, that she's really for the people and that he got involved with these tech billionaires and with globalism, and she's really for America. The other thing I would say about Marjorie Taylor Greene, which I think is important to realize, is that she comes from pretty successful construction family. So as much as, you know, there's still that same element of being an elite, cosplaying the common man, just like Trump, you know, it's that same thing. And again, it goes back to this idea that Donald Trump said. You know, the one thing that Trump ever said that was totally true was that the system is technically a little bit rigged right, against the common person. But I do. I see her positioning herself for something bigger, like for, you know, to say that she's the true heir of maga. Now, whether or not it works, I don't know, but it does feel to me like there's ambition there well, she's.

Nicole Wallace (22:05)

Also, I mean, most of her sort of news cycles are dominated by outrageous things. She's, she's also aligning herself with more substantive things. I mean, she's talking about inflation. She's talking about grocery prices, energy prices, the electricity bill. She's talking about the ACA premiums. Talking, talking about something that you hear all the time, people deciding paying more isn't an option for a lot of people. They just go without and pray to God that they don't get sick or the kids don't get sick. And then saying that the immigration. I mean, Trump has bet the whole farm on his deportation plan. And she's saying, I know I'm gonna get pushback on it, but I'm living in reality and that's not realistic.

Greg Bluestein (22:46)

Yeah, this underscores a real important point, Nicole, because I know that a lot of the focus has been on Hearst break with Donald Trump on the Epstein files and other high profile. But this goes far beyond just Epstein files.

Ben Rhodes (22:58)

Right.

Greg Bluestein (22:58)

We've heard her in Georgia for a long time now rail against what she calls the good old boy establishment. She has not been happy with the way the state has been run for a long time now. And now we're hearing her being much more vocal on the affordability issue, saying that even her own daughters struggle to pay their health care premiums. And with the rise of health care premiums after the subsidies expire, she's worried about her own family. Now. Now, yes, she comes from a very wealthy background, but she's also playing herself as the every woman. Right. Someone who also suffers from these price.

Nicole Wallace (23:30)

Increases and, or is cognizant that all of her constituents live in the real world. Tim, I want to come back to you on these sort of three pillars you could build in our campaign days. You could build an entire campaign around these three things that she said. The price of everything at the grocery store store, the price of your electricity bills and ACA premiums. And then add onto it, for good measure, a business owner's perspective on the irrationality and insanity of mass deportations. I mean, you have the current Democratic Party encapsulates all those policies. But I wonder where you think she's positioning herself in the Republican Party.

Tim Miller (24:12)

Yeah, well, look, I think I agree with Molly as far as where she's positioning herself within the Republican Party. I think I have no idea what she's planning for next, but I think that what she's trying to do is, is say, look, real mega populism hasn't been tried. Right. And and that is going to include some pretty crazy cultural and social views. And I think that the very, the same statement that I'm going to give some compliments to also decried the transing of people like using that as a verb and in a, in a derogatory way. Right. So she, and she has, she remains has some crazy views. I think she also said that we should cut the capital gains tax for, for people which is, doesn't, isn't very popular. So, you know, it's a grab back. But the elements that are, that I think are useful to learn from if you're a Democrat or you know, tell us where she would be trying to differentiate herself within the Republican coalition is saying, look, I'm trying to focus on bread and butter issues, economic populist issues, about things that are, things that are costing too much for regular people, why rich people are doing well. And I think that the Republican Party is focused too much on the wealthy and the Democratic Party is focused too much on, you know, caring about these cultural mores. I'm going to be the person that's focused on you. I don't know that Marjorie Taylor Greene is going to be the vessel for that message, but I think that that's a powerful message that could work in either party.

Nicole Wallace (25:32)

Yeah. Tim Miller. Molly John Fast, Greg Bluestein. So nice to have all of you. Well, not all of you at the table, Tim. We missed you at the table, but nice to have you guys at the table. Thanks for starting us off. When we come back, we'll turn to how Donald Trump is trying to force Ukraine to accept a so called peace deal that we give Russia about everything it wants. What the Ukrainians are doing to fight back. We'll bring you that story next.

Advertisement Voice (25:59)

As President Trump continues implementing his ambitious agenda. Follow along with the MSNow newsletter, Project 47. You'll get weekly updates sent straight to your inbox with expert analysis on the administration's latest actions and how they're affecting the American people.

Nicole Wallace (26:16)

The American people are basically telling the president that they are not okay with any of this.

Advertisement Voice (26:20)

Sign up for the Project 47 newsletter at Ms. Now. Project 47.

Nicole Wallace (26:30)

What did you think of him? I liked him. Yep.

Advertisement Voice (26:34)

I thought he was straight up with me. Of course. By the way, I've said that I don't regard Putin as a bad guy.

Nicole Wallace (26:43)

They're talking about Putin. What you think? Oh, I liked him. That glowing endorsement of Russia's brutal dictator earlier this year came from Donald Trump's own special envoy for peace missions, Steve Witkoff. And keep that in mind, in light of today's reporting, Axios reports this. Quote, President Zelensky listened on speakerphone one week ago as Trump's adviser Steve Wyckoff and Jared Kushner read line by line from a 28 point plan to end the war in Ukraine. That plan, which Trump demanded President Zelensky accept by Thursday, was written without any involvement or input from Ukraine. And it essentially reads as a complete capitulation to Putin. New York Times describes the plan like Many of the 28 points in the proposed Russia, Ukraine peace plan offered by the White House, read like they have been drafted in the Kremlin. They reflect almost all of Putin's maximalist demands. Ukraine would have to cede to Russia all of the land that Moscow has declared for itself. The United States would recognize that as Russian territory. No NATO forces could be based inside Ukraine. The Ukrainian military would be limited to 600,000 troops, a 25% cut from current levels. And it would be barred from possessing long range weapons that could reach into Russia. In return, all sanctions on Russia would be lifted and the country would be, quote, reintegrated into the global economy, end quote. Putin's most critical objective. It was a plan written so clearly either by or to appease Putin, that it drew widespread bipartisan criticism and kicked off frenzied talks in Geneva between US And Ukrainian negotiators. Over the weekend, Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Rubio left the negotiations claiming that tremendous progress was made and said that the original plan was a, quote, living, breathing document. But as Rubio was meeting with officials, Donald Trump took to social media to accuse Ukrainian leaders of expressing, quote, zero gratitude for his efforts to end the war started by Putin. I want to bring into our coverage former Ambassador to Russia, international affairs analyst Michael McFaul. With me at the table, former deputy National Security Adviser to President Obama, Ms. now contributor Ben Rhodes. And Lieutenant General Mark Hurtley is back with us. Ambassador McFaul, your thoughts?

Political Commentator (29:06)

Well, first, Mr. Witkoff is wrong about Putin. As you alluded to, Putin is a bad guy. He started the biggest war in Europe since World War II. He terrorizes Ukrainian civilians and kills them every single night. He's kidnapped thousands of Ukrainian kids. He's killed his own political opponents inside Russia, Boris Nemtsov and Alex Novo, Alexei Navalny. That is a bad guy guy. But you might be, we could excuse Witkoff for calling him a good guy and being his friend if he got something tangible for the American people or the Ukrainians. But as you just alluded to, what he got instead was just a laundry list of Putin's old talking points. I can't think of a single concession after all of this courtship. Flying to Moscow, bringing him to Alaska, literally rolling out the red carpet, the that Witkoff and President Trump have achieved. So it's not working. That strategy is not working. And I hope that Secretary Rubio had better success in his negotiations with the Ukrainians yesterday.

Nicole Wallace (30:09)

Well, how could he? It's clear he reports to Jared Kushner. I mean, what is Rubio doing there, in your view?

Political Commentator (30:17)

Honestly, I don't know. That's first thing I'd say. Second, it sounds like he was blindsided by this, this 28 point program that Putin wrot or his colleague Kirill Dmitriev wrote and handed to Witkoff, and then he had to do something to save it. Meeting with Andrea Mok, he's a very close chief of staff to President Zelensky, as he did yesterday, suggests to me that they're not just adopting the 28 point plan. That's cautiously good news. But the real test will come in. Can they get anything out of Putin and the Russians? And when the President just keeps undermining his own negotiators, his own Secretary of State, his own national security adviser by lambasting Zelensky for not saying nice things about him, by the way, at a time when we are giving the Ukrainians nothing, we are not giving them any military assistance or economic assistance. We're just selling our weapons to the Europeans. That suggests not a great negotiating position for Rubio or the Ukrainians to be.

Nicole Wallace (31:28)

I guess, Ben, what I want to push all of you on is I want to understand if this is actually a negotiation, like if this was. This is Putin's entire wish list. I'm not sure there's anything that he wanted when he came to America for that ridiculous summit. That's not in this plan. It's written, it's been reported. It's written by Kushner and Wyckoff, who said to Tucker Carlson, a huge Putin apologist, that he's a good guy and Rubio is downstream from the three of them. And your Mac is downstream. What is this?

Ben Rhodes (31:58)

Here's how I see it. Okay, Just my analysis of this is this is no different than what Putin came to Alaska with, right? Putin came to Alaska wanting all of the Donbas, all of Eastern Ukraine, including parts that they don't currently control. He came there, remember, with business delegation. He wanted to negotiate business deals. He wanted to get the sanctions off. He wanted these kind of partnerships and investment. And Trump seemed Like, he was a little bit eager to do that deal. Then the Europeans and Zelenskyy had to fly to Washington the next day to kind of talk him down from that. So then everybody kind of takes a breath. The Russians keep escalating, by the way. They keep bombing energy infrastructure, trying to knock that out ahead of the winter. So they're escalating the war anyway. Then they go back to the drawing board. This feels to me like a Russian proposal that went to Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, who just want to call whatever it is a peace plan. And I want to be very clear about something. We need to stop calling these things peace plans. This is a surrender plan. This is literally Russia dictating the terms of surrender to Ukraine. There's not a single Russian concession in this. Mike mentioned. Just not a small issue, but an issue that doesn't get as much attention. The kidnapped children, they're not returned in this plan. There's some mechanism to, like, review it or something, right? Marco Rubio is not in charge of this file in the White House. That is very, very clear. If you're looking at this from the outside, he's very involved in policy in Latin America, right? In Venezuela, in Cuba, in El Salvador. It seems like on this account, it's Wyckoff and now Jared Kushner, who's now kind of become a wingman to Witkoff since the whole Gaza ceasefire. And it just feels like the Russians keep coming back again and again. Mike knows this. The Russian terms on how to end this war have not changed since the beginning of the Trump administration, not once. Their strategy has been, we have the exact same, no NATO cap, the Ukrainian military, business deals. We're back in the G8. We get all the territory we want. You have to recognize our terms, right? They don't change. We escalate the war and we just wait this out. And we hope that Trump is so eager to achieve, quote, unquote, peace that he just bullies the Ukrainians into accepting our plan.

Nicole Wallace (34:02)

General Hartling, one of the tragedies with the time that this has gone on is the American people, who very much support President Zelensky very much. There's still Ukrainian flags around this country. It's not top of mind anymore. But I came on the air after the massacre of civil in Bucha, and Admiral Kelly was in the administration, and they'd never seen him so upset by what had happened to civilians. It was early in the war. Russia is unchanged. The soldiers that carried out atrocities in Bucha were awarded by Putin himself. What are we doing as a country aligning ourselves with Putin and against our ally in Ukraine?

Lieutenant General Mark Hertling (34:53)

Well, first I'll start off, Nicole, by saying, I think, you know, my bias toward Ukraine. I spent a lot of time there with their soldiers, helping them transform their army. I'm going to jump on what Ben just said, that, you know, I think there are some in this administration that believe that ending a war is synonymous with creating peace. It isn't. Granting the aggressor, as Ben said, new territory, relaxed sanctions or the ability to rearm at leisure is not peace, but preparation for another renewed assault. True peace has to reduce the likelihood of the aggressor resuming or expanding its violence. This so far what we've seen does not do that. We're strengthening his hand, as you just said. And you know, the thing that I'll say is, you know, it's interesting that Americans are supportive of Ukraine by the majority. Ukraine continues to fight. They are a nation that has tasted betrayal before and remembers it vividly from the 1970eens through the 1930s to recent debates and discussions and treaties with both the United States and Russia. So they're not going to move a whole lot, and they should. So does this proposal that Mr. Rubio is putting together, does it propose to end the war, or does it create more space for Russia to do the same kind of things they've done so many times in the past, which Ambassador McFaul certainly knows?

Nicole Wallace (36:31)

I have to sneak in a break. There are important pillars to lay down for all of you. The Wall Street Journal editorial board that's done a lot of laundering of Donald Trump over the last 10 years has a sharp rebuke, basically saying that if Trump thinks American voters hate war, wait until he learns how much they hate dishonor. Basically says this plan would taint the rest of his presidency. And then the one and only Thomas Friedman describes this as Trump's Neville Chamberlain Prize. I'll read all those pieces to you on the other side of a short break. We'll be right back.

Advertisement Voice (37:03)

As President Trump continues implementing his ambitious agenda, follow along with the MSNow newsletter Project 47. You'll get weekly updates sent straight to your inbox with expert analysis on the administration's latest actions and how they're affecting the American people.

Nicole Wallace (37:20)

The American people are basically telling the president that they are not okay with any of this.

Advertisement Voice (37:24)

Sign up for the Project 47 newsletter at Ms. Now Project 47.

Nicole Wallace (37:35)

We're back with Ambassador McFaul, Ben Rhodes and Lieutenant General Hartling. Let me read you Thomas Friedman's piece today, quote, if Ukraine is indeed forced to surrender to the specific terms of this deal by Thursday, Thanksgiving will no longer be an American holiday. It will become a Russian holiday. It will become a day of thanks. That victory in Putin's savage and misbegotten war against Ukraine's people, which has been an utter failure morally, militarily, diplomatically, and economically, was delivered to Russia not by the superiority of its arms or the virtue of its claims, but by an American administration. How do you say Thanksgiving in Russian? To all the gentlemen who delivered this turkey to Moscow, I can offer only one piece of advice. Be under no illusions. Neither Fox News nor the White House spokeswoman Caroline Levitt will be writing the history of this deal. If you force it upon Ukraine as it is, every one of your names will live in infamy alongside that of Neville Chamberlain. Chamberlain, who is remembered today for only one thing. He was the British Prime Minister who advocated the policy of appeasement, which aimed to avoid war with Adolf Hitler's Germany by giving into his demands. This was concretized in the 1938 Munich Agreement in which Chamberlain, along with others in Europe, allowed Germany to annex parts of Czechoslovakia. Chamberlain boasted it was secure, quote, peace for our time. A year later, Poland was invaded, starting World War II and leading to Chamberlain's resignation and his everlasting shame. Ambassador McFaul, I guess why I asked you at the beginning what we were doing. It's clear that this doesn't end the conflict. So what does Marco Rubio think he's asking Ukraine to do?

Political Commentator (39:14)

Well, first, I agree with Ben. It's not a peace plan. It's a plan for capitulation. That's most certainly the way the Ukrainians have read it, the ones I've talked to. Second, with respect to Secretary Rubio, I think he's trying to amend it to make something out of a very bad plan that he was handed and then flow over to do. And notice he was in the chair. Witkoff was not sitting across from Yermak. But I think the comparison to Chamberlain is a good one. Tom's right. Chamberlain, by the way, did not win the Nobel Peace Prize. And the sad reality is that President Trump actually doesn't care about any of the details of this war. He doesn't care about good and evil. He doesn't care about dictators versus Democrats, Democrats. He just wants to end the war so that he can say he was the one that did it. And that puts the Ukrainians in a terrible situation. They don't want to lose the American support. But they can't accept these terms. And I hope, as they did after Alaska, we'll see the Europeans come to the rescue and help try to make something more palatable about it. But I want to be clear, I don't think this is a recipe to end this war. I think Putin will keep fighting until he can fight. And that's why I wish we would stop focusing on trying to change Putin's intentions and focus instead on changing his capabilities, that is giving Ukrainians more weapons and better sanctions against the Russians so that we limit his capabilities so that he can't keep fighting. Because I don't think we're going to convince him through arguments to stop fighting.

Nicole Wallace (40:54)

Yeah, it's like this upside down and backward world. Like if America's position remained to help our ally win, which is, is predates World War II, which is the parallel that Thomas Friedman draws, and we'd be having an entirely different conversation.

Ben Rhodes (41:09)

Yeah, because the other thing is there's not really any meaningful effort to Mike's point, to create new leverage on Putin to do things that would potentially change his calculus. Because part of what you'd want and what the Europeans have pushed for is just, yes, it would be good to have a ceasefire, A ceasefire, and then negotiate instead of the kind of daily bombardment of Ukrainian civilians. But Putin is not incentivized to do that. He's just grinding away at that front line. And meanwhile, the Americans are not providing any new weapons. Right. We're not providing any new capabilities that could threaten Russia, that could make it more costly for Putin to perpetuate this war. What Putin is testing out here, by the way, he has an entire economy built on a military right now and a war economy. That's why he wants an accelerated pathway to joint investment and sanctions relief. He wants, Putin wants to pocket all the gains that he's made so far, get the economy in good shape, get Ukrainians military in a smaller weakened state without any security guarantee so he can come back and take the rest of Ukraine at a date of his choosing in the future. Right. And unless and until the Trump administration is willing to actually do things that might change Putin's calculus, he's either going to get this plan or he's just going to kind of keep grinding away at that front line.

Nicole Wallace (42:23)

Unbelievable. Ambassador Michael McFaul, Van Rose, Lieutenant General Hertling, thank you so much for joining us today. We'll stay on top of this. Quick break for us. We'll be right back. I really do feel like we are still at just the bottom of the next mountain. Like I said, I'm cautiously optimistic. I think the beautiful thing, as I mentioned, was the bipartisanship. But to change the degree of institutional failure is going to take a lot of effort on a lot of people's part. So most my hope is that we all continuously work together in a nonpartisan, bipartisan way that is, that is going to serve the American people and keep women, children, young men safe. That's the most important thing. So that's Jess Michael. She was on this program last week when we did that interview. She is a survivor of Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse and she is my guest on a special encore presentation of the Best People podcast. She is fiercely outspoken about the need for accountability, truth and justice. And in our conversation, she says she's not going anywhere until the full Epstein story comes out. You can download the Best People wherever you get your podcasts. One more break. We'll be right back. Thank you so much for letting us into your homes today. We're grateful.

Advertisement Voice (43:51)

Ms. Now presents season two of the Blueprint, hosted by by Jen Psaki. In each episode, she talks to leading Democrats about how they plan to win again, including Texas Congressman Greg Cassar, who chairs the Progressive caucus, Congresswoman Sarah McBride of Delaware, the first openly trans person elected to Congress, and more who are helping to shape the future of the party. The Blueprint with Jen Psaki Season 2 All episodes available now.