“A solution in search of a problem”

Summary

**Podcast Summary: “A Solution in Search of a Problem”
Deadline: White House
Host: Nicolle Wallace, MSNBC
Release Date: June 30, 2025

---

1. Introduction to the Domestic Spending Bill

The episode opens amidst the heated debates surrounding the second Trump administration's ambitious domestic spending bill. The bill aims to radically transform America by introducing significant tax cuts for the wealthiest individuals and corporations while implementing substantial cuts to essential social programs.

Key Quote:
"Utterly insane and destructive." – Charlie Sykes [00:34]

---

2. Republican Opposition and Potential Senate Defectors

Despite the bill's potential passage, there is notable dissent within the Republican ranks. Senators Rand Paul of Kentucky and Thom Tillis of North Carolina have declared their opposition. Their reasons are rooted in the bill's projected impact on the national debt and essential social services.

• Rand Paul opposes the bill due to its projected addition of $3.3 trillion to the national debt.

• Tom Tillis criticizes the bill for cutting nearly $1 trillion from Medicaid, risking the coverage of approximately 12 million people.

Key Quote:
"663,000 people in two years or three years when President Trump breaks his promise by pushing them off of Medicaid because the funding's not there." – Tom Tillis [02:00]

Tillis's opposition is particularly significant as he has announced he will not seek re-election, citing the administration's betrayal of healthcare promises.

Key Quote:
"It is inescapable that this bill in its current form will betray the very promise that Donald J. Trump made." – Tom Tillis [02:42]

---

3. Democrats' Strategy to Oppose the Bill

Democrats are unified in their opposition and are leveraging amendments to highlight the bill's adverse effects. Their strategy revolves around:

• Shining a Spotlight on Negative Impacts: Emphasizing how the bill will strip millions of Americans of essential services like Medicaid and SNAP.

• Utilizing Republican Dissenters: Amplifying voices like Thom Tillis to underscore internal Republican conflicts and amplify bipartisan concerns.

Key Quote:
"And what you have is the speed with which this is being done and the lack of transparency with which this is being done also means that we're gonna have a lot of surprises." – Charlie Sykes [05:48]

---

4. Polls and Public Opinion

Polling data underscores the bill's unpopularity:

• Quinnipiac Poll: Only 29% of voters support the bill, while 55% oppose it.

• Independent Voters: A staggering 65% disapprove of the bill, making it a significant liability for Republicans heading into the midterms.

Key Quote:
"65% of independent voters disapprove of this bill." – Charlie Sykes [07:59]

---

5. Media Influence and Narrative Control

Fox News plays a pivotal role in shaping the narrative around the bill, often deflecting attention from its negative impacts by focusing on unrelated issues.

• Elon Musk's Criticism: Musk labeled the bill as "utterly insane and destructive" and pressured the House Freedom Caucus to oppose it.

Key Quote:
"The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country." – Elon Musk [02:42]

• Fox News' Coverage: The network disproportionately emphasizes President Biden over Medicaid, with a 10 to 1 ratio, diverting attention from the bill's consequences.

Key Quote:
"Fox's dominant story right now is that you have to pass it." – Charlie Sykes [22:49]

---

6. Impact on Medicaid and the American People

The proposed cuts to Medicaid would have devastating effects on millions of Americans, particularly the working class and low-income families.

• Case Study: Anid Rodriguez, a 51-year-old from North Carolina, exemplifies the individuals at risk. Currently benefiting from Medicaid expansion, she faces losing critical healthcare services due to the cuts.

Key Quote:
"The working class people who are hurt by this bill must become the face of it." – Charlie Sykes [13:54]

• Future Implications: Beyond immediate healthcare impacts, the bill threatens the financial stability of rural hospitals and the broader social safety net.

Key Quote:
"Millions and millions of Americans are going to be paying higher energy costs, are going to see their premiums, annual premiums go up upwards near $1,000." – Charlie Sykes [18:40]

---

7. Political Ramifications and Potential Retirements

The bill's unpopularity is leading to political fallout within the Republican Party. Senators like Thom Tillis are stepping down, signaling deeper internal conflicts and potential vulnerabilities in upcoming elections.

• Tom Tillis's Departure: His decision not to seek re-election stems from the administration's stance, highlighting the strain between moderates and the Trump-aligned base.

Key Quote:
"It's very sad. I've seen a lot of Republican moderates disappear." – Charlie Sykes [52:00]

• Senator Cory Booker's Criticism: Booker's passionate condemnation labels the bill as a "moral obscenity", emphasizing its detrimental effects on American families and the national deficit.

Key Quote:
"This bill is a moral obscenity." – Cory Booker [50:20]

---

8. Community Impact: Immigration Enforcement in Los Angeles

Parallel to the domestic spending bill, immigration enforcement raids in Los Angeles are causing widespread fear and disruption within immigrant communities.

• Union del Barrio's Role: This community group vigilantly monitors raids at workplaces like Home Depot, offering support and ensuring the safety of immigrant workers.

Key Quote:
"We are literally looking out for our neighbors and our friends and our fellow community members." – Alicia Menendez [32:37]

• Challenges Faced: The indistinguishable tactics of federal agents and imposters have led to heightened anxiety, with communities struggling to differentiate between genuine authorities and malicious actors.

Key Quote:
"People don't want to pick up the phone and call law enforcement because they don't know who's out on the streets." – Alicia Menendez [36:07]

---

9. Media Manipulation and Public Perception

The Trump administration, supported by certain media outlets, employs strategies to manipulate public perception, often deflecting from the bill's adverse effects by highlighting other divisive issues.

• Disinformation Tactics: Encouraging narratives that shift blame and obscure the direct consequences of the spending bill.

• Effectiveness: These tactics contribute to voter confusion and diminish accountability, making it harder for the public to grasp the bill's true impact.

Key Quote:
"If I can't win the debate, I want to muddy the waters." – Alicia Menendez [27:59]

---

10. Conclusion and Call to Action

Nicolle Wallace emphasizes the urgent need for public awareness and political accountability. She urges listeners to engage actively—through voting, protesting, and communicating with their representatives—to oppose the bill and safeguard essential social programs.

Key Quote:
"If you can't just simply assume that this is going to be instantly unpopular because... this is going to be one of those fights that we ought to be prepared for in the era of Trump." – Alicia Menendez [10:19]

---

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• "Utterly insane and destructive." – Charlie Sykes [00:34]

• "663,000 people in two years or three years when President Trump breaks his promise by pushing them off of Medicaid because the funding's not there." – Tom Tillis [02:00]

• "65% of independent voters disapprove of this bill." – Charlie Sykes [07:59]

• "Millions and millions of Americans are going to be paying higher energy costs." – Charlie Sykes [18:40]

• "This bill is a moral obscenity." – Cory Booker [50:20]

• "If I can't win the debate, I want to muddy the waters." – Alicia Menendez [27:59]

---

Final Thoughts

“A Solution in Search of a Problem” delves deep into the complexities and controversies surrounding the Trump administration's domestic spending bill. Through incisive analysis and robust discussions, Nicolle Wallace and her guests shed light on the bill's far-reaching implications for healthcare, economic stability, and the political landscape. The episode underscores the critical juncture at which American politics stands, highlighting the urgent need for informed public engagement and decisive political action.

Transcript

[Alicia Menendez]

Start your day with the MSNBC Daily Newsletter. Each morning, read sharp insights from the voices you trust. Catch standout moments from your favorite shows. The second Trump administration has gone to.

[Charlie Sykes]

Unprecedented lengths to radically transform America.

[Alicia Menendez]

Stay up to speed with our latest podcasts and documentaries, and get fresh perspectives from experts shaping the news. It's everything you love about MSNBC delivered to your inbox. Sign up [e-mail].

[Charlie Sykes]

Hi everyone, it's 4 o' clock here in Washington, D.C. i'm Alicia Menendez in for Nicole Wallace. Quote, utterly insane and destructive. Quote, an unhappy episode. The reviews are in and even Republicans and their allies are warning about the consequences of Trump's so called big, beautiful bill. At this hour, the Senate is in the middle of a marathon voting session, taking up amendments to the bill from members of both parties. The goal? To pass the bill later today. And rarely, if ever, have members of a political party seemed so glum on the eve of passing major legislation. With Democrats unified in their opposition to the bill, Republicans can only lose four votes. And right now, at least two GOP senators have said they will be voting no. They are Rand Paul of Kentucky and Senator Tom Tillis of North Carolina. While Rand Paul's opposition to the bill is based on the fact that it would add $3.3 trillion to the national debt, that's according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Tillis has been vocal about the nearly $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid, cuts that would kick roughly 12 million people off of the program. That is also according to the cbo. Tillis, who was considered one of the most vulnerable Republican senators in next year's midterms, announced that he would not run for reelection and then slammed the bill on the floor of the Senate last night.

[Alicia Menendez]

So what do I tell 663,000 people in two years or three years when President Trump breaks his promise by pushing them off of Medicaid because the funding's not there Now Republicans are about to make a mistake on health care and betraying a promise. It is inescapable that this bill in its current form will betray the very promise that Donald J. Trump made in the Oval Office or in the Cabinet Room when I was there with finance, where he said we can go after waste, fraud and abuse on any programs.

[Charlie Sykes]

Tillis is not alone. Trump's single biggest political benefactor in the 2024 election, Elon Musk, and is resuming his attacks on the bill on X. He said the latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country, utterly insane and destructive. Just in the last hour, Musk put pressure on the far right House Freedom Caucus to tank the bill. And when it comes to the voters, well, they have reservations, too. Quinnipiac poll released Thursday found that just 29% of voters supported the bill while 55% opposed it. And that is where we start today with NBC News White House correspondent Vaughn Hilliard, plus MSNBC columnist and author of the newsletter to the Contrary, Charlie Sykes, an NBC News political analyst and president of Brilliant Corners Research, Democratic strategist Cornell Belcher. Charlie, this bill is unpopular. You see it in poll after poll. As you know, there is no actual need to pass it. At this very moment, July 4th, totally arbitrary deadline imposed by Donald Trump himself. So help me understand this, Charlie. Why are Republicans rushing to pass a bill that they know will be a political liability for them?

[Alicia Menendez]

Well, three reasons. Because they're afraid of Donald Trump, they're afraid of failure, and they're afraid of Donald Trump. Look, this is what's happened to legislation in the era of Trump. It's not new that we've had these massive bills, but Donald Trump has basically made this the cornerstone of his agenda. And so they know that it's the mother of all crap sandwiches, but they have to eat it. And one of the reasons why they're so glum is that in a normal legislative process, you would be able to vote against things that you regarded as horrible ideas. But because this 900 page bill must pass, in Trump world, they have to swallow everything. And they know what it's going to be like going out and trying to explain these massive cuts in healthcare, pushing millions of people off healthcare, raising taxes on various industries, picking and choosing. And the reality is that the speed with which this is being done and the lack of transparency with which this is being done also means that we're gonna have a lot of surprises. We're going to find out what's in this bill afterwards. But again, Donald Trump has demanded this. And as we're seeing it, as Thom Tillis belatedly recognized, there's no room for opposition, there's no room for compromise, there's no room for independence or dissent. They all have to follow the lemmings off the cliff. Because to be a Republican these days means that you have to vote for something like this. Now, of course, there might be some people who decide they're going to follow Thom Tillis who doesn't take that many votes to derail it. But if we learned one thing over the last 10 years is that Both moderates and fiscal conservatives, despite all of their qualms, usually end up caving.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, to your point, Thune has two more votes he can afford to lose. Vaughn, help us understand the administration's thinking on this bill. Where did July 4th come from as a self imposed deadline?

[Alicia Menendez]

This was one that the President has staked out for months now. And you guys said it accurately and echoed exactly what Thom Tillis, the Republican senator from North Carolina, called it. It's artificial. There is nothing that says that this has to be done by Friday. Yet he is putting the pressure on, on the House and the Senate to push this thing through and get it done. But there is a reality that is about to hit the President here, and that is even if this does get it through the Senate, you're looking over at the House of Representatives that initially pass it to 15 to 214. And one of those members of Congress, David Valadao, he's from the Central Valley of California and folks may recall him because there are only two Republican members of Congress left that voted to impeach Donald Trump in the aftermath of the January 6th attack. Ten Republicans voted to impeach him. Just two remain. One of those individuals is David Valadao. So on policy and substance, the president and this administration must make their case to members that are representing districts that are so crucially involved in watching this unfold. But also on a human level, there's relationships that the President has burned with people like David Valadao and Lisa Murkowski, who folks will Recall back in 2022, he went to Alaska and, and back to primary challenger and told crowds of thousands that she was not a Republican. You know, three years later, he may very well need her vote to get this through the Senate.

[Charlie Sykes]

I think, Cornell, it is important that Vaughn points us back to the House given that House Republicans are watching what their colleagues in the Senate are doing and asking themselves if they are willing to back whatever it is that passes through the Senate. But I want to talk just for a second about Democrats because I think part of what we are watching today on the Senate floor is Senate Democrats really pushing to get Republicans on the record vis a vis a series of amendments. Talk us through that strategy, how that strategy becomes useful for them going into midterms.

[Alicia Menendez]

Well, look, the simplest strategy, and usually the best strategy is the simplest, most straightforward strategy. And going back to that Quinn Impact poll that you, that you talked about, what you also say in that poll is, and I don't say this very often, but I think Democrats have done a Pretty good job thus far messaging around this bill because you do have a majority of voters in the Quinnipack poll that heard something about this, about this bill. And when you get even deeper, look, you look at where independent voters are and a really crucial sort of middle of the road group that, that Republicans and Democrats both vie for, especially in swing districts. It is, you know, 65% of independent voters disapprove of this bill. So it is a hard sell going into the midterms if you, if you're, if you're, if you're underwater with independent voters. And look, what we've seen is also in the pollings. Look, what we've seen is the Republican brand has, under Trump, they've lost some of their shine on handling the economy. They've lost some of their shine on inflation. So you go in here and Tillis, quite frankly, is the best television ad that Democrats will have going into the midterms because he has gone out and said that this is a betrayal. And that's not in a Democratic voice, but that's in a Republican voice. And I think that adds a great deal of credibility to his argument. So I think to a certain extent, Democrats are doing a pretty good job, which again, I don't say very often on messaging about this bill and making it very clear to voters across these battleground districts, but also in these states that how many people, like 600,000 people in North Carolina will lose their health care? When you talk about those kind of numbers and you hit people with those kind of facts, it is jarring. And I think Democrats should stay in that space. And again, I think Tillis will be the best ad that Democrats have going into midterms.

[Charlie Sykes]

Charlie Tillis may be the best ad that Democrats have going into the midterm. He is also a harbinger for the Republican Party. You got a swing state senator coming out and warning his own caucus that what they are doing in this moment is going to lead to an electoral wipeout. Is it your sense that there are any Republicans who are listening, Charlie? I think you're muted and I really want to hear what you have to say.

[Alicia Menendez]

Oh, yes, I'm sorry, but it's a very, very small number. I mean, it's maybe Lisa Murkowski, maybe it's Susan Collins. The rest are lockstep because they know that if they defy Donald Trump, they're going to be primary. And the problem with American politics right now is that most of these Republican representatives, including the senators, are more worried about the primary than the general and so even if they may lose the general election, they don't want to be cast into outer darkness by maga. Now, I agree with Cornell that the polls certainly would indicate that the Democrats have done a good job with marketing on all of this. But keep in mind, though, that once this is passed, the race is gonna be on to define what is in it. Donald Trump still has a very big bully pulpit. He will focus on the bright, shiny objects and the goodies in all of this. And it's going to be very they shouldn't, people should not just simply assume that this is going to be instantly unpopular because, and this may come as a shock to many of the viewers, but Donald Trump may lie about what's in the bill. Donald Trump may make stuff up. He may say that there are goodies in this bill that do not exist. He may deny that there are certain horribles in this bill that in fact, are there. So this is going to be one of those fights that we ought to be prepared for in the era of Trump. And the other problem is, because it's 900 pages and trillions and trillions of doll, we can't expect that voters are really going to know, get their heads around everything in it. So the question is, who gets out first to define how people should think about this bill. But I agree completely. They ought to weaponize the Thom Tillis comments because when it comes from somebody like a Republican incumbent senator saying you have been lied to, it has a lot more credibility than it does from one of the talking heads here or any Democratic representative.

[Charlie Sykes]

Cornell, I want to pick up on this point that Charlie is making about how it's hard to know what is in this bill. And I think sometimes it's even hard just to help people understand the impact it has. When you talk about a trillion dollars in cuts to Medicaid, who is it that is impacted? You have the bulwark with some incredible reporting. I'm going to read it to you and then we'll talk about it on the other side. Anid Rodriguez, 51 years old, has been working for pretty much her entire life. First in organizations that provided support and therapy to at risk children, more recently in a small electrical business she helps her husband run, while she also take for aging mother, severe asthma, chronic chest and gastric problems, back pain from a hip injury a few years ago. But Rodriguez has never made enough money to pay health insurance premiums. All of that changed in late 2023 when North Carolina officially opened its Medicaid program to anybody with incomes below or just above the poverty line. In other words, to people like Rodriguez who were too poor to get insurance on their own, but did not qualify for the older, narrower standards North Carolina had for its Medicaid program. Since then, Rodriguez has been able to see those specialists, including one who figured out her chest pains were an upper GI condition, not a heart issue. She's also getting physical therapy for her old injury and is on weight loss medication that doctors think will help with other conditions. All of that is now at risk for a need, thanks to these potential Medicaid cuts. How do you tell that story, Cornell? People will live that story and their neighbors will live that story, and that will become clear to people very quickly. But there will also be the task for, for ad makers and for messengers to make sure that people like this, who fall in that gap, who were once covered and now will not be, become the face of this bill.

[Alicia Menendez]

Well, that's exactly it. The working class people who are hurt by this bill, who are losing something because of this bill, they must become the face of it. And look, in politics, we talk about it all the time. It's one thing to fight against a hope or possibility. Right? I remember when ACA was first talked about, and you all remember ACA was underwater, it was unpopular, but then all of a sudden we had aca and Americans got on aca and they have health care, they have health insurance, and now it's above water. And now it becomes a lot harder to take away because people feel it well when they start gutting these middle class and these working class people of their insurance and things that benefit. And sort of the twist on that is to benefit the really rich. I don't think there's a better contrast between the face of a working class woman like that who's done everything right, played by the rules, but she just can't get ahead and this is helping her pay for health insurance versus, I don't know, pictures of the wedding and the Bezos wedding just happened versus people like this benefiting while working class women like this are hurting because of this bill. Right. I think it's a, I think it's a really clear contrast on this one.

[Charlie Sykes]

Vaughn, it strikes me that in the Senate you have Thom Tillis announcing that he's not going to seek reelection. In the House, you have Don Bacon of Nebraska announcing he's not going to seek reelection. Is this the beginning of a series of departures? Is this where we find ourselves in American politics, where members of the majority who can't agree with the president decide it is easier to see themselves out to get to be honest brokers on their way out rather than to stay and fight.

[Alicia Menendez]

There aren't many left here at this point. Right. We watched in 2020 to him effectively toss eight, those eight House members who voted to impeach him out of office through to Charlie's point, the primary process by backing challengers. And that's why we've seen Bill Cassidy, who is also up like Thom Tillis In 2026, Bill Cassidy was under a lot of scrutiny. He was somebody that actually voted to convict Donald Trump in the aftermath of the January6 attack. And we have seen so far in 2025 him vote largely in line with the president, including even backing the confirmation of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Over. You see time and again the concern that the president has quite vocally expressed. It took just a mere minutes for Tillis to suggest he was no on the motion to proceed on Saturday night for the president to put out that social media post. But there is also a reckoning here when it comes to health care. Each of these individuals that we're talking about, Thom Tillis, Don Bacon, they were around back in 2018 on the campaign trail in 2017, it was each of these members that had difficult votes when it came to repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act. And I remember very clearly it was actually at the Capitol the night of Senator McCain's thumbs down. But Lisa Murkowski along with Susan Collins were the other two Republican senators that killed that effort. And I caught up with Murkowski down the Senate subway afterwards. And she was very specific to me saying we cannot let the public believe we are done with health care. We are just beginning. Those comments at the time made it very clear that health care was a sensitive subject to all Americans. And we saw in the 2018 midterms, I was out on the campaign trail with Martha McSally, who actually voted yes when she was a member of the House on that replacement proposal which effectively would cut Medicaid expansion. But also it created these high risk pools, calling to question whether individuals with preexisting conditions were going to be protected. And in those final weeks on the campaign trail in 2018, when she was running for the US Senate, time and again, voter after voter, I continually heard health care concerns, health care concerns, and she lost that Senate bid. And I think that that is where dating back to 2017, we haven't seen health care this type of magnitude be put in front of the voters in this way. And that's where you saw Senator Tillis emotionally expressing because if you go even to places like Oklahoma who voted their lawmakers did not pass Medicaid expansion, Alicia. But back in 2020, their voters put it on the ballot and voted to pass Medicaid expansion. 41 states have done that. And this amendment from Rick Scott that he's putting forward would effectively all but eliminate any new enrollees through Medicaid expansion from entering the system. What is clearly popular among a vast majority of Americans.

[Charlie Sykes]

Charlie, just real quick, before we go, I want to pick up on that point from Vaughn, which is it is not as though they are coming forward with a proposal that said this is how health care could work in this country. Here is our big alternative to all of the cuts that we are making. They are hiding behind waste, fraud and abuse. But there is no actual vision here. Unless I'm missing something, you tell me.

[Alicia Menendez]

Well, they're also not, they're also not making the case. Right? Because you know, one of the problems of rushing this through is they are not arguing to the American people what they are doing. As you're pointing out the same ways fraud and abuse people are gonna find out that's not the case. But I also think that it's an important political reality to mention how many Trump voters rely on Medicaid. This is not simply an inner city welfare problem. In fact, Medicaid recipients, I think, voted for Donald Trump by 2% points. Very, very close. So in many ways they're going after their own constituency in a remarkable way. And I wonder if they fully understand how that's going to play out, particularly at the time when you have the contrast like why can't you afford to continue to pay the Medicaid fees when for Medicaid, when in fact you are providing these massive tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. And we are sort of in an era, as Cornell referenced, of conspicuous vulgar consumption. And so people sitting at home will see the rich and the famous being benefited and their neighbors will be the ones and members of their family who will have their health care cut. So it is an incredibly perilous moment for members of Congress and I think that you got the sense of that from Senator Tillis. Speech on the floor of the Senate.

[Charlie Sykes]

Charlie Sykes. Vaughn Hilliard, thank you so much for joining us as we continue to monitor those votes on the floor. Cornell, you are sticking with us. When we come back, Republicans on the Hill are poised to slash Medicaid, something viewers of right wing media might not be aware of. In fact, there's one word that has outpaced Medicaid 10 to 1 over on Fox News these past five months. You will never guess what it is. Plus, as ICE enforcement raids continue at workplaces across this country, there are organizations working overtime to protect frightened and anxious immigrant communities. Jacob Sober off road along with one group in L. A. He joins us with that firsthand account. And later in the show, Senator Cory Booker is going to be here on what has unfolded today on Capitol Hill, how things, how he thinks it's all going to end. All those stories and more when Deadline White House continues after this.

[Alicia Menendez]

As president President Trump continues implementing his ambitious agenda. Follow along with MSNBC's newest 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. The American people are basically telling the president that they are not okay with any of this. Sign up for the Project 47 newsletter at msnbc.com project47. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts for early access, ad free listening and bonus content to all of MSNBC's original podcasts, including the chart topping series the Best People with Nicole Wallace, why is this Happening? Main justice and more. Plus new episodes of all your favorite MSNBC shows ad free and ad free listening to all of Rachel Maddow's original series Ultra Bagman and Deja News. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

[Charlie Sykes]

Millions of Americans are set to lose their health care thanks to Donald Trump's deeply unpopular domestic spending bill, one that could become law any day now. And many of these Americans might not even know it is coming, especially if they are regular viewers of Fox News. New study by Media Matters highlights the lengths Fox News is going to to distract their audience from these deeply unpopular cuts to programs like Medicai. Media Matters identified 1,390 mentions of the word Medicaid on Fox's original programming from January 20 through June 21. Now, by contrast, they found that the network mentioned Biden over 13,000 times during that period. Joining our conversation, President of Media Matters for America, Angela Carson Cornell is back with us. All right, Angela, talk to me about this study. The fact that you have Fox News mentioning former President Biden at a rate of 10 to 1 in comparison to the term Medicaid. What does that tell you about where their attention is?

[Alicia Menendez]

Yeah, I mean, that's the old standby, right? Is that you, you, you deflect, right? You put most of your attention on something completely different so that the little bit of information, that's the part that's important here, is that the little bit of information they do end up getting about the bill, the potential cuts to Medicaid, they also get to control that. Right, because that it's a lot easier to control, a much sliver, you know, much narrower, you know, the story about what's being told about the cut. So you give them a big piece of pie to focus on and then the few other sort of side dishes you also get to have influence and control over. And that's where this ten to one advantage comes in. And I think it's particularly sort of in focus when you look at how the 8pm hour right at the beginning of primetime is covering it. Because you know, that's Jesse Waters and He has a 55 to 1 ratio on his program. So that is sort of the lead into the rest of the night. And it just goes to show you where the bulk and the focus of Fox's attention really is. And it seems to be working right because it is a fait accompli now largely within the larger, not just right wing media space, but in Republican politics, they picked a lane here. They ended up being sort of the editor in chief or the assignment editor of what the story that was going to be told about this bill is. And that has largely filtered down. Obviously the administration's political pressure has sort of put everybody else in line. But right now they're sort of filling a role that they haven't actually filled in quite a long time, which is they're the, they're, they're the Pied Piper.

[Charlie Sykes]

Here, which it matters. Cornell, when you look at the polling and you ask whether or not people like this, it matters whether or not people understand what is actually in this. And one of the things that I think is really important to get to sort of this idea of Republicans will say they are not cutting Medicaid, Democrats say they are. And the New York Times had just some great reporting on what exactly is the differential there? We're cutting $1.7 trillion in this bill and you're not going to feel any of it, Mr. Trump said Thursday at the White House. Here's the part that I want to focus on. That claim rests on a maneuver embedded throughout the sprawling legislation. Instead of explicitly reducing benefits, Republicans would make them harder to get and to keep. The effect, analysts say, is the same with millions fewer Americans receiving assistance. By including dozens of changes to dates, deadlines, document requirements and rules, Republicans have turned paperwork into one of the bill's crucial policymaking Tools yielding hundreds of billions of dollars in savings to help offset their signature tax cuts. It just. It makes me sick, Cornell, because I'm thinking about people who are going to realize, like, oh, I missed the deadline because the deadline changed, or I don't know how to fill out the paperwork, and so I am losing my benefits on what feels like a technicality. And that that may actually be harder to draw the line to or connect the dots to. This is what they intended. They intended for you to miss the deadline. They intended for you to be so mired down in paperwork that you weren't able to access something that you deserve. I mean, there's a specific type of cruelty in that, Cornell, that I find a little difficult to capture rhetorically.

[Alicia Menendez]

Well, I do as well. And I think this is from a political science and social sciences standpoint. This, because this is how manipulation works. And look, I've sat through enough focus groups with Manila Road voters going, I don't know if I can trust anything they're saying in Washington because, you know, one side says this and the other side says that, and I don't know who to trust or who's being straight with us. And then you have Fox News, who is. Look, and there was a study back in 2022 that said that Fox News viewers weren't only being misinformed, informed, that they were literally being made less intelligent around most of these issues. And that's the point. The more you can confuse voters. And in politics, if you can't win the debate, you muddy the waters. That's politics 101. If I can't win the debate, I want to muddy the waters. And this is exactly what you have happening here. They're muddying the waters and causing confusion. And I'm haunted by the Statement by Mitch McConnell. Now, you can say a lot of things about Mitch McConnell, but he's been around a long time. He's seen these things play out many times. Mitch McConnell says, I think they'll get over it. Right? There'll be a lot of hand wringing, but in the end, will our voters in our red state get over it? He says they'll get over it. And why does he say that? Because he's seen it in the past. And you see all this misinformation and this mudding in the waters coming from Fox, which is a major influencer on the right. And what is the next shiny thing? Well, I may be losing my health care, but, oh, yeah, we're throwing those brown people out of our country who are taking our jobs and killing us and bringing in fentanyl. Right. It's the next shiny thing. Right. We're taking, you know, gay and lesbian leaders names off of our naval ships. Right. It's the next shiny thing that they move on. So I would, I like to have hope that when red states, some of these, some of these voters start losing these benefits, the next shiny thing won't move them off. I would like to have hope that this time it will be different. But there's a lot of history that says this time may not be different.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, Angela, you have Fox News rooting for this bill and for the president. What they see as a big win for the president. And then at the same time, you have Elon Musk saying this on every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending. Spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame and they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this earth. I don't even think you can call that a thinly veiled threat.

[Alicia Menendez]

No, it's not. I mean, and you know, he should follow through with that. He should certainly do the thing that he says he's going to do here and engage in those sort of primary challenges on, on this particular fight. And, you know, it is a sort of this, you know, it is a political fight as much as it's a media fight and a narrative fight, too. Like I said, it is a really rare instance in a while where Fox is the one that is actually leading the conversation. And I think part of what Cornell was getting at before, what you were teeing up as well in your lead in there when you were talking about that there's going to be all these harms that cascade from this that are all going to follow through. And that's the point. Fox's dominant story right now is that you have to pass it. That you have to pass it. This is the best thing that can happen. And they're doing that through denying, through deflecting. Right. And through and downplaying. That's sort of their range. But once that's over, once this passes and all those harms start to materialize, their primary function is going to be to paper over and hide and shift the blame for any of the things that people are experiencing to something else. They're going to make sure that nobody actually blames the bill and the bill's passage for the harms that they experience. Experience. And so, you know, to Musk's point, because he's as much a media figure as he is a political figure now. The thing that he can do is to make sure that his platform and his is not just engaging in those primary politics, but also connecting the harms to this particular action, to those people, to the things that people are experiencing. And so that's a story that's going to have to be told not just in the 30 days before the election, but starting after those first change deadlines get met, is being able to tell both sides of that story. And you know, it is it is a power struggle for politics as it is about media. And it's a reflection of the state of we are. Trump got to where he is because he used the new larger media landscape to build and organize power on the fringes. Things have been really sort of mucked up because of that, because of all these players that come in and this mudding of the waters and largely our political landscape is a is sort of a consequence of whatever is happening in this larger swirl of these fever swamps. So it's fever swamps, creatures battling with themselves and their instruments is misinformation and lies.

[Charlie Sykes]

Angela Carson, as always, thank you so much for joining us. Up next, Jacob Soborough riding along this morning with an immigrants rights group in Los Angeles. They're the eyes and ears of that community on the lookout for ICE agents. Jacob joins us after the break with more on what they do and what they saw today. Stay with us. We are now 23 days into the increase of immigration raids in Los Angeles and they are showing no signs of slowing down. Raids continue today at workplaces across the city like the one shown here at a Home Depot in Cypress Park. Throughout the crackdown in la, we have been able to have eyes and ears on the ground to give us footage like this, thanks to volunteers and groups like Union del Barrio who are committed to providing a rapid response to the raids. Today, NBC's Jacob Sobroff met with the members of that organization, talked to them about their efforts to support and protect the immigrant communities in their city. Here's some of that conversation. So we're here right now.

[Alicia Menendez]

We're being very vigilant, looking at not.

[Charlie Sykes]

Only like federal agents, you know, ICE agents, cbp, ero, FBI, hsi, but we're.

[Alicia Menendez]

Also here looking out for like, honestly.

[Charlie Sykes]

Like vigilantes that are being paid to be out here and hunt down and kidnap our people.

[Alicia Menendez]

We know that specifically Home Depot has been a hot spot recently in South.

[Charlie Sykes]

Central and in like the greater Southern California area. So that's why we chose this area. This morning because people are afraid.

[Alicia Menendez]

And when they see people like us.

[Charlie Sykes]

Here, when they see Union del Barrio.

[Alicia Menendez]

Here, they see other community members that are here saying we support you, saying that, you know, we know that you're just trying to work. We're saying we know that you have to to work. And so we're just going to be here to ensure that your rights are defended. It makes the community feel better.

[Charlie Sykes]

It makes the workers feel better. Joining our conversation, NBC news correspondent Jacob Sobroff. Jacob, tell us about Union del Barrios efforts. What more you learned today.

[Alicia Menendez]

Well, you heard Alicia Lupe, they're talking about how Home Depot has been a hotspot and despite of course, the sort of the stated line of the administration that they're going after the worst, the of the worst in criminals. Now that we enter this fourth week of wide scale immigration enforcement across the streets of LA. She's exactly right. That was around 6 o' clock this morning when I talked to her in that clip. Around 10:45 sprinter vans filled with heavily armed tactical agents showed up. Here's a photo of it at the Home Depot in Cypress Park, Los Angeles on Figueroa. They went there to detain day laborers dressed like that. And I think maybe they got one or two gentlemen, picked them up and took them off for processing. It's part of the reason that Union del Barrio is on the streets of Los Angeles every day. Part of a much larger effort to have a community based coalition of people literally looking out for their neighbors and their friends and their fellow community members. I want to show you a little bit more of what it was like to be out there so early this morning before, before this raid took place with those activists and community members as they, as they watched out for other people in the community.

[Charlie Sykes]

People are scared. People are scared. People are not working. People aren't going grocery shopping. People are sending their kids to go to work.

[Alicia Menendez]

It's really bad.

[Charlie Sykes]

This is almost like a Covid level, like pandemic beginning pandemic kind of level.

[Alicia Menendez]

Where we're seeing people not being able to make rent because they're afraid to go to work, sending their kids to go do vendor work for them.

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah, it's really sad.

[Alicia Menendez]

Even as we're standing here, I'm watching the three of you. Your head is almost like on a swivel. All of you looking around the parking lot. What are you looking for?

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah, well, I'm looking, I'm looking for.

[Alicia Menendez]

The tried and true, like undercover vehicles that the, these mask kidnappers are using. And we're saying Mass kidnappers, because we.

[Charlie Sykes]

Have no idea if they're agents of.

[Alicia Menendez]

Some federal agents or they're the mercenaries that are in town. We have no idea.

[Charlie Sykes]

So we just say anything that looks and matches what we're looking for. We're vigilant.

[Alicia Menendez]

So that's part of the terrorization, Alicia, is that the members of the community don't know oftentimes who these people are rolling up to Home Depot parking lots or the agricultural fields a couple weeks ago, or you name it, wherever they show up. The other thing I want to really emphasize and underline, Chavo, Lupe, everybody there has other jobs. They have day jobs. So the two women that you saw in the clip there are educators, and they were going off to the schools. I know it's summer school, but going off to work at school. Chavo works in the health care industry, community health. They're doing this because they care about Los Angeles. They're doing this because they care about their neighbors. They're handing out those exact fliers because they want people to understand what the vehicles look like when they roll up in the community. Driving around every single morning for the past 23, going on 24 days in this unprecedented effort by the federal government.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, you work in education, you work in health care. You also understand the devastating impact this can have on a community. You talked, Jacob, about the mass agents there. There's reporting, I'm sure you've seen it, of people posing as federal agents amid these raids. Your sense speaking with Union del Barrio, like, how concerned are these groups about the fact that they reference it there? They can no longer tell who is ICE and who is not.

[Alicia Menendez]

I think it's one of the top concerns. You hear language like bounty hunters or vigilantes or mercenaries. The reason that people on the street are using this language is not to be derogatory towards federal agents. They sincerely, genuinely feel like they do not know who is out there coming after them and coming after people who are in their community. And there have been arrests of people who are impersonating federal agents, trying to commit crimes against a vulnerable population here in the city. And that's the other part of this. That's why local law enforcement doesn't participate in immigration enforcement actions, civil immigration enforcement, because it scares people away from reporting things like violent crimes, burglaries, rapes, homicides. That's the situation that Los Angeles finds itself in, where people don't want to pick up the phone and call law enforcement because they don't know who's out on the streets and who might show up.

[Charlie Sykes]

When they do that, we always say in times of crisis, look for the helpers. Thank you, Jacob Soboroff, for pointing us towards them after the break. Why? After months of repeatedly promising to eradicate the violent Ms. 13 gang, Donald Trump is dropping charges against some of its leaders. That story after the break.

[Alicia Menendez]

Last month, we officially designated MS.13 and trend, that's the Venezuelan gang, the toughest gang, they say, in the world, and the Mexican drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations. That's a big deal. Nobody wanted to do that. These are tough people and bad people, and we're getting them out of our country. And some are so bad, we don't want to get them out. We have to put them in jail because we don't want to even take a chance that they can come back.

[Charlie Sykes]

So this has been one of Donald Trump's most repeated promises, that he will dismantle MS.13, a transnational violent gang. But now new reporting in the New York Times reveals how a deal Trump struck with El Salvador's President Bukele is threatening that promise. The Times reports this, quote, in exchange for helping President Trump carry out his deportation agenda, the United States paid El Salvador millions of dollars, adding an important sweetener at Mr. Bukele's request, the return of key Ms. 13 leaders in American custody. Before returning those Ms. 13 leaders, the Trump administration is also dropping their prosecutions. And while Trump is boasting about his deal with Bukele as a crackdown on crime, the Times reports the deal is, quote, undermining a longstanding US Inquiry into the gang, according to multiple people with knowledge of the initiative. Joining us now, Vice President for Immigration Policy and campaigns at Forward US Andrea Flores. Cornell is back with us. Andrea, explain to me what is happening. Some really very concerning details have come.

[Alicia Menendez]

Out now about this administration and their.

[Charlie Sykes]

Purported promise to really prioritize public safety. So this deal with the El Salvadorian government has been suspect since the very beginning.

[Alicia Menendez]

And it's still something that Congress hasn't really adequately reviewed.

[Charlie Sykes]

And so to see details come out.

[Alicia Menendez]

That they're sending people in exchange for.

[Charlie Sykes]

El Salvador imprisoning over 200 men who've received no due process. I mean, I think we have to be honest. This administration is not prioritizing public safety. And you see this time and time again. And this story is just the latest.

[Alicia Menendez]

Example of where they are being very.

[Charlie Sykes]

Hypocritical and prioritizing sort of the imprisonment of innocent people over the verified public safety threats that have already been under.

[Alicia Menendez]

Investigation by prior administrations.

[Charlie Sykes]

So to Put a finer point, Andrea, on the argument that you are making about public safety. There is this reporting from the Washington Post. Quote, the Trump administration has agreed to release from prison a three time felon who drunkenly fired shots in a Texas community and spare him from deportation in exchange for his cooperation in the federal prosecution of Kilmara Brego Garcia. That's according to review of court records and official testimony. What does that say to you? You, Andrea? It says that this administration is willing to go to incredible lengths to actually detain, arrest, detain and deport people that we know have no criminal convictions, who have only civil offenses, and that their goal of mass deportation is actually much bigger than their goal of national security and public safety.

[Alicia Menendez]

And so, you know, I think it's.

[Charlie Sykes]

Time we all recognize they have continued.

[Alicia Menendez]

To say that they're focusing on, say.

[Charlie Sykes]

Immigrants who may pose a threat to.

[Alicia Menendez]

Public safety or national security.

[Charlie Sykes]

But this case is yet a perfect.

[Alicia Menendez]

Example of where they are being dishonest.

[Charlie Sykes]

With the public about that. So this deal needs to be scrutinized and this should really renew the calls for the return of all of the innocent fathers, brothers, sons who are still.

[Alicia Menendez]

Sitting in El Salvador because of this deal.

[Charlie Sykes]

And Congress needs to investigate These claims around Ms. 13 Cornell, this question of what was promised versus what was delivered, is this starting to show up in your focus groups?

[Alicia Menendez]

This piece is not. But I think drip, drip, drip, drip. I think you'll start to see it right? This is again, look, we started this show talking about, you know, promises made, promises broken on health care. And I think we're going to end the show talking about promises made. It almost as and you look at the segment that you showed about the ICE raid. So let me get this right. We are raiding and picking up day workers, people who are adding to our economy, people who are our businesses and so many of our families depend on, but we're letting, letting out gang members, right? He promised to dismantle gangs. How are you dismantling gangs if you're in fact cutting deals to let go the kingpins in these gangs? It almost as if though this whole gang thing was a strawman for something else. Because when you see them letting go the gang members, cutting deals for the gang members, but rounding up day workers, people who are adding to our economy, you have to think, well, the whole, whole conversation about gangs and this being the thrust of the deportation, it was all just a ruse. It was all a strawman for something else.

[Charlie Sykes]

Right, Andrea? Much like the ruse that there is somehow an invasion of this country by Venezuelan nationals. There's an appeals court holding a hearing right now on whether or not Trump lawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act. Most lower court judges considering this question, they have disagreed with the Trump administration. Do you have a sense of what is likely to happen here on the day? Well, the fifth Circuit, we know, oftentimes.

[Alicia Menendez]

Has sided with a more conservative argument.

[Charlie Sykes]

But even the conservative argument here can't really hold up our plain understanding of.

[Alicia Menendez]

Both the Constitution and the law.

[Charlie Sykes]

This administration wants to equate all migration with an invasion by a foreign government. And so that is a huge claim. Can you imagine if there's were other countries claiming that a number of Americans immigrating there or moving there suddenly meant that they needed to declare war on the American government? I mean, that's how ridiculous it is to think that this wartime authority needs to be utilized for the Venezuelan refugee crisis, which is the largest refugee crisis recorded in our hemisphere.

[Alicia Menendez]

But once again, this is much of.

[Charlie Sykes]

It is a ruse and it's rhetoric and it's important that we see clearly through this.

[Alicia Menendez]

So I'm pointing, hopeful the 5th Circuit.

[Charlie Sykes]

Really just reads a plain text about the Alien Enemies act and the Constitution.

[Alicia Menendez]

And understands the danger of equating just.

[Charlie Sykes]

Somebody migrating and comparing that to, once again, an incursion by a foreign government.

[Alicia Menendez]

But if it goes up to the Supreme Court, I think that the ACLU.

[Charlie Sykes]

And those defending the people who've been.

[Alicia Menendez]

Detained under this act have a very strong case.

[Charlie Sykes]

Once again, why are you invoking wartime authorities during peacetime? How can you equate all immigration with an invasion?

[Alicia Menendez]

It's a very slippery slope and hopefully.

[Charlie Sykes]

We see a good outcome from that. Andrea Flores, Cornell Belcher, thank you both so much for spending some time with us. And up next, the fate of music mogul Sean Combs is now in the hands of 12 jurors in a courtroom in New York. A check on how those deliberations are going, that's next. Keeping an eye on Manhattan courthouse today where jury deliberations have gotten off to a rocky start in Sean Diddy Combs federal sex trafficking trial. Jurors sent a note to the judge saying they are worried that juror number 25 does not follow the judge's instructions. The judge has now reminded every juror of their duty to deliberate on a verdict in the seven week trial, which has included testimony from 34 witnesses such as former employees and two former girlfriends of Combs. Prosecutors alleged that Combs ran a criminal enterprise and sex trafficked those two former girlfriends. His defense argues he is being prosecuted for his sexual lifestyle and that the activities were consensual. He faces two counts of sex trafficking, two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution, and one count of racketeering. We're going to bring you any updates as we have them on that case. A quick break for us. Senator Cory Booker will be our guest for the very latest on the President's domestic spending bill and where the voting stands at this hour. A quick break. We'll be right back.

[Alicia Menendez]

MSNBC presents the chart topping original podcast, the Best People with Nicole Wallace. This week, Nicole speaks with American soccer legend Abby Wambach and her wife, best selling author Glennon Doyle.

[Charlie Sykes]

We are in the middle of amazing dehumanization. So staying human and feeling it all and witnessing it all feels like the only antidote right now.

[Alicia Menendez]

The Best people with Nicole Wallace. Listen now. For early access ad free listening and bonus content, subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. Start your day with the MSNBC Daily Newsletter. Sharp insights from voices you trust, standout moments from your favorite shows, and fresh perspectives from experts shaping the news. Sign up [e-mail] we owe it to the states to do the work to understand how these proposals affect them. How hard is that? I did it. How hard is it? I'm telling the president that you have been misinformed. You supporting the Senate Mark will hurt people who are eligible and qualified for Medicaid.

[Charlie Sykes]

Hi again, everyone. I'm Alicia Menendez in for Nicole Wallace. And it is 5:00' clock here in Washington, D.C. where the vote a rama taking place in the Senate is still underway on that massive domestic spending bill, a bill that would drastically increase our deficit and drastically cut assistance programs like Medicaid and snap. Today, a flurry of amendments, mostly put forward by Democrats, are being voted on. Democrats attempting to stop the passage of the bill or at least cut back on the most extreme parts of it. But as they are in the minority, there is little they can do to truly stop it. However, Republicans can only afford to lose one more vote. Having already lost Senators Rand Paul of Kentucky and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. Tillis, as you just heard, came out strongly against the bill in a fiery speech on the Senate floor. And when Donald Trump announced he would support a primary challenger to the Senator, Tillis announced he would not seek reelection next year. Tillis is a no vote on this bill because of what it does to our most vulnerable slashes a trillion dollars in Medicaid, one of the spending cuts to make up for the bill's tax cuts to the wealthiest. The Congressional budget office found 11.8 million people would lose their health insurance in the next 10 years if this bill becomes law. Across the board, this bill, it is very unpopular. Poll after poll after poll shows its unfavorability. Yet Trump keeps pushing for it to be on his desk by his July 4th deadline. Senator Chris Murphy this afternoon calling it the most deeply immoral piece of legislation he has ever voted on.

[Alicia Menendez]

There are going to be kids who go hungry because of this bill. This is the biggest reduction in, you know, nutrition benefits for kids in the history of the country. I mean, this is the most deeply immoral piece of legislation that I have ever voted on in my entire time in Congress. We're obviously going to continue to offer these amendments to try to make it better. So far, not a single one of our amendments, not a single one of our amendments to try to make the bill better has passed. But we'll be here all day, probably all night, giving Republicans the chance over and over and over again to slim down the tax cuts for the corporations or to make life a little bit, bit more, less miserable for hungry kids, or maybe don't throw as many people off of health care, maybe don't close so many rural hospitals. It's going to be a long day and a long night.

[Charlie Sykes]

And that is where we start this hour with Democratic Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey. Senator, do you agree with your colleague that this legislation is, quote, immoral?

[Alicia Menendez]

Well, I'll go further. I think it's a moral obscenity, and it is violence in the sense of what it will do to many families by denying them health care when they're sick, by denying them food when their children are hungry, denying our seniors critical care in their latter years, denying the disabled the kind of support that they need. This bill is a moral obscenity. And I'm stunned that only a few senators on their side of the aisle have even been willing to speak to the impact it will have on their states, their constituents, their rural hospitals, their families, their children in their state. They're not looking plainly at the reality. And then you add in the one thing, to me that just exposes a lot of hypocrisy is the Senate bill blows our deficit up far more than even the House bill did. The Senate version now has our deficit going up about $4 trillion. So they are gutting and cutting programs for millions and millions of Americans and giving tax breaks to billionaires, all while doing such fiscal damage to the stability and strength of America and racking up a bill that our children will have to pay for.

[Charlie Sykes]

Senator, I want you to take listen to what your colleague, Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri had to say about this bill.

[Alicia Menendez]

We can't, we can't be cutting health care for working people and for poor people in order to constantly give special tax treatment to corporations and other entities.

[Charlie Sykes]

Okay, so if I just listen to that sound, Senator, I would assume that Senator Hawley was not going to be voting for this legislation, but at this moment he is. Is counted in that whip count as a yes. Make it make sense.

[Alicia Menendez]

I can't. I really can. I've heard everybody from Josh Hawley to Ron Johnson so stridently speak out against parts of this bill, major parts of this bill, but yet they all seem to fall in line when they were doing the motion to proceed. I'm sorry. Josh Hawley needs to understand this is going to take away from working class Americans health care, food aid and other critical support. Millions and millions of Americans are going to be paying higher energy costs, are going to see their premiums, annual premiums go up upwards near $1,000. They're going to see more and more people really hurt. While the wealthiest who do not need our support, they do not need our help. The wealthiest will be getting the biggest benefits from this bill. The wealthiest individuals and corporations. That's why I call this bill a moral obscenity. All the basic decency of our country is being offended, undermined and frankly, just brutalized by this bill.

[Charlie Sykes]

Senator, you referenced the two Republican senators who have already said they will not be voting for this legislation. Tom Tillis resignation announcement. Did that come as a surprise to you?

[Alicia Menendez]

It did. I saw his behavior as someone was preparing to run again. I think that he was right in his statement. This is a sad commentary in our country that a Republican senator who's trying to work across the aisle, trying to find points of compromise, who believed that you could stand your ground and still forge common ground, is going to be put in a situation where he could not win reelection because of the President turning against him. And more so, again, I think it's sad. I've seen a lot of Republican moderates disappear in my short time in the Senate from people like John Corker or Jeff Flake who stood up and spoke out against the president. Anybody who doesn't get on board with Donald Trump's way seems to become a casualty in their reelection efforts.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, Senator, I think a lot of us watch Senator Tillis on the floor. Now that he is not running for reelection, now that he is unleashed and speaking truth to power and, and Wonder if your Republican colleagues, who do not have the same luxury, are whispering the same to you behind the scenes. Do you get the sense that they know both how damning this is for the American people when it comes to those cuts for Medicaid, those cuts to snap, and then politically just how unpopular this bill is?

[Alicia Menendez]

Well, look, I've had Republican colleagues tell me a lot over the last months of the Trump administration. Everything from the unqualified people that Trump has put up for major cabinet positions all the way to just some foreign policy and national security nightmares like the Secretary of Defense signaling out attack plans. There's a lot of things I know are offending my Republican colleagues, but it doesn't show a profile and courage to whisper those things, to say them privately, but not stand up on the Senate floor like Thom Tillis did yesterday, calling out this bill for what it does to his state and to our nation. We know the truth of this bill. The more people know about the bill, the more people hate the bill. Independents, Democrats and Republicans, they are not telling the truth when they go and defend this bill. The beneficiaries of this bill are going to be the wealthiest in our country. They will see the disproportionate benefits. Benefits average working Americans are going to see higher costs from their energy costs to their health care costs. And they're going to rack up a deficit that could take generations to pay and will become just debt service payments are going to become the largest expense in our budget as a country, absent the Social Security benefits we pay out to American seniors.

[Charlie Sykes]

Senator, I want you to talk me through what we're watching today on the Senate floor because you have largely Democrats offering amendments, evidence that in the words of your colleague, Senator Murphy, would actually make this legislation better, either depending on how you look at it, offering Republican senators the opportunity to make this better. If you look at it from a strategic Democratic vantage point, to get them on the record on some really hard issues here. As you know, Leader Thune, he can lose one more vote. That math is very tricky. Explain to me what it is we're watching today unfold on the Senate floor and what whether or not you in fact think there is a Republican you can peel away from soon.

[Alicia Menendez]

Well, so there will always be a chance. Remember, we need two, actually. One would be a tied Senate and the vice president would have to come in, but two, giving us a four total, would be able to do it. I don't know who those two could be. It could be Murkowski. It could be Collins. There's A number of others that are sort of in the mix. It's more likely we lose tonight than win, but. But we are going to spend as much time as we can shining a spotlight on either their hypocrisy or their cruelty in this bill, saying simple things like, hey, let's not give billionaires a tax hit. If you're making over $100 million in America, how about we say that you get no benefit in tax breaks for this bill? Or maybe we'll give amendments about saving rural hospitals or saving Medicaid or saving food stamps. We're going to do everything we can on aspects of this bill that are horrible, to shine a spotlight through our amendments and force them to vote again to try to defeat things that would help constituents in their own state. Now, whether that creates the kind of moral pressure and urgency to get them to change their vote, we don't know. But we will all not forget what happened in 2017. The more we strung out that fight, the more pressure was on senior senators and ultimately Murkowski, Collins and the late, great John McCain saved the affordable Care Act. So we're hoping in the night tonight we might see another miracle like that that kills this bill in the Senate and sends a clear message to Donald Trump that we're not going to let him in. The Senate hurt millions and millions of Americans, take away their health care, take away their food supports, raise, unfortunately, their cost of living. At a time when many Americans are just struggling day to day to get.

[Charlie Sykes]

By, we are always watching and waiting for an act of moral courage. Senator Cory Booker of the great state of New Jersey. Senator, thank you so much for starting us off this hour. And let's bring into our conversation. Speaking of New Jersey, Princeton University professor and MSNBC contributor Eddie Glaud. And with me for the hour, senior opinion writer and columnist for the Boston Globe and MSNBC political analyst Kim Atkins Store. I am intrigued, Kim, that you have both senators there, both Senator Murphy and Senator Bookings Senator Booker. Putting this in moral terms, that feels like a rhetorical pivot on the part of Democrats. I wonder how you see it.

[Alicia Menendez]

I think it's a necessary one because we have to look at it in terms of that moral foundation. A budget bill has always been an enunciation of an administration's priorities. And what this bill is prioritizing are tax breaks for the rich while funding, putting more and more funding into an immigration agenda that we've seen carried out in the most brutal and tyrannical of ways before our eyes, and paying for it by stripping Americans from the things that they have not only depended on, but paid into, in addition to blowing up the deficit, the way Senator Booker correctly notes, I was struck by the analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Fiscal Government that said not only will these tax cuts and the cuts in the bill itself be harmful, but it could render Medicare and Social Security insolvent within seven years. These are things people have paid into their entire careers. And to say that that is the priority. We don't care about Americans, particularly in some of the poorest places, which are also some of the reddest places, we don't care about them. We want to give tax breaks for the rich and give them the entertainment of seeing people ripped from their homes by masked ICE agents. That's the priority. So how can you not. How can you not frame it in moral terms?

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, especially Eddie, because the cruelty, the indifference to pain is so clear. You got Joni Ernst saying, we're all going to die. You have McConnell saying, well, they'll get over it. You have a bill that's going to take nearly 12 million people off their health insurance so that it's, as Kim Atkinstor said, a bunch of millionaires and billionaires can get a tax cut. You can't be much clearer if a budget bill is your statement of priorities as a party. They're clear about where their priority and who their priority is.

[Alicia Menendez]

Absolutely. I mean, calloused hearts, right? I mean, Senator Raphael Warnock on the floor of the Senate last night framed this as a moral issue as well, ending with Micah invoking the love, justice, mercy and the like. Right. So there's this sense in which the Republican Party has made it clear that their aim and ambition is to rip apart the Great Society, is to destroy the New Deal. I mean, just to flatten it out in so many different ways. I'm right now talking to you from.

[Charlie Sykes]

The state of Mississippi, one of the.

[Alicia Menendez]

Poorest states in the union. And so when you think about 18% poverty rate, when you think about 27.9% of children in Mississippi are living below the poverty line, when you think about 65 out of 82 counties in the state of Mississippi are rural, and we think about the impact of Medicaid, the cuts in Medicaid, the cuts in snap, what's going to happen to rural hospitals and the like, A state like Mississippi, which is scarlet red, will be devastated in so many ways by these calloused hearts. And so it seems to me, not only do we have to respond to this at the level of policy and politics, we have to call this out for what it is. It reveals something broken in terms of the social contract, something broken in terms of the moral center of gravity of the country. And if we don't address that and only address it at the level of politics, then we failed, it seems to me.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, speaking of things that are broken, Kimberly Atkins, store I want to read you a little bit of what Thom Tillis had to say announcing his retirement from the Senate. Quote, I look forward to having the pure freedom to call the balls and strikes as I see fit and representing the great people of North Carolina to the best of my ability. Isn't that the job? KIMBERLY Atkins I get that you're part of a political party. I get that sometimes you take party line votes. But representing your constituents to the best of your ability, that should be the job, regardless of whether or not you're seeking reelection. That, that says something to me, to Eddie's point, about the fact that the system itself is deeply broken, isn't that a remarkable statement?

[Alicia Menendez]

Alicia People should not get cookies for doing what they're supposed to do. That's always my statement. So the fact that it is so remarkable is in itself really saddening. What the American people can do in this moment is to, with their calls, their votes, their protests, their letters, let their lawmakers know that that is the job they expect every single one of them to do. And if they don't want to do it, they can ensure that they don't have that job very long. You should not have to retire to be able to speak your principles. And what does that say about the Republicans as a party? That they are not a party? That they stand on their ideas because they think they're right or that they will debate their views because they think that they have the better. No, it's saying that they have to rule by keeping everyone in line. They have to crack the whip to ensure their power because they know what they're doing is unpopular. They know what they're doing is divisive. And that's the only way. Pure loyalty from everyone involved as if they are some sort of foot soldier. I hope more people, rather than retire, I hope more people in the party actually do their jobs while they have their jobs and listen to what their constituents are saying.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, Eddie, that's what we're hearing from at least one Republican. Let's take a listen to what we're hearing from Democrats about this bill. Republicans have made their values clear. They are willing to throw millions of Americans under the bus so that they can help out a handful of their.

[Alicia Menendez]

Billionaire buddies and giant corporations. They should be ashamed. It's only a beautiful bill if you're a billionaire or a very wealthy person. For everybody else, this is a big, ugly betrayal. It's a betrayal because while it provides tax breaks for billionaires and very wealthy people, it does so at the expense of everybody else. Right? This piece of legislation is crooked. This piece of legislation is a rotten racket. This place feels to me today like a crime scene. Get some of that yellow tape and put it around this chamber. The midnight transfer of wealth in this bill is disgusting.

[Charlie Sykes]

That last part there, Eddie, people are going to feel the cuts to Medicaid. They're gonna feel the cuts to snap. That will become very real very quickly. But this other piece, who is it that is actually benefiting here that the rest of us have to live with the consequences of what America was willing to sacrifice so that millionaires and billionaires could get their tax cut? How long, Eddie, before that becomes real to folks?

[Alicia Menendez]

Oh, I think it's already real. It's gonna become even more concrete and pressing over the coming weeks. But look, we know that the modern day robber barons have seized control over government. We know that they're exploiting hatred and grievance. We know that we're in a second Gilded age. And part of that involves destroying, flattening out the social contract that in some way suggests that if you work hard, if you're honest and you obey the rules, that somehow you can succeed. We know that's always been troublesome in this country, but that's at least been the stated principle. But now, if you're rich, you're above the rules. If you're uber rich, you can actually move and control the levels of government. And so I think it's really important for us to understand that if they pass this bill, the American people should engage in a general strike and say, no, we just can't wait for the next election cycle. The damage would already have been done.

[Charlie Sykes]

Eddie Glaud, as always, thank you so much for getting us started. Kim, you are sticking with me for the hour. When we return, legal experts are sounding the alarm over a Trump administration plan is already underway to compile a national database of Americans. We have new reporting on what they're up to and why it's happening so far under people's radar. That's next. Also ahead, two new pieces of intelligence that contradict Donald Trump's claims that Iran's nuclear program has been obliterated. We're going to be joined by a reporter who broke a stunning story about what Iranian officials are saying about the U.S. airstrikes and later moving the goalposts on Trump's vow to complete 90 trade deals in 90 days. But he's promising to do instead and why some of our allies are moving on without us. Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Stay with us. In an alarming new development amid efforts to wrest control of election administration from the states, give that power to the federal government, NPR is reporting that the Trump administration is now developing a federal database of citizens to allow state and local election officials to check the citizenship status of their voter rolls. NPR reports this quote dhs, in partnership with the White House's Department of Governmental Efficiency team Doge, has recently rolled out a series of upgrades to a network of federal databases to allow state and county election officials to quickly check the citizenship status of their entire voter lists, both U. S. Born and naturalized citizens, using data from the Social Security Administration as well as immigration databases. Such integration has never existed before, and experts call it a sea change that inches the US Closer to having a roster of citizens, something the country has never embraced. The centralized national database of Americans. Personal information has long been considered a third rail, especially to privacy advocates as well as political conservatives who have traditionally opposed mass data consultants. Validation by the federal government comes as the administration is ramping up its efforts to control who gets to be a citizen. NPR is reporting that, quote, the Justice Department is aggressively prioritizing efforts to strip some Americans of their US Citizenship. Joining our conversation, voting rights attorney and founder of democracy docket, Mark Elias. Kimberly Atkins Storr is also back with us. Mark, your first reaction when you read this news?

[Alicia Menendez]

My first reaction is it's chilling. I mean, the idea that Donald Trump's government is creating a national register of all of us, everyone, citizens, noncitizens, just is building a national database at the same time that, that they, that you are seeing people being disappeared off the streets at the same time that we are hearing that US Citizens are being deported out of the country. It's just chilling on the voting front. You know, it is ironic that they are building this database to so fear and discord and perpetuate fraud. Note, Alicia, they're not using it to create automatic voter registration for all those citizen.

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah, I mean, that's exactly it. It would seem to me, and you tell me if you agree, Mark, that this is like a solution in search of a problem.

[Alicia Menendez]

Oh, it's definitely a solution in search of a problem. I mean, there is no problem in this country in voting when it comes to citizenship. First of all, non citizens can't register to vote and therefore they don't register to vote. And there are lots of procedures in place to make sure that doesn't happen. The second is they can't vote. Right. And so like you have this double set of, of checks and balances in place right now. And, and until very recently when, when probably some pollsters came up with this as the, the best way to merge one pathology of Donald Trump's with another pathology of Donald Trump's, this was not even like on the radar screen, you know, a few years ago when Donald Trump was claiming that, you know, dropboxes were the big evil.

[Charlie Sykes]

Right. So I'm curious which two factors it was merging is like the nativists and the populace. Like who actually comes together on this issue? Mark Elias.

[Alicia Menendez]

Oh, I'm sorry. It is the merger of the election denialists, the election deniers and the people who want to demonize migrants and US citizens that they don't believe are part of the blood and soil of this country. You know, it is, it is the nativist world and the, the big lie election deniers which are, which is in Donald Trump's brain, the two core principles that I assume some Republican pollster came up and figured out how to merge.

[Charlie Sykes]

And so just to remind everyone, Kimberly, that means you, me, Mark, every US citizen is now on this list in this database that we did not sign up for. I'm busy spending most of my trying to get time trying to get off all these calling and databases. And now the US government has made a mega one. It tells me something, Kimberly, that you used to have privacy advocates, small government conservatives who would have stood up and said, I got problems with this. Where are they today? Kim, I would love to pose that.

[Alicia Menendez]

Question to all of the libertarian leaning Republicans out there who wanted small government that you took the words out of my head that I was thinking of as you were describing this, and this is a profound privacy violation, the very one we were concerned about when we learned that DOGE was rummaging through all the data that the federal government had to offer. When I read this story, this is what I thought about because there's a reason why we have not had a federal voter identity registry before. It's not because they haven't tried, it's because it's very difficult to do and efforts were riddled with errors. So imagine this circumstance. You have someone who wants to vote is, is a citizen, knows that he or she is a citizen, but knows if they go and try to register or vote because of an error, they can be tagged as a noncitizen. So then what happens? They are not just disenfranchised. They're worrying about ICE showing up at their door and them ending up on a plane and being sent to some third country that they don't have a connection to. So what does that mean? That means they are less likely to vote. And that is the point of this. This is one of the biggest voter suppression efforts that the United States will have ever seen, because it's meant to scare people and discourage them from using the vote that they earned when they became citizens of this country. It's meant to discourage even citizens, because if it's an error, nothing will stop them from ICE showing up at your door or mine either. So this is a disaster waiting to happen. But it is right in line with the Project 2025 style that the Trump administration has been rolling out when it comes to both voting rights and also when it comes to this immigration policy.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, Mark, I want to pick up on something that Kim just said there. When one becomes a citizen. Because so much of Donald Trump's rhetoric around immigration has pretended as though it focuses only on undocumented folks. You now have NPR reporting that the Justice Department is aggressively prioritizing efforts to strip some Americans of their U.S. citizenship. Department leadership is directing its attorneys to prioritize denaturalization in cases involving naturalized citizens who commit certain crimes and giving district attorneys wider discretion on when to pursue this tactic. That's according to a June 11 memo published online. The move is aimed at U.S. citizens who were not born in this country. That's according to data from 2023. Close to 25 million immigrants were naturalized citizens. This is what folks warned about, Mark, that it was never about criminals. It was never even just about undocumented folks. It was about them seeing how wide they could open the aperture on this question of who gets to be an American and who does not.

[Alicia Menendez]

Yeah, I mean, let's remember it was only five months ago that Donald Trump was saying, it will just be the worst of the worst. Remember that? The worst of the worst, the criminals, the murderers, the rapists. Right. And we have gone from the worst of the worst to disappearing people to foreign gulags, to instances that we are hearing about more and more about people being disappeared. We don't know whether they're being disappeared by actually the government or by people pretending to be the government, because they are all with their face covered and dressed in black. So we don't know. We have seen instances of US Citizens, people who are unquestionably US Citizens, who have been erroneously sent out of the country. And now they want to create a database of all citizens in the country as they are also, as you say, talking about denaturalizing. Now, when people think about denaturalizing, they're saying, oh, they're just talking about people who were not, not citizens and became citizens. Everyone, it's only month five. Like, it's only month five. They're, they're getting, they're, they're working their way down this list. And if anyone thinks that they are safe, if anyone, no matter what their background, no matter how long they and their family have been here, think that they are safe, they misapprehend what Donald Trump and his project is about. You know, one of the questions I have for the administration that maybe someone could ask them is talking about a database that goes from the government, the federal government, to the states. What are the states given back? You know, I'm a Democrat. Donald Trump could look that up. He knows I'm a Democrat. He knows who I am. Even happy to tell him I voted against him twice. But, you know, for lots of millions of Americans, those voter records have, that the states have, have a lot of information about them. Donald Trump want that data back. Is that information going to go into some federal database that his cronies are going to use?

[Charlie Sykes]

The sighs from Kimberly Atkins store, which I can hear even as you lay that all out, sir, tell us everything we need to know. Mark Elias, Kimberly Atkins Storr. Thank you both so much for joining us. When we return, we've got two critical headlines that cast even more doubt on Donald Trump's claims that Iran's nuclear program has been obliterated. The reporter who broke one of those stories is going to join us after a very short break.

[Alicia Menendez]

They can have in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium. Frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there. It is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage.

[Charlie Sykes]

That was the chief nuclear inspector for the United nations yesterday disputing Donald Trump's claims that US Strikes set Iran's nuclear program back decades. Meanwhile, Trump again dismissed reports that preliminary assessments cast doubt on the damage to Iran's nuclear facilities, which he described as, quote, obliterated three more times in a single interview answer yesterday. But now there's this, too, from the Washington Post. Quote, the United States obtained intercepted communication between senior Iranian officials. Remarking that the attack was less devastating than they had expected. It said four people familiar with the classified intelligence circulating within the US Government. More from that reporting, quote, the Trump administration did not dispute the existence of the intercepted communication, which has not been previously reported, but strenuously disagreed with the Iranians conclusions cast doubt on their ability to assess the damage at the three nuclear facilities targeted in the US Operation. During our conversation, national security reporter for the Washington Post, John Hudson, he is bylined on that Post reporting. We just read from. John, your reporting. It's the latest sign. It's just much more complicated than what we're hearing from the White House. What more can you tell us about the assessment by senior Iranian officials?

[Alicia Menendez]

Yes, that's absolutely right. I mean, this was a private communication that these Iranian officials were having. It was intercepted. The intercept was obtained by US Intelligence officials who viewed it as valuable for US Leaders to have in their possession when they're trying to understand the latest in these communications. Iranian officials expressed surprise that there was not as much devastation in the strike as they expected. There was even speculation during the conversation about why the United States did not hit as hard and do as much damage as they expected. This is, this is one of the pieces of preliminary information that has come in that has complicated the picture that President Trump has offered that it was completely obliterated. The President has obviously offered a soaring view about the success in his view of the operation. But there's more complicated picture, including from the IAEA Director General who believe that some of the enriched uranium may also have not been destroyed in the strike.

[Charlie Sykes]

When you say that the Iranian officials were speculating as to why the strikes were not as destructive nor as extensive as they had anticipated. Can you give us a sense of what that speculation looked like?

[Alicia Menendez]

You know, this is sort of in the eye of the beholder and I've heard different things about this. You know, I've heard, heard from some that the speculation was, you know, maybe the United States didn't want to escalate as much as they did and they wanted to control the ladder of escalation. Obviously that was not the goal of the United States. The United States wanted to decisively cripple and take out the nuclear program, but these were officials in the aftermath of the strike trying to make sense of what was going on. And so, so again, it is a more complicated picture than one would have believed if they were just listening to President Trump.

[Charlie Sykes]

John Hudson, thank you for bearing with us through that technical difficulty. I do want to ask you one more question before I let you go. The White House lashed out at your reporting and at the idea that Iran could know the status of its own nuclear program. Your reaction?

[Alicia Menendez]

JOHN HUDSON yeah, I will say that one, they, they did not dispute the fact that there was this intercepted intelligence. But you're right, they do strongly dispute the Iranians conclusions. I think one of the things that's important to keep in mind is the Iranians live in Iran. They have access to this site. The United States does not have access to the nuclear site. So that does give the Iranians some credibility. But ultimately the important thing to remember is, is that we need some humility about this. According to the original DIA report, the one that originally cast all the doubt on the success of the strikes is it's going to take days or weeks to have a full picture of what happened with the strikes. That's information that the Trump administration is not necessarily taking to heart. They're making their sweeping claims now. So I think it's worth everybody has having some humility. But it's also very valuable to have to understand some of this raw intelligence that's coming in about the fact that the program might only be set back a matter of months, which is something, by the way, that U.S. intelligence officials have long warned are the real limitations of the military option when it comes to Iran. It's very hard to be a silver bullet, very hard to have a panacea when it comes to military action in Iraq.

[Charlie Sykes]

John Hudson, thank you so much for being with us, for bringing us your reporting.

[Alicia Menendez]

Good to be with you.

[Charlie Sykes]

The Trump administration has repeatedly promised 90 trade deals in 90 days. It was an ambitious pledge to begin with. But this afternoon, with only 10 days left in that timeline, it appears the administration has only one and a half agreements in place. Naturally, the goalpost moving has already begun. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant now suggesting negotiations could be wrapped up up by Labor Day. And Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, maintains more deals will happen whenever lawmakers pass Donald Trump's spending bill. Meanwhile, Trump himself today subtly redefining what a deal really means.

[Alicia Menendez]

Watch. What I want to do is and what I will do just sometime prior to the 9th is we'll send a letter to all these countries. There's 200 countries. You can't talk to all of them. No matter how many people you have, you can't talk to all of them. We'll send a letter and we'll say we, we would consider it a great honor. And this is what you'll have to do to shop in the United States. We'd like a department store to shop in the United States. And you'll pay a 25% tariff. And we wish you a lot of luck. And that's the end of the trade deal.

[Charlie Sykes]

Joining our conversation, professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan, Justin Wolfers. Justin, is that how it works? Is a trade deal like having an aggressive pen pal?

[Alicia Menendez]

You know, I have a partner, Alicia, and she and I try and work out our lives together so that we can enrich each other's lives. And at the start of our relationship, we took this really seriously, and we talked about what was important to her and what was important to me so that we could cooperate together and create a rich and beautiful life together. You know, if I had said to her, instead, I'm just going to send you a letter, I can tell you for sure and for certain, Alicia, I would be very, very single right now. And there's actually a really good analogy between personal relationships and trade relationships. Both are about trying to find ways where we can cooperate and make each other better off. And if you refuse to get in the room and talk, you're never going to be able to find those ways we can make each other better off.

[Charlie Sykes]

So if I'm understanding this correctly, the markets have been relatively stable. If he starts sending out these letters and these letters are taken seriously, what then does that do to the markets? How soon do we sort of see the consequences of these stated policies?

[Alicia Menendez]

It really depends what's in the letter. Okay, so the 90 day pause is meant to end next week. I've heard it called Taco Tuesday. And if it turns out to be a Taco Tuesday, where those letters are sort of meek and mild and say, you know, I'm walking back from tariffs, then don't expect markets to respond much at all. But if, as I think we're hearing signs of, he's going to go back to very high, very robust tariff policies, the sorts that would decimate trade between the US and other countries, and the sort that would call forth retaliation from our partners. If that's what happens, you can expect exactly what we saw happen on Liberation Day to happen again on Taco Tuesday, which is the President walks out in the lawn, announces a crazy and incoherent set of tariffs, and the markets freak out saying, hey, I didn't realize you were serious about this. Oh, my goodness. If this is what you think economic policy is, the United States is not a bet we think is worth making.

[Charlie Sykes]

There's some reporting today. I want to read this from the New York Times. Justin. India, Vietnam, Japan, the European Union, Malaysia and other governments have been working toward deals that could smooth relations with the United States and avoid double digit tariffs. But the Trump administration has been moving forward with plans to to impose another set of tariffs on certain industries that it views as essential to national security, a threat that has foreign leaders worry that there could be more pain ahead. What do you make of that reporting?

[Alicia Menendez]

I mean, it points to a really fundamental problem, which is the president tends to change his tariff policies more often than I change my underwear. And to be clear, I do that daily, Alicia and the problem with that is if you try and make a deal with someone based on what they said today, but they're and they reserve the right to completely upend the way they do business tomorrow, then it's not really much of a deal at all. Look, think about the poor Canadians, for example, which is they had a deal. It went through Congress, it went through their parliament. It was called NAFTA. This new bloke Donald Trump came to power in 2017, ripped up that deal, said it was a terrible deal and wrote a whole new one. So then they abided by it. And then this new bloke, Donald Trump comes back to power, calls that a terrible deal, rips it up, and then accuses them of not doing a nice job job in negotiating with them. When your word is worth nothing, why would anyone trade anything away in exchange for your word? And that's the difficulty they're facing, which is if the US Isn't going to make serious commitments, why would anyone make a serious commitment back?

[Charlie Sykes]

Justin Wolfers, thank you for the economic expertise, the relationship advice and the tmi. Always so fun to have you ahead for us. A call to action from Nicole's latest guests on the Best People podcast. We're going to have that for you after a short break. I'm used to deciding that when I'm doing well, when I'm mentally strong, when I'm in a good place, that's when I go out and do my stuff. And I just figured out recently I can't do that anymore. Like if people who are not sad and scared and broken hearted don't show up, up and speak anyway, then the only people who are showing up and speaking are the ones who are not sad and scared and brokenhearted. And that is the last thing we need. The brokenhearted people have to show up now. A call to action for the brokenhearted from best selling author Glennon Doyle and global soccer icon Abby Wambach. They're Nicole's guests on this week's episode of the Best People. You can listen to Nicole's entire conversation with them by scanning the QR code on your screen or downloading the Best People wherever you get your your podcasts. One more break for us. We'll be right back. Thank you for spending part of your Monday with us. We are so grateful.