John Brennan (5:54)

Well, first of all, Nicole, I think you captured well Mr. Kent's politics and how he trafficked in conspiracy theories and really was part of the MAGA heart and soul even before he came into the administration. And his resignation, in a very public way, I think, is designed to have an impact and to send a signal that the MAGA base of Trump's coalition is fracturing, that he is wanting to be, I think, one of the first individuals to do this, to carry out a resignation like this so publicly in the midst of a war. And the National Counterterrorism center, you know, is the. Is the center that integrates the intelligence from across the intelligence community, including in terms of looking out for possible Iranian terrorist planning. So clearly, he is being now derided by a number of people in the White House, including by, you know, Mr. Trump. But it's clear that this base of MAGA, the ones that are, you know, so opposed to foreign interventions, which included Tulsi Gabbard and Vice President Vance. And it's going to be interesting to see what this does to Gabbard's standing with the White House, because Kent was basically an acolyte of Gabbard with, appointed to the position by Trump, but with Tulsi Gabbard's advice and recommendation. So it's clear that this is now a big concern for the White House because, again, this was done in such a public way at a time of great concern and including great criticism of the course of this war.

Nicole Wallace (7:36)

Tom Nichols, Mr. Kent, writing this sort of sentence that'll live on forever when the history of this chapter is written and the chapter on the war in Iran is written, I believe the sentence will be there, quote, I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby. So writes the first senior national security official to depart Donald Trump's isolationist political coalition in the aftermath of the. The Iran war being launched.

Tom Nichols (8:14)

Well, the, the truest part of that was Kent saying that there was no imminent threat from Iran. There was nothing. There was no forcing function behind this war. It's not like we knew that they were days or weeks or months from a nuclear bomb. Although now that is the talking point the President seems to be holding on to for dear life. Just today he talked about, if it had, but not for me, there would have been a nuclear holocaust. But, of course, Kent's Kent, adding that, you know, this is really. The Israelis dragged us into war shows that I think even the MAGA base doesn't really understand Donald Trump's personality. Where everything is about the glory of Donald Trump. That, yeah, sure, I'm sure that the, that Netanyahu was whispering in Donald Trump's ear, you'll be the liberator of Iran. This will be over. It'll be a cakewalk. It'll be, you know, we'll smash the Iranian regime together. But Donald Trump, in the end, is responsible for Donald Trump's decisions. And he took this decision with a circle of people in the United States on his own accord. And I think what MAGA world is going to find out that tomorrow Donald Trump won't even remember who Joe Kent was. Because none of these people matter to Donald Trump. They are just raw material for his ego and his narcissism. And I don't think this is going to have much of an impact on him. Unfortunately, it should, but it probably won't.

Nicole Wallace (9:42)

I mean, and what I think is interesting is, is learning where the lines are. Right? So for this individual, Mr. Kent, the line wasn't a deadly insurrection wherein Donald Trump's supporters beat law enforcement, members of law enforcement. For Mr. Kent, the line wasn't. I believe the story that I mentioned in the lead was about his actions in being punitive because he wanted the intelligence community to have an assessment that held something along the lines of Venezuela as a state was doing something that would justify the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. I think that was. And if I, if I have that slightly off, I'll be more precise in the break. But it was around this effort to invoke the Alien Enemies act, to deport people here without granting them due process. And so the line wasn't crossed for him in that he found it suitable to try to massage an intelligence product to justify that the line was. And again, I'll just read from his letter, was deviating from, quote, the policies you campaigned on in 2016, 2020 and 20, which you enacted in your first term until June of 2025. And, you know, I always ask you, when autocracies take over, what happens and when they stumble, right, when the last sort of gasps of a democracy sort of reach back and pull them Back from the brink, what happens and fracturing within the coalition feels like something that always happens. If an autocrat is going to stumble, how big of a deal is it to see someone walk away sort of for cause, for a policy disagreement like this?

Anne Applebaum (11:33)

So there are different kinds of people inside Trump's coalition, inside the people who work for the administration, and they're there for different reasons. I don't know Joe Kent, but from the tone of his letter and from his public statements, it's clear that he belongs to one of the people who has a very clear, very radical ideology. As you say, what mattered for him was this argument about wars in the Middle East. What didn't matter for him, for example, was how Trump treated Americans, how Trump used the language of dehumanization against immigrants, against his political opponents, actually against even soldiers fighting in the Middle East. He's not particularly interested in their humanity. He's not taking their fate seriously. None of that bothered him. What mattered to him was this one line that he had interpreted Trump as being serious about. What MAGA people are learning is something that people outside of the coalition and outside of that coalition, outside of the administration have been seeing for a long time, which is that actually, as Tom just said, Trump has no ideology. People impose their ideologies on him. They imagine that he's speaking for them or he's speaking in service of something that they believe. But actually he does what he wants at any given moment. He doesn't really connect the past and the future. He doesn't think about the implications of his actions. He doesn't have a long term strategy. And other people are expecting him to have that and are disappointed when he doesn't produce it. I mean, I do think you're right that, I mean, autocracies fall for different reasons and they stumble because of internal contradictions and so on. But it's true that disappointment of true believers in this case is almost inevitable because actually Trump's. There are many people who want different things from this administration, and Trump isn't going to be able to fulfill any of them. And so you'll see more people falling for different reasons.

Nicole Wallace (13:39)

I mean, let me come back to the reporting in the Washington Post with you, Director Brennan. Again, Donald Trump has not articulated a mission, a sole purpose. But one of the things he's posted about in social media posts is getting rid of the regime. And the regime was awful. But if that was indeed one of the goals the Washington Post reporting makes clear, this, quote, U.S. intelligence assessments issued since the war began predict Iran's regime will remain intact and possibly even emboldened, believing it stood up to Trump and survived, according to two people familiar with the assessments. A lot of things factor into that, some knowable ahead of the strikes, some probably as a result of the response of the people since the strikes began. But all of it lead me to this question I've I've had for, for days and weeks now. What kind of information do you think is in front of Donald Trump?

John Brennan (14:38)

Well, I do think Netanyahu continues to be a whisperer in his ear about the need to topple the regime. I do believe that there are some real hard talks, including Lindsey Graham on the Hill as well as in the White House that are encouraging him to go to the mat with Iran because they believe that the Iranian regime can topple. But by all indications that I have is that the Iranian regime has dug in, is going to be continued to be defiant and very resilient and believes that all it needs to do is outlast the United States and that they don't have to win on the military battlefield. They just have to be able to continue to cause damage and pain to the Gulf Arab states, into the United States and others. So I do think that it's clear that Donald Trump is flailing at this point. He doesn't know which way to go with off ramp ramp, even though he has derided our alliance partners and allies in the past. Now he was whining about not getting people to sign up to his coalition to try to open the Strait of Hormuz. So he doesn't have any good options. Now he, he will continue to just, you know, claim that there was imminent threat that he saved the world from a nuclear sort of holocaust. Holocaust. But it's clear that we're in a very ugly mess and he doesn't know how to get out of it, nor do his advisors. And I think at this point they continue to double down

Nicole Wallace (16:04)

his. Well, let me let his statement speak for itself. Here he is talking about how he, after publicly pleading with our allies, how he doesn't need them anyway. Let me show you that.

John Brennan (16:18)

Well, we don't need too much help

Nicole Wallace (16:19)

and we don't need any help.

John Brennan (16:20)

Actually. I didn't do a full court press because I think if I did, they probably would be. But we don't, we don't need help. So I think NATO is making a very foolish mistake. And I've long said that, you know, I wonder whether or not NATO would ever be there for us. So everyone agrees with us, but they don't want to help. And we, you know, we as the United States, have to remember that because we think it's pretty shocking.

Nicole Wallace (16:48)

I think we are still the only country to have ever pulled out of the NATO bank in terms of asking NATO to stand with us, cashing in our article five Benefits in words that Trump might understand. But what do you make of that, Tom Nichols? There's such an erratic nature to his comments about what he wants and needs, both from our allies and in terms of the Strait of Hormuz.

Tom Nichols (17:12)

You know, in a way, he's not erratic. He's very constant. He's like an angry little boy. You know, that just when, you know, when people say they're not coming to his birthday party, he says, well, I didn't want you there anyway. And, you know, no, I mean, it's childlike. I mean, he really does seem to. He kind of approaches the world as sort of a resentful, arrested development small child, because, for one thing, he doesn't understand that other countries have agency. They are not simply wholly owned subsidiaries of the United States. They are not part of Trump Enterprises. You know, Keir Starmer is not the executive vice president for, you know, British relations in the Trump Organization. These people answer to their voters. Their countries have interests. And the tragedy is, for decades, they have identified their interests with ours and we with theirs. And now Donald Trump says, look, an alliance means that you do what's good for me when I tell you to do it, and when I snap my fingers, and then the rest of the time, I insult you and I talk you down because, of course, I'm the most powerful and we have the best and we don't need anyone. And then he's shocked when all the other kids won't come to his party. Well, you know, that's, that's international diplomacy. People don't like to jump into a war that they didn't have any part in starting. This could have been avoided with a, with just a modicum of competent diplomacy of just talking to some of these governments ahead of time, not just to make the case, but to say, look, we understand you might have heartburn about this. We're going to do what we can to keep you in the loop. And instead, every single day, Trump vacillates between we don't need you and you're stupid and weak. And how come you stupid, weak people that we don't need aren't showing up and putting your sons and daughters on the line and putting them in harm's way? He's not capable of grasping the paradox in that because the whole world is about Donald Trump and everyone else is just, you know, a prop or a bit player.

Nicole Wallace (19:16)

Yeah. I mean, it's also a window into his inability to understand that all these leaders have their own constituents and that around the world, the only place he's less popular than here is most of those places. No one's going anywhere. Another stunning moment where he reveals his ignorance of our own country's military history. I'll show that to you. Also ahead, the pushback against Pete Hegseth is getting louder after Pete Hegseth declared, quote, no quarter, no mercy, something that is considered a war crime under international law. Plus, Donald Trump is fuming over press coverage of the war and his administration's threats to silence the media as First Amendment defenders sounding the alarms today and later in the broadcast. It's not just our global allies who are angry with Donald Trump and his war or his former head of counterterrorism. It's his own MAGA allies in the media as well. The MAGA faithful who have been with Trump since the beginning will show you what that looks like and what that sounds like. It's getting pretty R rated. We'll have all that and much more when Deadline White House continues after a quick break, so don't go anywhere.

Commercial Announcer (20:28)

If you like sharp political analysis but want historical perspective too, check out the Signal Award winning podcast the Future of Our Former Democracy. Produced by more equitable democracy, the new season examines parallels between the rise of Nazi Germany and today's current political moment, and the lessons the US can learn about how Germany rebuilt its democracy to prevent extremism from taking power again. Episodes unpack how far right movements operate in modern day Germany and in the United States. They reveal why America's system has enabled minority rule, while Germany's proportional representation model has limited extremist power. Through sound, rich storytelling, personal narratives and expert interviews, the show challenges what democracy can be and explores bold ideas for a more equitable future. So don't miss out. Follow the future of our former democracy Wherever you listen to podcasts today with

Commercial Announcer (21:25)

VRBoCare, help is always ready before, during and after your stay. We've planned for the plot twists, so support is always available because a great

Nicole Wallace (21:36)

trip starts with peace of mind, avoiding

Commercial Announcer (21:40)

your unfinished home projects because you're not sure where to start. Thumbtack knows homes so you don't have to. Don't know the difference between matte, paint, finish and satin or what that clunking sound from your dryer is with thumbtack you don't have to be a home pro, you just have to hire one. You can hire top rated pros, see price estimates and read reviews all on the app. Download Today

Nicole Wallace (22:03)

some news has broken since we've been on the air and we have the three most perfect people to talk to about it. Let me read a little bit from the story just dropped by the Wall Street Journal. Quote Wall Street Journal Russia is sharing satellite imagery and drone technology with Iran. Moscow has expanded intelligence sharing and military cooperation to help keep Tehran in the fight against the United States and Israeli military might. I'll read a little bit of this and then ask you all to help us make sense of this. Russia has been expanding its intelligence sharing and military cooperation with Iran, providing satellite imagery and improved drone technology to aid Tehran's targeting of US Forces in the region. Russia is trying to keep its closest Mideast partner in the fight against the United States and Israeli military might and prolong a war that is benefiting Russia militarily and economically. They explain the technology, but the bottom line here seems to be that Iran has aided Russia so much in its fight against Ukraine that it is now Russia is now aiding Iran to scratch their back in return in a war against America. Director Brennan, do I have that right?

John Brennan (23:20)

Yes. The Iranians provided some real support to the Russians as far as the Shaheed drone technology that the Russ now producing on their own. And it's very unsurprising that the Russians are helping the Iranians now. And certainly I think US Intelligence would have forecast that before this war started that Iran was likely to provide any type of intelligence support that it could, in addition to maybe enhanced components for the drone technology. Since the Russians I think have upgraded some of those capabilities. But by providing satellite imagery, signals intelligence, intelligence derived from those Russian capabilities which are quite formidable, the Iranians can have much better chance of successfully targeting the US as well as Gulf Arab sites throughout the Gulf. So that Russian support I think is pretty significant from the standpoint of helping the Iranians do much better job using their capabilities that they have to target effectively those sites, those targets, maybe even US Naval vessels in the Gulf. And so the question is whether or not the White House is going to raise any concerns with the Russians about this. It doesn't seem like they have done that so far.

Nicole Wallace (24:31)

I mean, Tom Nichols just made the point about Donald Trump's consistency, I mean, and the consistent slobbering over Vladimir Putin, including an actual red carpet that Donald Trump rolled out for him since he's been president a second Time, you have to look at that differently when you take in the fact that this is not static, this is dynamic. This has changed even since the summer. Let me read this to you from the Wall Street Journal. Quote, Iran has had greater success targeting United States and Gulf state milit assets in this war than it did during last year's 12 Day War. The country's strikes using drones to overwhelm radar before a missile strike look very similar to Russia's tactics in Ukraine. According to military analysts.

Anne Applebaum (25:18)

It's a mistake to imagine that Iran is a country all by itself fighting alone against the United States and Israel. Iran is part of a network of autocracies. Actually. It had very close relations with Venezuela in the past, which may or may not continue. It has close relations with China. In fact, there's evidence that the Iranians have been allowing Chinese ships through the Strait of Hormuz, even though they're preventing European and other ships from going through. And so it's really not surprising that the Iranians should be working closely with the Russians, to whom they in turn supplied drones and drone technology early in the war in Ukraine. So it's a, you know, the idea that Iran would somehow be alone, that we could overwhelm them. I think the Trump administration has misunderstood the degree to which autocracies work together, work in collaboration, and are willing to help one another when they see that they have mutual interests. And here they do. The Russians have an interest in raising the oil price. They have an interest in keeping the United States occupied. They have an interest in embarrassing the American president. And they'll continue to help Iran as long as they see that they're getting something out of it.

Nicole Wallace (26:31)

I mean, the Wall Street Journal goes on to detail just how they have Donald Trump's fate in their hands. Wall Street Journal writes this, quote, the aid Russia can give Iran has been limited not only by its own ongoing conflict in Ukraine, but also by the Kremlin's reluctance to anger Trump. While Moscow could do much more to turn the dial up on its assistance to Iran, its current aid plays an important, albeit limited, role in helping Iran's war effort. The categories of assistance, including satellite data and advice on drone tactics, that Russia is providing, are limited but still valuable to the war and Iran's ability to hit specific military sites. I mean, Tom Nichols, we've seen Putin and Trump together enough. You can imagine the conversation. You be nice to me or else I will. To quote the Wall Street Journal, turn the dial up.

Tom Nichols (27:20)

Yeah. The only thing that would have been shocking is if the Russians weren't doing this. This is a layup for them. This is an easy call. It's cheap. It's simple. It's low risk. It's high impact. Any, any Kremlin that didn't do this, you know, would have been incompetent. And, you know, let's, let's also point something else out. Vladimir Putin has no respect for Donald Trump and really only cares about the United States insofar as we can complicate his life, and particularly in Ukraine.

John Brennan (27:53)

They.

Tom Nichols (27:53)

Trump has gotten it into his head that this is his pal, that they, you know, work together, that they can work things out because Trump really, because Trump is a narcissistic egomaniac who really believes all this stuff about himself, and Putin and others are laughing at him. And I think Ann's point about how, you know, these autocracies cooperate. They recognize their mutual interest. They don't make side deals. They're not interested in what Donald Trump thinks. They're interested in what works and what works for them and what keeps them alive. So, you know, the fact that the Russians are doing this is no shock at all. And I think what you're going to see, that the longer this conflict goes on, the Russians will up that, because just as we kind of boiled the frog in Ukraine by increasing our assistance to Ukraine, the Russians are going to play that same game and just keep turning up that dial. The longer Donald Trump stays stuck where he is in Iran.

Nicole Wallace (28:53)

I mean, Anne, I've asked you on multiple occasions how Europe has sort of reoriented itself once Donald Trump came back and took sort of a bystander role in Ukraine. This is just a stunning public display of the consequences of America sort of taking itself off the field as an aggressive backer of our allies. What are the ramifications of this sort of being a new publicly known axis of Russia's fighting Ukraine and they're fighting America right now by aiding Iran. I mean, what could possibly drive our European allies further away from us?

Anne Applebaum (29:32)

So remember what this looks like to European allies. They've spent the last year being insulted, attacked, demeaned, patronized. Their security interests have been dismissed. Trump repeatedly talks about NATO as if United States were not the founder and leader of NATO, as if NATO were not an American project created to benefit Americans and to create a zone of prosperity that has been good for Americans for many decades. They see and hear that. They remember it. The fact that Donald Trump doesn't remember it because he lives only in the present and he thinks only about what's good for him. Him in any given moment, you know, that's fine for him, but other people have longer historical memory. Other people understand, you know, that actions have implications and that behavior in one circumstance affects thinking in another. You know, autocratic countries are also are able to see when they have mutual interests and, and they see the benefit in working together. Of course they'll abandon one another too, if they, you know, if they see the advantage of it. But, but Donald Trump has been unable to find common language with America's historic allies. He's been unable to search for common values and common projects. And now we see the result.

Nicole Wallace (30:50)

It's amazing. We'll see if these headlines do anything to change his public rhetoric about Vladimir Putin, which, to Tom's point, has never not been glowing. John Brennan, Tom Nichols, thank you for starting us off today and for rolling with the breaking news. Anne sticks around after the break. Don Donald Trump and Brandon Carr's threats against the press might not hold much weight legally, but their media bashing may already have done some of its intended damage. We'll explain.

Commercial Announcer (31:23)

Day or night. VRBoCare is here 24, 7 to help make every part of your stay seamless. If anything comes up or you simply need a little guidance, support is ready whenever you reach out. From the moment you book to the moment you head home. We're here to help things run smoothly because a great trip starts with the right support. And hey, a good playlist doesn't hurt either.

Commercial Announcer (31:52)

Avoiding your unfinished home projects because you're not sure where to start. Thumbtack knows homes, so you don't have to. You don't know the difference between matte paint, finish and satin or what that clunking sound from your dryer is. With thumbtack, you don't have to be a home pro, you just have to hire one. You can hire top rated pros, see price estimates and read reviews all on the app. Download today.

John Brennan (32:18)

Free Talk, free text, free 5G and they'll never shut you off. Cause like I said, it's free Text now's got your back. They show nationwide no long term contracts. But are they nervous about losing service? TextNow's got your back. That's their sense of purpose. No matter what comes next. You've got free talk and text with the TextNow app.

Tom Nichols (32:38)

Wireless plans require the purchase of a sim card. Visit textnow.com for terms and conditions.

Nicole Wallace (32:46)

I think the threats are the point and we cannot diminish the effect of the chilling effect on our news coverage and on broadcasters generally. But what we need Everyone to understand is that there is no authority behind these threats. We need everyone to call this administration's bluff, because what this administration wants is for everyone to comply in advance. It is literally on the first page of Timothy Snyder's On Tyranny. Obeying in advance. That was FCC Commissioner Ana Gomez sounding the same alarm on the authoritarian threats coming from the agency's chair and from Donald Trump for the media to air only favorable coverage of Donald Trump and the war in Iran. Today, Trump declared from the Oval Office that he's, quote, very proud of the term fake news, while his deputy press secretary publicly fumes over CBS airing claims that the Trump administration was unprepared for Iranian missile strikes. These continued attacks on First Amendment rights with the goal of obeying or capitulating in advance have sparked bipartisan rebukes of Mr. Carr and this chilling warning from Senator Chris Murphy. Quote, we aren't on the verge of a totalitarian takeover. We are in the middle of it. Act like it. I want to bring in NYU law professor legal analyst Melissa Murray. Her new book, the U.S. a Comprehensive and Annotated Guide for the Modern Reader, is out in May. And Applebaum is still here as well. This idea that what they're doing isn't legal but is still effective feels like the through line of everything. I mean, the attacks on law firms were not deemed legal by the judges, but they were still effective. The attacks on universities have not been particularly viewed favorably by judges, but they've still been effective.

Commercial Announcer (34:39)

So here's the legal landscape. You need to know about this. There is a case from 1964, a Supreme Court case, called New York Times vs. Sullivan. And it is the absolute foundation of a free press. It establishes the actual malice standard for defamation and libel suits. So if you are someone and you don't like the press's coverage and you want to sue, say, Nicole Wallace for defamation, you have to establish that whatever you said, as on tv, was made with knowing falsity of that information. You knew it was false when you said it, or you said it with reckless disregard for the truth. It's an incredibly high standard, and it basically allows for the media to make some mistakes, innocent mistakes in their coverage, things like happen in war, like, I said this, but then I found out this all of exactly why we have a free press in the United States. It's a very different standard from what you have in the UK for example, by having Brendan Carr, the chair of the fcc, basically say, if you say anything that is wrong, that is fake, that is false, that we say is fake or false, we're going to pull your license. It's an end run around New York Times versus Sullivan because they know that media companies will worry about the loss of their licenses and they will scale back their coverage. They'll scale back what they say. They will. They will be chilled effectively. And it's as effective as filing a lawsuit. Knowing that with a lawsuit for defamation or libel, you probably won't win because the standard's so high here. You don't have to worry about that legal standard because you're using the force of the federal government to cow the media into submission.

Nicole Wallace (36:05)

Well, and the other half of it, I mean, they have that as a, as a powerful tool. The other half of it is they've already succeeded in so much consolidation. I mean, you had Pete Hegset from the podium saying, I just can't wait till Larry Ellison takes you over also.

Commercial Announcer (36:18)

Well, and that goes to the deregulation that's happening within the federal government. So there's incredible consolidation within industries, especially among media. And typically that's the kind of thing that a watchdog group like the FTC would be looking out for, or maybe the Department of Justice's antitrust division would be looking at. But right now, the antitrust group isn't doing that. Gail Slater, who used to be the chief of antitrust, left the organization and nobody knows exactly why. And Pam Bondi hasn't explained and the FTC we know, or the FTC or the fcc, we've seen the commissioners removed. Rebecca Slaughter was one of the commissioners of the ftc. She's been removed. There's now a lawsuit about her removal. If she's removed successfully and the Supreme Court overrules existing precedent that requires for Congress to make rules for keeping these multi member commissioners in place and doesn't allow the President to remove them without cause, we are going to see all kinds of agency heads being taken over so that this administration can consolidate their power and to organize the administrative state in ways that are consistent with their preferred agenda.

Nicole Wallace (37:25)

This is where we have to turn to Ann and talk about how in this struggle between democracy and autocracy, the democracy side makes the media a powerful tool. I have to sneak in a quick break before we have that conversation. We'll be right back. On the other side. I think it's the responsibility of journalists and media companies to get the truth out to the American people. And I never want to see a government take control and try to take that away.

John Brennan (37:59)

I'm a big supporter of the First

Tom Nichols (38:01)

Amendment I do not like the heavy hand of government, no matter who's wielding it. So. So, no, I would rather the federal government stay out of the private sector as much as possible. And really the federal government's role is to protect our freedoms, protect our constitutional rights.

Nicole Wallace (38:18)

Ann, it is a bizarre, strange, twisted coalition that you assemble to save one's democracy. But it sounds like on the question of the First Amendment, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Ron Johnson might occasionally be in it. Does that matter?

Anne Applebaum (38:33)

Yeah, I mean, better late than never. It matters that there's a broad coalition to support freedom of speech, just as it matters that there's a broad coalition to support the rule of law, the independence of courts, the power of Congress. Look, I think what's really useful and important also about this conversation is it reminds us of something that people often forget. We tend to think that democracy is all about voting and elections, and we associate it with polling and campaign. But actually, a really important part of democracy also is the maintenance of the playing field. In other words, for democracy to work, for power, to change hands frequently, you also need a set of institutions that are relatively neutral and that work according to an accepted set of rules, whether it's the Federal Trade Commission or whether it's the fcc. These are institutions that are supposed to, to monitor the playing field, to make sure that everybody's playing by the rules. When these kinds of institutions are politicized, when they're taken over by one party and they're made into cheering sections for the president rather than neutral, law abiding institutions that enforce the rules, then you begin to have these democratic breakdowns. You have this unfairness and you have the growth of the possibility of, of a different kind of political system growing. That's why this issue is so important right now.

Nicole Wallace (40:05)

You know, it's this tangle, right, of the desire to obey in advance all of the massive sums. You can call them settlements, you might call them bribes someday when the history of this time is written. But all of the early wins for the bullying tactic against media companies seem to have sort of taken root inside their minds. But I wonder what you make of sort of the current landscape where they haven't been able to control their own most high profile media allies on the question of the war in Iran.

Commercial Announcer (40:37)

So all of this, I think, is really interesting. You know, part of it seems to be, you know, this is a natural consequence of a political cycle where you do in fact have a lame duck president. They're thinking about how do they move on past Donald Trump? You know, that is part of the whole story around the Iran war and its unpopularity.

Nicole Wallace (40:54)

Unpacking power.

Commercial Announcer (40:55)

Yeah. Who has power? Notice, like, we haven't really seen J.D. vance, and I think he wants no part of this. It's not popular. It doesn't resonate with their message around affordability. It's the antithesis of affordability. It's the most unaffordable war we've heard ever. You know, and again, many consequences that will redound with deleterious economic consequences for the American people going forward. So that's part of it, I think. But I think when anyone stands up, the bully moves on. I mean, we've talked about this before. We've seen with Jimmy Kimmel. They stood up and he kind of moved on. He's not talking about Jimmy Kimmel. We saw that there were law firms who stood up to him, like, filed suit, and those lawsuits were successful. And there was a moment where the administration was like, we're out. But then they were like, we're back in. And maybe they were back in because the President didn't like the favorable press coverage around that. Who knows?

Nicole Wallace (41:47)

But.

Commercial Announcer (41:47)

But when you stand up, when you make your voice heard, then you're effective. He has to move on. And again, what the bully wants is to silence dissent. What any authoritarian wants is to silence dissent. That's why they're going after media. That's why they're going after any institution that is a vehicle for voicing any kind of opposition to what this regime is doing.

Nicole Wallace (42:08)

Well, and that's why it's important to understand the legal underpinnings. There isn't a legal rationale for what they're doing. So all they have is the bullying, which is why they're creating their own

Commercial Announcer (42:16)

legal system that operates acceptable, which isn't

Nicole Wallace (42:20)

a legal system at all.

Commercial Announcer (42:21)

It's not a legal system at all. That's what makes it not legal.

Nicole Wallace (42:24)

Yes. Melissa Murray, thank you for being here at the table, and thank you so much for spending the hour with us. Ahead, Donald Trump forcing every Republican to get on the record, whether or not he or she wants to make it harder for every American to vote. We'll explain. The Senate has passed its first hurdle to push what Trump has called his number one priority to make voting harder in America and to, quote, guarantee the midterms, whatever that means. The SAVE Act. Republicans needed a simple majority to pass, and they got that with a tight 5148 vote. Lisa Murkowski was the sole Republican. No vote, with retiring Senator Thom Tillis skipping the vote altogether. But this vote today was just a procedural step that sets up a marathon, possibly days long debate over the actual legislation. Donald Trump has continued to pressure members of his own party, writing this on social media in all caps no less. Quote, I will never, ever endorse anyone who votes against Save America. Three exclamation points for that one. It is an uphill battle for Republicans. Majority Leader John Thune has been clear that the GOP does not have the 60 vote on this legislation and will not nuke the filibuster in order to pass it. Democrats have made it clear that they will not back down from this fight. Senator Alex Padilla told reporters today, quote, we are prepared to stay here all night and all day or multiple days and multiple nights and even multiple weeks if necessary to make sure the SAVE act suffers the death it deserves. We will stay on top of that story. Up next, the very big rift the war in Iran has exposed among Donald Trump's most loyal backers and allies. DEADLINE White House continues after a quick break.

John Brennan (44:19)

Sometimes life will get you stressed out. Lucky you can always count on Text Now. Free Talk. Free text, free 5G and they'll never shut you off. Cause like I said, it's free. Text Now's got your back. Nationwide, no long term contracts. But all they nervous by losing service. Text Now's got your back. That's their sense of purpose. No matter what comes next, you've got free talk and text with the Text now app.

Tom Nichols (44:45)

Wireless plans require the purchase of a sim card. Visit textnow.com for terms and conditions.