← Deadline: White House
Deadline: White House
“Mind boggling”
00:42:56
Nicolle Wallace covers the latest comments from Obama on the National Guard in Chicago and Pope Leo’s message for journalists.
Loading summary
Transcript75 lines
- [00:00]
Nicole Wallace
Deadline White House is brought to you by Progressive, where drivers who save by switching save nearly $750 on average. Plus auto customers qualify for an average of 7 discounts.
- [00:11]
George Stephanopoulos
Quote now@progressive.com to see if you could.
- [00:14]
Nicole Wallace
Save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates.
- [00:17]
George Stephanopoulos
National average 12 month savings of $744.
- [00:20]
Nicole Wallace
By new customers surveyed who save with Progressive between June 2022 and May 2023. Potential savings will vary. Discounts not available in all states and situations.
- [00:31]
The connection between the guests on the show is the show. All that we do is put together people who are smart, people who are brave, people who are honest, and lots of times people who've never met each other to have a conversation that has never happened before. But on that day deepens everyone's understanding about the moment in which we gather.
- [00:53]
Deadline White House with Nicole Wallace, weekdays from 4 to 6pm Eastern on MSNBC.
- [01:04]
Barack Obama
When you now start seeing the politicization of the military deliberately, when you have what looks like a deliberate end run around not just a concept, but a law that's been around for a long time, Posse Comitatus that is a genuine effort to weaken how we have understood democracy.
- [01:41]
Nicole Wallace
Hi again everyone. It's now five o' clock in New York with each member of the National Guard that Donald Trump deploys into blue cities and blue states. He is essentially weakening our democracy deliberately. Former President Barack Obama weighing in there on comedian Marc Maron's latest episode of his WTF podcast as Team Trump considers a dramatic escalation and how it uses the military against Americans. White House officials have, according to NBC News, quote, held increasingly serious discussions in recent days about his invoking the Insurrection Act, a rarely used 19th century law that gives the President the power to deploy active duty troops inside the US for law enforcement purposes. Just take a listen to how JD Vance spoke about it over the weekend and then hear Obama point out the insanity of it all.
- [02:34]
Mary McCord
Are you seriously considering invoking the Insurrection Act?
- [02:39]
George Stephanopoulos
Well, the president's looking at all of his options right now. He hasn't felt he needed to, but we have to remember. Why are we talking about this? Kristen? Because crime has gotten out of control in our cities.
- [02:48]
Barack Obama
If I had sent in the National Guard into Texas and just said, you know what a lot of problems in Dallas, you know, a lot of crime there and I don't care what Governor Abbott says, I'm going to kind of take over law enforcement because I think things are out of control. It is mind boggling to me how Fox News would have responded.
- [03:17]
Nicole Wallace
I would like to see that. But it is truly mind boggling. And at the same time, this is where we are with the Trump administration being given a free pass to dismantle our democracy from its allies and folks on Fox News cheering him on or standing silently on the sidelines. One person who's not doing that, though, Illinois Governor J.B. pritzker, who clapped back at any suggestion of the need to invoke the Insurrection Act.
- [03:47]
Myles Taylor
Well, the Insurrection act is called the Insurrection act for a reason. There has to be a rebellion, there has to be an insurrection in order for him to be allowed to invoke it again. He can say anything he wants. But if the Constitution means anything, and I guess we all are questioning that right now, but the courts will make the determination if the Constitution means anything, the Insurrection act cannot be invoked to send them in because they they want to fight crime.
- [04:15]
Nicole Wallace
The fight that Governor Pritzker, along with a few other Democrats has been galvanizing is what Obama says we need to see more of, not just from elected leaders. Take a listen.
- [04:26]
Barack Obama
If you're a law firm, you know, you saying to we're going to represent who we want and we're going to stand up for what we think is our core mission of upholding the law. And maybe we'll lose some business for that, but that's what we believe. That's what's needed. If you're a university president, say, well, you know what, this will hurt if we lose some grant money from the federal government. But that's what endowments are for. Let's see if we can ride this up because what we're not going to do is compromise our basic academic independence. If you're a business, you say, you know what? We're not, we're going to, we think it's important because of what this country is to hire people from different backgrounds. And we're not going to be bullied into saying that we can only hire people or promote people based on some criteria that's been cooked up by Steve Miller. Yeah, we all have this capacity, I think, to take a stand.
- [05:43]
Nicole Wallace
We have the capacity, but will we do it? Taking a stand against the anti Democratic efforts of the Trump administration is where we begin the hour with some of our favorite experts and friends. Former top official at the Department of Justice, MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissman is here. Also joining us, former acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Department of Justice, Mary McCord. Also joining us, former DHS chief of staff during Donald Trump's first term, Myles Taylor is here. Myles Let me start with President Obama. He chooses the words almost as carefully as his targets, but on blast are firms like Paul Weiss universities. I'm guessing it's Harvard that's still weighing whether or not to do it, deal with the Trump White House or not, and businesses capitulating to what they think Stephen Miller has made legal or illegal is, you know, all of them. But ending on, you know, reminding people what they have the capacity for feels like an incredibly important message to amplify at this very moment.
- [06:52]
Myles Taylor
Well, Nicole, I think the other thing that we should note about this is that Barack Obama has long said that he took one of his biggest notes about the post presidency from the president that preceded him, George W. Bush, who famously said, you know, he didn't intend to criticize his successor because he didn't like it when his predecessors did the same thing. And so Barack Obama has left office and largely been uncritical of his predecessors. I mean, he's choosing his words very carefully. I think it's notable that in this moment, he. He's coming out, at least for him, swinging right now against Donald Trump, against the actions of the Trump administration. And, Nicole, I think that's one of the big indicators of the level of societal fear we are seeing, that he feels like he's got to take this thing that he set as a key principle for his post presidency and chuck it out the window, because things are getting really scary in the United States. And of course, you see that in his hometown of Chicago, but all across the country. And so I think it's very significant that Barack Obama has spoken out and he's spoken out about that fear. I mean, I personally had to deal with the struggle to find lawyers after Donald Trump came after me. Some of the biggest law firms in the country were scared to have the conversation because they had just signed capitulation deals with the White House. And a lot of these are firms who would have happily represented someone like me in a first Trump administration, all the way down to. Even in places like the city of Chicago, restaurants were scared to hold fundraisers for targets of the president's revenge because, as they told me, they were worried their employees might be deported. That's the level of societal fear that Barack Obama is seeing and calling out. And I think it's important.
- [08:40]
Nicole Wallace
How obsessed is Trump with Chicago? In part because it is President Obama's hometown?
- [08:50]
Myles Taylor
Oh, I think massively. I mean, look. But you also can't overstate how much his lieutenants, like Stephen Miller and others are aware of Chicago's history. Now, Donald Trump isn't a student of history, let alone has ever even cracked a history book open. But the people around him know that Chicago's got a history of protest, Chicago has a history of riots, and they're looking for cities where they can create unrest. Now, Nicole, I'll go all the way back to when I first came forward after the Trump administration, the first Trump administration, and unmasked myself. One of the first things I talked about is Donald Trump's reference to this thing he called at the time his magical authorities. That's how he described the Insurrection Act. Why did I choose that to be the first thing I sounded the alarm about to the public when I came forward? Because it was the thing I was most worried about him doing. That's what he described the Insurrection act as, his magical authorities. He wanted us to use it at the border. We said it wasn't legal. He wanted people like Mark Esper to use it against protesters in 2020. They told him it wasn't legal. Now he's got those people out of his administration. Now he's got people who are willing to let him use it without cause in major cities. And this is why, Nicole, I think people like J.B. pritzker and Governor Newsom need to call an urgent meeting of America's governors. Maybe it's just the blue state governors, but this is it. This is the moment all the governors need to get together and say we should talk about mutual aid pacts and joint boycotts and ways to get leverage over the federal government because the Trump administration is coming for them. This is an urgent moment. National security.
- [10:27]
Nicole Wallace
It's the subject after you sounded the alarm. Myles, I think some folks wrote in books up to the end of the first Trump term as president about those Oval Office meetings about the Insurrection act and Stephen Miller's insistence and folks like Mark Milley and Esper pushing back and some lawyers, I think were involved in the pushback. When you hear JD Vance go unchallenged on a Sunday show saying, well, yeah, we might have to because of crime. It seems like in a world where one of the biggest threats to democracy is disinformation, that's a pretty important lie to correct.
- [11:05]
Myles Taylor
Yeah, I mean, look, it's a presidential crack town looking for a pretext, and Donald Trump has been in search of that pretext for seven or eight years. If J.D. vance wanted to be honest with the American people, and he knows this, he's a smart guy. I know he knows this, he could just say, you know what, guys? The real truth is my boss, who I'm a heartbeat away from, really just wants to go deploy the military in places to create violence, to justify a wider crackdown. Because I can tell you firsthand, Nicole, just before the State of the union in 2019, we stood in the map Room of the White House, and Donald Trump almost spontaneously brought up the idea of weaving a couple of sentences into the speech, announcing he was invoking the Insurrection Act. You can't imagine the panic on the faces in that room. And Donald Trump was just a few moments away from just telling the guy who sits at the teleprompter to write it into the speech. And we had to go spend the rest of the day convincing White House Counsel's office to stand up to the president to get him not to do it. But that's how long this has been going on. And Trump wanted to go deploy it and use the border as his pretext. It doesn't matter what they say. This is not about street crime. And by the way, if it was about street crime, you don't need to use the United States military to crack down on street crime. You can increase the number of police on the streets. You can do any number of things. These excuses are exactly that. They are excuses. The vice President knows it. And it's why, Nicole, by the way, I think you watch him in those video clips, and he has a really tough time defending this because the defenses are so completely threadbare.
- [12:36]
Nicole Wallace
Andrew, let me ask you about the law and the courts, because it's seems like the. I think it's the uptick is what Miles is describing. He's always been attracted to the Insurrection act because it's sort of a weak leader's tool for exerting brute force on a population that increasingly disapproves of him. Donald Trump's approval rating is between 34 and 39% in most of the recent polls. I think there's one that has him at 41%, but he is disliked by, I think, 55 to 58% of Americans and every poll. So it's a sign of weakness. He seems to know it. Will the courts help him or stop him?
- [13:21]
Andrew Weissman
This is one where I don't have good news for you. I'm going to be fascinated to see whether Mary agrees with this, which is the Insurrection act is a congressional statute that many people, Miles included, were ringing the alarm bells in Trump 1.0, that that congressional statute has loose language in it, language that allows the president to have sort of greater deference to him when he makes Decisions to at least potentially to be able to invoke it when regular law enforcement is sort of impracticable in terms of enforcing the laws as opp to the harder language that he has to deal with now and is litigating sort of across the nation and all the places where he is sending in the National Guard. And so lots of people thought that the statute should be reformed, that it should be tightened up, because it sort of was laying around like Chekhov's gun in a play that could be used by a president who is looking for a pretext. And so the courts are unfortunately going to be in a position where, on the one hand, the Supreme Court has said, you don't look very hard and you don't subject to a lot of scrutiny. What the president is doing and the sort of. And even whether he was acting in good faith, the lower courts so far are saying, no, no, no. They're relying on some language in older Supreme Court cases saying, no, the president has to be doing this in good faith, and we are entitled to have judicial scru. Scrutiny. And so everything that Miles is talking about sort of like that this is a pretext that is really where the battleground's going to be. But in the Insurrection act, that is probably the best battleground for Trump to be able to say, what I'm doing is lawful because Congress failed to act when they could have acted to sort of tighten up that statute. And that's why I sort of view this as going to be more of a political issue than a legal issue, because this is not the strongest case for people thinking this is outrageous as a policy matter. It is not the strongest of the legal cases to stop Donald Trump from doing this.
- [15:54]
Nicole Wallace
Mary, for once, I'm hoping you wildly disagree with Andrew Weissman. Your thoughts?
- [16:01]
Mary McCord
I'm not going to say wildly, but I would say that the very law that the lower courts are relying on right now, when the president has been federalizing the National Guard and. And the courts that have found that his reasons are not sufficient for purposes of the statute, they've said that there's not really a colorable basis that the president has invoked this sort of exercise of honest judgment, that the president is without an ability to enforce the law without using the National Guard, this is the same body of historic court precedent that one would use to challenge an invocation of the Insurrection Act. So while I agree that with Andrew that the act gives broad authority to the president, and that historically the courts, and particularly the Supreme Court, but the lower courts as well, have deferred to the executive when it comes to matters of national security, there is still this opportunity to challenge things that are done in bad faith and outside an exercise of honest judgment with respect to do the facts on the ground meet the criteria for an insurrection or a rebellion against the authority of the United States or the inability with impracticability of enforcing the laws with, you know, and I'm reading here by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings. So you would still have to show the government would still need to show that they can't enforce the, they can't use the courts. The courts are not in session. At least that's one argument that could be made. So I agree that these things are difficult. A very, very, very old case under the Insurrection act in completely different situation. It was somebody who had been called up, who was contesting, an actual service member who is contesting being called up. That very old case basically said there was plenary authority in the president to invoke it, but the situation was very, very different. And in fact, Judge April Perry, the judge in Illinois who just issued the TRO in Illinois on Friday, I think it was, she cited back to that old case, it's a case called Martin V. And said it's different here. So I'm, I am going to disagree slightly and say there would be some basis depending on the facts. Depending on the facts.
- [18:20]
Nicole Wallace
So, Miles, you get to be the tiebreaker here. I mean, and you tell me if I'm dotting together too many unrelated stars in a constellation. Stephen Miller let the word plenary slip from his lips with the camera in front of him. And I think in two more days, the federal government shutdown extends to the federal courts. What do you think they're up to?
- [18:40]
Myles Taylor
I think it could get as bad as it could possibly get. I mean, you know, my fellow panelists here I respect immensely. But what I would say, Nicole, is you need to do what Stephen Miller's doing right now, which is Stephen Miller is gaming this out all the way to the Supreme Court. He has been since the first administration when he told me it would be a shock and awe blitz in the second administration and they would try to run decisions to the high court as fast as possible so that they could be on the highest ground possible. And when and if this gets to the Supreme Court, because surely Donald Trump is going to invoke the act. Bark my words, he's going to invoke the act. There's not a policy debate that's happening with his underlings. He doesn't care what's happening with his underlings. He will invoke the act he has wanted to. And when he does, it will get challenged. And when he challenges it and when it gets challenged, it will eventually make its way up to the high court. What do you need to know about the Roberts Court? The Roberts court has been deeply deferential when it comes to executive power and has wanted to do what Andrew Weissman says. If things have the ability to be pushed into the political sphere, say it's the political job. Look, as far back as Obamacare, the first really big decision, the chief justice had the helm. He could have overturned it with his vote. Instead, he decided to say, look, it's Congress's job to decide what happens. That's what I predict will happen here. This will get to the high court. John Roberts will cobble together a majority and say, you know what? I don't like the president of the United States declaring martial law. A lot of these things are scary. But it's ultimately the job of Congress to fix this. And he's going to turn towards a two House Republican Congress that will say nothing and do nothing. And the president of the United States will have effectively been allowed to declare something close to martial law in this country which could go from mild to wild. Very, very quickly.
- [20:21]
Nicole Wallace
All right, we're going to have to pierce this with what can we do today about all this? I will show you more of what President Obama had to say on that front. On the other side of a break when we come back, Donald Trump has posted a conspiracy theory that is so brazen and dumb that even Kash Patel doesn't stand by it. A new chapter and his efforts to whitewash the Capitol. Insurrection or brain fog? We don't really actually know. Later in the program, J.D. vance gets cut off by another journalist after dodging a question on whether border czar Tom Homan accepted $50,000 in cash during an undercover sting operation. We'll show you that moment. We'll be back in a quick minute, so don't go anywhere. Today. The connection between the guests are on the show is the show. All that we do is put together people who are smart, people who are brave, people who are honest, and lots of times people who've never met each other to have a conversation that has never happened before. But on that day deepens everyone's understanding about the moment in which we gather.
- [21:31]
Deadline White House with Nicole Wallace, weekdays from 4 to 6pm Eastern on MSNBC. 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. 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 now@msnbc.com.
- [22:26]
Over the weekend, Donald Trump posted something that we don't know if it's a conspiracy theory or an actual blip in his hard drive. So I'm not going to characterize it, but I'm just going to read you what he posted on social media. Quote, the BIDEN FBI placed 274 agents into the crowd on January 6th. THE Biden FBI, if this is so, which it is, a lot of very good people will be owed. Big apologies. What a switching to all cap scam. Do something. President DJT California Governor Gavin Newsom responded this way, quote, in a late night post. Trump does not remember who was president on January 6, 2021. He was weirdly shouts do something. Likely at the clouds. His mental issues are very bad. We're back with Andrew, Mary and Miles. Now, Miles, I don't want to jump to the Trump peddling conspiracy theories because I actually think it's a bigger scandal if he honestly doesn't know who is president on January 6, 2021. What do you make of this?
- [23:33]
Myles Taylor
Yeah, look, I've got to agree with Newsom. I don't think he's just scoring political points by talking about Donald Trump's mental health. Like this is very serious. How could he not remember he Was President on January 6, 2021? He sat there in the anteroom to the Oval Office. That's where he was in the White House. He was in the White House watching the proceedings. You got to stitch that together with Donald Trump the other day, going up to Walter Reed for, you know, imaging and other things and ask the question, what's going on here? Why does the guy's face keep drooping when he's out in public? Why is he typing things that are so obviously false? That is a very legitimate question that the Jake Tappers of the world and others should be writing books about is Donald Trump's mental state right now. And then of course, Nicole, to say nothing of the fact that of course this is a complete conspiracy theory. Rather than question those FBI agents, we should be giving them medals because those 270 plus agents were deployed to the Capitol to help Capitol Police gain control of the situation. People who were being attacked and tear gassed. And they helped them gain control when Donald Trump would not, when Donald Trump was doing nothing, when Donald Trump was sitting in the White House, when Donald Trump had the ability just to pick up the telephone and call the Pentagon to get the force presence there needed to turn this riot away, to turn this insurrection away. The FBI had agents out there to help their brothers and sisters in law enforcement from getting killed. So they should be lauded. There was no conspiracy here and no, they were not in the crowd ahead of time to try to foment an insurrection that Donald Trump did himself.
- [25:16]
Nicole Wallace
Well, and Andrew, I guess the last point is they were not. Wasn't Joe Biden's FBI. It was, it was led by Christopher Wray, who was appointed by Donald Trump, who has since turned on him. But let me just put some more context around this. How bad is it? This one is so bad that Kash Patel is attacking the assertion he said this to Fox News about FBI agents being in the crowd on January 6th. This is from September 27th, quote, while the agents were on hand. They were sent in after the riot had begun to try to control the unruly crowd. FBI officials told Fox News, quote, agents were sent into a crowd control mission after the riot was declared by Metro Police. None other than FBI Director Kash Patel a few days ago. This does feel like a dangerous lie wherever it's coming from. Either Trump's actual mental delusions or an effort to rewrite the history of January 6th.
- [26:18]
Andrew Weissman
So let's do what you did. Let's put on one side, like whether this is a mental issue. Let's assume it isn't. What it tells us is, because it's so palpably and obviously false, is that you have a president who is willing to lie and is willing to lie to cast doubt and attack Joe Biden and Democrats. And let's not normalize that. And let's connect it now to the conversation we were having just a moment ago about sending the military around the country and invoking the Insurrection Act. And this is to Myles point and Mary's point, which is that when you're looking at whether things are a pretext and whether you have a president who is acting in good faith, the courts, it's going to be so necessary for the courts and the public to look at the whole picture. And don't ignore something like this as a glitch. This tells you everything about the man. And like, even if he has a mental issue, but I'm assuming he doesn't, it tells you what kind of conduct he engages in about the falsehood, about conspiracy theories, about doing things solely for political advantage in an unprincipled way, untethered to the facts. And I use that word untethered to the facts because those are the words that a federal judge appointed by Donald Trump said about his trying to bring the military into Portland and saying she could not stomach it because it was untethered to the facts on the ground. And I think that is really the issue that the courts are going to confront. Obviously, it's an issue that the voters have to confront.
- [28:13]
Nicole Wallace
Mary, let me try to pull both of these conversations together with a little bit more of what President Obama had to say about how we find our way out of this moment.
- [28:25]
Barack Obama
By virtue of meeting in person, you kind of realize people are a little more complicated.
- [28:30]
Chris Hayes
Sure.
- [28:32]
Barack Obama
Maybe they don't agree with me on everything. Maybe they're. And that's a good thing. Right. So it creates this friction and this interest and it forced people to kind of say, all right, well, you know, it turns out that I don't have to agree with everything to work with somebody. There was that that sense of human interaction that gave people a sense of how somebody could be a good guy but also have blind spots. Somebody could be, you know, seem like a real jerk. And yet there's this redeeming quality.
- [29:11]
Nicole Wallace
So, Mary, this is President Obama talking about the virtues of maybe getting out from behind our screens and out into the world. I think we'll see a lot of that. And no King protests this coming weekend. But the science of counterextremism, right, is that most extreme movements can only be countered from within side the movement. And that's why we started the last hour showing what Joe Rogan and Marjorie Taylor Greene are saying about mass deportation. To both of your legal analysis, it seems to have, at best our hope out of this is that it's rejected by the country. That would have to include some Republicans rejecting it as well to be a pushback that would stop Donald Trump from seizing power, that he could argue, at least to the Supreme Court. He has. Where do you see, where do you see the sort of resistance to the extremism and the excesses of Trump so far at the nine month mark?
- [30:06]
Mary McCord
So one thing I would note is when we were, you know, just talking about the deployment of the National Guard from other states into states where the receiving governor said, no, we don't need it, they're not wanted. We did have Republican governor of Oklahoma, Kevin Stitt coming out and saying, basically, you know, I think he said something along the lines of Oklahoma's would Oklahomans would lose their minds if Illinois sent their National Guard into Oklahoma over my objection? And I think what he's trying to voice is like, we need to think about, and I think this is what some of the other Republicans are starting to voice. We need to think about what if the shoe was on the other foot. Now, personally, I don't like to think that if the shoe was on the other foot, these types of abuses would be happening. But the fact is, once you start this type of sort of like, back and forth and abuse of authority, it, it is kind of hard to see where it ends. And certainly the other side is able to use those authorities as well. And it's interesting to me, too, now that we're seeing, you know, I just got asked earlier today by a reporter about the weaponization task force in the Department of Justice being supposed to get rid of weaponization. And it seems kind of weird to even call a task force that is clearly weaponizing the Department of Justice and prosecuting political enemies. It's kind of hard to look at that as actually ending weaponization. It seems like it's ratcheting it up. And I'll note that the Supreme Court last year, when it issued its immunity ruling, that's the very thing it was afraid of. It was afraid that every administration was going to then use its power to basically go after the administration before it. And, you know, it just so happens, I think they chose the wrong way to try to avoid that. And here we are in this situation. So I do think more and more people need to be stepping back and thinking, wait a minute, if, you know, certain authorities are the authorities of Congress, certain authorities are the authorities of the judiciary, they're not the president's authorities. And if this president can abuse and steamroll the other two branches of government and do things that broad swaths of the population are opposed to, then another president could do that, too. And I will note, and Andrew already pointed this out, in the judiciary, at least the lower courts, the federal district courts, we are seeing judges appointed by Republicans, Democrats, and Donald Trump himself very much coming out with rulings that they are trying to uphold the rule of law with, even when that is to the detriment and against President Trump's desired policy changes, desired executive orders. So I think it's starting to happen. And as more and more people start feeling the economic offense effects, that's the thing that seems to move Americans, frankly, more than almost anything else. I think we'll start seeing more and more of that.
- [33:02]
Nicole Wallace
Yeah. And not to be, not to be dire about it, but I think in the Supreme Court, they have affirmed his power 17 times and only voted against him twice. But we will, we will keep the faith. Andrew Weissman, Mary McCord, thank you for starting us off this hour. Miles stays with us after the break. For us, a plea from the Pope for the media to stand up against the, quote, ancient art of lying. We'll show it to you and talk about it next.
- [33:32]
MSNBC presents season two of the Blueprint, hosted by Jen Psaki. Each week she talks to leaders, strategists and rising stars within the Democratic Party about how they plan to win again, including Texas Congressman Greg Cassar, who chairs the Progressive Caucus red state Democratic Governor Andy Beshear of Kentucky, Congresswoman Sarah McBride of Delaware, the first openly trans person elected to Congress and more who are helping to shape the future of the party. The Blueprint with Jen Psaki Season 2 First two episodes drop Wednesday, October 15th. Follow now for ad free listening. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.
- [34:12]
Chris Hayes
Hey, everyone, it's Chris Hayes. This week on my podcast, why Is this Happening? Cultural anthropologist Richard Grinker on why the autism discourse has become so the truth.
- [34:22]
Myles Taylor
Of the rise of autism as a diagnosis and the truth about what causes the whole autism spectrum isn't satisfying if you're looking for a single cause and effect, because you gotta go into, well, there are more child psychiatrists now and we've improved our special education and they broadened the criteria and on and on and all of those things and are what act in concert. But the single bullet, the magic bullet is so seductive.
- [34:52]
Chris Hayes
That's this week on why is this Happening? Search for why is this Happening wherever you're listening right now, and follow.
- [34:59]
Nicole Wallace
It was an extraordinary thing that happened, an extraordinary exchange crackling with the moment and the context of the moment. First, watch ABC's George Stephanopoulos and his conversation with Vice President J.D. vance, extending a recent line of questioning for which it appears no Trump official has a good answer.
- [35:19]
George Stephanopoulos
The White House borders. Our Tom Holman was recorded on an FBI surveillance tape in September 2024 accepting $50,000 in cash. Did he keep that money or give it back?
- [35:31]
George, you've covered the story ad nauseum. Tom Homan did not take a bribe. It's a ridiculous smear.
- [35:37]
But I'm not sure you answered the question. Are you saying that he did not accept up to $50,000?
- [35:44]
George, this story has been covered ad nauseam. He did not take a bribe. Did he accept $50,000? I'm sure that in the course of Tom Homan's life, he has been paid more than $50,000 for services. The question is, did he do something illegal? And there's absolutely no evidence that Tom has never taken a bribe.
- [36:03]
Different question.
- [36:04]
I'm asking you why he's working in the administration.
- [36:07]
I'm asking you, did he accept the $50,000 that was caught on the surveillance tape? Did he accept that $50,000 or not?
- [36:14]
George, I don't know what you're talking about. Did he accept $50,000 for what?
- [36:19]
He was recorded on an audio tape in September 2024, an FBI surveillance tape accepting $50,000 in cash. Did he keep that money.
- [36:30]
Accepting $50,000 for doing what? George, I'm not even sure I understand the question. Let's talk about the real issues. George. I think the American people would benefit much more from that than from you going down some weird left wing rabbit hole where the facts clearly show that Tom Homan didn't engage in any criminal wrongdoing.
- [36:47]
It's not a weird left wing rabbit hole. I didn't insinuate anything. I asked you whether Tom Homan accepted $50,000, as was heard on an audio tape recorded by the FBI in September 2024, and you did not answer the question. Thank you for your time this morning.
- [37:01]
No, I said that I don't know.
- [37:03]
We'll be right back.
- [37:06]
Nicole Wallace
That's how it's done on this face. A remarkable back and forth. Remarkable act of focus and journalism by George. But again, there are layers and layers of subtext. It happened on abc. That's part of the story. It was George Stephanopoulos, after all, who was at the center of his company's $15 million defamation settlement, described by many as a shakedown, the ultimate capitulation about which Donald Trump routinely boasts and brags and posts on social media. Add to that a new appeal from the Vatican. Yeah, that Vatican. To news agencies and news practitioners all around the world. Pope Leo urging the media to stand firm in the face of what he calls the, quote, ancient art of lying. A plea turned into practice, at least there. Joining me at the table, Oliver Darcy. He's the author of the newsletter Status, which covers all things media. Miles Taylor is still with us. I thought this was a really good and Instructive example of just one thing that, and I should say Kundalini and Caroline, I think, broke this story and there was no denial of the facts under it. So this rewriting of the facts or inability to acknowledge the facts of the $50,000 in a. I think it was a Kava bag is only newly in dispute.
- [38:25]
Chris Hayes
Yeah. And I think that's why it's so important that journalists ask these hard questions to the administration, and clearly they don't want to answer it. And JD Vance did not answer the question that George Stephanopoulos was doing. But all too often, I think the administration escapes that kind of scrutiny, escapes that kind of prosecutorial questioning that George Stephanopoulos is known for. And he, you know, I think he handled that interview brilliantly and didn't allow him to deflect. He entered the interview when he did not answer the question. And it's really good to see because as you pointed out, ABC obviously settled that lawsuit that the Trump administration filed or that Trump filed against ABC News. And so George is clearly not backing down in the face.
- [39:07]
Nicole Wallace
What's interesting is if you put George's exchange with J.D. vance next to Joe Rogan, prominent sort of call him maga, adjacent broadcaster on immigration, you stitch together all the misgivings. And I'm not a they should have known person. I'm happy to have them sort of rowing in the right direction. He's unpopular in his own media bubble in a way he wasn't a year ago.
- [39:34]
Chris Hayes
That's exactly right. And you're seeing with comedians too, on the right, they're criticizing him quite a bit these days, saying, we did not vote for this. We didn't want the mass deportations. We wanted lower costs. And that was basically it. We wanted free speech. That was another big one. Right. He was supposed to legalize free speech. And instead what he's done is really assaulted free speech. Gone after journalists, gone after late night comedians. And I think that's what the Pope, I mean, the Pope did not mention Donald Trump when he was talking about using the ancient art of lying to divide and to basically seize power. But it's hard to read those comments and not think about the broader context that we're living in where Donald Trump is filing lawsuits against news organizations, smearing news organizations, even, you know, you see ICE detaining and mistreating journalists. You see what's happening in the Pentagon where P. Hegseth, who we refer to as safe beats Pete over at Status, is trying to erect a giant safe space around the Pentagon and not Allow journalists to do a reporting. And so when you see the Pope's comments, I think that's really what he was referencing as the first American Pope. This climate that has been chilled and that's not what people like Joe Rogan or Andrew Schultz, but who they thought they were voting for, at least.
- [40:45]
Nicole Wallace
You also have. It's a real grassroots issue for a lot of MAGA folks who were riled up by what they viewed as the tech companies clamping down on what they viewed as their speech. So I think it's the influencers, but I also think the students. This shakes the coalition as well.
- [40:59]
Chris Hayes
Yeah. I mean, if you remember back when Elon Musk took over Twitter, there was all this concern about the tech moguls and how they were potentially pushing things in a certain political direction. And now you look at what's happening. I mean, Elon Musk has really just totally warped what was once Twitter. Now it's basically a right wing fever swamp. But you look Elsewhere, whether it's YouTube bending the knee to Donald Trump, whether it's Mark Zuckerberg bending the knee to Donald Trump, it is clearly going in one direction. TikTok's another one.
- [41:28]
Nicole Wallace
Yeah.
- [41:29]
Chris Hayes
And I think maybe there's some realization amongst maybe not the MAGA diehards, but the people who Donald Trump had kind of won over that this is not what they at least thought. I think we knew this is what was going on, but they were sold something else and they're seeing that that's not what's being delivered to them anymore.
- [41:47]
Nicole Wallace
All right, I want to pull Myles in. I have a million more questions for you. I have to sneak in a break. We'll all be right back. We're back with Oliver and Miles. Miles, I want to come back to the Pentagon story because I think Oliver is flagging tomorrow as a date when if you haven't signed the pact to only print information the governor, the government gives you, you may be kicked out or have your access cut off. This is the Washington Post reporting on that. Media across the ideological spectrum said they will not sign the Defense Department's restrictive new press policy by Tuesday's afternoon deadline. The Washington Post, New York Times and CNN said they wouldn sign, as did Newsmax and the Washington Times. This seems like something that was aspired to in the first term and under Hegseth, maybe carried out in a second.
- [42:35]
Chris Hayes
Yeah, it was.
- [42:36]
Myles Taylor
Look, it was practiced in the first term. I mean, I was there the day that they revoked Jim Acosta's press pass from cnn. And I can Remember the head of White House communications coming across the street and a group of us were having dinner and he walked in gloating about it. But now, now it's becoming something so much bigger, Nicole. I mean, this is as close as they've gotten to a ministry of truth. This is very Orwellian, and I want to connect it back to what the Pope said. You quoted that in your last segment, that ancient art of lying. And you don't know this, Nicole, but I've been on something of a side quest to try to sum up history and science and philosophy into the tightest phrase possible. And I think I've come up with it. And it's something that connects people from antiquity. Jesus of Nazareth and Socrates to St. Thomas Aquinas to Voltaire to Lincoln to Orwell, to Nicole Wallace. And that phrase would be, we die by lies. That's one of the biggest things that we've learned all throughout human history, is that we die by lies. Civilizations and republics die because lies corrode them. What we are seeing with the Pentagon is one little example of that. They don't want the truth told. They want their lies to be the only thing broadcast. And it will affect how Americans understand their Defense Department. It will affect. Affect how Americans know what's going on inside the Trump administration. It will affect whether or not America can continue beyond this administration.
- [44:03]
Nicole Wallace
Wow. All right, well, I'm going to put you both on notice. I agree with you. I'm sort of stunned into silence, but I'd like to pick this up again regularly. Oliver, Darcy, thank you for being here for this. Miles, thank you for spending the hour with me. One more break. We'll be right back. As Miles said, in times like these, we are looking to history and to the heroes of history for guidance. Heroes like Joan Baez, who told me that what's happening now is scarier than what she witnessed in the 60s. Here's what another iconic figure from the world of activism and acting had to say about that question.
- [44:38]
Myles Taylor
You know, we kind of crawled out of the 60s. We lost Reverend King. We lost John Kennedy, his brother Robert. We lost. We lost Medgar Evers. We lost Malcolm X. We lost all the heroes in the Martyrs, but we came out absolutely dedicated to serving lost causes. Lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for. And the only weapon to fight fight with is nonviolence. That's what we carried out of the very turbulent era.
- [45:20]
Nicole Wallace
He was incredible. It's the one and only Martin Sheen. He was my guest over the weekend at a live taping of the Best People podcast. You can listen to the entire conversation. Just scan the QR code on your screen. And speaking of heroes in this country and my personal heroes, this weekend we have a special bonus episode, a Conversation with Sue Gordon. She's a frequent guest on this program. She's a towering figure in the world of intelligence. She's been briefing American presidents since Ronald Reagan. But as she told us, briefing Donald Trump was decidedly different.
- [45:52]
Mary McCord
He's the first president that didn't understand anything about the government. And so we kept thinking that he understood the broad framework, not the fact that he had no idea the difference between the CIA and the FBI. And he was the first president that didn't believe that intelligence was sacrosanct. And I don't mean agree with it, just believe that he trusted other people, people more. And those were really hard things for us to overcome.
- [46:16]
Nicole Wallace
I never give you homework, but I am this week. Listen to both of them. Sue Gordon's wisdom and courage and humanity and her personal insights will change your outlook. Scan the QR code on the screen and subscribe to MSNBC Premium to listen right now. One more break. We'll be right back. Thank you so much for letting us into your homes today. We are grateful.