← Deadline: White House
Deadline: White House
"The cruelty, the violence, the impunity"
00:40:22
Alicia Menendez, in for Nicolle Wallace, on ICE's escalating violent tactics in Chicago - including tear gassing children in their halloween costumes.
Loading summary
Transcript67 lines
- [00:00]
Ed Yohnka
Ondeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team or bridging cash flow gaps, OnDeck's loans up to $250,000 help make it happen fast. Rated A by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five star Trust pilot reviews, Ondeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in minutes@ondeck.com depending on certain loan attributes. Your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank. Ondeck does not lend to North Dakota, all loans and amounts subject to lender approval.
- [00:30]
Alicia Menendez
The connection between the guests on the is the show.
- [00:33]
Andrea Flores
All that we do is put together people who are smart, people who are brave, people who are honest, and lots.
- [00:41]
Alicia Menendez
Of times people who've never met each other to have a conversation that has never happened before.
- [00:46]
Andrea Flores
But on that day deepens everyone's understanding.
- [00:49]
Alicia Menendez
About the moment in which we gather.
- [00:51]
Nicole Wallace
Deadline White House with Nicole Wallace, weekdays from 4 to 6pm Eastern on MSNBC.
- [01:03]
Alicia Menendez
Hi everyone, it's 4 o' clock here in Washington, D.C. i'm Alicia Menendez in for Nicole Wallace. The cruelty, the violence, the impunity with which they act, Practically every defining feature of the second Trump administration and the efforts to hold Team Trump accountable collided in a Chicago courtroom today. A federal judge sharply questioning top Border Patrol commander Gregory Bevino over brutal tactics federal agents have used against prot protesters and journalists in Chicago, especially in the wake of her order that puts limits on the use of tear gas by immigration authorities. The Chicago Sun Times reporting that Judge Sarah Ellis told Bevino, quote, it is difficult for me to see that the force being used is necessary to stop an immediate and serious threat of physical harm to a person. At times, Judge Ellis was sharply critical about how Bavino handled incidents between residents and federal agents, Ellis saying, quote, that was the instance as well where children were and they were dressed up in their Halloween costumes. Those kids were tear gassed on their way to celebrate Halloween in their local school parking lot. These kids, you can imagine their sense of safety was shattered on Saturday and it's going to take a long time for that to come back, if ever. Residents, journalists and protesters laid out multiple alarming incidents by federal agents. Enrique Behenna submitted to the court this picture after he was shot by a pepper ball from just five feet away. He says he was on his way to work when he witnessed federal officers holding guns and advancing on a crowd. Combat veteran Chris Gentry says that, quote, as agents were driving away, they pointed a pepper ball gun and then a real gun as he was lawfully standing on the side of the road, voicing his opposition as agents were driving by in their vehicles. The agent who pointed the real gun at Mr. Gentry's face said, bang, bang, and you're dead liberal. That just a portion of the allegations that federal officers are facing in Chicago. When questioned about specific incidents, Bavino dodged saying, quote, I believe that each situation is dependent on the situation. The judge then ordering Bavino to appear in court every day at 6pm to face questions from the judge. A federal judge pushing back against overreach by the Trump administration is where we start today. Joining me now, director of communications and public policy for ACLU of Illinois, Adyanca is here. Also with us, Vice president for Immigration policy and campaigns at Forward us, Andrea Flores. Plus, MSNBC senior legal reporter Lisa Rubin is here. All right, Lisa, walk us through what happened today in court.
- [03:48]
Lisa Rubin
So Alicia, Gregory Bovino, before he even got to talk, had to listen to Judge Sarah Ellis make sure that they were on the same page about what her temporary restraining order required. She read it thoroughly to make sure that it wasn't just a question of willful disobedience of the temporary restraining order or not understanding or reading it, but that she and Bevino both had the same baseline understanding of what she had ordered. And then she went through with him some of the evidence that the plaintiffs had presented, some of which you already referred to declarations by people in the neighborhood, declarations by people who were there to protest and saw and or experienced deadly force being pointed at them or pepper balls being aimed at them. You showed that picture of Enrique Verhenna with the pepper ball welt in his neck. And she asked him a series of questions about whether certain instances would violate the tro. He generally did not give much ground. And I want to read to you from the transcript, if I can, she was talking about some guy. This is Judge Sarah Ellis. Some guy standing on the street in front of his house or next to his car most of the time absent something unusual is not presenting such a risk, meaning a risk of force being used against law enforcement officers that puts them in imminent danger such that deadly force is appropriate if he's just standing next to his car. Bevino's response is, well, yes, ma', am, you, Honor. Again, that would be situationally dependent. I would have to understand what that individual was doing or what was happening before I could make a definitive assessment on how I would respond to a situation like that. So Gregory Bevino really not giving up much in terms of are there situations where under no circumstances would it be appropriate to use deadly force, much less tear gas. But as you also noted, Gregory Bevino has to show up each workday between now and the November 5th preliminary injunction hearing. That's where the plaintiffs in this case will ask Judge Ellis to enter a much longer term order that would prohibit some of the use of force that they have contested thus far. Not only the use of chemical munitions, but, for example, putting people in chokeholds or the way in which they disperse crowds without warnings, whether or not they can show up without clearly identifiable markers for individual law enforcement officers. One of the complaints has been, we don't even know who these people are. We can't tell what agency they're with, much less what their name is. And so Judge Ellis reiterating today that they must wear in a conspicuous place at least two identifying markers. And then, of course, she extracted one important concession from Bovino, which is that despite her order, that all of the CBP and ICE officers on the ground need to be wearing body cams, that he himself, despite being a part of the action, was not wearing one, but that he will do so by Friday. Alicia.
- [06:55]
Alicia Menendez
Andrea, let's pick up on that point. Pavino not wearing a body camera, does that strike you as unusual?
- [07:02]
Andrea Flores
It doesn't, because we're talking about the Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection, and these officers are trained for a different mission than what we're seeing in Chicago. They are supposed to be guarding our nation's boundaries. They're supposed to be dealing with drug cartels and threats that are very, very different than what happens in our communities. So I am deeply alarmed by the growth and Border Patrol leadership taking over these operations in cities because ICE is a deeply imperfect agency in need of reform. But they have a long history of working with local police departments. They work with local nongovernmental organizations. And so Border Patrol doesn't have those relationships.
- [07:43]
Alicia Menendez
Right.
- [07:43]
Andrea Flores
They were trained for a different mission, and they are essentially a paramilitary force meant to be at our borders, not in our communities.
- [07:50]
Alicia Menendez
Well, let's talk about that, because we have that reporting, Andrea, from msnbc. You got field directors, special agents in charge in multiple cities expecting to be replaced by Border Patrol officials. So this is now becoming part of a larger pattern. Why do you believe that is happening and what is it going to mean for American cities?
- [08:10]
Andrea Flores
Well, I would say that there are more constraints generally that ICE is used to operating under. Right. There's more checks and balances within ICE as an agency than there ever has been for Border Patrol. And we need to connect the dots of the Announcements that they're making. So last week they said that they were going to have the Navy. You know, they entered a contract with the Navy to build multiple soft sided facilities, the type of detention facilities that we've seen in border areas during really, really big migration surges. Now they're going to be outside of our cities and those are spaces that are operated by the Border Patrol. So they're really bringing these border tactics deep into our communities that are completely ill equipped to serve any sort of public safety interest when it comes to civil immigration enforcement. Right. What you need to combat someone who is a human smuggler is very different than what you need for someone who has a basic civil immigration violation. But they are building an infrastructure to bring this untrained paramilitary force to do domestic policing on behalf of the President's goals.
- [09:11]
Alicia Menendez
I mean, listen, Ed, Judge Ellis is clearly doing what she can to hold the line inside her courtroom. I am curious about how that is translating on the streets of Chicago. I remember earlier this month you told Nicole ICE agents they were out of control in Chicago. Has anything changed on the ground since then?
- [09:30]
Ed Yohnka
No. And in fact, I think that's one of the reasons that Bevino was called into court today. You know, what we've seen over the last few days are, you know, heavy handed tactics and, you know, violent activities on the part of ICE and cpb, not just in one part of the city, not just aimed at, you know, a particular group or particular part of the city, but in a variety of parts of the city. Again, always met with the same opposition. And then that opposition always bringing out these tactics of the use of tear gas, the use of threats, the use of physical violence when they found it necessary. You know, the fact is, is that, you know, the Halloween party event that the judge made reference to this morning took place in a very quiet neighborhood in Chicago that, you know, was not really the target of these raids. Heretofore, it is clear that they are becoming both more aggressive and more expansive in terms of where they're going. And I think that, that what we see is a judge who's paying attention and wants to hear each and every day where, when, how and why these raids are taking place. And to check and to be able to test whether or not that's being used is necessary.
- [10:56]
Alicia Menendez
The force that is being used, necessary. And Lisa, at whose direction and in whose name court filings cite comments Bovino made to a reporter as evidence of his disregard for the law. Let's listen to them and then we'll talk about them on the other side.
- [11:11]
Nicole Wallace
I take my orders from the executive branch.
- [11:13]
Congressman Jamie Raskin
Yes.
- [11:13]
Nicole Wallace
Whether that's President Trump or Secretary Noem.
- [11:17]
Alicia Menendez
So one Lisa, does that comport with your understanding of the law? Doesn't he still have an obligation to abide by the courts?
- [11:24]
Lisa Rubin
That's absolutely true. And Judge Ellis sort of subtly reminded him of that today. Alicia, at the beginning of the hearing, she said, as a member of the executive branch, you, Commander Bevino, have a different role to play than I do in the judicial branch. And then she continued, my role is not to tell you that you can or cannot enforce validly passed laws by Congress. That's not my role. I have no intention of doing that. But then she continued, my role is simply to see that in the enforcement of those laws that you and the agents operating under, you are acting in a manner that is consistent with your obligation under the law, meaning that it's consistent with the Constitution, it's consistent with federal law, it's consistent with the consent decree that's operating here, that it's consistent with the TRO that I entered. Again, Judge Sara L. Is very subtly reminding him, you may take your orders from the executive branch, but at all times, the executive branch still has to be in compliance with the boundaries of the law, as I interpret them, as the district court judge in charge of this matter. And, of course, we all owe fidelity to the Constitution. That says true of me as the federal judge overseeing this and my oath as it is of you, Commander Bovino.
- [12:38]
Alicia Menendez
I mean, Ed, I wonder if you read this the way I did, which is that is as much a reminder to DOJ as it is to be himself.
- [12:47]
Ed Yohnka
You know, I think it's hard to say. I thought one of the other compelling points of that, of that opening was when the judge actually reminded both Mr. Bevino and talked about herself in taking an oath to the Constitution, in taking an oath to uphold the law. And I think in many ways, you know, one of the things that she did here as, as Lisa said, is to remind us that it doesn't matter who the president is, it doesn't matter what their policies are. We still have laws and the Constitution that have to be followed. And in. In point of fact, that was really much of the questioning today. It's been much of the dialogue over the past few weeks here, in which is, you know, the question of, I think, you know, many people who just simply want ICE and CPB to follow the law, to follow the Constitution, and to not just be dragging people out of cars, not just to be, you know, harassing and scaring children, you know, not to be engaged in the, you know, in the wholesale abduction at times of US Citizens, even off of our streets, simply because they're protesting, filming, or in some ways disagreeing with the policies of this administration.
- [14:08]
Alicia Menendez
Andrea Nicole spoke with Governor JB Pritzker for her podcast the Best People. I want you to take a listen to what he had to say about the city of Chicago.
- [14:19]
Governor JB Pritzker
Think about how people are feeling, just folks who live in Chicago. I'm talking about if you have brown skin or black skin, you are literally afraid that you are going to get pulled over or detained walking, walking down the street just for being brown or black. Donald Trump said that he was using customs and Border Patrol and ICE to go after the worst of the worst. And listen, I would love it if they would go arrest the actual gang members who are committing violent crimes if they'd actually go after criminals. That's not what they're doing. They're literally stopping the Abuelas and, you know, little kids and zip, tying them. I went to a, an elementary school in a community where the kids, you know, we often think about the adults and how they are, you know, having to hide away or they're fearful, you know, and they're not going out to the restaurant or the local store because they're afraid. But the kids in that school that I was at, those kids are afraid when they go home, no one will be there, that their parents will have been disappeared. Everything from the restaurants and the stores are dying because people are too afraid to go out shopping. People are staying indoors because they're afraid to walk around. And then when there are shootings, and there have been several now by ICE or CBP against people who are residents of the city of Chicago. I mean, I don't know what to say except that people are traumatized.
- [15:56]
Alicia Menendez
I want to pull apart two pieces, Andrea, of what the governor said there. The first, and I want to give you credit because you were the first to warn me that this type of racial profiling was coming. The fact that it predates even what the Supreme Court has sanctioned specifically when it comes to having troops in American cities. So, one, the fact that you do have a court that has rubber stamped this and given its approval, that is now the country we live in. And two, just sort of this image, Andrea, of kids who are supposed to be enjoying Halloween. They were supposed to be making a happy memory. And that memory is now marred by the reality of a country that uses excessive force even on its own citizens, even its own children. That Traumatization is not a bug. It is a feature of this administration's deportation machine.
- [16:48]
Andrea Flores
I have to say, I lived this. The first time I was pulled over by Border patrol, I was 12 years old because I'm a Mexican American who grew up in a border community where Border Patrol was policing my community every single day. And it's really difficult to hear about a new generation of children who not only were stopped, but were tear gassed. The idea that that is one of the most extreme uses of force that our law enforcement has, and they are tear gassing children. What for? Right. And if, if people don't start reading this for what it is, as a bigger condemnation about the Latino community in this country, about completely eliminating any distinction in citizenship status for those of us, like myself and my family who are Mexican American, we are going to see so many worse images if they're already willing to use tear gas on children. What is coming around the corner when Border Patrol is suddenly a force in major American cities heading into an election year? So my heart goes out to those children and to the city. And I just really want to commend Governor Pritzker, who has not been afraid to be very moral and clear about exactly how this is terrorizing not only immigrants, but US Citizens. Because you have a lot of Democrats right now afraid of how to say, we want to support the enforcement of immigration law, but I want them to add that extra beat and say we can enforce our laws without terrorizing our communities.
- [18:16]
Alicia Menendez
Yes, there is a way to speak with moral clarity. Ed Yonka, Andrea Flores, Lisa Rubin, thank you all so much for starting us off today. Come back. The $230 million taxpayer shakedown cooked up between Donald Trump and top officials at the Justice Department. House Democrats have called it unethical and illegal. Congressman Jamie Raskin is leading an investigation into the latest scheme the White House didn't even want us to know about is going to join us next. Plus, states fighting back against Donald Trump, who has refused to fund a program that could leave more than 40 million Americans without much need, needed food assistance during a government shutdown today, filing a lawsuit to try and force their hand. And later in the show, the US has launched another takedown of alleged drug boats near Central and South America without warning, without approval. These strikes were followed by a promise of more to come. We're going to look at that and much more when deadline White House continues after this.
- [19:12]
OnDeck Announcer
On deck is built to back small businesses like yours, whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team, or bridging cash flow gaps on Deck's loans up to $250,000 help make it happen fast. Rated A by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five star Trust pilot reviews, Ondeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in minutes@ondeck.com depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank. Ondeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.
- [19:41]
Nicole Wallace
MSNBC presents the chart topping original podcast the Best People with Nicol. This week she sits down with former White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci.
- [19:53]
Angela Corazon
We are a beautiful, colorful mosaic of people and we are exactly what Lincoln said, the last best hope for mankind.
- [20:00]
Nicole Wallace
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. Each morning, read sharp insights from the voices you trust. Catch moments from your favorite shows.
- [20:21]
Alicia Menendez
The second Trump administration has gone to unprecedented lengths to radically transform America.
- [20:26]
Nicole Wallace
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 now@msnbc.com.
- [20:43]
Alicia Menendez
Today, House Democrats are calling on Donald Trump's Justice Department to reject what they call his corrupt and blatantly illegal plan to steal $230 million from U.S. taxpayers. The new York Times reported last week that Trump is demanding the massive payout from his own Justice Department over complaints about past DOJ investigations. Trump said last week that he could be seeking that compensation now, which would be approved by Trump's own loyalists in the doj, and it would come straight from taxpayer pockets. Democrats led by Jamie Raskin and Robert Garcia have also launched an investigation, demanding documents from Trump about his claims and calling out convenient timing, quote, if either of your claims had any merit, you could have taken them to court by now and litigated them publicly. You did not do that. That is injustice. That is theft. I want to bring in the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, Maryland Democratic Congressman Jamie Raskin. Congressman, good to see you actually showing up for work in the nation's capital. Thank you for being with us. I want you to talk about what it is you're demanding today from Trump's doj.
- [21:49]
Congressman Jamie Raskin
First, we're demanding recusal of the two Trump appointees who are deciding whether or not to write him a check for $230 million, Stanley Woodward and Todd Blanche. Blanche, of course, got famous or infamous when he was Trump's deputy to go and get involved in the Epstein affair and to talk to Ghislaine Maxwell, where he pronounced himself satisfied with her answers, that is, satisfied that she wasn't implicating Trump in any way, and then arranged for her transfer to the, you know, relatively gentle camp in Texas. In any event, these are the two people who clearly have a conflict of interest because they have an interest in maintaining their jobs, which means essentially doing whatever Donald Trump wants them to do versus their duty to enforce the law and the Constitution, both of which are completely contrary to what. Contrary to what Donald Trump is asking for at this point. For example, he's asking for $100 million with respect to the execution of a judicial search warrant at Mar a Lago, remember, which found those classified documents in his bathroom. So he's asking for $15 million in compensatory damages because of the search, of course. Course, the government conducts searches all the time with legal judicial search warrants, and you don't get $15 million because of that or for your lawyers. Then he added another $85 million in punitive damages against the government, which are strictly forbidden under the Federal Tort Claims act, which is what he's using here. So this is a frivolous claim that he's made, knowing that somehow he's going to be able to convince his own employees, who he asserts unitary executive control over, just to write him the check. But the total is nearly a quarter of a billion dollars that he's asking for. Remember, there's no judge involved, there's no jury, nobody's representing the taxpayers of America. It's just getting his own employees to write the check. And for all we know, it's already happened, because this could be a completely secret process until the government publishes a list of the claims that have been paid at the end of the year. So we're demanding they recuse themselves and that the Department of Justice, the Attorney General, just announced this can't be done. And in addition to all those other reasons I just mentioned, it's completely unconstitutional because Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution says that the President is limited to his official salary, which cannot be increased $1 by deriving compensation from some other part of the federal government. So that $230 million payment would dwarf his $400,000 a year salary. So they have to say it's completely off limits. If he really thinks he could do this, he should go to court, which is what he could have done after 90 days of filing his phony administrative claim here.
- [24:49]
Alicia Menendez
Okay, so this is what you and Congressman Garcia are doing at the the House today. In the Senate, Republicans block Senator Jackie Rosen's attempt to pass a resolution condemning Trump for trying to get this money from the doj. Where's the Republican outrage on this one, Congressman? I know it is a question we return to frequently, but this one, I don't know. Should we be surprised that no Republicans are standing up?
- [25:15]
Congressman Jamie Raskin
I mean, I would think that any self respecting Republican who still believes in constitutional government government would have to speak out about this government shutdown, presidential shakedown which is taking place. He's using the opportunity of a closed government and the House of Representatives not being in town to try to snooker the taxpayers for $230 million. And I really hope the Republicans would say this is an egregious precedent that would be set. Presidents should not be allowed to, to shake down the government just by inventing tort claims, filing with their own Department of Justice, and then getting one of their sycophantic underlings to sign a check to them.
- [26:00]
Alicia Menendez
Right. The request is absurd. The possibility of DOJ actually sanctioning this is absurd. And then the third possibility of Trump bringing a lawsuit against his own Department of Justice, also absurd. All right, I want to get your reaction on something else. Trump today formally appealed his conviction Last year on 34 felony commission counts in the hush money case. His lawyers citing the Supreme Court ruling that created a new standard for presidential immunity. Your response?
- [26:27]
Congressman Jamie Raskin
Well, that that case dealt with these 34 counts of paying hush money to a mistress that had nothing to do with the execution of the president's core duties under Article 2 of the Constitution. And so presidential immunity is just irrelevant to that. And so, you know, I haven't seen what the pleadings have to say, so I guess I'll reserve any more judgment on that. But he already appealed that case, lost the appeal there, and was convicted by a jury of his peers unanimously in 34 different counts.
- [27:15]
Alicia Menendez
I mean, the reason I bring it up, Congressman, is it because to me connects to the story about demanding $230 million from his own Department of Justice in this way, which is all retrospective. It is all a perversion of him telling his supporters, I am your retribution. The only retribution he seems to be interested in is that that involves himself and that has now come to define this period of his Justice Department.
- [27:46]
Congressman Jamie Raskin
Well, he believes if he, you know, holds his breath and turns purple like Veruca Salt in Charlie and the Jolkin Factory, the Supreme Court will come out and do whatever he, you know, he wants them to do. And he's got some reason for thinking that because, because of them magically inventing out of whole cloth that presidential immunity from prosecution doctrine for felony crimes committed under the auspices of his office. That's something that we have had no use for for more than two centuries in our history. And they made it up. But in any event, the, the crimes he was convicted of in New York have nothing to do with his execution of his, his presidential duties. And I hope that the Supreme Court will not, you know, jump up into his lap like a lap dog and just ask him what he wants them to do next. I mean, those, those criminal convictions are settled law at this point.
- [28:46]
Alicia Menendez
Congressman, we have less than a minute left. So, of course, I have saved my most complex question until the end here on this news today, 14 more people killed in US strikes on alleged drugs boats. This is the 11th incident that we know about. What does this administration's ever evolving legal rationale for what they are doing tell you about what they are actually up to?
- [29:10]
Congressman Jamie Raskin
Well, there's no legal rationale for it. Congress has not declared war on drug boats in the eastern Pacific, nor is this a legitimate police act. The president is not himself, the police, the prosecutor, the judge, the jury and the executioner. And it's a terrifying logic they're, you know, advancing to the world because if they can do it in the eastern Pacific, why can't they do it off of the coast of California? Why can't they do it in the waterways of America? So it's a lawless operation. Only Congress can declare war. And we have law enforcement bounded by all of the rules of due process, the presumption of innocence, prosecution, and so on that the president himself has afforded himself of when he's been prosecuted for crimes he's committed.
- [30:06]
Alicia Menendez
I have the same questions about what they are doing internationally, potentially correlating here domestically. Congressman Jamie Raskin, thank you so much for joining us today. And just ahead, a new lawsuit today calling out the federal government for what it says is a cruel and illegal decision to withhold food assistance payments for millions. We've got more on that next. As Donald Trump refuses to utilize emergency funds so that Americans can feed their families during the government shutdown. More than two dozen democratically led states are now suing the Trump administration in an attempt to force them to tap into emergency funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program, or SNAP, and spare the approximately 42 million Americans who depend on food assistance. In a lawsuit, the states wrote this, quote, the usda, the agency which oversees the program, has historically funded SNAP benefits during prior lapses. Defendants also failed to consider the dire public health consequences that will result from a suspension of SNAP benefits or the other irreparable harms the decision will inflict. Joining me now, Democratic strategist and professor at Columbia University, MSNBC political analyst Basil Smythe. Also with US Media Matters President Angela Corazon. It is good to see you both. Basil, the lawsuit notes SNAP has been funded to some degree during past shutdowns. Why not this one?
- [31:29]
Basil Smythe
Well, the only thing that I could think of is that they believe that people who are, who refuse to come back to the table to negotiate during the shutdown. The only thing I can think of is that they want to punish people because there is no policy solution that would suggest you don't pay the Americans that are some of the most vulnerable in our country because this hurts families, this hurts children. And when you consider the relationship that SNAP has to the WIC program, Women, Infants and Children, you're also targeting young mothers and infants from with the reduction or the complete denial of these benefits. So it seems more punitive than anything else. And the point I would make in addition to that is if you are looking to punish people, right, they're mostly punishing their supporters. There are more people in this country from red states. There are more white Americans, particularly Republicans, that are on these programs. So if you want to even use the sort of, you know, that sort of welfare queen trope that a lot of Republicans have historically used, it doesn't even touch that or come close to touching that. So the suggestion, the point I would think is that they're only just trying to punish Americans using this tactic.
- [33:01]
Alicia Menendez
Well, Angela, to build on the point that Basil just made, I'm sure you've seen the highly partisan framing of the USDA's, a government agency's communication in a message saying that Democrats are to blame and quote, the well is about to run dry. I wonder the extent to which on conservative media that message is being echoed or how they are justifying to Bowse's point about the fact that this is a lot of Trump's own supporters who are being impacted by this, how they are explaining that away.
- [33:32]
Angela Corazon
Yeah, I mean, I think the way they look at is in a few dimensions. One, they never acknowledge the reality, right. That it's gonna be a lot of their own supporters, even though they all kind of know it. They never actually acknowledge that the predominant right leaning narrative is what's been that way for 20 plus years, going all the way back to Rush Limbaugh, you know, sort of really reinforcing the sort of the false notion of a welfare queen or you know, one of the things used to say about the Wick program in particular was that it was all just a gigantic fiction because why would you need a program like this if they were able to have babies in the first place? Surely they weren't that desperate if they were able to have babies. So clearly it was just sort of a Democratic fiction and that's been percolating forever. So it's basically the notion that it's liberals and black people that are getting this program predominantly. So to some extent they're happy, there's a lot of shadow for it and they're leaning into cruelty, that there's a whole bunch of people that don't get it, that they don't like that are going to be punished. And on the flip side, some of this sort of soft undercurrent and you sort of got to that in your messaging, is that, yeah, there are going to be some of their people, people that are going to suffer from this. And to an extent, they're perfectly fine with that as long as they know that and that they can convince their people that it's Democrats at fault. Because recognize that a big part of what they want to do here is not only to punish liberals and Democrats and any of the perceived political opponents, but to keep the anger flowing on their side so that they can continue to justify and rationalize the cruelty that they're inflicting on the country country and our slide toward authoritarianism. And you sort of need that as the fuel to then justify all the other extreme measures that you're taking. So that's sort of the large framework that's playing out in the right wing media right now. More bloodthirst and more cruelty.
- [35:16]
Alicia Menendez
Well, what is interesting to me, Basil, or something that makes this conversation and this story different is that you are actually starting to see a schism on the right over this issue. Political reporting. Speaker Johnson told House Republicans on a call earlier today that GOP leaders, they have no plans to put a standalone bill for these food aid benefits up for a vote. But that's directly at odds with what other Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Greene who have pushed for food assistance are out there talking about. And so it becomes, I would imagine, a little bit harder to spin that narrative when you have members of your own party saying, hey guys, we could end this right now.
- [35:58]
Basil Smythe
Well, that's absolutely right. I mean, these are members of Congress that even if they don't particularly feel substantial, substantially vulnerable, they're hearing it, they're hearing it from their communities, they're hearing it from their constituents. And there's another piece to add to this. You know, there is this long sort of strategy that Republicans have of taking responsibility and authority away from the federal government and pushing it to the states through block grants. So this is going to beit's part of a larger strategy to put the burden more on states than it already is to be able to find fund these programs. And that is something that I would imagine if you're a governor or state legislature, you're going to be particularly upset about because now all of a sudden you're in a position of having to defend a federal decision and what's going on in D.C. to your own constituents without sort of a plan in place. Now, this is really just punitive, not just for the people who might be receiving these benefits, but also for the legislators themselves. You're sort of putting them the firing line with their constituents because there is no real alternative at this point. And you've actually shifted responsibilities so much so to these, to the local legislators and to the states that you've put them in a position where they really don't have any recourse but to sort of look back to D.C. i want.
- [37:25]
Alicia Menendez
To continue this conversation about state leaders. You are both staying with me. Up next, one of Trump's most loyal and aspiring MAGA acolytes, promoting and picking up on one of the administration's most baseless and unscientific health claims. We've got more on that after a quick break.
- [37:43]
OnDeck Announcer
Cash flow crunch on deck. Small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing and control over repayment, get funded quickly and confident. Apply today@ondeck.com funds could be available as soon as tomorrow, depending on certain loan attributes. Your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic bank. Ondac does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amount subject to lender approval.
- [38:14]
Nicole Wallace
As 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.
- [38:32]
Alicia Menendez
The American people are basically telling the president that they are not okay with any of this.
- [38:36]
Nicole Wallace
Sign up for the Project 47 newsletter@msnbc.com Project 47 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.
- [39:16]
Alicia Menendez
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing the makers of Tylenol, accusing the pharmaceutical company of failing to warn consumers about what they claim is the risk of taking Tylenol pregnant. The lawsuit, which is the first of its kind from a state government, comes a month after Donald Trump and his Cabinet secretary, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Announced updated guidance discouraging pregnant women from taking the drug, also known as acetaminophen, citing it as a possible cause of autism. Now, it's got to be said the bulk of the scientific literature suggests no causal link between autism and exposure to acetaminophen in the womb. Kenview, the corporate subsidiary that makes Tylenol, said in a statement that it would vigorously defend itself against Paxton's claims in court. We are back with Basil and with Angela. All right, Basil, let's talk about the political timing here. You got Paxton running for Senate in Texas. Do you think that plays any role in his decision to bring this lawsuit forward?
- [40:11]
Basil Smythe
Well, of course it does. You know, he's trying to get out there and essentially create the framing for or continue to promote the framing that's already taking place nationally with respect to how we look at healthcare and health and public health policy in this country. Going after a big corporation, a big company like Tylenol and their owners, you know, doesn't hurt matters any. But I actually also find it rather convenient that they're in that lawsuit. They're talking about this sort of long history of defrauding the American people or lying to the American people. But I've also seen on the other side of it, when individuals are trying to, you know, have make these same kinds of claims or similar claims to cigarette companies or gun manufacturers about what they know and what they didn't know and about the harmfulness of their product in communities and in America that there is a lot of Republican resistance to all of that. Can't even get a bill passed in Congress to actually control, you know, enforce gun control in this country. Yet we have someone using, using this lawsuit for political purposes, presumably, but also, and more importantly to promote this larger narrative that actually puts people at risk.
- [41:28]
Alicia Menendez
I don't want to talk about that narrative. I think, Andrew, the contrast that Basil makes is incredibly striking. And I wonder your sense of who the audience is here for this suit.
- [41:39]
Angela Corazon
Yeah, I mean, that's the part that's interesting. There are a lot of things that MAGA is pretty much in uniform lockstep on and this isn't one one of them. And that's the thing that's so disorienting about it. And it's one of the one areas where, you know, parts of the MAHA movement which sort of glommed onto maga, that's, you know, Trump attracted them with rfk. They don't, they're not, they're not really all online in line with this. I mean, this is one of the things that John Thune, the leader of the Republicans in the Senate, points to as his example of when he challenges Trump. And that's only one of many. The rest of the right wing media barely really talks about the Tylenol thing because they're kind of uneasy about about it and Maha. They were initially excited about it, but then all that did was actually stir up anger with Trump and the rest of the MAGA movement because they felt like they weren't doing enough to implement the Maha agenda. So I mean, as an example with this lawsuit, the only one that really heralded it in any meaningful way was Laura Loomer. And that's because Maha right now is more angry one that there hasn't been any more follow through on this Tylenol stuff from Trump's administration. But then beyond that, they're really mad at the Trump administration for pushing through pesticides and smoothing that along, especially in the last two months, which they thought was going to be the opposite of that, which is why they voted for MAGA in the first place. So in a weird way, this actually stokes parts of the MAGA base, the new Maha people that are sort of mad at the administration, it doesn't really do anything to satisfy or satiate the appetites of the MAGA base. I genuinely don't know what narrative is being tapped into here because it isn't one that really is one of the big ones. That's right.
- [43:12]
Alicia Menendez
Unless, Angelo, it is simply to curry favor with the President and his administration. Basil Smichel, Angelo Corazon, thank you both, as always, for being with us. After the break, an update on Hurricane Melissa roaring its way across the entirety of the island of Jamaica. And we'll be right back. The strongest hurricane of the year and most powerful storm to hit Jamaica in recorded history made landfall just hours of ago. Hurricane Melissa is only the second storm to ever make landfall with a whopping 185 mph winds. The slow moving storm could wreak havoc for days causing catastrophic flooding. Officials in Jamaica say many residents have refused to evacuate and at this point it might be too late. Residents and tourists are being ordered to shelter in place. At least seven hurricane related deaths have already been reported across the Caribbean so far. We're going to keep an eye on that storm. And after the break, another round of US Strikes aimed at boats around Central and South America with the promise of more to come in this sneak in a quick break. We'll be right back.
- [44:21]
Basil Smythe
Change is coming to this network but.
- [44:22]
Congressman Jamie Raskin
We'Re still going to be having conversations.
- [44:25]
Basil Smythe
About the issues that define us as a country.
- [44:27]
Ed Yohnka
The only thing changing is our name, same mission, new name.
- [44:30]
Nicole Wallace
MSNBC becomes Ms. Now. November 15th.