← Deadline: White House
Deadline: White House
“The line up for a pay out from the Trump fund”
00:41:01
Ayman Mohyeldin is in for Nicolle Wallace. Ayman covers the ongoing backlash to the nearly $1.8 billion fund set up by the Trump administration to potentially pay out Trump supporters and allies. Among those lining up to cash out are disgraced Congressman George Santos, Jan 6 Capitol rioters, and the mypillow guy Mike Lindell.
Loading summary
Transcript98 lines
- [00:00]
Podcast Host
Avoiding your unfinished home projects because you're not sure where to start.
- [00:04]
Reporter
Thumbtack knows homes so you don't have
- [00:06]
Podcast Host
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. Thursday, June 25 Join Rachel Maddow and Ally Velshi in Philadelphia for A dynamic evening. Ms. Now live presents we the People America 250. Get tickets at Ms. Now America 250 today.
- [00:42]
Eamon Javers
Hi there everyone. It is four o'clock in New York. I'm Ayman Mohideen in for Nicole Wallace. The backlash to the nearly $1.8 billion fund that has been set up by the Trump administration to potentially pay out Trump supporters and his allies is only growing today as everyone from disgraced Congressman Jorge Santos to Capitol rioters hope to cash in on it. The Washington Post reports that among the people thinking about applying for these taxpayer funded payouts, this guy on your screen, Mark McCloskey, 1/2 of the couple that gained notoriety for pointing guns at Black Lives Matter protesters back in 2020. He says his reputation was damaged. It also includes the former Congressman Jorge Santos, who was serving time for wire fraud and identity theft before having his sentence commute by Donald Trump. CNN CNN reports also that my pillow guy, remember him? Election denier Michael and Dowell? Well, he's hoping to cash in on it as well and he wants to get compensated. One person has already reportedly filed a claim, former Trump staffer Michael Caputo. He is seeking $2.7 million for being investigated by the FBI's Russia probe. Now if you don't remember, US intelligence concluded that Caputo worked with Russian agents to produce a documentary about Ukraine and Trump's first impeachment. But in Caputo's telling, he is a victim of so called weaponization. Now the prospect of people like these getting potentially millions of your dollars has enraged Democrats and it has made quite a few Republicans in Congress very uncomfortable. Outgoing Louisiana Republican Senator Bill Cassidy tweeted out, quote, people are concerned about paying their mortgage or rent, affording groceries and paying for gas, not about putting together a $1.8 billion fund for the president and his allies to pay whomever they wish with no legal precedent or accountability. This is adding to our national debt. If there needs to be a settlement, the administration should bring it to Congress to decide. Another Senator Thom Tillis saying this, quote, imagine that, a fund that is set up to compensate people who assaulted Capitol Police officers. How absurd does that sound coming out of my mouth? Well, Democrats are trying to ensure that Republicans pay a steep political price. Congressman Jamie Raskin says that he plans to propose a bill to block funding for the fund, an effort to force every Republican member to get on the record and decide where they stand. Now, political, ethical and legal. Firestorm around this so called slush fund is where we begin today. Tracy Fightlove is here. She is the founder and executive director of Lawyers for Good Government. Also with us, Scott McFarlane. He is a chief Washington correspondent for Midas Touch. He did extensive investigative reporting around the Capitol insurrection, including the prosecution's sentencing and trials of those rioters. And with me here at the table, legal analyst Christy Greenberg. She is a former criminal division deputy chief at SDNY and host of the YouTube show Courtside. It's great to have all three of you with us. Scott, you did some of the most important reporting around January 6th. But let's start with what you are hearing from folks on Capitol Hill about this fund and how this is all going down on the place that was attacked back on January 6th.
- [03:56]
Scott McFarlane
Eamon, the sales pitch the Trump administration undertook for this slush fund on Capitol Hill is something they could put on a White House blooper reel. It has been a clown show from the start of the pitch to where we are now. The Senate was to take up a critical Trump priority, a reconciliation plan, a priority list of things for Trump's Immigration and Customs Enforcement agencies. That thing blew up. The Senate peaced out and left town for two weeks because they were stuck in the mud on what to do about the $1.7 billion fund for convicted crooks and rioters. Haven't found a single senator, not a single one who says declaratively that he or she supports this thing. Senator John Hoeven of North Dakota told me that this is one of the issues. The slush fund, or he calls it the potential guardrails that are needed for the weaponization fund, is a wedge issue even inside the Republican conference. There are no owners of this thing on Capitol Hill and the White House has had trouble selling anybody publicly on it. And Eamonn, when you list the names of the January 6th defendants, the High profile fraudsters who say they want millions of dollars from taxpayers, that makes this sales pitch even harder.
- [05:09]
Eamon Javers
Krista, give me your thoughts on this. When you just hear about what is happening with this fund that is being set Up. I don't think anybody in this country with a straight would look at what happened on January 6th and say those people who attacked our Capitol were somehow unjustly prosecuted. In some cases, they actually admitted their own wrongdoings on that day. Some people who ultimately went to prison for it. And yet this is a fund that is meant to correct an injustice in the eyes of this administration. What do you make of it?
- [05:43]
Christy Greenberg
The inmates are running the asylum.
- [05:45]
Eamon Javers
Right.
- [05:45]
Christy Greenberg
These are the criminals. These are people who are found in court to be guilty of crimes. We all saw these crimes happen on TV before us. We all saw the attack on the Capitol, and now they are crime victims. It's outrageous and it's dangerous. It's bad enough to pardon these people, but to now reward them. I mean, it was. We remember Trump saying, stand back and stand by. Now it's stand up and cash in. And the message that sends that, it's not just for rewarding what. What they did in the past, but the future. January 6th, that we could see. I mean, the midterms are just six months away. And so, yes, this is corrupt, but to me, it is more than that. It is dangerous. I worry about the message this sends in a time where we really have to worry about political violence, that somehow this is endorsing it. And the fact that the Attorney general, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, when he was asked if anybody who assaulted a police officer, if any of them would be eligible to make a claim, he
- [06:49]
Tracy Fightlove
didn't rule it out.
- [06:50]
Christy Greenberg
He said, sure, they can make a claim, and it'll be up to the commission. The answer to that question should have been, of course not. Of course, anybody who assaulted a police officer won't get the taxpayer's money. And he didn't say that. And that tells me that's exactly who it's intended for, because nobody is telling us anything different. It's just. It's all fundamentally based on this lie of trying to rewrite history, that somehow this wasn't a violent attack on the Capitol. This wasn't trying to steal the 2020 election. And this is how the rule of law is dying right in front of us. It's death by a thousand lies.
- [07:23]
Eamon Javers
Yeah. You bring up a really important point that I wanted to ask you about, Tracy, and that is the issue of rule of law. And let me just ask you about this fund and how it potentially works. The Washington Post reports that, quote, the agreement states that payments will be reported quarterly to the Justice Department, but that those records will remain confidential and that the fund's members will get to decide whether to disclose their processes for granting or denying claims. So on one hand, the payouts are confidential and the board members don't have to explain who gets a claim. There's actually no transparency in this process whatsoever. And to, you know, Christie's point about rewriting the narrative around an attack like January the sixth is that history will look back and say these people were wrongly convicted and deserve some kind of compensation, and we have no visibility into how or why.
- [08:20]
Tracy Fightlove
The complete lack of transparency, lack of accountability, attempt to shield this entire fund and this entire process from any sort of oversight is all part and parcel of one single thing that we have all now been watching for quite some time. And that is one of the most brazen abuses of presidential power that we have ever seen in this country. It is presidential self dealing with by means of a manufactured legal process in an attempt to legitimize corruption. That's all it is.
- [08:50]
Eamon Javers
What do you think of the lack of transparency in all of this, Christine? The fact that there's no, not only no visibility, I mean, Jim Comey, the former FBI director who's now not been prosecuted once, but potentially twice. I mean, he obviously the first one was dismissed, but. But not for a lack of trying on the part of this doj. A real example of what many believe to be the weaponization of a Department of justice going after the President's political opponents while simultaneously creating a fund for all those who are basically his foot soldiers.
- [09:22]
Christy Greenberg
Yeah. So let's take the Jim Comey example. So Jim Comey has a case right now, a pending case, and I expect he will make a motion to the judge that he is being vindictively prosecuted. Trump's DOJ will get to respond. We will all get to see the briefing, and there will be argument, and then a judge will issue a decision and it will will all be transparent. That is how vindictive prosecution claims have always worked. There is transparency around them because there is a public interest in knowing if our government is being weaponized in some way. It's rare in the past, at least that it happens, but you know about it. And if there is a finding of vindictive prosecution, there can be payments made, you can get attorneys fees, you can move for costs, you can move for sanctions against the prosecutors. But it's all public, it's all transparent. This, the fact that they are hiding this, the fact that they don't want us to know who is getting the money, what the amount of the payouts are, that this is all, again, people that the Attorney General is going to get to choose and Trump can just remove the commission at will. Who gets to make these decisions? I mean, he is pulling the puppet strings here. I mean, this is all Donald Trump. He says he didn't know anything about it. He's all over this.
- [10:35]
Eamon Javers
So he was bragging about it last week in the Oval Office. This week, he doesn't know anything about it because of the backlash that it created. But in this theory, does James Comey, does he have a legitimate grievance here that if he gets, if he's being, if the DOJ is being weaponized against him, can he make a claim here?
- [10:49]
Christy Greenberg
He should make a claim. So he should make a claim. Letitia, James should make a claim. John Brennan, everybody that feels they have a claim should make the claim. And then let's see what happens. I mean, I will eat my words if any of them see a penny from this one.
- [11:04]
Eamon Javers
Tracey, what are the best legal means you think people have to fight this? There's already been some news that people like Harry D. And Daniel Hodges have filed lawsuits. Give me your sense of what you think happens with those lawsuits and if there's a chance for them to succeed.
- [11:21]
Tracy Fightlove
The possible legal remedies here are very limited. And the reality is that the whole way in which this settlement took place was designed to create exactly that outcome. That's why I say this is all fabricated. It's meant to look like a legitimate legal process, but it isn't one. So I believe our best bet at this point is to look to Congress and to insist that every member of Congress pay attention and do their jobs in ensuring that we have some type of oversight over what is, in fact, a giant conflict of interest masquerading as a legal outcome.
- [11:56]
Eamon Javers
Scott, let me play for you what two Capitol rioters told Santa. Take a listen to this.
- [12:03]
Christy Greenberg
A lot of people don't agree with
- [12:04]
Tracy Fightlove
what happened on January 6th, but when you step back and you, you look at somebody like me, for example, my major felony had to be struck down by the Supreme Court. It's my crime that day of breaking a window. Technically, that's a misdemeanor charge. And yet I had three years of a house arrest, then having to endure everything I did through prison and getting
- [12:29]
Eamon Javers
a five year sentence on top of that.
- [12:33]
Tracy Fightlove
That's clearly weaponization.
- [12:34]
Charlie Sykes
I rationalize people, even violent people, getting
- [12:39]
Eamon Javers
paid for that day because the government set it up. And also on top of that, they stole the election. So the first woman there, you can see, she was breaking the window at The Capitol. The second person interviewed still believes the election was stolen or believes election lies. Is this what Donald Trump is validating when he makes them eligible for taxpayer dollars?
- [12:59]
Scott McFarlane
Here's the first sign that you have an indefensible idea. You have to pervasively put out false information to defend that idea. The critics of the January 6th prosecutions have alleged it was a Biden launched weaponization. It was Donald Trump's first term in which those prosecutions were launched. It was Trump's Department of Justice that did so. They called themselves victims of weaponized prosecutions. That assumes that every single grand juror and every single trial juror, hundreds of people, were all in on this, which is a preposterous notion. What's more, it also indicates to me that they haven't made peace with reality, that the 2020 election was not rigged, that January 6th was not a setup. I'll tell you, Amon, I was in the courtroom for hundreds of the hearings, hundreds of the cases. A lot of people were denying reality during their own proceedings to their own detriment at sentencing. They were denying reality.
- [13:57]
Eamon Javers
Yeah, Scott, what I was going to say in that process is people forget that Donald Trump was the president when the election happened on January the six. When people come out and say, oh, the FBI had people there, or this was an attempt by the government to overturn an election. Who is the person that was in charge of the doj? Who is the person that was executive at the time? It was Donald Trump. They're claiming that Donald Trump rigged an election that he would lose.
- [14:23]
Scott McFarlane
I'm also just gobsmacked, Aiden, by the idea that juries by the dozens all colluded with each other to convict every single person who went to trial by jury, Eamon, every single person who went to trial by jury was convicted. You cannot get 12 people in lockstep on anything in life. That they all were synchronized tells you how overwhelming and damning. And the evidence was the same evidence that will be on television, on our phones in perpetuity if cop beaters get taxpayer money.
- [14:54]
Eamon Javers
So, Scott, let me go back to a point that Tracy brought up, which is hoping that Congress does its part and oversight and have some kind of visibility into this. You said that from the senators that you spoke to, not a single one showed an appetite for this. Give us a sense if there's an effort right now, a concerted effort, to try and prevent this fund from actually getting up off the ground.
- [15:14]
Scott McFarlane
This is like the least popular thing I've seen in Congress, like getting carrot Sticks on Halloween. This is not what anybody wants. And they don't even want to be talking about it. I can't find Republicans to even tacitly endorse this thing. And they know their constituents are well aware that as they pay so much for so many things in life, as they're growing beneath the weight of costs, that they want any of their money going towards this fund. They're not going to find constituents championing this either. And they know it, that they had to walk away from a critical priority of the Trump administration, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement reconciliation bill today and just go home without it because they couldn't figure out what to do with the slush fund. That's a problem, and it's not a problem that's going away.
- [15:58]
Eamon Javers
Tracy, what is it that Democrats can do with this right now, besides Capitol Hill? I mean, we're going into the midterms. There's a long list of what many people believe to be a grift by this administration, by this president for his allies, for his family, for his interests and. And any. You know, they obviously don't have the power on Capitol Hill. But short of being able to get some Republicans to break rank and cross the aisle to support whatever measure they have, what else can Democrats do here to prevent this from taking off?
- [16:32]
Tracy Fightlove
I mean, I think one of the most important things that every member of Congress who understands what's happening right now needs to do is help to educate the general public and voters well in advance of midterms about what's taking place and what should not be allowed to take place. The Justice Department is not Donald Trump's personal law firm. The IRS is not his private bargaining chip. Taxpayer money cannot become a loyalty fund for the president's allies. These are things that every voter is, every member of the public needs to understand. And the reality is, if this entire process, if this settlement is legal, then Congress needs to look at how to change that, because this should in no way be illegal. And every voter going into the midterms needs to understand that.
- [17:16]
Eamon Javers
Yeah, one more example of the many loopholes Donald Trump in this administration have exposed. Tracy, fight love, Scott McFarland. Thank you to the both of you for starting us off. Christy, I'm going to ask you to stick around. We've got a lot more to discuss when we come back. Back. We're going to talk more about Todd Blanche's private meeting with Republican senators, the same senators who have been very vocal against the slush fund and the ballroom and that abrupt decision to delay a vote on the budget. We're going to talk with one Democratic senator on what he is hearing about this mess happening right now on Capitol Hill. Plus, Trump promised lower gas prices to Americans, lower inflation and no foreign wars. And those broken campaign promises are starting to come back at Donald Trump and the Republicans. A new wave of data showing just how angry voters of both parties are right now. We're going to bring that to you and look at whether it signals disaster for Republicans in the midterms. And later in the show, more on the president who sued himself and won. And that grift keeps growing. All those stories and much more when Deadline White House continues after this quick break.
- [18:22]
Podcast Host
Listen to your favorite Ms. Now shows anytime as a podcast. Enjoy new episodes of Morning Joe, Deadline, White House and the Rachel Maddows Show.
- [18:31]
John Della Volpe
Every small d Democratic muscle that we have is flexing.
- [18:35]
Podcast Host
Plus the Last Word with Lawrence o', Donnell, the Beat with Ari Melber, the Weeknight and more on the Go wherever you get your podcasts for ad free listening to all of your favorite shows. Subscribe to Ms. Now Premium on Apple Podcasts.
- [18:54]
Eamon Javers
What do you make of this 1.7 billion dollar fun for that news?
- [18:58]
John Della Volpe
We're gonna try to kill it.
- [18:59]
Eamon Javers
You're gonna try and kill it.
- [19:00]
Reporter
Wow.
- [19:00]
Eamon Javers
Okay.
- [19:00]
Reporter
And how?
- [19:02]
Eamon Javers
Well, we're considering legislative options.
- [19:04]
John Della Volpe
We're gonna write a letter to the AG to start, but we're considering a legislative option.
- [19:11]
Eamon Javers
Okay.
- [19:11]
John Della Volpe
We're trying to unpack exactly, you know,
- [19:13]
Eamon Javers
what the legal machinations are, but can't do that. We have an update to what Republican Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick told reporter Scott McFarlane yesterday. Our Capitol Hill reporter Michael Schnell reports that Fitzpatrick is working across the aisle with Democrat Tom Suozzi on a bill that prevents taxpayer dollars from going to this anti weaponization fund that Donald Trump is trying to set up. It's just one of many efforts to block the fund from going forward. Over in the Senate, Democrats had been preparing amendments to a legislative package that Republicans have been building. But the backlash over the fund and the White House ballroom has led the GOP to punt on voting on the bill for the rest of this month. I want to bring into the conversation Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware Center. It's great to see you again. You told our team that you're filing two amendments on this bill that has now been, as I mentioned, punted to June. Tell us about those amendments and if you expect them to pass.
- [20:11]
Reporter
Eamon I was counting on two votes tonight on amendments to the reconciliation bill that directly relate to this slush fund this $1.7 billion weaponization fund. Two days ago, the acting attorney general was in front of me on the Appropriations Committee. He couldn't answer whether or not those convicted of assaulting police officers here on January 6th would get million dollar payouts. So one of my amendments would prohibit that. He couldn't answer whether President Trump's businesses or family would be eligible for a big payout. So another amendment would answer that issue. Look, reconciliation is this complicated process, but it allows the Republicans to pass with just 50 votes things they otherwise can't do. What were they going to use Reconciliation for tonight? $72 billion more for ICE and Border Patrol enforcement. Rather than negotiating with Democrats on a reasonable set of reforms to how they are conducting immigration enforcement, they were going to jam this through. And frankly, I'm relieved that some Republicans have woken up to the fact that funding Trump's billion dollar Golden Ballroom or funding Trump's $1.7 billion grievance fueled fund for payouts is not a good idea when most Americans can't make ends meet, can't meet their bills, and are seeing steadily rising costs for everything from gas at the pump to groceries at the grocery store to family health care and rent.
- [21:50]
Eamon Javers
So let me ask you about that meeting with Todd Blanche. POLITICO is reporting that the attorney general, the acting attorney General, Todd Blanche, had this very highly contentious meeting with Rep today before it was decided that they would start voting on the bill. Do you have any insight as to what happened? Did Blanche fail to convince his party or the Republican Party to take votes on the fund? Was that a factor?
- [22:15]
Reporter
Well, what I have heard is that it was a very contentious lunch. Dozens of Republicans pressed him for answers on some of the issues I was just talking about and he was combative, defensive. And as a result, they don't have enough votes to pass reconciliation. So they're going to take the next week and try and see what changes they have to make to the package to get the votes. But I'll remind your viewers there's still probably enough votes in the Republican caucus to put another $72 billion towards mass deportation. That's still popular with Republicans. It's not popular with the American people because we all saw what happened in Minneapolis and it was a disgrace. I was responsible. Amen. For the second largest police department in my state when I was county executive. And we know how to do policing in an appropriate and constitutional way in this country. We just need to adopt standards that say no masks. You have to wear a badge and an ID that shows what agency you're from. You can't run around in like hopped up vehicles and Cabela's gear. You have to present as an officer. There has to be a process for resolving inappropriate use of force. And they can't just kick down doors with an administrative warrant. Our Constitution's Fourth Amendment says there has to be a judicial warrant to get into a residence. That's just a few of the issues. But rather than negotiate with us in good faith, they're going to give ICE and Border Patrol more money than the Marine Corps. And that's a basic disagreement between our parties and I think something that's broadly unpopular with the American people.
- [23:56]
Eamon Javers
Senator, what does it say to you that Republicans are suddenly feeling squeamish about the ballroom, this so called slush fund, the billions of dollars that appear to be wasted on vanity projects. Have they finally found their red line with Donald Trump?
- [24:14]
Reporter
Well, they're seeing the same numbers that we are on a recent Fox News poll. President Trump is the least popular he's been in his second term. And the issues that were winners for him in 24 are losers for him. Now, remember, he ran on lowering your costs, making America healthy again, releasing the Epstein files and no new stupid foreign wars. And he's failing on all of those fronts. So I think this is a symptom. This is a sign that Republicans in the Senate are hearing from their constituents that rather than spending billions on ballrooms and a victory arch and a grievance payout fund, they'd like to see that money spent on their health care or the president and Republicans focused on lowering their costs. President Trump's completely distracted. He's now seriously talking about starting a war in Cuba when he hasn't even resolved the conflict in Iran. And I think the average American would really rather see him stick to their daily concerns, which is their steadily rising family costs.
- [25:16]
Eamon Javers
All right, Senator Chris Coons, thank you so much. Really appreciate your time today. Senator, thank you.
- [25:20]
Reporter
Thank you, Raymond.
- [25:22]
Eamon Javers
Chris, let me get your thoughts on this. I mean, we're starting to see Republicans, not across the board, but some having an issue with Donald Trump spending on some of these projects. Why do you think this is the issue that they're starting to break on? Not two Americans being killed in Minneapolis, not the $72 billion more, not the potential wars in Cuba, Venezuela and Iran that have no legal basis in it. Why is this the one where Republicans are saying, hey, maybe this is a bridge too far?
- [25:49]
Christy Greenberg
Well, I think if you claim to be the party of law and order and you claim to back the blue. This is about giving money to people who have been convicted of crimes. Those two things are so fundamentally intentioned that I don't, I don't see how Republicans can square the two. And so I think they really have to look at this. I mean, and also the Capitol Police that were there that day, they were protecting these members of Congress. And so, you know, I don't know if many of them have a conscience, but you'd like to think at least some of them do and know the sacrifice that was made on their behalf to protect them. So, you know, maybe that is kicking in. It's hard to see.
- [26:30]
Eamon Javers
They saw it with their own eyes. They felt the fear that day. And so they can't just kind of brush that off.
- [26:36]
Christy Greenberg
Absolutely.
- [26:36]
Eamon Javers
Kristi Greenberg, great to see you as always. Thank you so much.
- [26:38]
Christy Greenberg
Thanks for having me.
- [26:39]
Eamon Javers
Really appreciate it. After the break, another new poll showing just how unpopular Donald Trump is. It is a pattern, for sure, but this one coming from his preferred news network, as you just heard earlier, sinking to a record low among his own party. We're going to talk about that and what it all means next.
- [27:00]
Christy Greenberg
Stitch fix. Stop shopping. Get styled. A plus on the outfit. Ms. Turner, you are about to slay parent teacher conferences. Oh, these just the most perfect fitting jeans my stylist sent me.
- [27:11]
Eamon Javers
Oh, hello, you who didn't set one foot in a mall and still looks amazing.
- [27:16]
Christy Greenberg
Just share your size, style and budget and your stylist sends personalized looks right to your door. Stitch Fix, get started today@stitch fix.com to my stylist. This look is dedicated to you. Thank you. Thank you.
- [27:30]
Eamon Javers
Simone Sanders Townsend and I have known each other for more than a decade, tussling over politics and policy when she worked in the White House. And I reported on it.
- [27:39]
Christy Greenberg
And now we're friends and colleagues. And on our podcast, Clock it, we
- [27:43]
Tracy Fightlove
are positioning ourselves at the intersection of culture and politics.
- [27:46]
Eamon Javers
Clock it is where we talk about what we see and hear in the news. So you can start to clock it, too.
- [27:53]
Podcast Host
Clock it with Simone and Eugene. All episodes available now.
- [28:02]
Eamon Javers
Donald Trump is facing one devastating poll after another when it comes to how the country thinks he is handling his job, especially on the issues that matter most to voters. This time, a new poll from Fox News shows that a record high 61% of the country disapproves of the job Donald Trump is doing. Those numbers driven in large part by the economic hardships that Americans are facing as a casualty to Donald Trump's war of choice with Iran. That poll shows that a whopping 71% of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of the economy. That's a five point higher jump than just last month. And notably, that increase includes a 7 point rise in disapproval among Republicans. Look, those are devastating numbers for a president who built his brand on promising a booming economy. And relief does not appear to be anywhere in sight. Gas prices hit another record high just today since the start of the war. They are now At a staggering 4.54 dollars 56 cents a gallon, I should say. Let's bring in the director of polling at the Institute of Politics For Harvard University, Ms. now contributor John Della Volpe. Also joining us is Charlie Sykes. He is the author of the newsletter to the Contrary. It's good to have both of you with us, Charlie. Those numbers on the economy alone have to be a massive red flag for the Republicans. But this is undoubtedly a self inflicted problem between the war of choice on Iran that led to gas prices and the tariffs that are making the rest of goods in this country sky skyrocket.
- [29:35]
Charlie Sykes
Well, I think that's the key. Yes, they are devastated. And it is an own goal. Right. All of this is self inflicted by Donald Trump's own policies. But not only is it devastating, but I also think that in terms of the cost of living. But I think Americans are also seeing the lack of focus. They're seeing a president who is so concerned about almost everything other than what's happening to their financial condition. I mean, when you have the billionaire president focused on his ballroom and the reflecting ponds and building the arch and hanging out with his fellow billionaires and saying that the cost of gas is just, is just peanuts. What you're seeing is a disconnect. They're looking at a president saying, you're not focused on what you claim to be focused on. You're not accomplishing what you said you were going to do. And that's really hard to overcome.
- [30:23]
Eamon Javers
John, what do you make of Republicans here increasingly disapproving of Trump's handling of the economy? And could it signal long term problems for the Republican Party? They've always felt that they've had an upper hand when it comes to the economy. But 71% disapproving is a staggering number for any president, let alone a Republican president. True.
- [30:44]
John Della Volpe
So, Eamonn, we are now in a new era, I think, of how we think and we should understand politics. We're in an era where ideology is important, but experience is more important. And the experience that Americans are having, including Republicans, including the 89% of Republicans in that FOX poll say that the Iran war is responsible for the hiking gas taxes. 84% of Republicans say that gas prices are a problem for them. And more than half of Republicans say the economy today is fair. Only fair or poor, okay? It doesn't matter if we're talking to working class, rural voters, college educated voters. That is what is so clear about that FOX poll. And that is the reason we see for the first time in years that Democrats are doing better on the generic ballot, but Democrats are also doing better on which party is more trusted on handling the economy.
- [31:45]
Eamon Javers
Charlie, the president has struggled to explain this. He has struggled to even talk about this. Let me play for you how he talked about the very real problem of soaring gas prices this week. Take a listen to this.
- [31:57]
Donald Trump
This is peanuts. And I appreciate everybody putting up with it for a little while. It won't be much longer, but you're going to have, and frankly, there is so much oil out there. One of the things that is happening is these big ships are coming up to Texas, Louisiana and Alaska and they're loading up. But I don't even think about that. What I think about is you can't let Iran have a nuclear weapon and they won't have a nuclear weapon.
- [32:22]
Eamon Javers
So last week, the message coming out of Donald Trump was he didn't care about what Americans felt at the gas pump. Now the message has slightly been modified to say, I hear you, but it's peanuts. Hang in there. It's going to get better soon.
- [32:36]
Charlie Sykes
Well, I mean, he's, he keeps saying it's going to get better soon. He's been saying that since the beginning of this war.
- [32:41]
Eamon Javers
Right.
- [32:41]
Charlie Sykes
The war that we won on day one. If you look at oil futures, it would suggest the oil markets think that the price of oil is going to be, is going to be high for, for quite a long time. And clearly, Donald Trump does not have an exit strategy, doesn't have an off ramp to this war. And it also seems as if, as if grandpa's kind of fallen asleep in front of the Iran television show that he's lost interest in it. It's sort of faded. He wants to talk about really a lot of other things. So you have disconnect layered upon disconnect with the president with these numbers. And by the way, in your last segment, you were asking why are Republicans pushing back? Well, look, I think the Republicans have been, and you know, they, they, you know, Donald Trump has made it very clear that he controls the Republican Party. But what Republicans are realizing is that Donald Trump doesn't care about what happens to the Republican Party in the general election. And they see these headwinds and they know that Donald Trump is not making life more interesting to them. And every time he throws one of their members under the bus, he reminds them that the loyalty only goes one way.
- [33:47]
Eamon Javers
Yeah, and speaking of that disconnect, John, that was Donald Trump speaking outside of a construction site. That was the ballroom behind him with Trump literally talking to the American people telling them their woes are simply peanuts because of the gas prices. This is what the FOX News poll shows when it comes to American concerns over gas prices. I'm going to put this up on the screen here for our viewers. 96% of Americans see gas prices as a problem. 75% call it a major problem. Donald Trump calls it peanuts.
- [34:20]
John Della Volpe
And they're connecting the dots between the, between Iran and what's happening in the pump. And every single day, Americans, Republican voters as well are passing gas stations, but they're also experiencing inflation multiple times every single day. And I have not seen a poll where the first five or even ten open ended questions, whether it's in a FOX News survey or any other survey or the constituent survey is that Republican members of Congress are doing where the Iran nuclear capability is anywhere close to kind of a top priority. What Americans care about, whether Democrat, Republican or Independent is staying in their homes, is affording health care. It's, it's affording gas to get to work. Those are the essential things. And what we can see in the polls are that it's clear that Americans don't feel like the president is hearing them or listening to them. And that's why we see the ratings where they are, 29% approval rating on the economy. That's all that matters right now. It's a top issue.
- [35:25]
Eamon Javers
All right, everyone stay with me. No one's going anywhere. After a break, Donald Trump, another Donald Trump project that absolutely no one asked for got the green light today to move forward by a group filled with, no surprise here, Trump appointees. We're going to tell you about that next. So while Americans want Donald Trump to actually focus on lowering their cost of living and gas prices and what have you, here's what he is actually focused on instead. More of his vanity projects. The Washington Post reports today that Trump is planning on building that 250 foot arch near Arlington National Cemetery without approval from Congress. Now, according to that reporting, the Trump administration is, quote, arguing that they do not need it because lawmakers a century ago authorized a somewhat similar project that was never built. Trump officials claim that building that arch today would be carrying out past lawmakers wishes. We are back with John and Charlie. John, you know, these vanity projects really seem to be Trump's top priority and his obsession, even though polling shows that some of them are deeply unpopular, including the ballroom and even this arch.
- [36:40]
John Della Volpe
Well, I think the voters that we talk to think about this in the following way. Number one, is an arch often should represent a triumph, okay? A victory of some kind, a place where there is national consensus. Those the times where Americans I talk to believe we ought to have a public monument, number one. Number two, and I know that when members of Congress go back to their districts and if they ask them with a billion dollars, what could we do? The answer wouldn't be an arch, it wouldn't be a ballroom. It would be about help keep me in my home, help support the veterans who are suffering from mental health crises every single day, help reduce my medical debt or make it more affordable to go to college. I mean, these are the issues that we all know millions of Americans are struggling with. And they see this as further evidence that in this case, the president, but largely the infrastructure within Washington, D.C. and Democrats as well, don't understand what is happening every single day in millions of homes because they're looking for someone to hear them. And they're asking more from Republicans but also more from Democrats as well.
- [37:58]
Eamon Javers
I mean, Charlie, can you imagine for a second what the outrage would be if a Democratic president tried to bypass Congress to build a 250 foot monument? If he had torn down the east wing of the White House without congressional planning or approval to slap his name on the Kennedy center, to try to get his face minted on coins. I can go on and on and on and on.
- [38:25]
Charlie Sykes
And I can imagine on and on and on what the outrage would be. The kinds of people who would have their hair on fire. I mean, two points. I mean, number one, you described it accurately as a vanity project. You look this up in the dictionary, vanity project. It would be Donald Trump in the middle of a war, in the middle of economic anxiety, building a 250 foot arch which will obscure the view of Arlington National Cemetery. I don't know what effect it has on the flight patterns to Reagan Airport. But I guess this is the larger point. There is a reason why he doesn't want to have congressional approval. Because right now we are actually seeing that there is a red line. Members of Congress do not want to vote for the ballroom. They do not want to vote for the slush fund. And they sure as heck do not want to explain to their constituents why at a time when we have $39 trillion in national debt, they will build an arch which no one asked for, no one can use, and for which he's provided really no rationale. I mean, the lucid ballroom, you know, they tried to put, you know, some lipstick on it by saying we need it for security or these various other things. What the hell do you do with an arch? You know, other than basically create another monument to Donald Trump's massive ego and another. Another expression of his, you know, bottomless self doubt.
- [39:39]
Eamon Javers
And to that point, I mean, Charlie, there's another part in all of this which is the sycophancy that we're seeing in various agencies today. A federal panel approved Trump's plans for that arch. But here's the catch. The panel that actually approved it is all filled with Donald Trump appointees. And you can almost kind of go down the list of almost everything that he's doing. Somewhere along the line, you know, somebody is rubber stamping what Donald Trump wants to do, whether it's this panel or Congress or somebody at the fcc. You can go on and on with that as well.
- [40:16]
Charlie Sykes
Well, I think this is actually an important point because in this particular case, you get an arch. But you're seeing what Todd Blanche, the acting Attorney General, is willing to do with the Department of Justice. You're seeing what Brendan Carr is willing to do with the fcc. And it's obvious by now that the qualification for being part of any of these independent, alleged independent agencies is not just loyalty to Donald Trump. It is a willingness to take the most egregious acts. It is if Donald Trump is testing them by saying, what can I get away with? What can I make you do? What will you approve? So Todd Blanche approves the most corrupt, brazen deal in the history of American political corruption. And whoever it is who's doing this is approving something that, that, frankly, I doubt is going to be built and will, doubt will stand through future administrations. But again, it's an indication that Donald Trump foresees the federal government as an extension of his own ego, of his own id.
- [41:17]
Eamon Javers
Yeah, absolutely. Charlie Sykes, John Della Volpe, thank you to the both of you today. Really appreciate your insights as always.
- [41:24]
Charlie Sykes
Thank you.
- [41:24]
Eamon Javers
Coming out when we come back, a big wedding this weekend to tell you about with one noticeable RSVP still pending. Well, in case you haven't heard, there is a big Trump wedding happening this weekend. Donald Jr. Is getting married, reportedly in the Bahamas, but The father of the groom might be missing
- [41:53]
Charlie Sykes
your son's wedding
- [41:54]
Eamon Javers
this weekend, by the way.
- [41:55]
Donald Trump
He'd like me to go, but it's going to be just a small little private affair and I'm going to try and make it. I'm in the midst. I said, you know, this is not good timing for me. I have a thing called Iran and other things. That's one I can't win on. If I do attend, I get killed. If I don't attend, I get killed. By the fake news. Of course I'm talking about no, but he's got a very person who I've known for a long time and hopefully they're going to have a great marriage.
- [42:28]
Eamon Javers
A person I've known for a long time. And just to be clear, it's not exactly clear whether Trump was referring to his son or soon to be daughter in law there. And sure it's bad optics to jet off to a wedding in the middle of a war you chose to start, but the optics have never been Trump's thing. Given that he has played over a dozen rounds of golf since he decided to start that war with Iran. After a break, there seems to be no limit to the Trump family's desire to make a quick buck. There's a lot more news ahead. We'll tell you about that and a whole lot more. Stay with us.
- [43:07]
Podcast Host
Listen to your favorite Ms. Now shows anytime as a podcast. Enjoy new episodes of Morning Joe, Deadline, White House and the Rachel Maddows Show.
- [43:16]
John Della Volpe
Every small D Democratic muscle that we have is flexing.
- [43:21]
Podcast Host
Plus the Last Word with Lawrence o', Donnell, the Beat with Ari Mess Albert, the Weeknight and more on the go wherever you get your podcasts for ad free listening to all of your favorite shows. Subscribe to Ms. Now Premium on Apple Podcasts.