“The soul of a nation”

Summary

Podcast Episode Summary: Deadline: White House – “The Soul of a Nation”

Host: Nicolle Wallace
Date: September 15, 2025

---

Overview

This episode examines the rising threats of political violence in America and the evolving response from national leaders—particularly the polarizing reaction of President Donald Trump and his administration. Drawing parallels with previous moments of national trauma, Nicolle Wallace and her panel of journalists and legal experts explore how presidential rhetoric, distortion of facts, the weaponization of the federal government, and high-profile Justice Department firings collectively impact the nation's soul and democratic resilience.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. A Nation at an Inflection Point ([01:10] – [03:30])

• Background: The assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk shocked the country and prompted calls for unity from current and former presidents—Clinton, Bush, Obama, Biden—and bipartisan congressional leaders.

• Contrast in Leadership: Donald Trump eschews calls for calm, instead blaming the left and escalating the rhetoric. This set the tone for the episode’s investigation into the consequences of divisive leadership.

  • Nicolle Wallace quotes:
    • Bush: “Members of other political parties are not our enemies. They are our fellow citizens.” (01:42)
    • Biden: “It must end now.” (02:01)
    • Gov. Spencer Cox: “…at some point, we have to find an off ramp or it’s going to get much, much worse.” (02:25)

• Trump's Response: Rather than echoing bipartisan calls for peace, Trump continues inflammatory language:

  • Conservative commentator impersonating Trump: "You look at the scum that speaks so badly of our country... That’s the left." ([03:20])

---

2. Echoes and Amplification: The Trump Network's Escalation ([03:30] – [06:53])

• Trump’s unwillingness to call for calm is mirrored and magnified by allies like Steve Bannon and members of his cabinet.
• Peter Baker, NYT:
  • “Trump has long made clear that coming together is not the mission of his presidency... He acts as president of red America and the people who agree with him, while those who do not are portrayed as enemies and traitors, deserving payback.” ([04:15])
• Vaughn Hilliard, White House correspondent, contextualizes this in the current White House’s approach:
  • "What we’re seeing from President Trump is a reaction... that is not like that of previous leaders before him..." ([06:53])

---

3. The Battle Over Facts and Political Violence ([08:55] – [14:49])

• Nicole Wallace juxtaposes the administration’s narrative with FBI Director Christopher Wray’s testimony from 2020 and recent data, demonstrating that most politically motivated violence stems from right-wing extremism, contrary to Trump administration claims.

  • Christopher Wray (via Glenn Thrush):
    • "Within the domestic terrorism bucket... racially motivated violent extremism... is certainly the biggest chunk of that." ([09:12])

• J.D. Vance, Vice President, fuels the administration’s narrative:

  • “While our side of the aisle certainly has its crazies, it is a statistical fact that most of the lunatics in American politics today are proud members of the far left.” ([10:27])

• Mary McCord, former DOJ official, rebuts the distortion:

  • “We are seeing violence from both sides, right? ... The one person most needed to [unite the country] is the one person who is least capable or willing—and that is the president.” ([11:31], [14:49])

  Memorable Quote:

  • Mary McCord: "He [Trump] ran on division back in 2016. He ruled on division throughout his first administration. And he's ruling based on divisive politics right now." ([14:49])

---

4. Leadership Vacuum: “What Happens Next?” ([14:49] – [16:52])

• Mary McCord emphasizes the necessity of community and non-political leaders stepping up, as trust in the presidency erodes.
  • "Maybe those voices of the people need to be the ones lifted up. And when people talk to each other, they're much less apt to be engaged in the kind of really nasty rhetoric that you see when there's distance." ([16:39])

---

5. Internal Chaos: FBI Director Kash Patel’s Controversial Tenure ([16:52] – [21:20])

• Discussion of the fallout from Patel’s handling of the Charlie Kirk investigation highlights deeper dysfunction and infighting within federal law enforcement under Trump.
• Conservative commentator on Patel:
  • "Over the past 24 hours, we have seen actions out of Patel that were not even remotely imaginable from any prior FBI director... this sort of orgy of self-aggrandizement." ([17:49])
• The segment reveals ongoing purges within the FBI, with reporting of lawsuits from ousted officials and broader concerns about leadership credibility.

---

6. Exploitation of Violence for Political Means ([23:59])

• Glenn Thrush:
  • “We have to reject anyone who would try to exploit political violence. The response to this cannot be for government to crack down on individuals or groups not because of violence, but because they challenge the government politically.” ([23:59])

---

7. Weaponizing the Government: Legal Tools and Precedent ([25:12] – [33:45])

• The Trump administration, according to Vaughn Hilliard, is intent on using federal agencies to uproot “left-wing” groups, accusing them of links to violence in the absence of evidence.

  • "He is arguing that there is a conspiracy, a network of organizations that were behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk... yet what you have heard is people like Steve Bannon suggest today that organizations like Antifa should be classified as a domestic terrorist organization." ([25:47])

• Mary McCord explains the factual and legal obstacles:

  • "First of all, there is no authority under U.S. law to designate domestic organizations as terrorist organizations... So it would require a new legal regime to even consider something like actual designation..." ([31:02])

• She cautions against new domestic counterterrorism tools, highlighting the risk of selective enforcement against political opponents.

  Notable Quote:

  • Mary McCord: "I think it would be very concerning to many people to create new tools. Now when we see the factual disparity here, when we see the weaponization out of this Department of Justice and this president..." ([33:45])

---

8. Retribution in Federal Firings: The Maureen Comey Case ([35:42] – [45:09])

• Feature Segment: Maureen Comey, career prosecutor and daughter of ex-FBI Director Jim Comey, sues the Trump administration alleging her firing was politically motivated and unconstitutional.

  • Andrew Weissman (DOJ analyst):
    • "The Trump administration embraces retribution. They talk about it. The President talks about trying to use the criminal powers of the government against people." ([37:53])
  • Glenn Thrush:
    • "Congress has said it is unlawful... if you want to fire people who are career, like Maureen Comey, you need cause. What Mike was saying—there has to be a reason. They didn’t even give us [one]." ([39:16])

• Connections to Epstein Case: Comey’s involvement in high-profile cases; the timing of her firing raises questions about retaliation linked to sensitive investigations.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• President George W. Bush ([01:42]):
  “Members of other political parties are not our enemies. They are our fellow citizens.”
• Gov. Spencer Cox ([02:25]):
  “…at some point, we have to find an off ramp or it’s going to get much, much worse.”
• Donald Trump (via commentator) ([03:20]):
  "You look at the scum that speaks so badly of our country... That’s the left."
• Mary McCord ([14:49]):
  "He [Trump] ran on division back in 2016. He ruled on division... And he's ruling based on divisive politics right now."
• Glenn Thrush ([23:59]):
  “We have to reject anyone who would try to exploit political violence.”
• Andrew Weissman ([37:53]):
  “The Trump administration embraces retribution… They talk about it. The President talks about trying to use the criminal powers of the government against people.”

---

Key Timestamps for Reference

• 01:10 – Wallace’s introduction; bipartisan responses to Kirk assassination
• 03:30 – Trump/Bannon rhetoric and Peter Baker’s analysis
• 06:53 – Vaughn Hilliard compares past and present presidential responses
• 09:12 – FBI’s Wray on sources of political violence
• 11:31 – Mary McCord discusses facts vs. narrative
• 14:49 – What leaders and communities can do going forward
• 16:52 – Patel’s performance as FBI director; inner turmoil
• 23:59 – Glenn Thrush on politicizing violence
• 25:47 – Hilliard on Trump’s plans to target left-wing groups
• 31:02 – McCord on legal constraints against domestic terror designation
• 35:42 – Maureen Comey’s lawsuit and the culture of retribution
• 39:16 – Glenn Thrush on legality of firing federal employees
• 45:09 – Discussion of Epstein files and further legal-political implications

---

Tone & Language

Wallace guides a sober yet urgent discussion that blends legal analysis, investigative reporting, and appeals to national unity—contrasting pointed, inflammatory statements by Trump and allies with facts and calls for civil responsibility. The mood is deeply concerned, underscored by mounting evidence of democratic norms under strain.

---

Final Takeaways

• America faces a critical juncture where violence and division threaten democratic institutions.
• The current administration’s approach marks a departure from historical precedents valuing unity.
• The use of federal power for partisan retribution and the targeting of opponents carries grave dangers.
• Leadership, facts, and the involvement of communities beyond Washington are vital for the nation's healing and the preservation of its democratic soul.

Transcript

[Commercial Announcer]

Your new beginning starts now. Dr. Horton has new construction homes available in Ellensburg and throughout the greater Seattle area. With spacious floor plans, flexible living spaces and home technology packages, you can enjoy more cozy moments and sweet memories in your beautiful new home. With new home communities opening in Ellensburg and throughout the Seattle area, Dr. Horton has the ideal home for you. Learn [e-mail] Dr. Horton, America's builder and equal Housing Opportunity Builder Deadline White House.

[Nicole Wallace]

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. Quote [e-mail] to see if you could save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates national average 12 month savings of $744 by new customers surveyed who saved with Progressive between June 2022 and May 2023. Potential savings will vary. Discounts not available in all states and situations.

Hi there everyone. It's Board Clark in New York. We can call it a shared national interest, Peace in our time. It is why in the aftermath of a conservative activist's shocking murder, just about every elected leader, current and former, called for and preached calm. President Bill Clinton encouraged introspection and a redoubling of efforts to engage in peaceful debate. His successor, President George W. Bush, insisted, quote, violence and vitriol be purged from the public square, emphasizing this, quote, members of other political parties are not our enemies. They are our fellow citizens. President Barack Obama suggested, quote, this kind of despicable violence has no place in our democracy. It is a sentiment that was reflected by President Joe Biden as well, who added, quote, it must end now. Such messages extended beyond former commanders in chief. House Speaker Republican Mike Johnson said he wanted lawmakers to help, quote, turn the temperature down. Alabama Senator Republican Katie Britt asserted, quote, the time for unity and peace in our nation is now, end quote. And Spencer Cox, the Republican governor of Utah, the state where Charlie Kirk was murdered, made clear to Americans that, quote, at some point we have to find an off ramp or it's going to get much, much worse, end quote. And then really, since Wednesday, there's been Donald Trump, who's been given opportunities time and time again over these past few days to reflect any one of those messages calling for peace and calm, opportunities he has seemed to reject completely.

[Conservative Commentator]

For years. Those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world's worst mass murderers and criminals. This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we're seeing in our country today. The radicals on the left are the problem.

[Nicole Wallace]

And they're vicious and they're horrible.

And when you look at the agitators.

[Conservative Commentator]

You look at the scum that speaks.

[Nicole Wallace]

So badly of our country. The American flag burnings all over the place. That's the left.

[Mary McCord]

That's not the right.

[Nicole Wallace]

Donald Trump is charting a new path for America, setting a new standard for that office and for political leadership more broadly, one that has been received, one that's been heard loud and clear among huge swaths of Donald Trump's sizable base of support. Steve Bannon, for instance, has suggested our country is, quote, already at war. Members of Trump's cabinet, along with his two sons, have fanned the flames in appearances they have made on right wing media. That vocal undercurrent of blame and revenge is the subject of a New York Times piece of reporting by Peter Baker. He describes Donald Trump's reaction this Trump has long made clear that coming together is not the mission of his presidency. In an era of depolarization in American society, he rarely talks about healing. While other presidents have typically tried to lower the temperature in moments of national crisis, Mr. Trump turns up the flames. He does not subscribe to the traditional notion of being a president for all the people. He acts as president of red America and the people who agree with him, while those who do not are portrayed as enemies and traitors, deserving payback, end quote. The vital question now, as we bear witness to the words being uttered by our current and our only president, our only commander in chief and other powerful people who've come before him, is what happens next as our country comes to terms with what feels like a new normal of political violence? What do the president's words mean? Not just for the American people, for standing in the world, for the soul of our nation, if you will. So where we start today with some of our favorite reporters in France, New York Times Justice Department reporter Glenn Thrush is back. Also joining us, former acting assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Justice Department. MSNBC legal analyst Mary McCord is here. And MSNBC senior White House correspondent Vaughn Hillier joins us from the White House. I want to do one thing with you, Vaughn. First, I want to show you what Governor Josh Shapiro said about the comment from Donald Trump that I played. And you of all people know how careful I am about amplifying some of Donald Trump's most controversial messages. But Governor Shapiro responded to the word scum, and I just want to read you what he said. He subtweeted this line from Donald Trump that, quote, the problem's on the left, it's not on the right. Some people like to say he goes on to call the left scum. Of that, Governor Shapiro said this, quote, no one party is immune from political violence. My family and I can attest to that. Using the rhetoric of rage and calling some of our fellow Americans, quote, scum, no matter how profound our differences, only creates more division and makes it harder to heal. We are at an inflection point in America. Violence transcends party lines and the way to address it and have true peaceful debate is for leaders to speak and act with moral clarity. That needs to start with the president. What are you seeing from the president in your reporting, Vaughn?

[Vaughn Hilliard]

I think that what we're seeing from President Trump is a reaction to this that is not like that of previous leaders before him, whether it be Josh Shapiro, whether it be the Republican governor of Utah, Spencer Cox, telling young Americans to reject the rage that may be instigated from this. If you look at Steve Bannon, who again earlier today pushed back against Spencer Cox's handling of this, saying to reject the idea that everybody should have a big hug, but instead that this malignant problem on the left needs to be rooted out, was echoed by JD Vance today, the Vice President saying that this is not a both sides problem. He also used the word malignant to describe the problem that he says is on the left. And I say that the way that President Trump and his cabinet officials, including the Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, are responding to this doesn't match that of even if you go back to 2017, Steve Scalise, who was shot there on that ballpark ahead of the Congressional baseball game, four months after that, he went onto the floor of the US House and he said while some people might focus on a tragic event and an evil act, to me all I remember are the thousands of acts of kindness and love and warmth that came out of this. If you go back to 2011 after Gabby Giffords was shot in Tucson and Christina Taylor Greene and five others were killed by that shooter down in Tucson, President Obama of the same party went down to Tucson and made the very specific statement that we may ask ourselves if we've shown enough kindness and generosity and, and compassion to the people in our lives. The examples go on. You can go back to generations past and what is being presented by this president and his top cabinet officials. However, particularly in the last 72 hours, is a plan to go out and use the federal government and specifically the executive branch in still ways that are unclear here to us now as a means of going and rooting out what they say is a problem specifically on the left.

[Nicole Wallace]

So let's deal with two things here. One is the factual inaccuracies. Let me show you what Donald Trump's last FBI director, Christopher Wray said the actual domestic threat environment looks like and where it comes from, ideologically speaking.

[Glenn Thrush]

What I can tell you is that within, within the domestic terrorism bucket category as a whole, racially motivated violent extremism is I think, the biggest bucket within that larger group. And within the racially motivated violent extremist bucket, people ascribing to some kind of white supremacist type ideology is certainly the biggest chunk of that. And I would also add to that that racially motivated violent extremists over recent years have been responsible for the most lethal activity in the US now this year, the lethal attacks, domestic terrorism, lethal attacks we have have, I think all fit in the category of anti government, anti authority, which covers everything from anarchist violent extremists to militia types.

[Nicole Wallace]

And let me again show you what Vaughn is talking about. Mary, these are J.D. vance's comments while he was hosting the late Charlie Kirk's show today about where he is alleging violence comes from.

While our side of the aisle certainly has its crazies, it is a statistical fact that most of the lunatics in American politics today are proud members of the far left.

And again, I just. Christopher Wray made those comments on September 17, 2020. Here's some more current data. This is from Cato. Politically motivated violence is rare in the United States. Quote, terrorists inspired by Islamist ideology are responsible for 87% of those murdered in attacks on US soil since 1975. Right wingers are second most common motivating ideology, accounting for 391 murders and 11% of the total. The definition here of right wing terrorists includes those motivated by white supremacy, anti abortion beliefs, involuntary celibacy and other right wing ideologies. Your thoughts about not the emotional reaction, but the distortion of the record of the facts?

[Mary McCord]

Well, I mean, this is just the, you know, count, count and give me a number with a whole bunch of zeros after it. That's how many times we've had the facts distorted under this presidency and Mr. Trump's first presidency and frankly while he was running for reelection during the Biden administration. I mean, what's always remarkable to me is that there are so many things and this particular example might not be one of them, but there are so many things where the facts are so readily available to the American public. January 6, 2021 we could all see it in videos and hear what was being said through the audio accompanying those videos. Yet the those who were charged and convicted of violently, violently attacking law enforcement, violently attacking the Capitol, trying to prevent the counting of the 2020 Electoral College ballots, I mean, those are the people that got vilified by Donald Trump. And I mean, those are the people who got made into saints by Donald Trump. And those who were involved in the investigation or the prosecution became vilified by Donald Trump. So we've turned facts on its head. But as to these particular statistics, I even if you don't look at sort of like back to 1975, even if you just look at the last several years, you can see that we are seeing violence from both sides, right? We are seeing that this is not all about whatever lunatic left means. And I don't know how you can have a statistic about lunatic left because I'm not aware of any research anywhere that puts people into those types of labels or those types of categories. But if you just look in the last few years at the violent attacks on people, the killing of Minnesota legislator and her husband, the attack, then you have the attack on Steve Scalise, that you have the attack on Paul Pelosi, Speaker Pelosi's then Speaker Pelosi's husband. I mean, we've, we're seeing more and more targeted attacks. They are on both sides of the aisle. And you know, this is not a one sided issue. And that's why what we've seen, the previous presidents and Governor Cox and others talking about is so important. To the extent we're at a point of inflection, we're not at something new. I've had reporters ask me over the last few days, wow, is this something really new? No, it's been the natural sort of escalation of political violence in this country. But because of the prominence of Charlie Kirk, because of where he was sort of in our political discourse, this is a moment that can be capitalized on by leaders to try to say, enough, let's come together, let's recognize that we do have a problem with violence, political violence, and let's try to take all that temperature down. But the one person most needed to do that is the one person who is least capable of or willing to do it, and that is the president. And I think that's partly because this is what he's been doing his entire career. I mean, he ran on division back in 2016. He ruled on division throughout his first administration. And he's ruling based on divisive politics right now. He doesn't have an interest, like Peter Baker said in that piece that you read from, he doesn't have an interest in representing everyone, just those with whom he agrees.

[Nicole Wallace]

So, Mary, what happens then?

[Mary McCord]

Well, you know, that's why I do think this is an important point. I think, I think it's really kind of incumbent on all of our other leaders, and that's across politics, but also people who are just admired in their communities and whatever their profession is. I mean, sometimes we come together the most when you see athletes and religious figures and, you know, your neighbors, right. Deciding that it's time to make a change. And we've gradually made changes in various directions over the course of history when the people have their voices heard and, you know, it's time to stop listening to the rhetoric that comes out of the president's mouth because at some point, I don't care how close you are to Donald Trump, you're probably going to get on the bad side of him. Ask all the number of people who have been fired by him. Right. You know, I wonder how Kash Patel is feeling right now. Right. Pretty mixed about how the president's treating him. And he hasn't even used these kind of choice words, at least not in public. So I think, you know, to the extent that anyone thinks that this is going to be like, I often think I hate this because I'd like to always appeal to people's better angels, but if nothing else, appeal to people's self interest. And people are interested in self preservation. They're interested in their own economic, you know, livelihoods. They're interested in keeping their family safe and making sure their family has access to, you know, education and health care and food, you know what? So focus in on that. Everyone at some point is going to become a target of Donald Trump. And if you think you're going to escape that, you're probably wrong. So maybe those voices of the people need to be the ones lifted up. And when people talk to each other, they're much less apt to be.

[Nicole Wallace]

You.

[Mary McCord]

Know, engaged in the kind of really nasty rhetoric that you see when there's distance, when it's social media or which when it's somebody behind a microphone, but not face to face. We need to get back to those face to face encounters.

[Nicole Wallace]

Gwen? Mary mentioned Kash Patel. This is NBC's latest reporting. We had you on last week with all of your great reporting, but this is NBC's latest reporting. FBI Director Kash Patel's activities during the investigation of Conservative activist Charlie Kirk's assassination raised questions about his decision making during a crisis. That's four former FBI officials and two administration officials talking to NBC News. From the shooting Wednesday to a suspect's arrest Friday, Patel took steps, gave pause to some federal and local officials, and raised questions about his judgment, the sources said. Several spoke anonymously. Those actions range from where Patel was on the evening of the assassination to what a former official described as his, quote, grandstanding about his own role after the arrest. Take us inside Kash Patel's sort of state of job security and how Donald Trump is feeling about him.

[Conservative Commentator]

Well, the question of job security is, as Mary articulated so well, really the decision of one individual. And at the moment, it seems like Patel is, in the short term sense, okay? I mean, a big move occurred this week in the arrival of Andrew Bailey, the former Republican Attorney General of Missouri, who was brought on ostensibly to layer over Dan Bongino, who himself, Cash Patel's number two, who himself got into some trouble. So the general belief for the past month or so has been that Bailey isn't just there to sort of to layer over Bongino, he's there to layer over Patel. And again, you have to look at these factions. Pam Bondi, Susie Wiles, the White House Chief of staff who was close to Pam Bondi, have been very negative on Cash Patel from the beginning, by the way. So has Jeanine Pirro, who is the U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C. who's close to Trump. And so they have felt that both Bongino and Patel, first and foremost have been disrespectful to Bondi in the Epstein affair, but also that he's just been kind of lost in space and stuck in this podcaster mode of self protection and self aggrandizement. And really, over the past 24 hours, we have seen actions out of Patel that were not even remotely imaginable from any other prior FBI director. Taking credit for watching like, taking credit for like this came through Fox, okay? But it was clearly authorized by people around Cash that he personally, to prove that Patel, Patel, mind you, played a central role in what was essentially the shooter's family turning him in to local police. Patel emphasized his role in overseeing evidence being loaded onto a plane. There was discussion of him observing the work of FBI agents. And most disturbingly, there are these accusations he made on Twitter that he, quote, unquote, in opposition to law enforcement officials, pushed hard to have a photo sent out. Now, look, I don't know how dysfunctional the FBI is at this point in time. But sending out a photo of a suspect is a relatively rudimentary decision. There is some dispute as to whether or not the photo of this suspect was sent out soon enough or why it might have been withheld. Might have been withheld because law enforcement agencies were concerned about tipping him off to knowing they were in his vicinity. We don't know any of this, but it's been this sort of orgy of self aggrandizement in a way that you have never seen from an FBI director. And I'll tell you what, when you bundle this with the firing of three senior FBI officials, including Brian Driscoll, who filed a devastating lawsuit against Cash Patel last week, saying he was obsessed with social media, essentially painting him as a lightweight who was in over his head. This has done nothing to bolster Patel's standing inside his own building. We focus on his relationship with Trump because he is focused on his relationship with Trump. But let's say he survives. What does this mean about his standing in his own building?

[Nicole Wallace]

It's such a thank you for bringing us back to the more important piece of his tenure there. We read big swaths of the lawsuit last week, an incredible look behind the curtain of Kash Patel's FBI. I need all of you to stick around. I want to show our audience some of the things you've referenced as well as Pete Buttigieg's response to Donald Trump targeting people who, in Trump's telling, quote, contributed to this atrocity. We'll do that on the other side of a break. Also ahead for us, a veteran prosecutor says she was fired because she is former FBI Director Jim Comey's daughter. But Maureen Comey is alleging in her sweeping lawsuit. Plus, brand new reporting undercutting allegations made by the Trump administration that Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook committed mortgage fraud. It was the basis for Trump firing her. And later in the program, Stephen Colbert and is now counseling canceled program win big at the Emmys will play his inspiring message for the country. All those stories and much more when DEADLINE White HOUSE continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.

[Commercial Announcer]

Your new beginning starts now. Dr. Horton has new construction homes available in Ellensburg and throughout the greater Seattle area. With spacious floor plans, flexible living spaces and home technology packages, you can enjoy more cozy moments and sweet memories in your beautiful new home. With new home communities opening in Ellensburg and throughout the Seattle area, Dr. Horton has the ideal home for you. Learn more at Dr. Horton.com Dr. Horton, America's builder and equal housing opportunity builder.

[Nicole Wallace]

I think that you have to have faith that in the end it'll all be okay. That no matter who wins a presidential election, we will live in a democracy. The First Amendment will govern what journalists can can say and do. The Constitution will protect the rights of everybody if you can agree that most people want those things. Our show is about trying to bend the arc toward that end result.

Deadline White House with Nicole Wallace, weekdays from 4 to 6pm Eastern on MSNBC. Start your day with the MSNBC daily newsletter. Each morning, read sharp insights from the voices you trust. Catch standout moments from your favorite shows.

The second Trump administration has gone to unprecedented, unprecedented lengths to radically transform America.

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

[Glenn Thrush]

I want to be really clear about this. This is an example of something that is hurting. We're not getting the leadership that we need to bring this country together from the White House. And in order to turn the tide of political violence, yes, we have to reject those who commit political violence. Yes, we have to reject those who celebrate or promote political violence. But also in order to deprive political violence of its power, we have to reject anyone who would try to exploit political violence. The response to this cannot be for the government to crack down on individuals or groups not because of violence, but because they challenge the government politically. We need to have free and open political debate and a healthy political process in this country. And by the way, just like an overwhelming majority of Americans reject violence, an overwhelming majority of Americans, left, right, and center believe that the government should not be cracking down on its political opponents because they are political opponents. Not in the United States of America, not ever.

[Nicole Wallace]

Glenn, Mary and Vaughn are all back. Vaughn, if you put that, you know, in a time capsule and sent it down from another planet and you played it and you didn't know it was, you'd wonder what he was talking about. How did we get here? How committed, I guess, is the question I want you to try to answer for me. And how insulated, I guess, is this White House mindset that you're describing that sets out to do exactly what Pete Buttigieg is warning against doing.

[Vaughn Hilliard]

They are very clearly intent. We have to take their words for what they are. They're speaking this out loud. These are not behind closed doors conversations that are leaking. The deputy chief of staff just a mere few hours ago said that this White House had to use every lever of the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security to dismantle left wing organizations that promote this idea of violence. He is arguing that there is a conspiracy, a network of organizations that were behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Let's be very clear at this point in time, there has been the furthest thing from any suggestion from any law enforcement entity of any organization or any financing or let alone any second individual, beyond the actual assassin in the shooter who is currently in custody being behind the killing of Charlie Kirk. Yet what you have heard is people like Steve Bannon suggest today that organizations like Antifa should be classified as a domestic terrorist organization. He even suggested transgender individuals. This idea that there's a conspiracy network of transgender individuals should be considered a terrorist organization. And when you're looking at here the realities, J.D. vance, for his part, provided the most insight you could say into what their plans may be. He referenced the Nation magazine, which is a longtime publication dating back to the Reconstruction era. He noted that there was an opinion piece that was written the other day about Charlie Kirk's passing that essentially said to not mourn his passing. And he suggested that George Soros was behind the funding of that publication, which is very not clear. But regardless, he is suggesting that there are things that can, can be done to take on what he calls these financiers of left wing radicalism. So of course they could go and try to take away tax exempt status, which is against the law. An executive branch official cannot order an investigation or tax exempt status for a non profit organization to be removed. But there's a lot of serious questions about exactly what they have planned. Because what is being alleged is not rooted in any evidence that is presented in any which way. And when we talk about the contrast, we have to go back to the fact that there were more than 100 Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, 3 percenters that were in fact charged by the Department of Justice for the violence that took place on January 6th. There were nine men that were convicted for a conspiracy to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer, the Governor of Michigan. And so, so every suggestion there is sort of rebutted by the fact that there is a clear history of organized crime on the right. And here that is not to suggest that there are not individuals who have violent intentions and of course pose serious threats to public officials and others. At the same time, what this White House is suggesting is that in the words of Stephen Miller, that they should take their angered focus is to dismantle these left wing organizations, yet have been far from presenting anything to suggest any actual connection between those who have Engaged in the crimes and these organizations that have promoted left or democratic ideals.

[Nicole Wallace]

I mean Mary, correct me if I'm wrong but I think this is in the counterterror world about material support and I think it's one of the tools Right. For fighting terrorism. And if you were to pull the thread, I think on what Vaughn is articulating and target or lay out a campaign like this to do it and I just want to go back to the data and quote it accurately. This is from Cato. Again, right wingers are the second most common motivating ideology beyond Islamist ideology accounting for 391 murders and 11% of the total. The definition here of right wing terrorists includes those motivated by white supremacy, anti abortion beliefs, involuntary celibacy and other right wing ideologies. A material support effort or campaign to go after the ideologies that lead to 11% of the murders and, and to investigate or come up with evidence for the other, which makes up 3%. I mean that's an extraordinary and dramatic and controversial thing to say, let alone do. But to just apply it to the side that they don't like when as you said, political violence has taken the lives of Democratic state representative in Minnesota just three months ago did severe damage to the husband of Nancy Pelosi. Gabby Giffords was shot. I mean it is not a problem that only has as its victims people on the right like Charlie Kirk. What do you think? One of the tactic and two of narrowing it to one side.

[Mary McCord]

Yeah, so there's like legal issues and factual issues with all of this. And it does remind me of the summer of 2020 when you had some similar comments made by the President and then Attorney General Bill Barr about considering sort of, you know, antifa and Black Lives Matter as, as, as terrorist or terrorist groups. First of all, there is no authority under U.S. law to designate domestic organizations as terrorist organizations. Foreign terrorist organizations is created by law. The criteria starts number one. Foreign. Right. It's got to be foreign. Foreign, it's got to be a threat, have the capability and intent to commit terrorist acts and three be a threat to U.S. persons or U.S. national security. So you don't meet the foreign criteria. So it would require a new legal regime to even consider something like actual designation that would then trigger the criminal prohibition on providing material support to that designated group. But factually you're exactly right. And I think this is why people have historically been nervous about creating new counterterrorism tools that would apply domestically. You know, I have previously said we lack and it's remains the truth to this day, we lack a general domestic terrorism criminal offense in the US code. You can there are 50 some terrorism offenses, but the most common types of terrorism in the US Is a crime committed using a firearm, whether it's a mass shooting or an assassination like we just saw. And unless you are associated with a foreign terrorist organization inspired by that foreign terrorist organization, are targeting a U.S. government official or U.S. property, use of a firearm is not going to be a terrorist offense. And I've at times pointed out this anomaly and the lack of moral equivalency. But I think that it would be, I think it would be very concerning to many people to create new tools. Now when we see the factual disparity here, when we see the weaponization out of this Department of Justice and this present, because what would those tools be used against? They'd be used against the disliked organizations, whether they actually pose the greatest threat or not. That is completely antithetical to what Director Reyes testified about many, many times. It's also antithetical the way that the FBI prioritizes its work. It has threat matrix, right. And those greatest threats have the greatest resources. So, you know, I think factually and legally, these kind of comments are are very concerning.

[Nicole Wallace]

Glenn Thrash, Mary McCord, Vaughn Hilliard, thank you so much for starting off us off today. These days all feel huge and historic and we're really lucky to have the three of you. Thank you. Coming up next for us, Maureen Comey, a highly regarded veteran prosecutor, is suing the Trump administration over her firing, saying that it violated the Constitution. We'll bring you that story next.

[Commercial Announcer]

Your new beginning starts now. Dr. Horton has new construction homes available in Ellensburg and throughout the greater Seattle area. With spacious floor plans, flexible living spaces and home technology packages, you can enjoy more cozy moments and sweet memories in your beautiful new home. With new home communities opening in Ellensburg and throughout the Seattle area, Dr. Horton has the ideal home for you. Learn [e-mail] Dr. Horton, America's builder and equal housing opportunity builder.

[Nicole Wallace]

I think that you have to have faith that in the end it'll all be okay. That no matter who wins a presidential election, we will live in a democracy, that the First Amendment will govern what journalists can say and do. The Constitution will protect the rights of everybody if you can agree that most people want those things. Our show is about trying to bend the arc toward that end result 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.

A career federal prosecutor who handled criminal cases against Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell has filed a lawsuit contesting her firing by the Trump. Maureen Comey, who is the daughter of former FBI Director Jim Comey and a 10 year veteran of the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, was abruptly fired back in July. Ms. Comey says in the lawsuit filed today that her termination was, quote, without cause, without advance notice and without any opportunity to contest it. It was unlawful and unconstitutional. She's arguing that the quote defendants fired Ms. Comey solely or substantially because her father is former FBI Director James Comey or because of her perceived political affiliation and beliefs, or both. Ms. Comey's lawsuit, filed in federal court in Manhattan, names as defendants the Office of the President, the Justice Department, Attorney General Pam Bondi and others. As the complaint spells out, Ms. Comey was an exemplary prosecutor. Quote, she helped protect the American public by securing hundreds of criminal convictions and participating in dozens of complex cases including prosec of homicides, racketeering and public corruption. Based on her outstanding record, she was assigned to prosecute high profile defendants including Sean Diddy, Combs, Robert Hayden, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. In recognition of her work, the Department of Justice repeatedly promoted and honored Ms. Comey. She was abruptly fired the day after the U.S. attorney's office had asked her to take the lead on a major public corruption case. And just three months after her latest receipt of an outstanding review, the White House and Department of justice have not responded to her lawsuit. Joining our coverage, former top official at the Department of Justice and MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissman is here at the table and New York Times investigative reporter MSNBC national security contributor Mike Schmidt is here. Mike, take us through the latest reporting on not just why she was fired, but what they will possibly say in defense of her lawsuit. It almost reads as an indisputable statement of fact.

[Andrew Weissman]

Well, it's interesting. In the lawsuit is a line about how the U.S. attorney Jay Clayton said to her that the, the order had come from Washington, that, you know, basically all he was going to say was that this had come down from Washington. The, the Part of this that. That I find most intriguing, especially from the retribution angle, is that more often than not, not all the time, but more often than not, the Trump administration embraces retribution. They don't really run from it. They don't come out and say, oh, no, no, Maureen Comey didn't file her receipts on time, or, Maureen Comey didn't turn off the light in her office, and that's why we're getting rid of her. They openly embrace retribution. They talk about it. The President talks about trying to use the criminal powers of the government against people. They have gone forward and purged the upper ranks of the FBI and the Justice Department and really hollowed them of their top investigators. So what will the administration ultimately say when they have to go to court to answer this, and how will they defend it? Now, they can obviously, as we've seen before, they can go to court and say one thing. Even when they meet, they mean another. But at the end of the day, she's essentially suing them for something that they're often proud of. They're often most proud of their retribution. It's not something they run from.

[Nicole Wallace]

Is it legal?

[Glenn Thrush]

That is such a great question. It should not be legal. And sometimes a small case where people are thinking, oh, one person was fired carries with it the seeds of a big issue. It's really very much what you asked, which is, is this lawful? Congress has said it is unlawful. There's a congressional statute, and this is something we've seen. There's so many examples that you have covered of congressional statutes that this administration blows through. Think of all of the immigration cases of the Alien Enemies Act. There's a civil service. Congress said that if you want to fire people who are career people like Maureen Comey, you need cause. What Mike was saying, there has to be a reason. They didn't even give us.

[Nicole Wallace]

It's like the opposite of reason. There's promotions and accolades. Well, it's.

[Glenn Thrush]

We can do it. We have the power to do it. And in some ways, they win no matter what, because she's not even, you know, the legal system will take a while. The most she would get is reinstatement and back pay. But she's still not there. She could also just get back pay. If you're the administration, you did something lawless. But the remedy is going to happen a lot later. Now, the argument that the government will have is they will say the President has the unilateral power to fire people, including when Congress has said they need cause. So just make sure everyone understands the big picture here. The reason your question's so right is this is the president saying, I do not have to follow a congressional statute. The fundamental nature of our government, which is division of power in order to secure liberty. You divide power between the courts, Congress and the president. And this is saying that congressional power, we are going to ignore that effort by Congress to protect people like Maureen Comey.

[Nicole Wallace]

I'm just sneaking a break. There's something that you can't look away from on the timeline. I understand the legal process will take a while, but the political process and the timing as it pertains to the Epstein scandal is whatever is stronger than notable. I'll tell you about it on the other side of a break. We'll all be right back. We're back with Andrew and Mike. You both lay out both the sort of hubris with which they do this and the legal dice that they're willing to roll. But here's the political backdrop against which they fired Maureen Comey. On July 15, Maureen Comey is asked to join a trial team for a major public corruption case. This is six months into the Trump administration, so not some holdover, you know, legal exercise. July 15th, the Wall Street Journal reporters email Caroline Levitt about their planned reporting on a purported letter sent by Trump to Epstein for Epstein's 50th birthday on July 15th. That's the day before Maureen Comey is fired. July 15th at 7:15pm at the White House's video of that gaggle, Donald Trump says, quote, these files were made up by Comey talking about the Epstein files before also blaming Obama and Biden inexplicably. July 16th. The next day, Maureen Comey's fired Trump again. Posts about the Epstein story being a hoax names Jim Comey, Chris Wray and other inexplicable Democrats. On July 17, the Wall Street Journal birthday book story is published. Mike Schmidt, do we know if these are just dots on a line or did Trump tell Jay Clayton? Is that where the line comes from? You know, get rid of her?

[Andrew Weissman]

I mean, obviously it's the biggest problem that happens when you fire someone in a situation like this and it looks political. It allows for a range of different potential explanations that largely implied nefarious motivations on behalf of the president. And it's one of the reasons why the president is supposed to not dip his hand into and get involved in matters like this. The thing about the Epstein case and the Epstein files that is most remarkable about all this is that if there is anyone in the entire US Government that understands the depth and breadth of what the Epstein files are. And you know what? By that, I mean what the federal government collected in its different investigations into Jeffrey Epstein. It's Maureen Comey. She is the person who led the prosecutions related to these files. She was one of the leads on that. She's obviously someone who is respected in the department for being steeped in the facts. So if there is anyone who understands what the Epstein files are, it is Maureen coming.

[Nicole Wallace]

Well, Andrew Weissman, I guess you could argue that both ways. I mean, you've got Thomas Massie, a Republican, and Ro Khan, a Democrat, wanting to get to the bottom of the Epstein files. Should they call her?

[Glenn Thrush]

Well, just remember, they could call her. Absolutely. And by her bringing this lawsuit, assuming it gets to the discovery phase, I mean, she gets to be deposed and take evidence and testify. I mean, so the information that is in her head, that is everything that people have been clamoring for, whether it's there or not, she's going to know. And she's going to also know whether Glenn Maxwell was truthful in the most recent interview where the deputy attorney general dangled a carrot and then gave her the carrot, which was a can after that. And I would, let's say educated guess is that Maureen Comey would have strong views about whether Ghislaine Maxwell was truthful. A big, big picture here, though, to pull back is why would you want to get rid of somebody who's got this much experience or who's good at.

[Nicole Wallace]

Putting pedophiles in jail? Isn't that arguably something everyone still agrees? Maybe not. Mike Schmidt, thank you for your reporting on this and for joining us today. Andrew sticks around a little bit longer. We have to sneak in one more break. We'll be right back. Speaking of the Epstein files, we are keeping an eye on the House's investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. NBC News has confirmed this afternoon that the estate of Jeffrey Epstein turned over additional materials to the House Oversight Committee last week. In that second batch of materials, the estate's lawyers included two updated pages from the birthday book for Jeffrey Epstein's 50th birthday, telling the committee that they had unredacted one name that does not appear to fit within the categories of potential victims. The lawyers also say they have provided another of Epstein's contact books redacted to protect the names of potential victims. They told the committee that they will make the original unredacted book available for members of Congress to view. This comes as the Hill reports that some Republicans are now saying it is inevitable that Congress will pass that legislation directing AG Pambondi to release all files the DOJ possesses related to Jeffrey Epstein. We will stay on top of this story and bring you any more updates as we get them. Coming up for us in the next hour of Deadline, White House how Donald Trump is threatening to wreck an institution that sits at the the beating heart of the global economy, the Federal Reserve, and how his interference could have some grave consequences. That story is next.