← Deadline: White House
Deadline: White House
“The worst of the worst”
01:26:44
Nicolle Wallace covers the Epstein Scandal as victims plea for more transparency and denounce the Trump administration's handling of the case.
Loading summary
Transcript148 lines
- [00:00]
Nicole Wallace
Deadline.
- [00:01]
Frank Figliuzzi
White House is brought to you by.
- [00:03]
Nicole Wallace
Progressive, where drivers who save by switching save nearly $750 on average.
- [00:08]
Frank Figliuzzi
Plus auto customers qualify for an average of 7 discounts. Quote now@progressive.com to see if you could.
- [00:14]
Nicole Wallace
Save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates.
- [00:17]
Frank Figliuzzi
National average 12 month savings of $744.
- [00:20]
Nicole Wallace
By new customers surveyed who save with Progressive between June 2022 and May 2023. Potential savings will vary. Discounts not available in all states and situations. Hey, I'm Frank and I have Hidradenitis suppurativa HS. Before starting Cosentyx, I was so uncomfortable.
- [00:39]
Frank Figliuzzi
With my symptoms, like not being able to sleep on white sheets or wear white clothes.
- [00:44]
Nicole Wallace
Now I can appreciate the little things.
- [00:47]
Alex Wagner
Cosentic Secukinumab is prescribed for adults with moderate to severe Hidradenitis suprativa.
- [00:53]
Frank Figliuzzi
Hs.
- [00:54]
Alex Wagner
Don't use if allergic to Cosentyx. Get checked for TB before starting.
- [00:58]
Nicole Wallace
Increased risk of infections and lowered ability.
- [01:00]
Alex Wagner
To fight them may occur like TB.
- [01:02]
Nicole Wallace
Or other serious bacterial, fungal or viral infections.
- [01:05]
Alex Wagner
Some were fatal. Tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms like fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough, had a vaccine or planned to, or if IBD symptoms develop or worsen serious allergic reactions and severe eczema like skin reactions may occur. Learn more at 1-844-cosentyx or cosentyx.com you're stronger than HS.
- [01:27]
Frank Figliuzzi
Ask your dermatologist about Cosenty.
- [01:35]
Nicole Wallace
Hi there everyone. It's 4 o' clock in the east. It is contemptible, yes. Despicable? You bet. Shameful. Immoral. Reprehensible. Wrong. Check, check, check and check. But while there are a thousand ways to describe the Trump administration's approach to handling the Jeffrey Epstein crisis today let's the one we'll start off with this afternoon is instructive because one can learn a lot about the totally upside down and backward dynamic of the ongoing spiraling debacle and crisis simply by observing who Team Trump is taking great care to accommodate who they're treating with care and public displays of respect and courtesy. That group evidently does not include the most essential humans, the most essential figures of the entire saga, the victims of Jeffrey Epstein and his longtime girlfriend and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, responding to reports today that the Epstein matter will be among the topics of discussion at a strategy session tonight that features VP JD Vance, Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, AG Pam Bondi and her deputy Todd Blanche. The family of Virginia Giuffre released a statement that reads in part missing from this group is, of course, any survivor of the vicious crimes of convicted perjurer and sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. Their voices must be heard. Above all, we also call upon the House subcommittee to invite survivors to testify as Virginia Roberts Giuffre's siblings. We offer to represent her in her stead, and we hope the administration takes our call to action seriously. Any information that may be released by the government should take into account the survivors who wish to remain anonymous. For their safety and well being, they should be consulted first. We reiterate that Ghislaine Maxwell should have remained in a maximum security prison and does not deserve the luxuries currently afforded her. Now, that last part of the statement from Jeffrey's family is essential to an informed observation of the Trump administration's very public actions, because the Washington Post has stunning new details today on Ghislaine Maxwell's new accommodations. They follow her cooperation with the Justice Department at the Bryan Federal Prison Camp, a minimum security facility in Texas that resembles a college campus much more than what you would think a prison looks like. From that piece, quote, someone gave special preference to Maxwell that to my knowledge, no other inmate currently in the Federal Bureau of Prisons has received. That's according to Robert Hood, a former warden of the Florence supermax prison in Colorado, home to some of the world's most notorious criminals and on the opposite end of the security spectrum from Bryan. Quote, it is a country club, Hood said of the camp about 100 miles northwest of Houston. Inmates, if they have a sex offense, are not going to a place like that, period. It is truly unheard of, end quote. That alone enough to make one's blood boil just reading those quotes. But to actually hear one of Jeffrey Epstein's accusers address Maxwell's recent special treatment is something else entirely. So watch. How does that make you feel? Obviously, not really good. Sorry. I'm extremely upset.
- [05:21]
Glenn Thrush
I'm angry.
- [05:22]
Nicole Wallace
I'm disgusted. To be denied your innocence, denied your justice, and then to have your healing.
- [05:30]
Glenn Thrush
Taken away from you without any consent.
- [05:33]
Nicole Wallace
It really feels like a part of me is dying inside. Ghislaine Maxwell doesn't deserve any mercy. She doesn't deserve any grace. She deserves nothing. To be clear, Ghislaine Maxwell is in prison for her counts of child exploitation and trafficking. Why would anybody give somebody like her, who is a monster and a liar.
- [05:56]
Glenn Thrush
A time of day to explain anything?
- [05:58]
Nicole Wallace
She doesn't know anything. And if she did, she would have already had the opportunity to speak. That opportunity has passed that is where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. New York Times Justice Department reporter Glenn Thrush is here. Also joining us, MSNBC senior political analyst Alex Wagner is here. And joining us, host of the Bulwark Podcast, MSNBC political analyst Tim Miller is here as well. Glenn Thrush, what is our current understanding or knowledge or what has been confirmed and reported out about the sequence of events between Todd Blanche's with Ghislaine Maxwell and a waiver being granted so that Ghislaine Maxwell moves to this prison being described by Mr. Hood as a place that is, quote, unheard of for convicted sex offenders?
- [06:51]
Glenn Thrush
Well, it seems to have been sequential. We know that there's correlation. We don't know if there's causation. But one thing happened and then the next thing happened a couple of days later. I've covered BoP for a really long time. You know, Maxwell was not in a particularly restrictive facility in the first place. And we've heard from some of our reporting that she was doing fairly well, wasn't having any really physical issues, no disciplinary problems behind bars. This is a pretty remarkable development. We too have heard the same thing, that this is not a common step down. This is for people who are typically, quote, unquote, not victimless crimes, but white collar criminals who've done paper crimes. And I should just tell you, in general, the Bureau of Prisons, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, is a wreck right now. The administration has proposed massive cuts to the Bureau of Prisons. And, you know, I get a lot of incoming from the families of prisoners about conditions all the time. I probably get three or four emails a week from lawyers and the families of prisoners complaining about rat infestation, terrible food, awful conditions, short staffing at prisons. So to be given an opportunity to go to one of the crown jewels of the system does raise a lot of questions. The president and I think Blanche himself has said that they did not necessarily order this, but they have broad latitude to make these determinations. And clearly it happened after the meeting.
- [08:30]
Nicole Wallace
What Glenn Thrush, is your understanding of the purpose of this strategy session tonight and the discussion about Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
- [08:45]
Glenn Thrush
Beats me. You know, like, again, I'm just totally stumped. I think the people that I've spoken to today in both the White House and the Justice Department are completely flummoxed. They don't know, A, they don't know why this thing would happen in the first place, and B, why anyone would publicize it. You know, this is the kind of meeting you might want to hear about after the fact, the fact that someone leaked information about it coming out to CNN really defeats the purpose. And now we're hearing mixed messages. I don't even know if it's going to happen. My general sense was that it was intended by Vance as a way to calm down what is a pretty agitated finger pointing relationship between the Bureau, the FBI and the Justice Department. Patel and Bondi claim to get along really, really well. There's been a lot of tension. Kash Patel's coming back from a 10 day to two week trip that included a stop off in New Zealand. So he was out of Dodge when the Epstein was hitting the fan, which did not go unnoticed in the Department of Justice. But Bondi's real beef is with Dan Bongino who literally at this meeting, I guess it's about a month ago, in Susie Wiles presence, made it very clear that he did not like Bondi and subsequently that she ought to resign. As of our reporting, Susie Wiles, the chief of staff is an interesting character in this as well. She has been in the past close to Bondi and she really wasn't happy with the way that Bongino spoke to her or to Bondi. So I presume that this was a kind of a smoking of the peace pipe meeting. But look, I can't figure out what their PR strategy is on this. There doesn't seem to be one. It just seems to be a lack of impulse control. Like watch would you keep having. Why would you publicize a meeting about a story you want to go away? They just keep from my perspective as somebody who's covered White Houses and other departments of justice, when you've got a story that is really a sinkhole, you try not to feed that again. It just I think speaks to the fact that this is kind of an, you know, for all of the claims that a lot of folks in the White House make about this being a more disciplined operation the second time around, it really has kind of devolved, particularly with the Epstein thing, which has put a lot of pressure on everybody into an every man and woman for themselves scenario.
- [11:19]
Nicole Wallace
I took a look, Glenn Thrush at the I'm sorry to seem to pick on you, Glenn, but I just want to get a couple of facts into the record to inform our discussion. I looked at some of the pardons and they include conventional men convicted of seditious conspiracy, they include fraudsters, they don't include any other sex offenders. So I wonder if you are aware of any. And to be clear, Trump has not pardoned Ghislaine Maxwell. There is this sequence where Todd Blanche visits her, and then within days, a waiver is granted and she's moved to this prison that resembles a college campus. Is there any precedent where Donald Trump has ever pardoned a convicted child sex trafficker or convicted sex criminal?
- [12:09]
Glenn Thrush
I don't believe so, but I will say there's been a lot of recidivism among the January 6th crowd. And, Nicole, I'm really glad that you pointed that out, because so much water has been under the bridge that we don't even have a bridge anymore. Right. But the very first thing at Donald Trump, Trump did was this mass pardon of the J6ers, which, by the way, I should point out, Pam Bondi during her confirmation hearing said would never happen. Okay, so you have a scenario here in which he gave a blanket clemency to people who supported him. And it's my understanding from reporting we've done and other people have done, maybe you guys know better than me that there has. There's been recidivism. I think there's been at least one or two instances of domestic violence. And I think we also wrote a couple weeks ago some coverage about somebody been pardoned during the first term who also had significant issues. So I don't think it's anyone who has been convicted of that particular crime, but I think it's folks who have been either granted clemency or pardons who have then committed other crimes once they've gotten off the hook.
- [13:12]
Nicole Wallace
Okay, so, Alex Wagner, I guess what's clear to me is that every day that passes, Trump generates more questions. And my question is, if you're committed to sending, quote, the worst of the worst to seekot in El Salvador, why are you treating a convicted child sex trafficker the way they're treating Ghislaine Maxwell? Do you have a theory on why they're so comfortable with the public projections of leniency for Maxwell?
- [13:47]
Tim Miller
Well, I think they're very comfortable with sending brown people or treating brown people in extrajudicial fashion. So I think they're incredibly comfortable sending brown people to see cot or wherever they want to, because the Trump candidacy and presidency is fueled largely on xenophobia and a latent, if not explicit, racism. So that I think I'll just put that in that bucket there. Ghislaine Maxwell. I am surprised by how explicit the quid pro quo seems to be at this point. I mean, you say she's been put up in a detention center that resembles a college campus. There are arts and Crafts classes there. Inmates can train dogs as part of their work training programs. There's a recreational program, I mean, I think of that sort of the enjoyment of those activities, in contrast to the recruitment and sexual trafficking of children, who I'm sure would have much rather been doing arts and crafts or playing with dogs or otherwise enjoying the fresh air rather than being, I guess, stolen into a sex trafficking ring by Ghislaine Maxwell for the pleasure and purposes of Jeffrey Epstein and his coterie of powerful friends. I mean, the irony is too weak a word to use. The cruelty of that asymmetry, the cruelty of those two realities should never be, I think, forgotten in this moment as Ghislaine Maxwell is transferred and gets really effectively a new lease on life. And these scores of victims are not only who invested, as their lawyers say, personally and emotionally in the justice system, not only got cheated out of their childhood, but now have to watch a woman who has been charged and found guilty in these crimes allowed to enjoy life in a way that they never can and maybe never will be able to. So, I mean, I think there's a gross miscalculation on the part of Trump and his allies in this changing of Ghislaine Maxwell's incarceration and how wrong that clearly is and how much that will strike the sort of a deeply emotional cord with the victims, and it's now finally causing them to come out. That is not what Trump wants. Trump thinks he can sort of pay lip service to not wanting to hurt the victims and making sure that, you know, if the grand jury transcripts are released, no one who's been hurt will be hurt more. But the reality is everything he's doing is hurting these victims more, and he's pushed it to the point that they are now speaking out through their lawyers. I do not think this is the end of the conversation if there is further clemency or goodwill shown to Ghislaine Nat Maxwell, my expectation would be you're going to be hearing more from the victims. These women have. These people have suffered in ways that we can't possibly imagine. And that suffering, and that the concern about their suffering is shared not just by their lawyers and family, but people in the MAGA world who want these Epstein files released to begin with. Right. There is a whole series of people who, I think, will be enraged by everything that's to happen, going, going on. And I think, to answer the question, you know, Glenn was posing, what's the strategy? The strategy is no strategy. The strategy is CYA and the why in that is is actually a T. Trump. I know that's a lot of different initials, but the reality is there's only one sir at heart. And it's, you know, like there, there is no strategy because they're trying to clean up his mess.
- [17:21]
Nicole Wallace
But I guess, Tim, what I'm getting at is how big is his message? Like, how big is the iceberg under the surface? This is an issue over which Joe Rogan has drawn a line in the sand. Now they're doing things to distract and we'll get to them later. And they have distracted in sort of the dark recesses of Twitter or whatever it's called now. But it hasn't worked in the manosphere because the manosphere didn't care about the things they're using to distract with. It's a point that Angelo made earlier in the week and I went and sussed it out on my own. And it's true. It bears out the. The sort of MAGA adjacent comedians were never big. Mueller is evil. Guys, I don't know that they know who Andrew Weissman and Robert Mueller are or care. So the distraction, the optics around the distraction are also a big shiny object and a distraction in and of itself. But the people for whom the idea of a massive deep state cover up, protecting the powerful men and accomplices around Jeffrey Epstein mean something. The people who feel betrayed, the people who are out there saying this is a line in the sand, the Joe Rogans and people in that orbit have made clear that they're not going to be treated as fools. They've said, what do they think we are, babies? So all the conduct that treats the people who care about this issue like babies and fools is mind boggling to me because their problem is that their desperation is showing. They're acting guilty. And I'm left wondering, what is it that they're trying to hide that they're comfortable with the optics of Ghislaine Maxwell, who I didn't understand participated in the actual sexual abuse. Tara, I know you've had Tara Palmeri on your podcast too. She described that it was Ghislaine Maxwell who told several of the victims and survivors to take off their panties, that she engaged in the sex act. She is. I mean, that is. That is child rape. I mean, she is a convicted sexual criminal. And I wonder what you make of the fact that everything they do projects whatever the opposite of innocence and transparency is.
- [19:31]
Maya Wiley
Yeah, no, that's right. Look, on the Ghislaine Maxwell thing, just really quick. Yes, she was participating in the Child rape, essentially. She also was like, essentially the ringleader of an effort to groom dozens, maybe hundreds of kids of young girls into essentially sex slavery. Right. Like, her job was you would go recruit like 14 to 17 year old girls, also some older young women. She would recruit these girls and have them come over to the house, sometimes participate in the sex, sometimes tell them what Jeffrey liked, and then would hold money over them, would hold threats over them to keep them in his clutches, I'm sorry to use such a gross term, for a period of time. And so what she did was monstrous. And so going back to what you and Glenn were talking about, I've also talked to folks, I don't have this 100% on sources, but the sense is that there's not any other sex offenders in a low security prison like hers of any type. So, I mean, not that, you know, you ought to rank the different types of sex crimes, but, like, Glenn's is about the worst. It's about as bad as you can do. I mean, like recruiting dozens of girls into, you know, a quasi sex slavery. I mean, what is worse than that? And she's the only one with any sex crimes that gets this kind of treatment. Something is a misstep. It's not like an accident. It's not like, oh, it's a quinky dink that Todd Blanche went down there and three days later, she has the best treatment of any sex offender in the entire federal prison prison system. Like, there's a deal that has happened there. So, like, why are they willing to do that? Back to your original question. I don't know. I do this. The other fact that we know that, we can just say, which is they have a file of the Times that Trump was mentioned in the Epstein files, and they've admitted to it. They said that they had FBI officials that were looking through. They had a Microsoft SharePoint file they flagged every time Trump was named. So if it's not that bad and whatever is in there is better than, you know, the perception of putting Ghislaine in this prison, then they could just put that out and they have it.
- [21:41]
Nicole Wallace
It's. It gets murkier and weirder by the day. You're all sticking around for the hour ahead for us. Five people were shot today at an army base in Georgia. The suspect is an active duty army sergeant. Will have the latest on that story. Also later in the program, brutal new public polling for Donald Trump shows that the American public has soured on a lot of things, including his handling of immigration. The economy, just about everything. We'll have all those stories and more when Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.
- [22:16]
Alex Wagner
Saturday, October 11th from New York City.
- [22:19]
Nicole Wallace
It'S MSNBC Live 25.
- [22:22]
Glenn Thrush
Join your favorite MSNBC hosts Rachel Maddow.
- [22:25]
Nicole Wallace
Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski, Nicole Wallace, Ari Melber, Alicia Menendez, Simone Sanders Townsend, Michael Steele, Chris Hayes, jen Psaki, Lawrence O', Donnell, Stephanie Ruhle and more. Visit msnbc.comlive25 to buy your tickets today.
- [22:45]
Maya Wiley
Hey everyone, it's Chris Hayes. This week on my podcast, why Is this Happening?
- [22:49]
Nicole Wallace
Journalist and author E. Jean Carroll, I.
- [22:51]
Anne Applebaum
Came to love the process of the judicial system and I found it very exonerating. I got to tell my story in court. I got to tell my story when thousands of millions of people called me a liar. So it was very satisfying.
- [23:08]
Nicole Wallace
That's this week on why Is this Happening?
- [23:09]
Maya Wiley
Search for why Is this Happening? Wherever you're listening right now and follow.
- [23:13]
Alex Wagner
Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.
- [23:16]
Nicole Wallace
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?
- [23:27]
Glenn Thrush
Main justice and more.
- [23:29]
Nicole Wallace
Plus new episodes of all your favorite.
- [23:31]
Glenn Thrush
MSNBC shows ad free and ad free.
- [23:34]
Nicole Wallace
Listening to all of Rachel Maddow's original series, Ultra Bagman and Deja News. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. We're back with Glenn, Alex and Tim. So Alex, I I said that Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted of rape. That's not technically accurate. Just read what she was convicted of. On December 29, 2021, following a one month jury trial, she was convicted of conspiracy to entice minors to travel, to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts, transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts, sex trafficking, conspiracy and sex trafficking of a minor. To this pardon conversation, we've all covered the pardons as outrageous but not illegal, right? Donald Trump has complete authority. The pardon power is absolute and that's why some of the recidivism that Glenn's talking about is hard for us to recall. There is a gentleman, I think named Jonathan Braun who was pardoned by Donald Trump in his first term. He went on to beat children, including children that weren't his own, as well as a couple of adults. There are a couple of January six insurrectionists who were pardoned who have gone on to commit other crimes. I think one even died, but I'm not sure if he was committing a crime at the time, the idea that pardoning the worst of the worst, if you will, to borrow a phrase, has become normalized, seems to numb the senses in this story. But the piece of this that feels tricky for Trump is that child sex trafficking animates a massive part of his coalition. I mean, QAnon is ostensibly animated most fervently around child sex trafficking rings the world over. I mean, what's your political read of the stakes of this?
- [25:32]
Tim Miller
Well, I mean, there was a coalition that was very much also part of Trump's base that was demanding the release and to some degree, the celebration of January 6th. Insurrectionists.
- [25:42]
Nicole Wallace
Right.
- [25:42]
Tim Miller
That's part of the. His group of people. Those are people inside his tent. There is no such coalition for Ghislaine Maxwell. In fact, as you point out, quite the opposite in part, Nicole. Because starting in 2015, Trump started whipping up his supporters to get their hands on to be interested in and demand the release of the Epstein files. He was the one that first brought up Bill Clinton being on Epstein Island. I mean, we can set aside the hubristic behavior on display for someone who, who knows they're in the Epstein files, stoking the flames of conspiracy and paranoia around the Epstein files and promising their release. However, explicitly or indirectly, knowing this day would come, Trump has been stoking interest in paranoia and rage in and around Jeffrey Epstein and what he's done. And so this is a problem, of course, of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's making, but also of Donald Trump's making. And now he's in a position where he could basically be forced to pardon or offer clemency to one of the two very people he has spent the better part of a decade vilifying and again, ensuring, are seen as the Antichrist by a significant portion of his own base. I mean, I am no one, I think, at this point point, to beg to understand the strange, twisted psychology of our president. But the reality is this is so beyond the. I mean, we keep asking, like, what are the politics of this? What is the strategy of this? It all rests in the sort of personal, twisted interests and the strange mindset of a man who was involved with Jeffrey Epstein, then used Jeffrey Epstein as a political cudgel to gain traction in a political presidential race he never thought he would win, and now faces the sort of the chickens coming home to roost on all those promises and cares, not reallyi mean cares about staying in the presidency, but does not have any allegiance to the victims, does not have any allegiance to his Deputies who. Fellow conspiracists who he appointed to the highest offices in terms of the Justice Department and the Vice presidency. He has no interest in their political survival. The only thing he has interest in is papering over his trail of wrongdoing as it concerns Jeffrey Epstein. So I think politics are out the window on this. I mean, he has now painted himself into an extraordinary corner where he could very well have to offer Ghislaine Maxwell something in return for political. We won't call it suicide, but a serious hit. The polling shows that EPSTEIN More than 80. Any other issue, Nicole is resonating with Trump's people. They do not approve his handling of it. They believe he has something to hide. They believe his name is in the files. Like the politics of this are the strangest and most tortured that I have seen. Maybe in the Trump presidency.
- [28:46]
Nicole Wallace
Tim. They require some anthropological skills that I haven't had to deploy in this job for several years. But here's why this matters. Donald Trump is able to do a lot of the damage that he does because the party you and I were once a part of has bent, buckled, broken. And they're doing things that he asked them to do that they've never thought were a good idea. Things like abandoning Ukraine at the beginning of his presidency. Things like tariffs, which they all know are taxes. But the more unpopular he gets, I think the question we've asked for nine years becomes more relevant. Will they find. I won't call it a spine, but will they find a pulse? And I just want to put up the polling on this because it sort of. It makes me do the most infuriating thing I ever do. Ask if they'll ever stand up to him, which I know you and I both think is probably not. But let me put up the polling anyway. The Trump administration is hiding information about the Epstein. 63% of all Americans. Special prosecutors should investigate DOJ's handling of Epstein. 59% of Americans. TRUMP was once good friends with Jeffrey Epstein. 67% of Americans have seemingly seen the picture of them boogieing side by side. A list of Epstein's clients exists. That's the highest number. That's what they want. 71% of all Americans believe a list of Epstein's client exists. Now, this is from the same poll. Who do you blame? Who's responsible for hiding the information? The person at 81% isn't Bondi, isn't Patel, it's Trump. 81% of all Americans think that Donald Trump is the person, the single person responsible for hiding information about the Epstein case, Bondi's second, but down 22 points below that at 59%. Kash Patel, maybe this is why Clint Thresh says he's been gone for two weeks. Is the down at 49%. Johnson, Speaker Johnson at 47%. Federal bureaucrats only 34% blame them. And congressional Democrats, only 16% blame congressional Democrats. I mean, 81% of all Americans don't agree on much of anything except maybe the need for gun safety reforms. But 81% is a lot. Yeah.
- [31:05]
Maya Wiley
And I think this kind of informs some of those other questions you were talking about in the first segment, which is like, what is their strategy? What are they doing? Like, what are their effects effective at this? I don't know. But Trump is trying to triage his core base. Right. You were talking about the Manosphere guys and the Rogan guys. So a lot of people that were added this last cycle, I think it's gonna be hard for them to find a winner on this one. With them, maybe there's been some reporting, I guess, that Todd Blanche might wanna go on Rogan. To me, I feel like that would be a disaster for him, but maybe they will try. But a lot of the other strategy is triaging that core base, and that is simultaneously with the distractions, but also, you know, by trying to do the subpoenas of the Clintons and subpoenas of the other people. Right. Like any. Anything possible to make this less about Trump. And I think that has, like, is kind of working. Right. Like, obviously that poll still shows he'll still hold him accountable, but. Right. What is the intensity of people's anger at Trump? Are they going to be more upset about other things like blue jeans ads or whatever? Right. Whatever Fox wants to talk about today. And. And you're starting to see folks come around on that. And I think that, you know, the interesting thing, when you go into this August recess with all these guys at the town halls, what are they going to be yelled at about? What do they feel like their biggest threat is? Is their biggest threat losing the general by sticking with Trump, or is still their biggest threat, Donald Trump, turning on them and threatening them? And I just think that as of right now, these Republicans still think that the biggest threat that faces them politically is that they turn into Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney. And obviously, to me, that wouldn't be a threat. That would be a tribute to them if they did that. If they're trying to survive, they think the best thing they can do still is stick around Trump. And I Think his number has to get even lower than this for that calculus to change.
- [32:51]
Nicole Wallace
81% of all Americans believe Donald Trump is the person, the single person responsible for hiding information about the Jeffrey Epstein case. Glenn, I'm going to put you on the spot one more time on the other side and ask what on earth could come out of tonight's strategy session to do anything to that number. Donald Trump has told everyone for years now that only he can fix things. He was standing on his own roof doing something last night that feels like an immovable challenge for them. We'll give you two minutes to think about it. We'll be right back. On the other side of the break, everyone's back. So, Glenn, this is the UMass poll that we've been covering today that has 81% of Americans who believe Trump is solely responsible for hiding information about the Epstein case. What is your sense of what his advisers could do if they wanted to do to fix that number? 81%.
- [33:50]
Glenn Thrush
Some kind of mass amnesia campaign, perhaps something in the drinking water to replace fluoride that will make people forget Epstein ever existed? Look, I think what they're going to, we've discussed this before. What they're mulling doing is putting out some version of Todd Blanche's conversation with Maxwell in Florida, probably not the entire conversation. Have Blanche discuss it in some detail. I've been hearing from my sources at Blanche, who interestingly has kind of stepped in front of Pam Bondi on this and has become the face of the DOJ response. He is, by the way, we should say, Trump's former personal lawyer and the most powerful deputy attorney general by far in the history of the department to the point where his power rivals his bosses. He's been very anxious about his reputation and is looking to do something dramatic over the next week or two. We've also heard about a potential effort to potentially release more records in another controlled way. But the truth of the matter is they painted themselves into a corner and they are not going to put out substantial amounts of information that are going to be damaging to Trump or to people that he associates with. Bondi has already said that most of the video evidence they have 10,000 hours or more involves pornography or other inappropriate images. So they can't put that stuff out. I just think anything they do next incrementally is just going to be contribute to the sense that they're going to have a cover up. I think time could heal this. And as you alluded to earlier and we've written quite a bit about, is this grand jury investigation that is intended as a grand distraction, an attempt to name and shame people and kind of move the department onto the attack. But, you know, my sense is, like, they have a great advantage that this is taking place in August when fewer eyes are on this. And I think Trump is going to have to president. You know, he's obviously moving ahead on a potential peace deal in Ukraine. I think something like that could eclipse this. But in terms of dealing with this situation, anything they do is going to beI was talking to a DOJ person today. Pretty much anything they put out. Everyone is just going to feed the, you know, the Epstein conspiracy industrial complex. And people are going to make money and increase viewership and get more Twitter followers, followers over accusing Trump and the administration of covering stuff up, the same thing that Trump and Maga did when they were out of power. So, like, what can they do? I don't know.
- [36:47]
Nicole Wallace
I mean, Alex Glenn offers a pretty candid articulation of where we are. The truth is, a lot of people hate this story. Our viewers would much rather us be covering the destruction of democracy. And I know what story he's talking about, and I understand why he's covered it. We've never covered it here. There is a politically motivated and questionably sourced grand jury investigation into something that Marco Rubio, as chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigated and said the, quote, most comprehensive investigation into the origins of the Russia probe came to the same conclusion as the same people that are investigating. So it's absolute, to borrow a phrase from Bill Barr, bullshit. But I understand that because it's the Department of Justice, even though they are all Trump's former criminal defense lawyers, we have to cover it. The thing about this story is that it will expose, reveal, or simply illuminate the abject corruption of the highest levels of the government. I mean, the reason this story, before you get to all the other news, is that this is why that coalition sent him there. They sent him there because the coalition thought he was on the side of Maria Farmer, who yesterday is one of the victims, one of the survivors who wrote a letter saying, quote, over 1,000 victims suffered from Epstein and Maxwell's actions. To date, however, the combined forces of the country's law enforcement agencies have only ever arrested these two individuals in connection with crimes committed against countless young girls and women. And the government's recent suggestion that no further criminal investigation are forthcoming is a cowardly abdication of its duties to protect and serve. So take all the other actors out of this. The QAnon part of the coalition the manosphere voices, Democrats, Republicans and journalists. That's where the victims are. That's where the victims are. And they aren't going anywhere. And so I guess my question for you is what is owed to the victims at this point?
- [38:47]
Tim Miller
Well, let me just say two things. I know what grand jury we're talking about and what investigation you don't want to talk about on the show. And I don't want to break that seal except to say we'll cover it.
- [38:56]
Nicole Wallace
No, no, no, we'll cover it. We'll cover it. We'll be covering it.
- [39:00]
Tim Miller
I do. I think there is an aspect of it that is very real and that is the threat it poses to President Barack Obama and the people, some of whom appear regularly on your show, who are his former advisors, who Trump has put directly in peril by suggesting that he and his advisors are guilty of treason. And while they will not bear any criminal prosecution for that, because there is no there there, the reality is that there are a lot of Trump supporters, including released January 6th convicts or those awaiting sentencing, who are demanding retribution, who say we were put in jail wrongly. When is someone going to be arrested for that? And that is a very real threat against a former president of the United States and something that should be taken seriously. And I think if there's a meaning, if there's a gravity to all of this beyond just trying to distract the American public from the Epstein drama, it is the threat that Trump is directly issuing to Barack Obama, to the Epstein piece, I will say, Nicole, I don't think we should think this is just about Trump because in, and I'm with Dan Pfeiffer on this, this is a cover up that will, at the end of it involve the House of Representatives and the speaker of the House trying to dismiss the recess, the House early in a favor to Donald Trump, the Justice Department cooking up investigations and lying to the American public and the presidency itself. That is on the level of Iran Contra or Watergate. And we should not let this just be about Trump and his sort of political survival on the decisions he's making as an individual. He has wrapped all of the party and all of the firmament of the executive branch in this controversy of his own creation.
- [40:42]
Nicole Wallace
That is absolutely, absolutely all 1,000% true. I want to associate myself with everything my friend and colleague Alex Wagner just said. I'll let it be the last word on this. Thank you guys so much. Glenn Thrush, Alex Wagner and Tim Miller. When we come back, we'll bring you the latest on top. Today's shooting at the army base in Georgia. Breaking news out of Georgia where in just the last hour officials provided an update on the shooting at the Fort Stewart army base. Five soldiers were shot and that the suspect who is now in custody is an active duty army sergeant. All the victims were treated on site before being transferred to a nearby hospital and all are in stable condition. The shooting prompted the base, which is home to more than 10,000 people, to remain on lockdown for nearly an hour. Three schools outside of the base took lockdown precautions as well. It was the students first day of classes. The base confirmed in a statement that there is, quote, no active threat to the community and an all clear has been issued. Joining us now is MSNBC justice and intelligence correspondent Kendallanian. Also joining us, host of the Independent Americans podcast, founder and CEO of Independent Veterans of America, Paul Rykoff. Kendallaneum, first take us through this harrowing day.
- [42:03]
Maya Wiley
Yeah, Nicole, the suspect has been identified as 28 year old Cornelius Radford, as you said, a sergeant who specializes in logistics. And what authorities are saying is this appears to have been a workplace shooting. He worked with the victims. He used his own personal handgun, they are saying. And as you said, the five victims survived and are said to be in stable condition. And investigators are praising the quick action by some of the other soldiers who were witness to the shooting who immediately rushed in and tackled and subdued the shooter. And that may have prevented, they're saying it definitely did prevent further carnage. It's worth noting that there have been more than 20 mass shootings at military basis since 1993, Nicole. And by one count, this may have been the 268th mass shooting shooting of four or more victims in the United States this year. Thankfully, this one as of now has caused no fatalities.
- [42:56]
Nicole Wallace
Nicole Paul Rykoff, your thoughts? Well, I think it underscores that no place in America is safe from mass shootings, Nicole. And I think there'll be a lot.
- [43:07]
Alex Wagner
Of focus on the shooter and what was happening with him and his possible motives.
- [43:11]
Nicole Wallace
But I also want to focus on the response because every single one of.
- [43:16]
Maya Wiley
Those soldiers around him is trained in.
- [43:18]
Alex Wagner
Crisis response, trained in trauma, trained in how to deal with gunshot victims.
- [43:22]
Nicole Wallace
So undoubtedly over the next couple of hours we'll find out that heroes stepped up. We say a lot to think about.
- [43:28]
Alex Wagner
The old Mr. Rogers quote, look for the helpers.
- [43:30]
Nicole Wallace
It looks like helpers rushed in, they subdued the shooter and they undoubtedly undoubtedly saved lives. And I think that might be a learning moment for us is finding out.
- [43:39]
Alex Wagner
If more people can be trained and trauma response can be trained and first aid can be trained to be first responders because that's likely what unfolded here and saved lives.
- [43:49]
Nicole Wallace
Ken, what questions will you be looking to see the government or the Pentagon answer in the coming days?
- [43:57]
Maya Wiley
You know, sadly, the questions that we always ask in these cases are so frustrating. Familiar, right? What is the background in terms of mental health issues or criminal history of the shooter? We're learning that he had a DUI that was not conveyed to base authorities. What was the weapons policy on that base? Was he allowed to carry his personal handgun or were weapons prohibited? Those are the kind of questions, obviously, you know, what was going on in his life and could there have been any intervention? That's always the question we ask in these cases, as we all, we always talk about in these issues of mass shootings. Every country has mentally ill people in crisis. This is the only country with the kind of level of access to guns where this pace of mass shootings is happening again. By one count, this is the 268th mass shooting of four or more victims in the United States just this year.
- [44:48]
Nicole Wallace
Nicole, this is stunning, a stunning number. Khalanian, I know you've been working for all of us all day long. Thank you so much for your reporting. Paul Rykoff, thank you as always. We're just sneaking a break. Don't go anywhere. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Announced Tuesday that his department has canceled nearly $500 million of grants and contracts for the development of MRNA vaccines, the same ones that Donald Trump himself hailed as a, quote, modern day miracle during the coronavirus pandemic during his first term as president. In his announcement, Secretary Kennedy falsely claimed that MRNA vaccines do not protect against Covid and the flu, which is clearly untrue. The director of the pandemic center at Brown University put it this way to the New York Times, quote, have we not used these life savings MRNA vaccines to protect against severe illness, we would have had millions of more COVID deaths. Unfortunately, it's just the latest blow to vaccine funding. The department already revoked a nearly $600 million contract to the drug maker Moderna to develop a vaccine against bird flu in May. We'll stay on top of this story. Coming up next for us, more devastating new polls for Donald Trump show that buyer's remorse has begun to set in among his own voters. We'll bring you that reporting next.
- [46:17]
Maya Wiley
We quilt this city with a comfy roll.
- [46:22]
Nicole Wallace
Quilted Northern is quilted with three cushy.
- [46:24]
Glenn Thrush
Layers for your comfort.
- [46:26]
Maya Wiley
The quilted comfort of quilted Northern.
- [46:30]
Nicole Wallace
Keep it quilted with quilted northern MSNBC presents the chart topping original podcast the.
- [46:37]
Glenn Thrush
Best People with Nicole Wallace.
- [46:39]
Nicole Wallace
This week she sits down with MSNBC reporter Jacob Soborough.
- [46:43]
Alex Wagner
It's about the connection that you and I have and our colleagues have. But it's also about the connection and the trust that people place in us at a time when trust in media I think is at all time lows.
- [46:53]
Nicole Wallace
The Best people with Nicole Wallace listen now. For early access ad free listening and bonus content, subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. Start your day with the MSNBC Daily Newsletter. Sharp insights from voices you trust, standout moments from your favorite shows, and fresh perspectives from experts shaping the news.
- [47:14]
Glenn Thrush
Sign up now@msnbc.com.
- [47:22]
Alex Wagner
The president held an.
- [47:23]
Nicole Wallace
Impromptu press conference from a highly unusual location.
- [47:30]
Glenn Thrush
Sir, why are you on the roof? That's nice.
- [47:39]
Maya Wiley
That's not a question you hear asked of a world leader that often.
- [47:44]
Alex Wagner
It's right up there with your majesty, where are your pants?
- [47:50]
Maya Wiley
Everyone was like, don't do it, sir.
- [47:52]
Nicole Wallace
Your approval rating isn't that bad.
- [47:53]
Glenn Thrush
We got.
- [47:59]
Nicole Wallace
Well, I don't know. Hi everybody. It's five o'.
- [48:02]
Maya Wiley
Clock.
- [48:02]
Nicole Wallace
The in in the east late night house had a field day with something that was happening almost exactly 24 hours ago. TRUMP did some really bizarre rooftop wandering yesterday. Turns out Americans are getting tired of pretending there's nothing to see here, that it's all totally normal to have a world leader president wandering around the roof and shouting from it. A new Gallup poll finds that Donald Trump and his administration are deeply unpopular with Americans. A poll on Americans views of world leaders, including the Pope, President Zelensky, Bernie Sanders, AOC has Trump and his administration at the bottom of the pack. With Trump's approval rating at just 41%, it doesn't get better for Trump the more polls you look at. A new UMass Amherst poll has Trump's approval rating at a mere 38%, with 58% disapproving of his job performance. A 28% gap according to that UMass poll. Trump is underwater in every single issue area that Americans say they care about. He gets 31% approval on his handling of inflation, immigration, 41%, jobs, 37%. And just 31% of Americans approve of Trump's handling of his pet obsession of tariffs. If that doesn't shake or scare Trump and his allies, his support with men has plunged, helping to drive this drop in his poll numbers from 48% in April to just 39% right now. That is where we start the hour with some of our favorite experts and friends poll Starr and president of Brilliant Corners Research, MSNBC political analyst Cornell Belcher is here. Also joining us, voting rights attorney, founder of Democracy docket, Mark Elias, who never gets to join us when we leave with Kolbaron Fallon. Also joining us, former Assistant U.S. attorney and President of the Legislature Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Maya Wiley is here, who doesn't get to join us on these topics either. I guess the point is in starting this way, and I thank all of you for indulging me, is that I think we all agree that where we are isn't ideal. But if we're going to get out of it, we're not going to be led out of it by some poll tested perfect politician. We're going to have to lead ourselves out of it. And culture is so important. And so I wanted to start with Colbert and Fallon and just ask all of you what you think their role is in the national conversation. I'll start with you, Cornell.
- [50:30]
Frank Figliuzzi
Look, I think their role is vital, especially their ability to reach a cohort of Americans who aren't tuned in, although they should, Nicole, be tuned in to MSNBC every day. But they're not.
- [50:47]
Nicole Wallace
Right?
- [50:48]
Frank Figliuzzi
They're not watching. They're not watching us. They're not watching every day. So their ability to speak to some of these, these cohorts of Americans who are not. And research shows that increasingly, especially after election, a large swath of Americans just start tuning out of news, start tuning out of sort of public affairs because they're so disappointed what's happening. I think these are ways to reach them. And I think when you look at the polling data, clearly some of it is reaching them, right? When you look at his, his numbers, particularly among moderates and independent voters, right? Those voters in the middle of the road who are not sort of strongly partisan one way or the other, you know, where you see the most movement and drops in his numbers, Nicole, in that UMass poll and shout out to the folks at UMass they do, they put a really good product in their polling. You see, there is where moderates and independent voters are pulling away and his numbers are dropping the fastest on issues of the economy and even on the issues of immigration. And one quickly, one thing on immigration is this, Nicole, we talked about it before. It used to be a strong point of Republicans. And in UMass poll in April, he was above water 4 points on immigration. Today, he's now below water on immigration. So you've seen a 17 point swing and performance around his immigration. So even the pillars of what was once his brand are coming undone.
- [52:13]
Nicole Wallace
Well, I mean, Cornell to be underwater 20 points in any poll is remarkable. I want to ask you about the swing of 10 points, 10 point drop in men. I was sort of late to the game and paying a lot of attention to the manosphere, to Joe Rogan and the other figures in the manosphere. I came around to recognizing their importance in the nick of time. Trump benefited enormously from the airtime and the association with figures like Joe Rogan and Andrew Schultz and Theo Vaughn and others. And I think knows it. I mean, I think Melania went on book tour and credited their son Baron with hatching devising the strategy that delivered the White House to Donald Trump the second time. So I don't think that the Trump coalition would disagree at their import. But the first place where Trump was criticized for the disappearing of people in this country, foreign students, not even, not people in this country illegally, but people on student visas was Candace Owens and Joe Rogan. One of the harshest critiques of Donald Trump's president practice of criticizing people at work, landscapers and construction workers also came from Joe Rogan. I don't know if we're ready to say cause and effect, but the 10 point drop in men is a big flashing red light for Republicans in the midterms.
- [53:37]
Frank Figliuzzi
Well, it's a huge flashing red light, but also, you know, they helped make him. And again, to my point about unconventional media sources, this is where the battle is going to have to be fought. And so a lot of my Democratic friends, right, this is where our resources and our people power are going to be, need to be moved because they, they help make him. And we see sort of the drop in his base, base of support is happening because they are also turning against him. And that's a space. And again, when you, when you start off the sort of the show with those cultural figures, Nicole, those cultural figures are for better or worse, just as important in today's social media space, perhaps even more important, important than some of our news anchors.
- [54:21]
Nicole Wallace
Totally, totally, totally, totally agree. Mark Elias. Let me, let me read a little bit more about this deterioration among men. Quote, Trump has cultivated a masculine reputation and sought to. This is from UMass. This is from UMass. Trump has cultivated a masculine reputation and sought to build support among American men. But strikingly, we find that support for Trump is deteriorated most substantially among members of this group, says one UMass pollster. In April, Trump enjoyed approval from 48% of men, compared with 39% of women. Now only 39% of men express approval of Trump, compared with 35% of women. When I got to cultivated a masculine reputation, I had to make sure people know that I wasn't saying that. There's nothing about the whole look that reads masculine to me, but that's just me. Your thoughts on where he stands right now politically?
- [55:14]
Alex Wagner
Yeah, look, I think that one of the most accurate and important statements about how voters process information actually comes from the right wing, Andrew Breitbart, who said that politics is downstream from culture. And by the way, Steve Bannon was an acolyte of Andrew Breitbart's and was very influential in building Trump's image. And very oftentimes, Democrats. Democrats think that the reason why the poll numbers are going up or down has to do primarily with policy. And I think that actually, unfortunately, oftentimes has very little to do with policy. I think the fact is that Bill Clinton became very popular as much because he was viewed as cool as because of his policies. I think George W. Bush helped himself run successfully in 2020 because of the sense that he would restore honor and dignity to the Oval Office, which was a culture, not really a policy. I think Barack Obama won two terms because he also was viewed as sort of a cultural figure and a cultural icon. And Donald Trump has benefited from that. Donald Trump has benefited from the sense that he is very, as you say, powerful, masculine, says things other people won't say. Not a politician would, whatever it is. But a lot of it is culture. And what has happened in the last few weeks and months is that that has taken a complete beating. I mean, I think that we are underestimating that. For many Americans, the Epstein files is a very understandable thing. It's not how Medicaid is going to work. It's not what the jobs report data does and doesn't say or how it's calculated. It is very, very clear, which is that Donald Trump's said that he was going to come to office and tackle all of the lies and all of the deep state and all of the hidden information. And the easiest proof point for that was releasing the files around Jeffrey Epstein. And every way in which he has handled the Epstein files has shown Americans that he is, in fact, not going to release the Epstein files because he's scared. He's not masculine, he's scared. He's not a protector of women. He's scared of what are in the Epstein files. And so, you know, I think that we can look at, like, how it impacts the individual issue set of immigration and economics. And again, I'M not, I'm not diminishing those importance. But the reason why Colbert and Jon Stewart and others are so important is because they speak to the culture. And when they, when they mock Donald Trump for walking around on the roof, what they are doing is they are signaling in the culture that this guy is just an old fat man wandering around on a roof.
- [58:02]
Nicole Wallace
I mean, yes, the picture also matches that assessment. Like, there may be a policy explanation, but the picture looked like what you just said. Mark Elias, let me follow up with the polling on the Epstein scandal from our friends at UMass. They write this, quote, the Epstein scandal remains a serious vulnerability, indeed quite possibly the most serious vulnerability for Trump right now. That's according to one UMass pollster. Quote, the controversy over the handling of the Epstein files by the Trump administration has interestingly brought Americans together. While on most issues we see clear and persistent generational class and racial divisions on Epstein Epstein, Americans across these divides speak with one voice. And in this same poll, 81% of them think Donald Trump is the person most responsible for hiding the Epstein files. Interestingly, 71% also believe that there is a client list hidden in the files.
- [58:57]
Alex Wagner
Mark, Look, I think, I mean, I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, because I'm not, but I believe there's a client list. Like, it may not be that, that Jeffrey Epstein put together a client list. I understand all the rationale why that would not be the case, but you're telling me the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the nation's leading law enforcement agency, dedicated all the resources they did, and they never went through all the documents and assembled a spreadsheet of all of the men? I mean, of course they did. And so when we talk about releasing the Epstein file, we're not just talking about the grand jury testimony. We're not just talking about, you know, the files that came from Jeffrey Epstein, but what about the investigative work that was put together? But I think the broader point, though, is that this is a very understandable scandal that Donald Trump's gotten himself into. But again, it speaks to who he is as a person. It is something that everyone, whether you're in the manosphere or whether you're watching late night television, whether you're listening to, you know, your wonderful podcast, and I love your podcast. Like, regardless of where you are in your podcast, politics, regardless of where you are, it's an except it's something that's very accessible and it speaks to who the man is. And that's why I would, I, you know, I would Guess, and Cornell is the expert in this, but I would guess that part of why Donald Trump's numbers went down on Paris is because of the Epstein files. Like, part of why his numbers go down, immigration, is because of the Epstein files. Because for people who are sort of generally familiar with what a tariff is and that it may be it's doing something to the economy, their perception of Donald Trump as a man, as a leader, is impacted by the Epstein files.
- [60:36]
Nicole Wallace
Let me show you guys what this looks like in the manosphere. This is Joe Rogan, Andrew Schultz and some of their guests.
- [60:45]
Maya Wiley
This one's a line in the sand.
- [60:46]
Nicole Wallace
Yeah.
- [60:47]
Maya Wiley
Because this is one where there's a.
- [60:49]
Alex Wagner
Lot of stuff about, you know, when.
- [60:52]
Nicole Wallace
We thought Trump was going to come.
- [60:54]
Alex Wagner
In and a lot of things are going to be resolved, going to drain the swamp, going to figure everything out. And when you have this one hardcore line in the sand that everybody been talking about forever, and then they're trying to gaslight you on that.
- [61:07]
Maya Wiley
Everything he campaigned on, I believe he wanted to do.
- [61:10]
Nicole Wallace
And now he's doing the exact opposite thing of every single.
- [61:14]
H
Oh, what he's done.
- [61:15]
Glenn Thrush
Yeah, exactly. To your point, if you tell me, it's easier for me to believe you, you wanted to do all these things, if any of them were happening in the way that you said they were.
- [61:24]
Nicole Wallace
To that point, like, there'll be people.
- [61:25]
Maya Wiley
That, like, they'll DM me, be like, you see what. You see what your boy's doing?
- [61:28]
Alex Wagner
You voted for this.
- [61:29]
Frank Figliuzzi
I'm like, I voted for none of this.
- [61:31]
Nicole Wallace
He's doing the exact opposite of everything I voted for. So, Maya, part of me wants to say what a lot of this was out loud, but I'll take it. And I wonder your thought and your advice on what Democrats do in this moment.
- [61:49]
I
Well, look, first of all, what Democrats need to do, I think, is make sure they're very clear about what their vision is for the future of this country. Because to your point and to the point of how Donald Trump got where he got. He got where he got because he did have a vision for the country. It was one that was very dangerous for a lot of us, actually. He's done a lot of the things he promised to do, with the exception of the fact that Project 2025, the extremist blueprint that was out there, that his acolytes helped to write and draft, that he had to distance himself from when he ran.
- [62:29]
Nicole Wallace
Right.
- [62:29]
I
That he had to distance himself from, except from that base. But he's doing it. And what's Getting him in trouble is the very conspiracy theories he himself blew oxygen on, as we've talked about before. But, I mean, I think the point is the Democrats need to run for something not just against Donald Trump, because what is getting him right now is that he was the person who was going to blow up government. He was the person who was going to disrupt it all, whatever that meant to folks. And part of that was, yes, as Mark said, the deep state. And part of, you know, quite Cornell's point about how that gets communicated out and the culture of that and the culture that you're raising, Nicole, of masculinity all becomes just some of the subtext for how you do that. But, you know, at the end of the day, the question is, who's going to turn out and what's going to turn them out? And it's always a turnout election. That's one of the reasons why, as we're sitting here at the 60th anniversary of the Voting Rights act, we, we're seeing and watching a frankly one party trying to work very hard to keep blacks and Latinos from voting, because they're looking at demographics, they're looking at how to gerrymander in Texas. They're looking at how to make it harder for people to vote, including women who got married and maybe changed their names and may be having a harder time making their birth certificates and their actual legal names match up in the voter rolls. I mean, they're actually not appealing to voters, but Democrats have to, and they have to do it in a way that says they're not just going to go back to 2024, because, frankly, nobody wants to go back to 2024. We've all been wanting a bigger and better vision for this country, and I think that's what Democrats have to deliver.
- [64:16]
Nicole Wallace
Cornell, what are the conversations among Democrats right now, and who's the doing things that you like?
- [64:25]
Frank Figliuzzi
Oh, I don't know if anyone thinks that I like, but, but I look, I do think some of it is, is Democrats are getting on board. Like, you know, I see what Leader Jeffrey is doing and how he's leading. And Nicole, we talked about this before, like, leading the House Democrats is like, you know, trying to herd cats. I think they've done a pretty good job of it thus far, far. And you can see it in some of the data, right, when, when, when a majority of Americans have heard about Trump's, you know, this big, beautiful, terrible bill that's different than it was going into 2018 with, with their bill now. So I think To a certain extent, Democrats are being a little bit more on message and focus in a way. And I think it is showing up in the data points, especially around how they've they've gotten this bill deeply underwater. And Republicans trying to figure out how to not how to get it from being underwater. I think they've ultimately lost that battle, Nicole. I think they will pivot soon and not even try to sell this bill because I think Democrats have done a very good job of defining this bill as one that hurts working people.
- [65:34]
Nicole Wallace
Yeah. We started this hour yesterday with the. I'm sorry, Maya.
- [65:39]
I
Well, no, I just want to build on Cornell's point, which I think is dead right. And it's also about how we are making demands for something bigger because as we know, there were a lot of states that, for instance, never expanded Medicaid for so many people who needed health care. So there really is an opportunity in building from the very points that Cornell has just rightly pointed out. And I would agree also to the fact that Democrats have been doing a good job on this. We've all been doing a good job on it because of has been important to all of us. Build on it. Build bigger.
- [66:11]
Nicole Wallace
Well, I mean, to be totally blunt, we've had a lot of help from Republicans who hate the bill, too, but voted for it anyway because they're too afraid of Donald Trump to protect their own constituents. So there's that. Cornell, thank you for starting us out on this. To be continued. My friend. Mark and Maya, stick around a little bit longer. When we come back, we will turn to Republicans, Republicans who are turning to the tactic of rigging the congressional map in Texas. It may not be enough, though, for them. Donald Trump's bad poll numbers and deeply unpopular agenda are causing the GOP to push redistricting in three more states. What Democrats are doing to neutralize that is our next story. Plus, brand new reporting on how the director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard overrode concerns from inside the CIA to try to score political points from her boss. And a harrowing look at the devastation left behind now that Donald Trump has given up America's traditional leadership role around the world. Our friend Anne Applebaum is back with reporting from one part of Africa where absence under Trump has made a dire situation even worse. Dead Then White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere. Today as we've been discussing Donald Trump, trying to push through his unpopular agenda is putting him in a precarious political position with plunging poll numbers just months into his second term as president, which is likely why we're seeing him scramble to ensure that he and the Republican Party can stay in power. A campaign taking the form of an all out effort to convince red states to redraw their congressional maps and secure more Republican congressional seats. Donald Trump has been very open about his wishes to have other red states look at redistricting following what is happening out of Texas. Missouri's governor, Republican Mike Kehoe, has apparently given the okay to Donald Trump's plan, even though that state's latest map was just finalized in 2022.
- [68:14]
Alex Wagner
Interesting conversation about is Missouri representative properly in Washington D.C. and quite frankly, what can we do to support President Trump's agenda? And Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House, who's done a very good job.
- [68:28]
Nicole Wallace
There are questions about whether Indiana may be the next state that Trump has his eyes on. JD Vance is heading to Indianapolis tomorrow. He'll be there for an RNC fundraiser, but he also plans to speak with the state's Republican governor, Mike Braun. So far, Braun has not publicly endorsed Trump's gerrymandering efforts. Meanwhile, frightening reporting out this morning concerning the Texas Democrats who left their state to block Republican efforts to redraw lines and give the GOP five more House seats. From NBC News, quote, Democratic state legislators from Texas were evacuated from their suburban Chicago hotel Wednesday morning following a threat at the property. And a news conference set to feature Democratic Senator Dick Durbin was canceled. The local police searched, but no device was found. Three Texas state House Democrats said in a statement, quote, we are safe, we are secure and we are undeterred and unintimidated. Joining our conversation is former top official at the doj, msnbc. Legal analysts Andrew Weissman, Mark Elias and Maya Wiley are still here. Mark Elias, let me just ask you to level set what is supposed to happen. This is supposed to happen every 10 years based on census data. And just explain, explain what is happening at Trump's behest in Texas and now potentially also Missouri and Indiana.
- [69:46]
Alex Wagner
Yeah. So the way the system is supposed to work is there's a census every decade that leads to a reapportionment of seats among the states and then every state legislature or in states with commissions. The commissions draw new congressional maps, new state legislation, legislative maps, and those maps are in place for the next decade, obviously subject to legal challenges that take place that you and I often Discuss. In the mid-1990s, Tom DeLay in Texas said, you know, we want to do what's called mid cycle redistricting, which is to redraw the maps in the beginning, in the middle of the cycle, this was challenged, went all the way to the U.S. supreme Court. The U.S. supreme Court said, okay, you can do mid cycle redistricting. But here's the thing, Nicole, the rationale, I'm not defending, by the way, Tom DeLay, I sued Tom DeLay for racketeering in the 1990s. But what Tom DeLay and the Republicans were doing was saying, look, the state of Texas maps were drawn under Democrats when Ann Richards was the governor. And so we're in power now and we want to draw the map and gerrymander them. What's happening this time is that states like Texas, states like Missouri, that have already engaged in grotesque acts of gerrymandering, I mean, the Texas map that is in place now is a grotesque gerrymander. My law firm and I, we are suing Texas because it's also an illegal and unconstitutional map. The Missouri map was a map that obliterated an African American opportunity district in the St. Louis area. Like these have already been gerrymandered to exclude as many Democratic seats as possible. But Donald Trump, because he is petrified that his authoritarian scheme is going to come to a halt if Democrats retake control of Congress, he has convinced these states to re gerrymander their gerrymanders, to literally take their grotesque maps and make them obscenely grotesque by gerrymandering them mid cycle. And you know, I am proud and I am thrilled that Democrats are fighting back. You know, I was on your show and other shows on MSNBC a few weeks ago, you know, before it was cool, saying that Democrats should not just match what, what Republicans are threatening, but should exceed them as a deterrent. And we are seeing governors like Governor Newsom, Governor Hochul in New York, Governor Pritzker in Illinois who are all saying, look, if Republicans are going to go forward with this, we are going to, to not just match them, but we may exceed what they are doing to deter this kind of horrible, terrible behavior that Republicans are doing for one reason and one reason only, to show subservience and obsequiousness and sycophanty to Donald Trump.
- [72:29]
Nicole Wallace
Is there enough time for Democrats to redraw their own maps, Republicans to say, oh, we didn't really want that, and then back down or once this train has left the station, are we heading toward red and blue states with gerrymandered maps? Mark?
- [72:45]
Alex Wagner
Yeah, look, I don't want to, I don't want to have rose colored glasses on. I don't want to act like everything is great and it's not on the time question, it's actually quite interesting. I wrote this for democracy docket earlier today that the timing here is actually kind of fascinating because Texas actually has one of the earliest ballot qualification deadlines, which means Texas actually has less time than either New York or California or virtually any other state in the country. So you could wind up in a world in which if the Democratic legislators stay away out of the state through November 8th, that it's simply too late for Texas for this election cycle because of their ballot qualifications deadline, whereas New York and California, those deadlines don't take place until months later in 2026. So it's very fluid in terms of the time. But I would say this to the critics who say, you know, Mark, aren't you just suggesting that we go into a perpetual, you know, race to the bottom? I'd say two things. Number one, the only thing that Donald Trump and Republicans understand is overwhelming force. And so if they are going to bring have a gunfight, not only can't we bring knives, we need to bring missiles. Like we need to deter this by saying we will not just match, but we will escalate. And I will note for people who say that will never work. What has happened in the last 48 hours? Two Republican members of Congress have said they will introduce federal legislation to ban mid cycle redistricting and to roll back any mid cycle redistricting that is taking place. You know what they could have done? They could have voted for the Freedom to Vote act, they could have voted for the for the People Act. But at least one of them, Mike Lawler from New York, voted against those laws that would have prevented exactly this. So we're seeing small moves by Republicans in the right direction. Maybe when they face their own electoral consequences, it will spur Mike Johnson to call the whole thing off in Texas. I'm not holding my breath, but you know, I think that we're not going to get anywhere productive in allowing Republicans to do this unilaterally.
- [74:47]
Nicole Wallace
Maya, should Democrats do this unilaterally? Like, if Republicans back down, should California, New York and Illinois do this anyway?
- [74:55]
I
Well, you know, look, that's a complicated question. And I am pro democracy. I am pro making sure that voters can vote for the leaders they want and be represented by people who understand their problems and their interests. And I actually think Mark is dead right when he, he says, look, you can't have it both ways. You can't be the politician that votes against the Freedom of Vote act or the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement act, which would ensure all voters including, frankly, Republican voters, voters who want to vote independent and don't know who they want to vote for, no matter your affiliation, that you get to show up, vote and not have a politician try to protect their own power by using that power against you, the voter, to be able to hold them accountable, because that's what's happening here. And I just want to go back to another point. Mark pointed to something that is a critical tension point and why we have to be in favor of voters. It's just we can't discriminate against black and Latino voters, period.
- [76:01]
Nicole Wallace
Mark Elias and Maya Wiley, thank you for joining us on this topic and helping us make sense of what's happening. Andrew sticks around with us when he and I come back. There's brand new reporting in the Washington Post breaking this afternoon about how the director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard overrode concerns from inside the CIA to release a highly classified report on Russia's interference in the 2016 election. We'll have that new reporting for you after a short break. Don't go anywhere. Brand new reporting in the Washington Post reveals the lengths Donald Trump's new team will go to in order to please him. The director of national security, Tulsi Gabbard, she's the dni. The dni. Tulsi Gabbard overrode the concerns of CIA officials in order to release a highly classified document on Russia's interference in the 2016 election. From that report, quote, Gabbard, with the blessing of President Donald Trump, overrode arguments from the CIA and other intelligence agencies that more of the documents should remain classified to obscure US Spy agencies sources and methods. That's according to multiple people familiar with the matter. Democratic lawmakers and former U.S. intelligence officials have objected to how the Trump administration released the report, saying it could imperil future intelligence gathering on threats against the U.S. we're back with Andrew Weissman. I read this story twice, and what's so amazing is this used to be the kind of thing that was never partisan. This could separate the members, Democratic and Republican from the intelligence committees from other members. But it never used to divide Democrats and Republicans on the intelligence committees themselves. Just explain how dangerous it is to have done what she did to the agency she now oversees.
- [77:56]
H
Sure. Let me first just take a moment to put this in context of what you talked about in the beginning of your show, which was the Epstein files. That is an example of the administration not disclosing information, even though it's not classified by all accounts. And that is information that they have, the government has its possession and they don't need a court order to release it and they're not releasing it. As far as we know to date, they haven't done that. Here to answer your question, we have an example of the intelligence community saying, and specifically the CIA saying, we need to release this, but we need to redact the material that would reveal methods and means. That's sort of the term of art. And that is how the CIA was able to collect this, whether it was through human sources or whether it was through eavesdropping in certain sensitive locations. And that is something, when you're in the intelligence community, it's sacrosanct, as you said. It is not a political issue. That is what keeps this country safe. That is what is used by the intelligence community to see whether there is a terrorist attack, where there was terrorist planning. The reason that there has not been another 9, 11 and where we have issues, but they are sort of, sort of lone wolf issues is because the intelligence community is so protective of methods and means. And yet here, when Tulsi Gabbard and reportedly the president thinks to their advantage, they disclose this information over the objection of career people who want to keep the country safe.
- [79:46]
Nicole Wallace
Why do you think they did that? Why do you think they want this out there so badly?
- [79:50]
H
Look, the reporting is that this is relates very much to the distraction effort because all, by all accounts, everyone who is reporting on what Tulsi Gabbard is alleging is it's pure nonsense. You have reported on this, that even the documents that she has now revealed do not support what she is saying. And it is very much a sort of look over here, look at the birdie instead of looking at things that are detrimental to this administration. But it tells you the depths to which they would go, that you would not take the care of making sure that methods and means are not divulged and that I cannot tell you when you are in the intelligence community how much you care about those things. Because literally the discussion inside the government is if this gets out, is it going to lead to a greater risk of harm? And I should say this isn't sort of speculation. Our allies overseas are looking at this and they know now that there's an administration, as there was in Trump 1.0, that is willing to divulge information. And so a lot of countries want to give us information and they want to help, but they do not want to be seen as doing that. And this undermines that effort tremendously.
- [81:24]
Nicole Wallace
It's happening. It's happening in real time. Andrew Weissen, thank you for spending some time with us on this today. When we come back, what Donald Trump's policy of America first really looks like around the world, how America's retreat from providing aid to hard hit parts of the world under Trump is doing grave damage. Our good friend Ann Applebaum has a powerful new front page story, cover story on that from Sudan and she will be our guest after a very short break. Don't go anywhere. There is a really important and devastating new piece of reporting to tell you about from our friend Ann Applebaum. She's reported from the front lines of Sudan's civil war. At its core is a warning about what is happening around the world now that Donald Trump has abdicated America's leadership role and pulled back life saving aid and leadership to foreign countries. Ann writes this for the Atlantic September issue cover story, quote, no statistics can express the sense of pointlessness, of meaninglessness that the war has left behind alongside the physical destruction. One younger boy, he told me he was 14 but seemed closer to 10, hung around watching the older boys. He had surely seen people with guns, understood that those people had power and wanted to be one of them. What was the alternative? There was no school at the camp and no work. The artillery fire, the burned television station, the melted refinery, the rapes and the murders, the children in the hospital, all of that had led to nothing built, nothing. Only this vacuum. No international laws, no international organizations, no diplomats, and certainly no Americans are coming to fill it. Joining us now is Anne Applebaum. Anne, when they talk about journalists writing drafts of history, every word of this piece felt like that to me and hit me. But I read your interview, I think, with Oliver Darcy about why you did this reporting. Will you share that story with us? Sure.
- [83:33]
Anne Applebaum
It was really after the US Election, I realized that a lot of changes to the international system, some of which have been in the works for a long time in many years, the slow decline of the UN of the UN Security Council, the weakening of international institutions, the withdrawal of the US from parts of the world, I realized all those things were going to become permanent. And of course, I do write about the consequences of those things in the US and in Europe and in Ukraine. But I wanted to see it from a different place. And I arranged two trips to Sudan. It's not easy to get there. The first time I went in to the western part of the country via Chad over land. The second time I went, I flew from Dubai to Port Sudan, which is on the coast. And then together with the Photographer Lindsay Adaria. We drove to Khartoum, which is about a 10, 12 hour drive. And on both trips I saw the conflict from the two sides of the two main combatants. But in both sides you realize pretty quickly that the main victims and the real tragedy are civilians who are caught up in what's really a nihilistic war. It's for territory, for money, for treasure, for influence. It's being all kinds of outside powers are part of it. And what you just see is the damage and devastation left behind.
- [85:07]
Nicole Wallace
Let me read a little bit more from your reporting. You write this, each loud noise meant that a child had been wounded, a grandmother killed, a house destroyed. One night someone brought out folding chairs for a street concert and music flowed through crackly speakers. The shelling began again a few hours hours later, probably hitting similar streets and similar grocery stores, similar falafel stands and similar street musicians a couple dozen miles away. This wasn't merely the sound of artillery, but the sound of nihilism and anarchy, of lives disrupted, businesses ruined, universities closed, futures curtailed. Just explain what the removal of any humanitarian footprint, the removal of USAID means in those circumstances.
- [85:57]
Anne Applebaum
So one of the strange things about USAID in Sudan is Sudan is one of the places where it was meant to continue. So the supposedly humanitarian aid was going to keep going and places like Sudan wouldn't be affected. But, you know, U.S. humanitarian aid was about 40% of the world's humanitarian aid before, before Elon Musk destroyed the whole agency. And it also ran quite a lot of the logistics. So the trucks and the companies that ran things and the payment systems and the, you know, statistics that people kept and websites that people used. And one of the things that happened in, when USAID was shut down, remember, it was shut down almost overnight. And I talked to one woman who literally lost contact with her people she was supposed to be dealing with, and she had no access to her email and it just went away. And all of that meant that all kinds of people who didn't even know they were dependent on USAID suddenly lost contacts, they lost money, they lost supplies. We were at a very small kind of soup kitchen on a street and outside of Khartoum, and we were told there that they had run out of food and they could only feed people three days a week, I think it was, whereas previously it had been five days a week. I mean, this is. These are pennies of food. I mean, it's very. They were serving people bean soup just to keep them alive. And the idea that this, you know, decision made in Washington by the world's richest man had affected people that far away was pretty devastating.
- [87:34]
Nicole Wallace
I want to read one more piece on this topic. This spring, more than 1700 of the communal kitchens run by volunteers in Sudan closed down entirely, affecting nearly 3 million people, thanks either directly to USAID cuts or the chaos created by mass US Government layoffs and canceled contracts. In February of this year, I spoke with one USAID official who had been directly responsible for humanitarian aid to Sudanese refugees and outside Sudan. She told me that although she had known that the Trump administration would make cuts, she had not anticipated the catastrophic impact of Elon Musk's assault on USAID and other aid programs or the new administration's utter lack of interest in how these unplanned cuts would reverberate across Africa. One thing that you report out is this phrase that I think Bill Gates said, you know, the reality of the world's richest man bringing about the death and suffering of the poorest people on the planet. But something like that, I'm paraphrasing. It's hard to wrap your brain around. I mean, you saw it. How would you describe to Americans here the desperation of the civilians that you covered and met?
- [88:44]
Anne Applebaum
You know, I think I was actually asked repeatedly about America. People are confused about America. I mean, they. Not everybody likes America in that part of the world, just as they don't like America in lots of places. But they had an idea of America as a country that was interested in them, that cared what happened, that was a provider of food, you know, that could be counted on in certain, you know, to come in and help negotiate, help end the war. I mean, actually, one of the reasons people invited me there, why I was allowed to come, it's very difficult to visit Sudan. You need all kinds of permissions and visas and so on, was that people wanted an American journalist to come and tell the story. And it is. I found it very hard to explain. Why had there been this sudden cutoff from one day to the next, and why was there so little interest? Why isn't the Trump administration hiring people with any expertise about Africa? Because so far it hasn't. And, you know, you can't really. You can't explain to people. All you can say is, it's this. This is just the whims of. Of our current president. Maybe it will, it will. It will change again next time. But, I mean, there is a. There's a kind of bemusement or bewilderment rather out there about who. Who are Americans now and why did we do this.
- [90:05]
Nicole Wallace
It's incredible. It's incredible reporting. And Applebaum, thank you you so much for taking the time to talk to us about it.
- [90:12]
Anne Applebaum
Thank you.
- [90:12]
Nicole Wallace
One more. One more break for us. We'll be right back. MSNBC's senior national and political correspondent Jacob Soff is my guest on this week's episode of the Best People. You can watch our conversation on YouTube if you want. You can also listen in by scanning the QR code on your screen or downloading it wherever you get your podcast. A quick break for us. We'll be right back. Thank you so much for letting us into your homes. We're grateful.