"We do not live in normal times”

Summary

Podcast Summary: Deadline: White House

Episode Title: "We do not live in normal times"
Host: Nicolle Wallace
Date: May 12, 2026

---

Overview

This episode centers on the extraordinary dysfunction at the FBI under Director Kash Patel and the broader normalization of abnormal conduct in American government. Nicolle Wallace leads a discussion on the state of the FBI, recent hearing controversies involving Patel, the erosion of institutional norms, Trump-driven politicization of law enforcement, and the chilling climate for both career officials and journalists. With expert guests, the show explores these themes through specific events, anecdotes, and testimony, painting a vivid picture of an agency—and a political culture—in crisis.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Unprecedented Controversies Surrounding FBI Director Kash Patel

• Patel’s Congressional Testimony (00:36-04:28)

  • Niccole Wallace plays Patel’s combative hearing before the Senate, featuring Democratic Senators Chris Van Hollen and Patty Murray.
  • Questions about excessive drinking, unexplained absences, and branded ‘Kash Patel’ bourbon distribution are met with categorical denials.
  • Instead of addressing serious concerns, Patel throws accusations back at senators and assails media reports as “fraudulent.”
  • Sen. Murray’s rebuke: “If you want to pass out liquor or pop bottles in a locker room, stick to podcasting. Leave law and order to people who really do care about justice and appearances.” [04:02]

• Carol Leonnig’s Reporting (05:12-07:21)

  • Leonnig (Washington Post investigative reporter) asserts that Patel’s denials are untrue and contradict reporting from numerous, credible agency sources.
  • She highlights verified incidents, such as Patel ordering polygraphs for security detail agents and orchestrating purges among career staff who investigated Trump-related cases.

“I watched Patel deny all these things as absolutely false that I personally know to be true.”
—Carol Leonnig [05:33]

2. Dysfunction and Low Morale at the FBI

• Questioning Claims of “High Morale” (10:06-13:01)
  • Patel claims morale at the FBI “has never been better” [10:24]
  • Multiple guests—particularly Asha Rangappa—rebut this, citing sources inside the agency who describe a “clown show” and “utter chaos.” [12:11]

“Some of the words that the people that I know who are still there are using are clown show, utter chaos. And I think the morale is very low.”
—Asha Rangappa [12:11]

• Brian Driscoll Interview Clips (12:45-13:08)

  • Driscoll, a respected agent forced out during “political purges,” expresses “disgust and shock” at the current internal culture.

• Christy Greenberg on Retaliatory Firings (13:16-14:39)

  • Cites Patel’s previous promise not to fire staff over case assignments, now clearly violated.
  • Draws attention to complete lack of accountability for “lying under oath,” and raises the specter of blanket pardons by Trump.

3. Normalization of Abnormal Conduct and Culture of Impunity

• Signature Bourbon Bottles and Blurred Boundaries (03:42-10:06)

  • Guests note the transformation of the FBI into an extension of Patel’s personal brand, echoing Trump’s style.
  • “He is the Bureau...he slaps his name on everything.” —Asha Rangappa [09:40]
  • Comparisons to J. Edgar Hoover, with consensus that Patel’s conduct is without modern precedent.

• Host, on Trump-Style Personalization:

"There's no ability to see that what the organization they're running is separate from themselves."
—Nicolle Wallace [09:22]

• On Culture of Impunity

“Even if he were to not tell the truth under oath, what enforcement is there? ...We can expect that all these people are going to have pardons on their way out the door. I think that's what you're getting at. So there's no real incentive here.”
—Asha Rangappa [08:31]

4. Politicized Revenge Investigations and Institutional Degradation

• Brennan Investigation and the “Grand Conspiracy” (23:29-31:38)
  • Coverage of DOJ/FBI investigation into former CIA Director John Brennan.
  • Guests outline the conspiracy-driven logic behind this, calling it “basement red string crazy wall stuff” [23:35-24:01, Jim Comey].
  • Discussion of repeated, bipartisan findings affirming Russian election interference and the lack of evidence of anti-Trump plotting.

“Part of the goal here by the Trump team...is to actually degrade the institutions themselves in the belief that they're deep state tools of the Democrats, which is entirely unproven.”
—Glenn Thrush [28:28]

• Cycle of Vindictive, Evidence-Free Prosecutions (31:38-34:54)
  • Asha: Trump’s DOJ is pursuing re-investigation and prosecution not for legal merit, but to punish political enemies.
  • Christy Greenberg notes the unprecedented ousting of lead prosecutors who declined to charge, replaced by politically motivated retirees.

5. Escalating Attacks on Journalists and Press Freedom

• New DOJ Targeting of Reporters (37:23-41:01)
  • Nicolle reports DOJ, at Trump’s urging, is subpoenaing journalists and news organizations over Iran war leak stories.
  • Glenn Thrush: This tactic aims to “chill sources” and deter coverage of unpopular administration policies.
  • Asha adds that the Espionage Act’s broad language is now a tool for direct legal threat against journalists, breaking decades of precedent.

“This is intended, make no mistake about it, I believe, to chill sources...This is a very, very dangerous pattern that we're seeing here.”
—Glenn Thrush [39:40]

“It’s worth highlighting here that this is a problem with the law, actually the way that it’s written...so you can see how this statute has the potential to get journalists into its crosshairs. Now, why hasn't it been used for, you know, decades, more than a century against journalists? Largely because of presidential restraint...until Trump 1.0.”
—Asha Rangappa [41:01]

6. Consequences of Dysfunction: Iran War, Economic Fallout, and Trump’s Social Media Distractions

• Economic Cost of Iran War (42:17-43:43)

  • Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s budget testimony under scrutiny—Cost estimates for the war with Iran continue to climb, with key questions left unanswered.
  • Sen. Chris Murphy: “If this goes on for another 30 days, there are going to be thousands more farms that will go bankrupt. There are going to be families that are going to be ruined.” [43:20]

• Trump’s Social Media Obsessions (Throughout)

  • Host and guests highlight how, amid public hardship, Trump remains focused on personal vendettas and social media attacks, including calls for former President Obama’s arrest.
  • Christy Greenberg notes: “He’s painting [the swamp]. He’s not draining it anymore. He’s painting it.” [36:06]
  • Physical and institutional damage to the DOJ, FBI, and military is ignored at the highest levels in favor of performative grievance and personal branding.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments – with Timestamps

• On Normalization of the Abnormal:

  • “Extraordinary even by today’s Trumpian organizing of what’s normal.” —Nicolle Wallace [02:45]

• On Morale:

  • “Some of the words that people that I know who are still there are using are ‘clown show,’ ‘utter chaos.’” —Asha Rangappa [12:11]

• On Institutional Breakdown:

  • “The place is a disaster.” —Carol Leonnig [20:55]

• On Trump’s Obsession with Revenge:

  • “...part of the goal here by the Trump team...is to actually degrade the institutions themselves...” —Glenn Thrush [28:28]

• On Press Freedom:

  • “This is intended, make no mistake about it, I believe, to chill sources...This is a very, very dangerous pattern that we’re seeing here.” —Glenn Thrush [39:40]

• On White House Priorities:

  • "He’s not draining [the swamp] anymore. He’s painting it." —Christy Greenberg [36:09]

---

Important Timestamps for Segments

• Patel Senate Hearing Mashup: 00:36–04:28
• Carol Leonnig on verified misconduct: 05:12–07:21
• FBI Morale and Political Purges (Brian Driscoll, Asha): 10:06–13:08
• Discussion of retaliatory firings: 13:16–14:39
• Alcohol-related controversies, public video: 16:15–19:19
• Brennan “grand conspiracy” investigation: 23:29–31:38
• Trump’s DOJ & Journalism subpoena campaign: 37:23–41:01
• Iran War cost and farm bankruptcies: 42:17–43:43

---

Conclusion

This episode offers a sobering exploration of the collapse of institutional norms in Washington, focusing on the FBI under highly politicized, erratic leadership. Guests use reporting, insider accounts, and expert legal and political analysis to demonstrate the dangers of unchecked impunity, politicized prosecution, disinformation, and attacks on the free press—all undergirded by Trump’s relentless demands for loyalty and personal vengeance. The tone is urgent, incredulous, and unapologetically frank, emphasizing just how far removed the current moment is from “normal times.”

Transcript

[A]

Artificial intelligence is moving very, very fast, and it's raising new questions just about every day about what it is, what it isn't. When all is said and done, what is the end game? I'm Chris Hayes, and as part of my podcast, why Is this Happening? I'm speaking with leading experts each week to help ground that conversation.

[B]

We're right now in a situation where it's very difficult to understand what is real and what's not real.

[A]

Why is this happening? The AI Endgame, a special mini series from Ms. Now. Start listening today wherever you get your podcasts.

[C]

Hi there, everyone. It's four o'clock in New York. A stark reminder that we do not live in normal times up on Capitol Hill today. And what would have just been a normal, routine budget hearing questioning quickly focused in on the flurry of reported controversies FBI Director Kash Patel has created for himself. Since we are not dealing with a normal or routine head of the nation's top law enforcement agency, we want to show you the very first line of questioning Kash Patel faced from Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen.

[D]

I really don't care about your personal life so long as you are able to perform your public and official responsibilities, which are awesome responsibilities. Multiple reports, including reporting by the Atlantic, have alleged episodes of excessive drinking, unexplained absences, and behavior that concern current and former FBI and DOJ officials. You have publicly denied those allegations and filed a defamation lawsuit. So today, as you testify before Congress, is it your testimony that those allegations are categorically false?

[E]

Unequivocally, categorically false.

[D]

So there have been no occasions during your tenure when FBI personnel were unable to promptly reach you?

[E]

Absolutely not. You can ask my entire workforce. They hear from me at every single hour of the day, as do these great gentlemen here. As do the men and women of the interagency and state and local law enforcement and the White House.

[D]

And so there have been no occasions when your security detail had difficulty waking or locating you, Is that right?

[E]

Nope. It's a total farce. I don't even know where you get this stuff, but it doesn't make it credible because you say so.

[D]

I'm not saying it, Director Patel. It's been written and documented.

[E]

You are literally saying it.

[D]

No, I'm saying that these are reports. Director Patel, you running a $7,000 bar

[F]

tab at Lobby Bar has been filed

[C]

by your own office during the day.

[E]

That's you.

[G]

This is the ultimate example of hypocrisy, Chairman.

[E]

I will not be tarnished by baseless allegations, fraudulent Statements from the media.

[D]

The fact that you mentioned that indicates you don't know what you are talking about.

[C]

Extraordinary. Extraordinary even by today's Trumpian reorganizing of what's normal. As a reminder of how the FBI would act under ordinary circumstances, under normal times, take a listen to Donald Trump's first director of the FBI, Jim Comey. He was on this program yesterday, and we asked him about those branded bottles of bourbon that Kash Patel is reportedly distributing. What is Kash Patel's deal? He just was reported to have made Kash Patel with the S as a dollar sign, and his name is on an FBI emblazoned bottle of bourbon. Did you have bourbon?

[D]

I did not, no.

[C]

This is a.

[D]

Nor a dollar sign in my name.

[C]

This is what Kash Patel gives out on behalf of America's premier law enforcement agency. What signal does that send?

[D]

I don't remember a lot from law school, but there was an expression, res ipsa loquator, meaning the thing speaks for itself. And so the thing speaks for itself.

[C]

Senator Van Hollem is not the only lawmaker to bring up all of the alleged chaos at the FBI. Here is Senator Patty Murray.

[F]

We need somebody at this agency who's focused on solving criminal cases, not passing out branded bourbon or jetting around the globe. Your job is to be reachable, and I know Senator Van Hollen asked you about this, but I gotta say, if you want to pass out liquor or pop bottles in a locker room, stick to podcasting. Leave law and order to people who really do care about justice and appearances.

[C]

The hearing is still happening, and we will dip into it and return to it if questioning there justifies that or if any news is made. FBI Director Kash Patel confronted about recent reports about the chaos he has created on his. It's where we begin today with senior investigative reporter Carol Leonig. Also joining us, Asha Rengappa. She's a former special agent at the FBI, now a senior lecturer at Yale School of Global Affairs. And with me here at the table, legal analyst Christy Greenberg. She's a former criminal division deputy chief at SDNY and the host of the YouTube show Courtside. Carolyn, let me start with you on Kash Patel being confronted with some of the recent news accounts about him. Your thoughts?

[F]

No, I thought it was interesting for him. Interesting is probably a Minnesota kind of euphemism, Midwestern euphemism. Interesting way for him to start to claim that Chris Van Hollen has a large daytime bar bill. In answer to the question about whether or not you have ever had to be rousted by FBI agents as a result of alcohol fueled nights or been unreasonable as a result of this. It really did said it was false, but didn't really directly go at it except to go after the senator. There have been many times, Nicole, that my colleague and I, kendelaneonian, have written about activities by Kaj Patel that have disturbed and worried FBI agents. And in almost every case, the FBI, via the director or the spokesperson, have denied these things as absolutely false. And I watched Patel deny all these things as absolutely false that I personally know to be true. For example, that at his direction, numerous agents were polygraphed who had been on his security detail. Those both who had been and are currently on his security detail were being ordered to being polygraphed last week. He said that wasn't true. And I know from our sourcing and other materials that it is. So it worries me to see this kind of pushback. But I understand from the sources we have inside the FBI and the Justice Department that Kaj Patel is really trying to put down all of this reporting and squelch it because his job is really on the line.

[C]

Let me just make sure I understand what you're saying. Did he lie before Congress today?

[F]

You know, I would like to pause before I say that big word, if you don't mind. But I would say that I know it to be true that at his direction, agents were polygraphed. And though I don't have the tape in front of me, I watched him today say that it was not true that these polygraphs were ordered by him.

[C]

Asha, let me bring you in on this. The first thing I thought when I saw that first exchange was I thought about all the pardon reporting that we have and that these people are operating in a way that is very clearly in response to the literal distribution of pardons that that culture seems to have seeped into. The things that we see that, you know, you used to be able to have some confidence that what was happening before Congress was, you know, sworn testimony. They take an oath. And I had the initial reaction that he was denying things that were sourced in stories with Carol and Ken's awesome number of sources, with their decades combined, decades of relationships and the agencies they, the Atlantic's dozens of sources. And to come out and categorically basically smear all that reporting as false felt like a new chapter in his leadership at the FBI. What did you think?

[H]

Well, Nicole, the I'm rubber, you're glue defense is never really a great defense, but it's unbecoming. I Think for the director of the FBI, you know, the FBI should be sticking straight to the facts, answering straightforwardly. We did not see that. And I think, to your point, Nicole, what we're seeing, I think, is a manifestation of a culture of impunity. Because really, what is the deterrent for him? Even if he were to not tell the truth under oath, what enforcement is there? I think we can expect that all of these people are going to have pardons on their way out the door. I think that's what you're getting at. So there's no real incentive here. And, you know, that's the culture that's been built. And there's also a personalist culture. I just want to add this, you know, in terms of the signature bourbon bottles, et cetera. I think what we're seeing with these Cabinet officials is sort of what we see with Trump, which is there's no. There's no ability to see that what the organization they're running is separate from themselves.

[B]

It is them.

[H]

You know, for Cash Patel, he is the Bureau, and so, you know, he slaps his name on everything. Challenge coins, bourbon bottles. I have to tell you, there's a lot of merch that's FBI branded. I've never seen anything with an FBI director on it, with the exception maybe of J. Edgar Hoover, but, you know, he's Hoover. So I think this is just a whole culture that we're seeing manifest right now.

[C]

Let me show all of you two pieces of sound. This is Kash Patel's response to a question about morale. And then this is Brian Driscoll reacting to the political purges that happen on Kash Patel's watch.

[A]

How's your morale at the FBI?

[E]

Morale has never been better. When I go across the country and I talk to the line agents and the intelligence analysts and professional staff, I travel around the country, I talk to our state and local partners. They tell me one thing resoundingly. We're finally going to do the work that we were asked to do with the resources that we needed to get the job done. And that's what this administration is focused on.

[G]

There was never any specific allegations or accusations coming from Beauvais that, okay, these people on this list committed some kind of legal or policy violation.

[D]

In the lawsuit, it says that Bove told you that an allegation of misconduct was not necessary for him to terminate FBI personnel if he subjectively felt a loss of confidence in their ability to carry out the President's agenda.

[A]

When that request was made, we take it in. Okay, tell me More why? Well, you know, cultural rot in the FBI.

[D]

That was a phrase they used, cultural rot, yes.

[A]

All of these other uninformed and wrong opinions.

[C]

So everything that I have read about Brian Driscoll supports and suggests that he is sort of an agent's agent. I think one of the attempts he made publicly to try to save his job and protect those around him, which seems to be the motivating factor for most of the agents to protect people under them and around them, was this very sort of Trump friendly list of top 10 bad guys they caught. This is someone who tried to stay, tried to hold the line and left and described basically bogus predicates for the political purges of agents who worked on the cases and to Donald Trump. Asha, what is the true answer to the question, how's the morale at the FBI?

[H]

Well, Carol will have more sources than I do, but some of the words that the people that I know who are still there are using are clown, show, utter chaos. And I think the morale is very low. I mean, this is a conservative small C organization. I think they thrive on sort of

[C]

being a very steady ship.

[H]

And that's just not what it's been under Patel's watch.

[C]

Let me show you guys more of Brian Driscoll's interview with Anderson Cooper.

[A]

It's just I'm disgusted and shocked.

[D]

Why were you disgusted?

[G]

Because now my fear that there was a political wave coming towards the FBI

[A]

with vitriol directed at the FBI.

[G]

It was palpable and there was a sense of shock that like, well, I

[A]

am really close to this thing.

[C]

It is a long way. Christy Greenberg, from what was testified to, morale's never been higher. I mean, this is disgust and shock. Yeah.

[B]

I mean, the idea that he says, well, FBI agents are telling me they're happy. What do you think they're going to tell you? They're not going to tell you anything different. Different. And you continue to polygraph everybody. That doesn't exactly speak to high morale. One thing I thought was interesting, when Patel was getting confirmed and he was in his hearing, he was specifically asked by Senator Blumenthal about whether anyone would be terminated for their case assignments. And Kash Patel said that would not happen. And he said all employees will be protected from retribution. And now we see the complete opposite happening. You see in that interview, former Agent Driscoll saying he was told by Cash Patel that, you know, that they basically are in a situation where he thought his job security would be on the line if he didn't fire these people. So those two things can't be true. At the same time, someone should be looking into that and finding out when exactly Patel had those conversations about firing FBI agents. He said at his hearing he had not had any discussions like that. So when was he told that his job could be on the line if he didn't fire these people? Did he lie under oath? But you know, to your point, again, if he did, who's prosecuting that? Certainly not this Department of Justice. Will they just pardon everybody on the way out for any lies that they tell in these hearings? And in that case, are they really just a farce?

[C]

Well, I guess we know from the failed attempt to indict Jim Comey and Edva that the statute of limitations is longer than two and a half years, right?

[B]

I mean, again, a future Department of Justice, if there's not a pardon, could certainly look into this. I mean, I can think of one thing that I heard already in the hearing from Kash Patel that was clearly false. And that is he said in that exchange with Senator Von Holland that you were out there. He said to the senator slinging margaritas in El Salvador with a convicted gang banging rapist. And in that, he's referring to Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who is in court today. This is the person who is deported by mistake that the government even admitted was a mistake. And this is somebody who the government has not convicted of anything. His case is still pending in Tennessee for the FBI director to say from presumably his little burn book of zingers, that he's going after each senator for that. This is a person who is convicted of being a gang member, which that has not been proven in court. And he's not even charged with raping anyone. I mean, that is so irresponsible. I mean, what happened to innocent until when you see the juxtaposition between how reckless a statement like that is, that's demonstrably false. Versus on your show yesterday, Jim Comey not wanting to even speak about his case because the rules in court are you're not supposed to do that. And the courts want you to just stick to court filings when discussing the merits of your case. So you can just see Kash Patel is an unserious person. I mean, it's obvious.

[C]

You know, Carol, what I thought was striking is he drinks on camera, right? So what happens in the locker room with the hockey team is on camera. And he seems very happy and very proud to be drinking, to be guzzling alcohol and spraying it on himself and not just consuming it, but wearing it. And then Spreading it. And the topic of his alcohol consumption, it feels like he's got this absolutist denial of something that he felt so comfortable and confident doing. The cameras were rolling.

[F]

Yeah. I found it really shocking that we were able to obtain that video that Sunday after the gold medal victory of the men's ice hockey team, because I thought he might, if he was drinking and he was there for a personal trip, and it was in such direct, dire conflict with what he and his spokesperson had said about his purpose for visiting, that he might stay off camera or ask people not to film him. But that is what happened. You know, there are so many things today that, you know, you can't say that it meets the standard for intentionally making a false statement, but there were so many things today that just did not ring true. You know, I didn't order the firing of the members of this team that are specialists in Iran. I'm paraphrasing. That's not true. Those people were ordered fired and removed at his instruction. Sometimes I wonder about semantics with all administrations. All presidential administrations kind of use the. The English language to their advantage when they can. And I wonder about his claim. When asked directly about whether his drinking is. Has been to excess, he has said, I've never been intoxicated on the job. That's not really the question. And that's not really the standard either for the sobriety. And I mean sobriety in the big, big definition of it, the broadest possible definition, the sobriety we expect as Americans of an FBI director.

[C]

I mean, Carol, let me just press you on this point, because what he testified to, and we'll pretend this is normal under oath, was that he's always on the job. That's his quote. I'm quote, always on the clock. And to your point, the alcohol, I mean, I hope he was drunk in that image. Like, I hope that isn't behavior that he would, under oath, describe as sober conduct, even if he was really, really excited. I know that we're all cautiously only dealing with that which is heavily reported happens in front of our very eyes. But he seemed to contradict himself by saying, on the one hand, I'm quot always on the job. He describes that as 24, seven. Seven days a week. And then there's video evidence of him drinking. If he's always on the job, drinking on the job.

[F]

Well, to be fair, great question, Nicole, because every FBI director I have known, everyone that I have written about does view themselves as being always on the job, you know, always available. There's a Reason there is a plane and always available for an FBI director, even in the case of Chris Wray, when he's going to his lake house or when Jim Comey might be going to visit a friend, they have to be close to that jet because they will be needed at 2 o' clock in the morning if there's a terror attack, if there's a mass shooting, they may not be drawn into a command center, but they need to be available at all times. And so, yes, it is a 24, 7 job. And but, you know, hats off to the Atlantic reporting, there was some detail in which they describe him being really drunk in two different clubs, one of them in Washington, D.C. and witnessed by others, including members of his security detail. That's not a great look for an FBI director. If we should be attacked by Iran or if there's an assassination attempt again on the President of the United States or some other member of the line of succession. I want to underline something else that was false. The morale of the FBI is in the toilet. There's no other way to say it. I appreciate Ash for saying, you know, maybe Carol has some more intel on this. I think she and I are hearing from some of the same people based on the language she was using. I've heard people say clown show. I've heard people say disaster. A former FBI official contacted me after going to a retirement party where they were sort of shocked that people at that level of their career when they would be going into jobs as assistant directors and deputy directors, are retiring. And the mood in this retirement event was absolute abject embarrassment. And the word was used over and over again. The place is a disaster. That doesn't give me a lot of comfort and I actually feel very sorry to say it.

[C]

Yeah, well, and importantly, it shouldn't give Donald Trump any comfort. Whatever his aims for politicizing the bureau are, and they seem deeply personal, it doesn't serve him. It doesn't serve the country to have the bureau totally dysfunctional. Caroline, thank you for all of your reporting and for starting us off with it. When we come back, there is brand new reporting on the FBI interviewing current and former CIA employees. It's part of their investigation into former Director John Brennan, who was here yesterday. We'll talk about that next. Plus, when Donald Trump says jump, his Justice Department clearly says, how high, sir? How Trump himself is directing his acting AG to pursue journalists and reporters in the wake of reporting about his handling of the war with Iran. And later in the broadcast, as more and more Americans say Donald Trump and his policies are causing financial hardship. Donald Trump, for his part, is posting away on social media at a clip that would make any parent of a teen very, very stressed at hours that would make anyone suspicious of how someone is doing. But these posts are reinforcing how Americans see him as, at a minimum, deeply out of touch. We have all those stories and much more when Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.

[A]

Artificial intelligence is moving very, very fast and it's raising new questions just about every day about what it is, what it is when all is said and done. What is the end game? I'm Chris Hayes and as part of my podcast why Is this Happening? I'm speaking with leading experts each week to help ground that conversation.

[B]

We're right now in a situation where it's very difficult to understand what is real and what's not real.

[A]

Why is this happening? The AI Endgame, a special miniseries from Ms. Now. Start listening today wherever you get your podcasts.

[C]

Do you think you will be investigated as part of their grand conspiracy investigation out of Florida?

[D]

It's hard to say. That is really red string on the basement crazy wall stuff and so it's hard to assess from a distance. I gather they found an 81 year old guy, Joe, to come back to government for the first time since Duran Duran was on the charts and lead an investigation again. They're trying to find people who will do that which principled people will not do.

[C]

Jim Comey with a solid burn there, the Duran Duran era guy and the quote red string on the basement crazy wall stuff. That is how the former director of the FBI Jim Comey described the so called grand conspiracy case and investigation based on, as the name suggests, the conspiracy theory that former national security officials and intelligence officials and law enforcement officers got together and somehow conspired to undermine Donald Trump even though he won at every step of what would then be a failed plot to do. I don't know what. Reuters today is reporting on some movement out of that red string basement case out of the Southern Florida office that is headquartering this. They write this quote. The FBI has begun interviewing current and former CIA employees as part of the Department of Justice's investigation into ex CIA director and Ms. Now senior national security and intelligence analyst John Brennan over his role in an intelligence finding that Russia interfered in the 2016 US election to help Donald Trump. That's according to five sources familiar with the matter. Employees were questioned last week by agents out of the Miami field office at CIA headquarters in McLean, Virginia. Interviews are expected to continue throughout the coming weeks, according to three of the sources, Reuters notes. And we've made this point on this program. The conclusions of that intelligence assessment that FBI agents are now actively investigating were confirmed by the Marco Rubio led bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee. Marco Ruby is, of course, now Donald Trump's Secretary of State and National Security advisor. So Donald Trump could just reach over and ask him if this is, as Bill Barr might say, bullshit or not. Those findings from the intelligence community were also confirmed by the Mueller probe. They were confirmed by John Durham, who was Bill Barr's guy who investigated the investigator. They were also confirmed by an internal review at the CIA after Donald Trump won a second time. So this is all really happening because of Donald Trump's obsession with revenge, especially revenge against anyone that worked for President Obama, his administration officials and President Obama himself. And yet another unhinged true social posting spree. Last night, Donald Trump posted and reposted about President Obama multiple times, including one repost that called President Obama a traitor and called for his arrest. I'm going to bring into our coverage Justice Department reporter for the New York Times, Glenn Thrush. Asha and Christy are still here. Glenn Thrush, who even works on something that Marco Rubio and John Durham said was B.S.

[G]

first, I got to tell you, it's been 24 hours since you aired the Comey interview, Nicole, and thanks to you, I've had Hungry like the Wolf in my head for a full day.

[C]

I feel bad that Duran Duran's getting dragged in like a Joe Genoa de Genova news cycle. But you know, it was Comey's like cultural reference, so says a lot for

[G]

the, for the 90% of Americans who, who are younger than me. Google it and watch the video. It'll tell you where, where us Gen Xers are coming from. Look, I mean like this grand conspiracy thing was itself. So the Brennan thing I reported, I don't even remember when. It's all kind of a whirlwind. But sometime last year, sometimes in the muddle that was 2025, we reported that the U.S. attorney in Philadelphia drop kicked the Brennan investigation out of his jurisdiction to Florida. Now, now for those viewers who are uninitiated, this investigation is being run by a guy named Jason Redding Quinones, who is a Trump die hard. And our reporting and other people's reporting have shown that Quinones has been up in D.C. quite a bit over the past few months. So this is in coordination with the knowledge of Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who is very, very much trying to Check off boxes so that he can take the acting away from his title. And I should just tell you, Blanche and Patel got a shout out at a Trump event last night, and it was very noteworthy that Trump referred to him not as Attorney General Todd Blanche, but as Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche as a way of just saying, hey, dude, the jury's still out, and the grand jury is very much still out on this. On the Brennan case, as you, I think, exhaustively and appropriately documented, this material has been gone over many, many times. And, you know, they might, as they were able to do in the Comey Seychelles case, obtain an indictment. Getting a conviction on this is quite another matter. So I think we're just seeing as we witness with the Patel testimony today, part of the goal here by the Trump team, and they haven't made a particular secret of this, is to actually degrade the institutions themselves in the belief that they're deep state tools of the Democrats, which is entirely unproven. So there's just a general sense across the board with all of these prosecutions, and one has to keep reminding themselves that Comey was indicted for seashells. Okay, so what we're seeing here, I think in general, and you saw it with Patel today, is just the institutions themselves are being diminished so that by implication, their investigations and indictments of Trump can be diminished. So it's all part of Trump's psychology of bringing down the institutions that questioned him.

[C]

I have to sing in a break, but I just want to follow up and press you on whether or not the failed investigators of the investigators will be subpoenaed, because it seems like if this was a grand conspiracy, John Durham and Marco Rubio were in on it because they spent millions of taxpayer dollars. They looked at it for years. They testified under oath before Congress that they looked at the intelligence community and found nothing. So if it's a grand conspiracy, it would seem to me that the conspirators conspired with Marco Rubio, and that might be problematic. I'll press you on that. On the other side of a break, don't go anywhere.

[E]

Foreign

[A]

is moving very, very fast, and it's raising new questions just about every day about what it is, what it isn't. When all is said and done, what is the end game? I'm Chris Hayes, and as part of my podcast, why Is this Happening? I'm speaking with leading experts each week to help ground that conversation.

[B]

We're right now in a situation where it's very difficult to understand what is real and what's not.

[A]

Real why is this happening? The AI Endgame, a special miniseries from Ms. Now. Start listening today, wherever you get your podcasts.

[G]

I was interviewed by John Durham himself, along with his investigators for, I think,

[C]

close to eight hours.

[G]

And, you know, they were able to look at all of the documents, all of my, you know, emails and other types of things, and they reviewed it, you know, extensively. And I think Bill Barr, you know, said that it appeared as though CIA stayed in this lane.

[C]

So, Glenn Thrush, the grand conspiracy. How does it allot for Marco Rubio investigating this to the ground? And Marco Rubio described his probe as the most comprehensive of the intelligence and the national underlying intelligence. And John Durham, who spent eight hours. I mean, are they part of the conspiracy or did they miss something?

[G]

It doesn't comport with anything. It's like essentially, as far as we can tell, it's just the President. Here's the thing, it's. What do they call it? Teleological. You start from a conclusion and you backtrack your way through the evidence. It's completely an inversion of the way that this process is supposed to proceed. I mean, he has a target list. And Cash Patel, again, not to keep returning to his testimony, but this is a guy who essentially had a hit list, a target list. He denies it now, but he wrote a book about it. The President of the United States wants people punished for essentially doing their job. And he is not going to rest until he gets it. And, you know, it's interesting, as we observed in the first term, there were individuals who had limits. You know, Jeff Sessions and Barr were criticized for going along with Trump too much. And some of those criticisms may have been valid, but, you know, in the end, they refused to do certain things that Trump asked them to do. We have no evidence that Blanche or Bondi really have resisted or opposed Trump on anything. We do have some instances in which they gave contrary advice, like they didn't want the Comey and James prosecutions to take place in Edva, and they supported Siebert, who was then the U.S. attorney there. But we do not have a situation in which senior Justice Department officials are pushing back. And this is what you get.

[C]

Asha. What does that mean for the agents that are asked to work on a case where the evidence has been investigated and run to ground by the Senate Intelligence Committee, by the FBI, by the Department of Justice, by the CIA? What are they doing, Nicole?

[H]

Not only has it been investigated by all these other places, the assessment was released by the FBI. We're talking about the January 2017 intelligence assessment on the 2016 election that was put out, a joint intelligence assessment by the FBI, the CIA, and the nsa. So the FBI actually put this out themselves. So, you know, as you noted, it's been vetted. I think it's important here to understand what. At least what I understand to be the theory of the case, because this is kind of red string in the basement kind of stuff. All of this happened too long ago for the events themselves to be prosecutable. They have a statute of limitations problem. And just incidentally, someone might want to tell President Trump that the immunity decision also applies to other presidents. So, you know, Obama is off the table. But what they're doing is now focusing in on Brennan's testimony in 2023, in which they're claiming that he basically lied about how the CIA put together this assessment, their role in it, and putting the Steele dossier. And it's a very. It's very similar to the first Comey indictment theory, you know, which didn't go very far. So I don't even think this is about the substance of the actual intelligence. It's just a vehicle to bring in to get these people in the crosshairs. Using more recent congressional testimony.

[C]

I try and fail to never normalize the fact that the current president, constantly, in the middle of the night in social media posts, accuses former President Barack Obama of treasonous conduct, but he does, and that happened last night. And I think in addition to what Asha just described, trying to catch Director Brennan in the crosshairs or trying to fabricate some criminality that no one else has identified in multiple investigations, it's about saying, I'm not the only president who was indicted. I mean, this is an obsession with former President Obama. This is an obsession with being the only president to be a felon. This is an obsession with saying, see, everybody commits crimes like me, and it's dangerous and disturbing that no one in his own party or cabinet tells him to knock it off. Right.

[B]

I mean, the string of messages from him last night into the wee hours of the morning are insane. But it is all to underscore this point that this is the swamp. He is draining the swamp. This is the.

[C]

He's painting it. He's not draining it anymore. He's painting it.

[B]

Yes. And. And all of it is to feed the narrative, but there's no there there. So. And if you ever needed to know there was no there there, the prosecutor that was assigned to this, who said, there isn't anything here for us to charge, they not only took her off of the case. And they said, well, it's normal to have changes of lawyers. It is not normal to take off a prosecutor from a team when that prosecutor disagrees with the charging decision, especially when that prosecutor is the lead prosecutor on the investigation, who also happens to be the chief of the National Security Division at the District of Southern Florida. This is about a conspiracy of national security officials looking to kind of take down Trump. But the person who's in charge of that division said there's nothing there. I've never heard of a national security prosecution going forward without the chief of the unit being on board. But that's what's happening here. And instead, and it's definitely not normal to bring on somebody who's been retired forever, who's been critical of Brennan in the press to then take over that prosecution. That tells you everything.

[C]

Seems to argue the vindictive prosecution defense without having to hire a lawyer.

[B]

Yep. Rights itself.

[C]

It's incredible. All right, everyone sticks around after the break. How the Justice Department is also following through and acting on Donald Trump's threats to crack down on journalists. We'll have that story next. The Wall Street Journal is now reporting that in the wake of Donald Trump's complaints about leaks related to the war in Iran, the DOJ has pursued aggressive investigations and has issued subpoenas of media companies and journalists, including to the Wall Street Journal itself. Donald Trump has focused his ire on articles that provided details on how he arrived at his decision to launch the war with Iran and what his advisors had told him as he deliberated, officials said the same administration that gave a pass to Pete Hegseth for texting war plans to the Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg is now looking to see if it can potentially charge journalists with a capital offense. According to reporting from both CNN and the Wall Street Journal, Donald Trump reportedly passed a stack of news articles, he and other senior officials to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche with a sticky note on it that said, quote, treason. Back with Glenn, Asha and Christy Glenn throwing around treason, I know, again, is another thing that can start to feel normal because Trump does it, but it isn't. It's a crime that can be punishable by death. And passing them on to a guy, as you have reported, desperate to lose the acting out of the acting attorney general title feels like a real combustible dynamic. Just talk about this attempt or interest in pursuing and prosecuting and investigating journalists.

[G]

Well, these stories that were written about his decision to go to war with Iran are the most fundamental kinds of stories that Washington reporters can, can Engage in. This is a policy that is enormously unpopular, that is putting lives at risk. And this is precisely the kind of reporting that is. That is fundamentally in the public interest. A lot of stuff that. A lot of criticism that Washington reporters take about, take on focusing on frivolity. This is not the case. This is the core of our business. And this is intended, make no mistake about it, I believe, to chill sources from.

[A]

From.

[G]

From speaking with us. This is a very, very dangerous pattern that we're seeing here. Blanche and Bondi scrapped an agreement that my paper and other news organizations had with the Merrick Garland Department of Justice to, you know, to not engage in these sorts of investigations. But this, along with the seizure of the Washington Post reporter's phone, represents what we believe to be a really dangerous. And we believe this series of decisions that are motivated by more. By an intent to keep us from obtaining information that's in the public interest than a decision that is made in the public interest.

[C]

Is it working, Glenn? I mean, have your sources dried up?

[G]

No, and it's not gonna work, because the reason why people are talking about this is because there's. There's dissension within the administration. This is not a popular policy. It's not going to shut people up. Maybe it's going to make folks inside the White House bubble feel better about this. But. But I know that all the reporters involved are undaunted and will continue to pursue the truth.

[C]

Asha. I mean, to Glenn's point, it seems to be having the opposite impact.

[H]

Yes, Nicole, But I think it's worth highlighting here that this is a problem with the law, actually the way that it's written. So what they're likely using is the espionage act of 1917, and that criminalizes the retention of information relating to the national defense. It doesn't even have to be classified. We encountered this same statute with the Mar a Lago documents, if you'll recall. So it's information relating to the national defense that the person has reason to believe could be injurious to the US if it's divulged and they don't even have to publish it. It can just be. So you can see how this statute has the potential to get journalists into its crosshairs. Now, why hasn't it been used for,

[B]

you know, decades, more than a century

[H]

against journalists, largely because of presidential restraint, because presidents, you know, believe that there needed to be the buffer between national security concerns and the First Amendment. They've gone after the leakers, but not after the publishers and journalists until Trump 1.0, where they did go after Julian Assange. So I think, you know, we had a preview of this coming.

[C]

Yeah. Buckle up. Glenn Thrush, Asher Ngappa, Christi Greenberg, thank you so much for spending the hour with us. Up next, how the Trump administration is fudging the actual cost of Donald Trump's war with Iran. That's our next story. Keshe Patel was not the only Trump cabinet official on the Capitol Hill today. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also faced Senate questioning over his budget proposal. Pentagon officials raised the cost of the war with Iran from 25 billion to 29 billion. Even with that new jaw dropping figure, it's important to note that Pete Hegseth did not answer questions from Democrats about how much it will cost to rebuild more than a dozen US Military bases that have been damaged so far. Our friend and economist Justin Wolfers estimates that the true cost is closer to hundreds of billions of dollars and very possibly trillions. Listen to what Senator Chris Murphy told Hegseth about the war turning into a quagmire.

[A]

I believe you are being way too optimistic in your assessment of their potential to cave. But if this goes on for another 30 days, there are going to be thousands more farms that will go bankrupt. There are going to be families that are going to be ruined. And so time is not on our side. And I just don't believe that Iran is ready to capitulate.

[C]

We'll stay on top of that. Coming up for us next, as Americans feel this squeeze from the war with Iran, Donald Trump just keeps posting and posting away on social media, talking about anything and everything except the issues that voters care about. We'll talk about that on the other side of a break.

[A]

You didn't start a business just to

[C]

keep the lights on.

[A]

You're here to sell more today than yesterday.

[C]

You're here to win.

[A]

Lucky for you, Shopify built the best converting checkout on the planet, like the

[C]

just one tapping ridiculously fast acting, sky

[A]

high sales stacking champion of checkouts. That's the good stuff right there. So if your business is in it

[C]

to win it, win with Shopify. Start your free trial [e-mail] win.