← Morning Joe
Loading summary
Transcript98 lines
- [00:01]
Joe Scarborough
These CEOs who are coming to town.
- [00:02]
Mika Brzezinski
Including from IBM and HP and Qualcomm.
- [00:05]
Joe Scarborough
They all need to go back to their boards and to their shareholders to.
- [00:08]
Mika Brzezinski
Explain what exactly is going to happen. And we also expect the White House to try to reassure folks who are.
- [00:15]
Joe Scarborough
Sitting there looking at their 401ks going.
- [00:18]
Mika Brzezinski
Down and down and down.
- [00:20]
Joe Scarborough
This is a White House that came in trying to get federal workers to.
- [00:24]
Mika Brzezinski
Retire by the hundreds of thousands.
- [00:27]
Joe Scarborough
But it's tough to make the argument that you should retire if your retirement.
- [00:31]
Mika Brzezinski
Accounts are getting throttled, which is what.
- [00:33]
Joe Scarborough
Is happening right now.
- [00:35]
Jonathan LeMere
Fox News reporter Peter Doocy posing questions of the Trump administration that a lot of Americans are asking right now.
- [00:42]
Mika Brzezinski
You know, we saw him ask that question, the press conference yesterday, but also I think some of the most remarkable coverage yesterday, cnbc, people saying things on CNBC that they don't usually say about this president or a Republican president.
- [00:58]
Jonathan LeMere
It all comes as new tariffs from the president took effect overnight. We'll go through those measures and look at how Trump's chaotic trade policies continue to impact the markets and the economy overall. Meanwhile, US And Ukrainian relations appear to be back on track after that disastrous White House meeting last month. U.S. intelligence and aid are flowing again into the war torn country.
- [01:25]
Mika Brzezinski
Great news.
- [01:25]
Jonathan LeMere
And there's even a ceasefire proposal on the table. The question is, what will Russia do now? We're going to dig into all of that major news just ahead on MORNING joe. Good morning and welcome to MORNING joe.
- [01:38]
Mika Brzezinski
I mean, what a day yesterday. I mean, we had what was going on in Saudi Arabia with the negotiations. That is very good news for the Ukrainians that especially they get the intel and they also get a bit and get the military aid. But the Wall Street Journal basically says it all, talking about stocks continuing to fall. Another volatile session. The headline U.S. canada Trade War hits, you know, twists and turns and again, trillions of dollars wiped out. Front page of the New York Times, of course, talking about this important breakthrough yesterday in the Ukrainian U.S. negotiations. And now we wait for Russia.
- [02:28]
Jonathan LeMere
What happens with us? We have the co host of our fourth hour, Jonathan LeMere. He is a contributing writer at the Atlantic covering the White House and national politics. Columnist and associate editor for the Washington Post, David Ignatius is here. And writer at large for the New York Times, Elizabeth Bumiller joins us this morning. Good to have you all. President Trump's 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports are now in effect. The taxes will affect Canada, Australia and the European Union and others. The EU has already announced countermeasures which will go into effect on April 1. But Australia's prime minister said the country will not impose reciprocal tariffs on US Imports because it would only inflate prices for Australian consumers. Late yesterday, Trump backed off on raising tariffs on metals from Canada to 50% after the premiere of Ontario said he would pause a surcharge on electricity exports to the U.S. the Canadian government, however, has promised to retaliate against the 25% tariffs on its metals. The President also reiterated his desire for Canada to become the 51st state.
- [03:48]
Mika Brzezinski
So we spend $200 billion a year subsidizing Canada. We don't have to do that. And frankly, the way that gets solved is Canada should honestly become our first aid. We wouldn't have a northern border problem, we wouldn't have a tariff problem. Canada would be great as our cherished 51st state. You wouldn't have to worry about borders, you wouldn't have to worry about anything. And by the way, Canada is very highly taxed and we're very low tax. We're considered a low tax nation because of me, because I cut the taxes so low so the people of Canada would pay much less tax. It makes a lot of sense. And by the way, when you take away that artificial line that looks like it was done with a ruler and, and that's what it was. Some guy sat there years ago and they said, rah. Well, when you take away that and you look at that beautiful formation of Canada and the United States, there is no place anywhere in the world that looks like that. Elizabeth, so many people have been thinking and saying, oh, Donald Trump's joking about Greenland. He's not really serious. This is opening negotiations are the Panama Canal are fill in the blank. But especially Canada. That was always dismissed as a joke. Prime Minister Trudeau, caught in a hot mic moment, told his advisers and people close to him, he's not joking. We have to take this threat seriously. And certainly yesterday, in the middle of an economic collapse, Donald Trump goes back to saying, we wouldn't have this tariff problem if you all would just agree to be our 51st state.
- [05:36]
David Ignatius
It is very hard to believe, but he is. He seems to be increasingly serious. The strange thing, though, is what it's done. It's made, you know, the Liberal Party is one in Canada. And should Canada become part of the United States, there would never be a Republican president elected again because it's a very liberal country and they would all be Democrats. It's loopy. You know, people still seem to think that he's doing this just for effect. That he is trying to get major concessions out of Canada. But right now it has had the opposite effect in Canada. He is, and America is increasingly unpopular in Canada, obviously. Same thing with Greenland, I think, although there seems to be, you know, Greenland wants to be independent from Denmark, but also there's would also welcome, you know, close relations with the United States. So that is less crazy than Canada. But, but right now that's where the president is. And it's a whole big question about which also, you know, business executives are having is, you know, how they didn't take him seriously about this tariff, the tariffs he was going to impose. They didn't think he was going to do it. They thought it was just negotiations. And it turns out he is serious, at least for now. And they are very, very rattled and they're calling the White House in a panic.
- [06:51]
Mika Brzezinski
But I mean, it's, I mean, I just don't know how anybody could be surprised. This is something that again, he's said he was going to do this for 40 years. And I've been hearing from people on Wall Street, I've been hearing talk to see other shocked. Can you believe where have you been for the last, like year? He's promised to do all of these things. Oh, yeah. Well, and on tariffs, he's been talking about it for 40 years. So again, these CEOs and you know, found out. Yeah, I mean, he meant, he meant what he said. And, and so I just, I don't want to hear, oh, I'm so shocked. Yeah, I'm losing money.
- [07:37]
Jonathan LeMere
There's a lot of gobsmacked CEOs and business leaders saying, I didn't think he would do this. And I think increasingly people are understanding that he is serious about many of the ideas that he has put on the table that he did during the campaign. And I will say, well, tried our best. I mean, if, if people are constantly watching news organizations that follow only what Trump says and not necessarily the facts, then they will find out the hard way.
- [08:13]
Mika Brzezinski
Well, I mean, again, it just Jonathan Muir, we've had people on this show, regulars on this show that said, oh my God, I'm surprised he actually did this. He's been saying he was going to do this since 1987. So if you are a CEO or if you've somebody that's invested in the market, we said it here repeatedly. He was serious, be careful with the economy. We have the strongest economy in the world. Don't screw around and find out. You have to be careful. Like we said it day in day out, day in and day out. And you actually talk to CEOs and investors and people on Wall street who were shocked that Donald Trump's actually doing what he said he was going to do on the campaign. And for 50 years, yeah, the Wall.
- [09:02]
Joe Scarborough
Street and business leaders sort of made a bet this past campaign that Trump would make these promises during the year. And some things, the pro growth, you know, cutting taxes alike, they, they approved of like he'll do that. But he also talked about these tariffs. He talked about slashing immigration, things that leaders opposed. But the bet they made was, oh, that's just rhetoric, that's just bluster. That's just things he says to get the crowd cheering at a rally. He won't follow through on that. Well, that's bet they're wrong. That's what's happened here. And we have learned, first of all, as you point out, tariffs, his belief in tariffs is one of his few really consistently held ideologies. He's done that since the 1980s. But more than that, this past we have learned from his first administration and particularly this past campaign. When he makes these promises, he tends to follow through. He tells us what he's going to do. He's actually far more transparent than people want to give him credit for. There's not a lot of hidden hand here. There's not a lot of if ever a three or four dimensional chess this Donald Trump when he says he's going to do it, more times than not he does. And we're seeing the impact now we have as we'll get into in a moment. The market's again rattled by these policies. It's chaotic, it's inconsistent, it seems to change by the hour. And we know Joe Amica that had business leader Steve Rattner again joined us yesterday saying how much it's about consistency and predictability. That's what the markets need. That's what corporations need. Well, that's exactly what they're not getting.
- [10:29]
Mika Brzezinski
And again, what everybody knew they were not going to get for the past year or what everybody should have known that they're going to hit these tariffs and that he, he negotiated again. There's no 100 year plan. It's just he's going to negotiate the way he negotiates and it's going to take wild twists and turns.
- [10:49]
Jonathan LeMere
President Trump's trade policy has even rattled some of his own allies as both Republican lawmakers and business executives have flooded the White House with calls of concern. The Wall Street Journal reports senior officials, including White House chief of staff Susie Wiles have received panicked calls from chief executives and lobbyists who have urged the administration to calm jittery markets by outlining a more predictable tariff agenda, according to people familiar with discussions. Many in community have abandoned efforts to get the president to reverse course on trade, instead pleading with the White House for clarity on his approach, the people said. The paper continues. The mixed messages from the president and his advisers have raised concerns among some Republicans that Trump lacks a cohesive economic plan. And the Wall Street Journal's editorial board is asking, how do you like the trade war now? Its piece reads in part. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said over the weekend that the president's tariffs would make some foreign products more expensive. But American products will get cheaper, huh? Companies that use foreign components will have to raise prices or swallow narrower profit margins. Does Mr. Lutnick understand? Well, commerce. The trouble with trade wars is that once they begin, they can quickly escalate and get out of control. All the more so when politicians are nearing an election campaign, as Canada now is, or when Mr. Trump behaves as if his manhood is implicated because a foreign nation won't take his nasty border taxes lying down. We said from the beginning that this North American trade war is the dumbest in history, and we were being kind.
- [12:45]
Mika Brzezinski
That's the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Obviously the conservative voice, really intellectual conservative v voice and, and the voice of most conservatives and traders on Wall Street.
- [12:58]
Jonathan LeMere
Joe mentioned the coverage yesterday on cnbc. Here's some of the reaction from senior economics reporter Steve Leesman.
- [13:06]
Mika Brzezinski
What President Trump is doing is insane. It is absolutely insane. It is about the eighth reason we've had for the tariffs. And now he's saying he's putting 50% tariffs on Canada unless they agree to become the 51st state. That is insane. There is just no other way of describing it. And the trouble, Kelly, is that it shows there are no bounds around President Trump.
- [13:30]
Joe Scarborough
This is very different from the first.
- [13:32]
Mika Brzezinski
Administration where there were people around him who seemed to, I don't know what the word is, but smooth over some of the edges now.
- [13:39]
Joe Scarborough
And the other thing that's not talked.
- [13:41]
Mika Brzezinski
About, Kelly, is what's going on within.
- [13:42]
Joe Scarborough
The administration in terms of how they're.
- [13:45]
Mika Brzezinski
Treating the Constitution and laws. I think all of that is bad for the attraction of capital. David Ignatius we actually turned on CNBC yesterday, something that I can't say I've ever done in the middle of the day. Not a trader, not a trader. But yesterday, in fact, we, we don't usually, we don't usually watch news during the day, you know, more. But we said yesterday, why, hmm, let's turn on cnbc. And it was remarkable. And one of the reasons we wanted to turn on CNBC is because, you know, most, most people that watch CNBC voted for Donald Trump. It is a, it is, it is a conservative network. And it's just be conservative with a small C as, as it pertains to business. They want to make money. That's why they're watching cnbc. But we were shocked by what we heard on it. It really does parallel a lot of what the Wall Street Journal editorial page said. So again, bedrock conservatives again, warning against these moves that are draining trillions of dollars from the economy. And as Mr. Ducey said Fox News yesterday, making people's 401 s go, I think he said, down, down, down, down, down. And let me just tell you, that is something that a member of Congress hears about on the campaign trail or in his district office.
- [15:18]
Elizabeth Bumiller
You know, Joe, I think we're all watching CNN or CNBC figuratively, if not literally, because we're all implicated in this. You know, the financial market slide is something that's going to affect all of us in our savings, our retirement plans. And I think there is a sense of shock. The standard business view of Trump was, well, he's a disruptor. You know, he loves to come in and shake things up. He has these big, bold proposals for tariffs or whatever, but he'll back off. That's the way he negotiates. He's the deal maker. So he'll shake things up and then the deal will come. And what we're seeing in these first six, seven weeks is that Trump is more determined, he's more confident, more insistent. I was thinking there's a little bit of Captain Ahab in him pursuing the white whale. He just won't stop. He won't pull back from some of these ideas. And I think as people watch CNBC or whatever, there's a dawning sense this is really going to be serious and dangerous for our country's economy. And I think it's that fear factor that leads us to watch the financial news. In truth, we're making a bit of a joke about it, but it's deadly serious for the American people. Political reaction, I think, is going to be very significant.
- [16:39]
Mika Brzezinski
Right? Yeah. It's a financial sort of version of what we do in Florida every time a hurricane start. Weather Channel goes on. You just said the weather channels in the background for days. But, but it's certainly in the background in a lot of Americans homes, right? Now in a way that it's not usually because again, their retirement accounts are 401ks. I mean, so much depends on the volatility of the markets. Jim Cramer also talking about this was a, could be a manufactured recession. This is what I will say. This is one thing that most of the analysts who were talking yesterday, deeply concerned about tariffs and all was going on saying. They said we don't have to have a recession. And Jim Cramer called it a manufactured recession. But I think what they're concerned about mainly, well, they're concerned about a manufactured recession. But even not even a manufactured recession. As Wall Street Journal says, hard landing fears start to grow. You know, we've been talking about this remarkable soft landing the United States has been going through over the past six to nine months. Now, that landing is not quite so soft. It's a hard landing. And as Jim Cramer at CNBC says, it's not because of natural market forces, it's because it is manufactured by policy. So a lot more to talk about there. And also make a great breakthrough for the Ukrainian people yesterday in we can only hope.
- [18:11]
Jonathan LeMere
Still ahead on Morning Joe, we'll get to that possible breakthrough when it comes to the war in Ukraine. Kiev has agreed to a 30 day cease fire proposal from the United States. But where does Russia stand on it? Morning Joe is back in 90 seconds.
- [18:29]
Mika Brzezinski
I don't think we'll have a recession. Like I said, it's manufactured, it's manufactured.
- [18:33]
Joe Scarborough
Well, that doesn't mean there won't be.
- [18:34]
Mika Brzezinski
I'm not sure I understand. No, manufactured easily cause recession. Absolutely. I don't, you know, I'm not, I'm not saying that manufacturing means it's not going to happen. Right. I'm saying manufactured is that you can make it happen. And when you get angry and when you kind of lose your temper and you get mad instead of like the way shine bombs handle it in Mexico, it gets people nervous and upset. They want the president to be a little happier. They let you know there's nothing wrong with being happy. You can be tough as nails and be happy, but right now it just feels like, like, oh, we're going to just screw every, you know, people have been screwing us for years and we're going to fight back. Which is true. It's absolutely true. But you got to explain it very commonly and empirically how we're being hurt by in Italy, how we're being hurt by Germany. And this is going to stop and we're going to make it stop and then don't scream at Those countries, it doesn't work. It doesn't work. It doesn't work because they know that they can stand their ground. You tell them, look, I am going to scream you at you. Help us. Help us and we'll help you.
- [19:36]
Elizabeth Bumiller
People are scared.
- [19:38]
Mika Brzezinski
They don't scare people. You don't scare. It's just, it's a wrong call. It's all message. People are scared.
- [20:10]
Jonathan LeMere
22 past the hour. The other big story we're following this morning. Russia is pushing back after Ukraine said it is ready to accept a 30 day ceasefire proposed by the United States. The Guardian quotes the spokeswoman for Russia's Foreign Ministry as saying Moscow will make its own decisions about the conflict in Ukraine, regardless of outside influence. US And Ukrainian officials met yesterday for nearly eight hours to discuss an end to the war. Afterwards, Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke to reporters about the agreement of peace.
- [20:45]
Mika Brzezinski
Today we made an offer that the Ukrainians have accepted, which is to enter into a ceasefire and into immediate negotiations to end this conflict in a way that's enduring and sustainable and accounts for their interests, their security, their ability to prosper as a nation. Hopefully, we'll take this offer now to the Russians and we hope that they'll.
- [21:03]
Julia Ainslie
Say yes, that they'll say yes to peace.
- [21:04]
Mika Brzezinski
The ball is now in their court.
- [21:08]
Jonathan LeMere
So last night, in his evening address, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said he welcomed the US Ceasefire proposal and expressed gratitude to President Trump. Trump. Whether Russia and Vladimir Putin ultimately agree to the ceasefire's terms remains to be seen. Meanwhile, European leaders reacted in support of the news, including the President of the European Commission and French President Emmanuel Macron. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he'll be convening leaders on Saturday to discuss the next steps in the process. Following Ukraine's endorsement of the US Proposed temporary ceasefire with Russia, the United States said it would immediately lift the pause on intelligence sharing and security assistance with the country. Presidential envoy Steve Witkoff will travel to Moscow later this week. That's according to a source familiar with the plans who spoke to NBC News, although that source would not confirm who Witkoff is specifically meeting with. We'll be looking into that.
- [22:12]
Mika Brzezinski
Well, David, if this US Policy holds, it certainly does sound like a very positive, very positive step forward that Secretary Rubio announced yesterday. And they have said, now the ball is in Russia's court. What do we expect?
- [22:30]
Elizabeth Bumiller
So, Joe, first, it is extremely positive. This terrible war has been going on for three years. As National Security Adviser Mike Waltz said, it's a meat grinder and trying to stop that meat grinder is something that I think everyone support, certainly the Ukrainians do. Now it is up to Russia, but I think more to the point, it's up to the Trump administration to pressure Russia to make enough concessions that you have a real negotiation. Something important that Secretary Rubio said in announcing this agreement is that he wants it to be enduring and sustainable. And that's a kind of code for giving Ukraine enough security that it can be confident that six months, a year, two years after the agreement is made, Russian troops won't simply resume the war and move towards Kyiv. A lot of us think that Putin has never really given up his desire to suppress Ukraine as an independent nation. So this is going to be hard bargaining. Russia does not want the kind of security guarantees that Ukraine is talking about and that were part of the conversation in Jeddah yesterday. I think I want to underline that this is something they didn't come to agreement on, but they certainly talked about. So action now moves to the U. S Russia dialogue. I was thinking this morning that if there's one way that Donald Trump could reset the global image of him, it's by being tough on Vladimir Putin. Something that many of us have wondered if he could ever do. If he does it, if he says you have to do this or you know, we are going to take increasing steps to compel you to the table, that would be interesting.
- [24:15]
Joe Scarborough
Yeah. To this point though, he never has shown willingness to be tough personally on Putin, even as in the first term, his administration will be hard on Russia. Putin as Trump, as we know time and time again will be very deferential to the Russian leader. And Elizabeth, that's continued so far in this term. And it's so much for Trump, diplomacy is about personality, it's about those personal connections. And we should note this was a breakthrough yesterday for U.S. ukrainian relations. But who was not in the room? Donald Trump was not in the room. Volodymyr Zelenskyy was not in the room. And we know how Trump feels about Zelenskyy. So as this accelerates, what will you be looking for? Cuz this won't get done until the very end when Trump's in the room. How do you see him playing the dynamics with both Zelenskyy and Putin?
- [24:57]
David Ignatius
Well, I want to know what his leverage is on Putin right now. More sanctions, what can he do? You know, if Putin, Putin is balks or if there's a holdup in the kind of security guarantees that the Ukrainians want. What is Trump'sthat'si should ask David that. Who's sitting here? What is the nextwhat is his next play? If Putin balks, what kind of leverage does the United States have on Putin right now in this war? It's a tough one.
- [25:24]
Elizabeth Bumiller
So there are two things that Trump has spoken about that are worth noting. One is the ability to add additional sanctions. The Russian economy is pretty fragile. They've been fighting war for three years. Their inflation problems are serious. They've had to divert resources to the war economy. So significant new additional economic pressure would be something there. Keith Kellogg, who's the special envoy, said that our sanctions enforcement is now at about 3. Sanctions may be at 8, but the enforcement's at 3. Well, you could move that up to 8 and have some real effect. And the second thing I just would note, Trump has talked from the beginning about bringing China in as in effect a co guarantor of this settlement in Ukraine. If China believing it's in its interest that this war end. I'm not sure China does think that. But if it decided that that was so, China could, I think, nudge Putin towards making concessions he's not now ready to.
- [26:21]
David Ignatius
But I would add, I think that debacle in the Oval Office with Trump and Zelensky and J.D. vance, as horrible as that was to watch, obviously it was a pressure tactic. That how ugly it was, it got us somewhere I hated.
- [26:41]
Jonathan LeMere
So, Elizabeth, in your latest piece for the New York Times, you write, quote, the silence grows louder every day. Fired federal workers who are worried about losing their homes, asked not to be quoted by name. University presidents, fearing that millions of dollars in federal funding could disappear, are holding their fire. Chief executives, alarmed by tariffs that could hurt their businesses, are on mute. Even longtime Republican hawks on Capitol Hill, stunned by President Trump's revisionist history that Ukraine is to blame for its invasion by Russia and his Oval Office blow up at President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that Elizabeth was just talking about, have either muzzled themselves, tiptoed up to criticism without naming Mr. Trump, or completely reversed their positions. More than six weeks into the second Trump administration, there is a chill spreading over political debate in Washington and beyond. And you see that in publications as well. Newspaper publications, yeah, you see it everywhere.
- [27:48]
Mika Brzezinski
And meanwhile, in a companion piece that I am sure they did not quit, the Wall Street Journal's editor emeritus, Jerry Baker, writes this in the Wall Street Journal, Capitol Hill's Republican Sycophant Caucus. And it reads, as the president ventures further down a diplomatic track that punishes and alienates for no good reasons. Our closest neighbor and ally that rewards the tyranny of a murderous and implacable foe of America, that nods approvingly as the dictator of that country carries out the rape of a free nation, that casually slashes at the bonds of alliance that have served this country well and enhanced its global power and standing for decades. My question is, when is someone going to say something? By someone, I mean a member of the world's greatest deliberative body and maybe its junior partner crossed Capitol Hill, too. There is nothing in the Constitution, Mr. Baker writes, or the conventions of Democratic politics that requires members of the co equal, elected branch of government to be constrained from offering even the slightest hint of critical advice or withholding consent when they see the president nonchalantly pouring gasoline on our national security and international economic relationships and dancing around them with a lighted match. Why don't you tell us how you really feel, Jerry Baker. But he this was all launched, Elizabeth, by Lindsey Graham saying, I don't mind what Trump does because I trust Trump, says servile Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Thus spoke Lindsey Graham last week, cheerfully declaring unconditional surrender, not only of his own judgment, his freedom of thought, his relevance and his dignity, but this one actually matters, his role as a leading member of one of the elected branches of the U.S. government. And I must say there were more than a few observers shocked how so many United States Senators serving in six year terms appointed are voted for the nominations of the president's cabinet, people that they said clearly off the record were not even qualified to fit the post. In some cases, they said were dangerous.
- [30:14]
David Ignatius
Right. Well, the answer to the questions of why they are so silent, there's a couple of answers. One, people are worried about primaries. And just yesterday, Trump threatened a primary which could be certainly a primary opponent, which could be certainly funded by his partner, Elon Musk, who gave $100 million yesterday to Trump political efforts. It could be funded by Musk. And he threatened Massie with the primary because he voted against the spending deal and Trump had a tantrum the other. But that doesn't make complete sense with the Senate because, as you note, they only run every six years. So some of them are quite, quite far away from a reelection campaign. The other reason people say quietly is that they're worried about the safety of their families. There are people, there are a lot of online threats against members of Congress and they're serious threats. The threats are quite high right now and people are scared. That's the other reason university presidents I mentioned in my story are Justthey're just protecting their institutions. They don't want to get into a big public battle with the administration, especially after the administration is now withholding or canceled $400 million in grants to Columbia University. And it's caused others to be silent. There's just a lot of fear. People say this is a sign of authoritarianism when people are so afraid of the government they're afraid to speak out. Others say this is overblown. This is reaction to the left and DEI and this sort of the efforts of Democrats and language efforts, especially last year after the October 7 attack, attacks on by Hamas on Israel and there was sort of language police there. It's still, but it's I've never seen anything like this in Washington where so many people are so afraid to talk on the record when they used to in the past.
- [32:19]
Joe Scarborough
Yeah. And connecting to our previous conversation, this is another campaign promise that Donald Trump is fulfilling and that's one of retribution, that there would be punishment for those who dare oppose him. You know, he has identified that deal deep state, these career bureaucrats as enemies of his from the first time around. Well, we're seeing Elon Musk and Doge take a chainsaw and eliminate so many of those positions, often losing high quality people. We're seeing that at the Pentagon as well.
- [32:48]
Mika Brzezinski
We are.
- [32:48]
Joe Scarborough
To Elizabeth's point, Harvard announced a hiring freeze. Some perceive that as, you know, means to stay clear of Trump's wrath. We saw what happened to Colombia. We're seeing media organizations be more concerned, their owners being concerned about avoiding litigation or not wanting to pursue critical coverage, perhaps because they had another business interest at stake. Whether that's we see it from the Washington Post, we're seeing it from the abc, we're seeing the LA Times. Other places there does seem to be an effort to sort of be intimidation seems to be working. And Joe, Mika, we're even seeing the White House and some of these Trump rapid response accounts and political allies target reporters by name in a way that we hadn't seen before, sort of. And that leads to an online wave of hate and at times threats. So there is an effort here of intimidation and retribution to, as Elizabeth points out, create this culture of silence.
- [33:42]
Jonathan LeMere
All right, thanks to Elizabeth Buehmiller for coming on this morning and for writing that. Thank you. Coming up, we'll take a closer look at President Trump, Trump's efforts to curb illegal immigration. NBC's Julia Ainslie will join us with her new reporting on the number of deportations conducted this year and how it compares to what we saw during the Biden administration. Morning Joe. We'll be right back. Welcome back. 20 minutes before the top of the hour. Time now for a look at some of the other stories making headlines this morning. The NTSB is making urgent safety recommendations following the mid air collision between a military helicopter and a passenger jet that killed 67 people in the Washington D.C. area yesterday. The NTSB called for the FAA to permanently ban helicopter operations in a four mile stretch over the Potomac river when flights are landing landing at Ronald Reagan National Airport. This comes as investigators believe January's deadly crash occurred after the Black Hawk helicopter was flying higher than its permitted altitude, putting it on a collision course with the passenger jet. Southwest Airlines will begin charging customers a fee to check bags. That's a reversal from a decades long policy the carrier has struck recently. In its bid to boost profits and revenue, IT cut roughly 15% of its corporate workforce last month. And scientists will now get the chance to study how galaxies formed and evolved over billions of years. NASA launched a new space telescope and four solar satellites yesterday from the Space Force base in California. The the $488 million Sphere X will take images of the entire sky in more than 100 colors or wavelengths.
- [35:44]
Mika Brzezinski
And Mika, this from Germany. Finally, after fierce competition, a German zoo has officially revealed the winning name for its four month old polar bear. Please make Mika no. Yeah. Say yeah. The Germans. You're very big in Germany, just like Jerry Lewis who's big in Japan.
- [36:08]
Jonathan LeMere
Oh my God.
- [36:08]
Mika Brzezinski
The adorable cub made his first public appearance yesterday and we're told he runs all day after his mom and plays with her and enjoys his bear naps.
- [36:20]
Jonathan LeMere
Runs all day.
- [36:21]
Mika Brzezinski
Runs all day and enjoys naps. That's it.
- [36:23]
Jonathan LeMere
Wait, that is the cutest thing. Is it really? Nika, like M I K a. Yeah.
- [36:27]
Mika Brzezinski
They had. They voted on it. And Mika was the winning. Yeah.
- [36:31]
Jonathan LeMere
Do you know that mika means blooming flower in Japanese?
- [36:35]
Mika Brzezinski
Oh, really?
- [36:36]
Jonathan LeMere
Yeah.
- [36:36]
Mika Brzezinski
Well, it means little cute bear in Germany.
- [36:39]
Jonathan LeMere
No, it doesn't. Still ahead, Democratic Congressman Jim Himes of Connecticut and Brendan Boyle of Pennsylvania will join us with reaction to the government funding bill that Platt passed in the House and much more. Plus, we'll speak with the New Republic Michael Tomaski on his new piece. Democrats are failing to deliver a key ingredient of effective protest. He'll break down what he says they should be doing instead. Also, a head actor and director Ben Falcone will be live in studio with a look at his new project. Morning Joe will be right back.
- [37:32]
Mika Brzezinski
You know, like so if you're keeping Score at home.
- [37:35]
Jonathan LeMere
Yeah, I, I'm keeping score.
- [37:36]
Mika Brzezinski
Conflated some things you did. Yeah. Are you ready?
- [37:39]
Jonathan LeMere
Yeah.
- [37:40]
Mika Brzezinski
Jerry Lewis, of course, is big in France. It's spinal taps that I was thinking about. Massive in Japan's final tap down.
- [37:48]
Jonathan LeMere
I was keeping score on some other things.
- [37:50]
Mika Brzezinski
And Mika.
- [37:51]
Jonathan LeMere
Okay.
- [37:52]
Mika Brzezinski
Big in Germany.
- [37:53]
Jonathan LeMere
Last week, during his joint address to Congress, President Trump falsely claimed tens of millions of dead people over 100 years old are receiving Social Security payments. Listen to a part of what he said.
- [38:07]
Mika Brzezinski
Believe it or not, government databases list 4.7 million Social Security members from people aged 100 to 109 years old. But a lot of money is paid out to people because it just keeps getting paid and paid and nobody does. And it really hurts Social Security and hurts our country.
- [38:30]
Jonathan LeMere
Now, according to the White House transcript, you heard, the president said, quote, it just keeps getting paid and paid and nobody does. And it really hurts Social Security. Nobody does what? Anything about it. Well, if a dead 100 year old is receiving a check in 2025, it stands to reason that back in 2016 when Trump was president, that same 91 year old would also have been receiving a check. Why didn't anyone do anything about it back then? Or when President Trump rails against usaid, calling it wasteful or part of a liberal agenda. Back in 2017, his own administration requested $37 billion for the program, saying it prioritizes the well being of Americans and advances U.S. economic interests. Was it a liberal agenda back then? And then there's President Trump's claims of being tough on undocumented immigration while suggesting former President Biden was weak on the border. But now, new exclusive reporting from NBC News shows Trump actually deported fewer people last month than Biden did one year ago. Joining us now, the reporter behind that story, NBC News senior Homeland Security correspondent Julia Ainslie. Also with us, the host of Way Too Early, Ali Vitale.
- [40:05]
Mika Brzezinski
And Julia, to two, two different stories going on here. One is that deportations are lower, but also, as you also have reported, border crossings have plummeted over the past several months.
- [40:21]
Julia Ainslie
Yeah. So what's going on here, Joe, is that we've heard a lot about the fact that border crossings have gone down and arrests have gone up, but it's been really hard to get our hands on this data about deportations. And of course, Trump campaigned on mass deportations in his inaugural address. He said he would deport millions and millions. He never campaigned on mass arrests. And as we've reported here, not everyone who gets arrested by ICE gets deported. Some of them are released. Some of them are not detained, not deportable. And so as it turns out, there's actually fewer people who were deported in February 2025, the first full month of Trump being in office this term, compared to February 2024 under Biden. A big reason for that drop, though, and why it's lower under Trump than it was under Biden, is because Customs of Border Protection are arresting fewer people at the border. It's much easier to deport people right after they've crossed. We have a pathway, they are called expedited removal. Biden used this to where they're basically deported very quickly rather than being in the United States and facing that years long backlog in immigration courts. And so it's easier to deport them if they're arrested by Border Patrol. Now, why the numbers are so low at the border is basically because Trump has completely shut down the asylum system. Biden, of course, signed that executive order in June of 2024. The numbers started to go down then because people weren't allowed to claim asylum if they crossed the border illegally. Now Trump's made it impossible to claim asylum even if you cross the border legally. As I'm told, it's almost impossible to even approach these legal ports of entry, where historically anyone who thinks that they are fleeing fear or persecution in their own country can make an asylum claim. Now, there are 10,000 people from the Mexican National Guard standing by these ports of entry. Many of these migrants can't even approach the legal ports of entry. And those who are coming through illegally are very quickly stopped by Border Patrol, not because Border Patrol is really doing anything different, but because there's so many fewer migrants to actually track that they're able to spread their resources more efficiently there than they would be if there were a surge. Also, Mexico is doing a lot. Mexico does not want tariffs. They're in a position where they're trying to do a lot to cooperate with the US on immigration and to combat fentanyl. So they've increased interdictions as well. That's all also bringing the numbers down at the border. But I do think it's important that we continue to look at this data on deportations, because it's something that they're not putting out. This is something that we obtained here at NBC. We also found that over half of those who were deported were non criminal, which of course goes against what the Trump administration said they would do by focusing on the worst of the worst for deportations. Yeah, Julia, that bucks the promise that.
- [42:57]
Jonathan LeMere
You and I were Talking about last.
- [42:58]
Mika Brzezinski
Week when you were here year with more reporting on this topic.
- [43:01]
Jonathan LeMere
But can you talk a little bit about how this latest report on deportation numbers being lower than the Biden administration might only exacerbate the frustration internally within.
- [43:11]
Joe Scarborough
The White House and at the agency.
- [43:13]
Jonathan LeMere
Level that you've been reporting on for.
- [43:15]
Julia Ainslie
The last two months of this administration.
- [43:17]
Jonathan LeMere
The concern and the frustration that they're.
- [43:19]
Mika Brzezinski
Not doing enough fast enough.
- [43:21]
Julia Ainslie
Yeah, you're right, Ali. I think we also have to remember that they've been looking at these numbers even though we're just now getting the. I think this explains a lot of that inner turmoil where we saw the acting head of ICE get reassigned to another part of ice. They replaced him very quickly. That's someone who had a relationship with Stephen Miller and was handpicked for that job. And now they're replacing him. We know that Borders are Tom Homan is very frequently on calls with ICE telling them they need to ramp up their deportation numbers. They tried giving them a quota, quotas that they weren't able to meet. Of course, they've assigned many people from DOJ components like the ATF and DEA to go out and help make these arrests. None of that has actually brought the deportation numbers as high as they want them to. I will say, Ali, one key thing that they could do or that they want to do that could increase is more money. If they get more money from Congress, which could be a long time coming, they can increase detention space. And then they could arrest and deport more people. Of course, they tried that in Guantanamo Bay. And now, as we've reported here, of course, they're rethinking that policy because that turned out to be so expensive and not logistically possible either. But this explains, I think these deportation numbers explain why we've seen so much hand wringing, the anger, the firings. It's because of these numbers. And that's one of the reasons why they haven't been as public with these as they have been with the arrest numbers, which are up over 100%.
- [44:43]
Mika Brzezinski
Yeah. NBC News senior host, Homeland Security correspondent Julia Ainsley, thank you so much for your reporting. And say this is again, go back to the tape. This is what we've been hearing around the table, that these high numbers are going to be very hard to reach because they're inflationary. But also what we were saying for some time, the cost of deportation, certainly a mass deportation, would be absolutely massive. And again, with the business community not wanting it, saying it's inflationary, there are just a lot of cross currents that are cutting against that right now in.
- [45:24]
Jonathan LeMere
The business community, especially coming.