← Morning Joe
Morning Joe
Morning Joe 3/31/25
00:47:33
‘DO YOUR JOB’: Crowd erupts in anger as GOP lawmaker defends deportations and Signal chat
Loading summary
Transcript145 lines
- [00:01]
Mika Brzezinski
Wait, does anyone else think Mark Dugan is low key hot with that haircut? Oh, my God, yes. Glow up, vibes.
- [00:11]
Joe Scarborough
FYI, green light on Yemen raid. Tomahawks airborne 15 minutes ago. Who's ready to glass some Houthi rebels? Flag emoji, flag emoji, flag emoji, flag emoji, flag emoji, fire emoji, eggplant.
- [00:27]
Jonathan Lemire
What is this?
- [00:29]
Joe Scarborough
Pete Hegseth, Secretary of Defense. Hey, while I got everyone sending a PDF with updated locations of all our nuclear submarines, check that one we got chilling right outside Shanghai. Jordan Peele, sweating like crazy. Gif.
- [00:43]
Mika Brzezinski
Stop sending us this stuff.
- [00:46]
Joe Scarborough
Hold up. Adding JD Now.
- [00:48]
Jonathan Lemire
Nice job on the strike fam. Female skier emoji.
- [00:55]
Joe Scarborough
What?
- [00:57]
Jonathan Lemire
My bad. Meant to send fire emoji. Okay.
- [01:02]
Joe Scarborough
How's Greenland, by the way? Bet you're killing it.
- [01:05]
Jonathan Lemire
No, I'm not. Nobody knows why I'm here, Especially me. But praise Trump, our work here is mysterious and important.
- [01:16]
Joe Scarborough
Hold up. Adding Marco Rubio in the house. Wait, who are the other three numbers here?
- [01:25]
Richard Haass
P.S.
- [01:26]
Joe Scarborough
Sending you the real JFK files, not those fake ones we released.
- [01:31]
Anne Applebaum
Hey, could be worse.
- [01:33]
Jonathan Lemire
We could have added the editor of the Atlantic again.
- [01:37]
Joe Scarborough
You did.
- [01:38]
Mika Brzezinski
And here we go. Saturday Night Live's cold, open take on the Trump administration's signal group chat blunder. The fallout continues. We're going to bring you the latest from that incident. Also ahead, we'll go through President Trump's critical comments of Vladimir Putin after the Russian president suggested a transitional government be put in place in Ukraine. Plus, we'll dig into President Trump's tariffs on all imported vehicles and foreign made auto parts, which are set to take effect this week. And we'll show you the fiery moments from another hostile town hall for a Republican lawmaker in a deep red district. No, I wouldn't want to demand that. All right, a lot to get to us this morning. Good morning, good morning, and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Monday, March 31st. With us we have the co host of our fourth hour, Jonathan Lemire. He's a contributing writer at the Atlantic covering the White House and national politics. US Special correspondent for BBC News and the host of the Rest is Politics podcast, Katty Kay is with US President Emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass. He's the author of the weekly newsletter Home and Away, available on substance, and staff writer at the Atlantic, Anne Applebaum is with us this morning and a great group to talk to this morning about all the news we have to get to. President Trump continues to stand by his top administration Officials amid the fallout from the Signal group chat incident. In his phone interview with NBC News, the president reaffirmed his confidence in National Security Adviser Mike Walsh, who created the chat, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who reportedly shared the Yemen attack plans. Trump said, quote, I don't fire people because of fake news and because of witch hunts. Trump went on to claim he has no idea what Signal is and that, quote, it's the only thing the press wants to talk about because you have nothing else to talk about. This comes as some Trump allies have called on the president to fire Waltz. Well, some Democrats say Hegseth should be pushed out. Meanwhile, the Atlantic Senator in chief Jeffrey Goldberg, who was accidentally added to that Signal Group chat, says he and Waltz have met before. Last week, Waltz said he and Goldberg had never communicated and suggested the journalist's phone number was, quote, sucked into someone else's contact information. Goldberg disputed that claim yesterday.
- [04:23]
Joe Scarborough
This isn't the matrix. Phone numbers don't just get sucked into other phones. I don't know what he's talking about there. You know, very frequently in journalism, the most obvious explanation is the explanation. My phone number was in his phone. Because my phone number is in his phone. He's telling everyone that he's never met me or spoken to me. That's simply not true. I understand why he's doing it, but, you know, this has become a somewhat farcical situation. There's no subterfuge here. My number was in his phone. He mistakenly added me to the group chat. There we go.
- [05:03]
Mika Brzezinski
So despite a lot of different things being thrown at, thrown out there, put it that way, over the weekend, Jonathan, this is not going away. In fact, the questions continue to persist because, I mean, I spent time over the weekend with people who have family members in the military. This is all they're talking about. Because their question is if this happened, and this is as egregious as it gets, attack plans being put in, all caps out there with emojis to an unknown person who turns out to be a member of the press. God knows what else is out there and are our members of the military safe right now. That is not how a lot of people are feeling. Especially when there are no consequences or announcements of plans to investigate this or new, new ways of doing things, new rules put in place, perhaps anything to show the American people that they see that this was a huge problem, a huge mistake beyond justit was just a mistake, such a big mistake that actual processes need to be investigated and things need to be changed. They're not getting that back. It's very invalidating to members of the public who feel that our country and our national security is at risk given the way these people communicate.
- [06:22]
Jonathan Lemire
Yeah, this is a story that is really broken through, which is sort of a rarity amid just this fire hose of news in the first two plus months of the Trump administration. This one's resonating particularly with military families who feel like, hey, that could be my son or daughter whose lives could be in jeopardy because secret plans were put in a group chat where they should not have been. We've seen the pop culture residents there for Saturday Night Live as well. And certainly we heard from President Trump some real frustration yesterday that this is all the press is talking about. Well, that's because the story is a really big one with a lot of far reaching consequences. And we should note there we played that sound from Jeffrey. There are photographs of Congressman Walz and Jeffrey Goldberg together at an event. And earlier in this news cycle, Jeffrey said, oh yeah, he had met Waltz once or twice, not provided details. Certainly hasn't said whether they communicated on any sort of source level. But it's of course they have met. That is clear. But that is something that really angers the president and a lot of his inner circle here. Why Waltz and not Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense who actually is the one who put the sensitive information in the group chat? The reason why Walls is under so much scrutiny is because he, first of all is less MAGA than Hegseth. In the words of one Trump ally to me over the weekend, and as I reported at the end of last week, he's the one in more trouble because there's a loyalty to Hegseth because the fight it took to get him confirmed. Well, they've always viewed Waltz a little more suspiciously because he's a more conventional Republican. So for more on this, let's bring in NBC News justice and intelligence correspondent Ken Delaney. And Ken, let's start right there. I know you've been covering sort of the fallout of this. It does seem, at least for now, that Hegseth getting a pass. You know, even as some have acknowledged privately that this was his error, greater in many ways than what Waltz did. Waltz is getting more scrutiny. But talk to us about how this is being perceived there in Washington. What's the latest? Is this, this story now has entered a second week with no signs of abating.
- [08:18]
Joe Scarborough
That's right, Jonathan. I think Jeffrey Goldberg captured why this is breaking in. He used the term farcical. This is why it's breaking through. This is why it's on Saturday Night Live because the administration is just not telling the truth about this. So obviously about the tiniest details, including the fact that Mike Waltz obviously knows Jeffrey Goldberg. But and you're absolutely right, in national security circles, the original sin is seen as by the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth. He's the one that put the attack plans initially on this Signal group. He's the one that put the most detailed what obviously was classified information in these group chats. But Mike Waltz also put some really significant information now that we've learned includes details from Israeli intelligence. And the Israelis are now really angry about this. And look, you've seen some Republican senators, James Lankford of Oklahoma being the latest over the weekend calling for an investigation here. But the executive branch uniformly is just saying nothing to see here. The attorney general Pam Bondi last week asked about this, made clear that she has no interest in investigating this and in fact pivoted to defending it. So it's breaking through because it's farcical. But as you said, it's significant because military families and anyone who deals with classified information knows that this was a horrific mistake, whatever the intent was. Two mistakes, adding the journalist obviously, even if that was inadvertent. But using Signal to convey what was clearly classified information, even though you think it's encrypted and foreign intelligence agencies can't get access to it, that is forbidden. Intelligence employees are told you can use Signal for some things but not for classified information. And so that's why this isn't going away, guys.
- [10:11]
Mika Brzezinski
Yeah. And you know, something like this, what's interesting about this one, and you see it on Fox News, them continuing to either completely ignore the story or defend the administration on this in the administration, Richard, continuing to push back and kind of throwing some non truths out there to push back against it. This seems to be the type of situation that is actually showing the American public the lying straight out. They see the lying, they can do the math here. It's one of those situations. And I'm just wondering in the world of our foreign policy, is that what's happening as well?
- [10:51]
Richard Haass
Well, sure. Remember Watergate, you have the crime and then you have the COVID up. So what we have is the original first of all, to me, the biggest error, not using the proper sit room National Security Council process. That's where you have serious conversations about major policies. Not on any app, signal or anything else. Then you have now all the, you know, not coming straight, not leveling with the American people and not instituting reforms. It would be so much better if they simply said, we learn from this. Every administration learns from its first crisis. All they would have to do is say, yeah, we learned from it. And in the future, we're going to do these by meetings rather than on apps, whatever. We're going to put into place all sorts of policy reviews and so forth. That is what they'd have to do. Not if you're an ally. This makes you very, very uneasy about sharing sensitive information. And it raises questions of competence. Again, who are allies. Allies are people who put their eggs in our basket. Their security is on us. And they see stuff like this and they go, we are dependent on these guys. They're getting tariffs put on them Monday, Wednesdays and Fridays and now Tuesdays, Thursdays, and happen. It has suddenly become risky to be an American ally.
- [12:00]
Mika Brzezinski
When you have someone in your life whose life is on the line protecting this country or working for this country, you don't want to be lied to. You don't want to feel like all you get is lies. I feel like this is really one issue that has been promulgated by the White House's approach, by this. This could have been over in a day. Whether or not it should have been, it could have been. We're going to get to tariffs in just a moment. Republican Congresswoman Victoria Spartz of Indiana has become the latest lawmaker to face an uproar from angry constituents at a town hall event. It happened in her deep red district on Friday and Saturday, where the raucous crowd booed and jeered Sparts over her remarks about immigration, doge cuts and the fallout from the signal group chat. Will you demand the immediate resignation of Pete Hetzag? No, I wouldn't want to, man.
- [13:11]
Jonathan Lemire
My question is actually related to all of the immigrants that are being rounded.
- [13:15]
Joe Scarborough
Up and deported.
- [13:22]
Frank Holland
Able to due process.
- [13:24]
Jonathan Lemire
A lot of these people, what President.
- [13:26]
Mika Brzezinski
Trump did it last time when he tried, if you seek asylum, wait in the other country, not get here in the country. So there is, there is no diplomacy. Violated the law, period. You violated the law if you violated law. And that's why we need to make sure the T is under control. Another thing that's breaking through, I think, are these deportations, especially people being picked off the street. This comes as several Republican leaders have urged members in their party to refrain from conducting in person town halls to avoid engaging with, quote, paid protesters. They accuse all those people of being paid protesters. Anna Applebaum, I'd love to talk to you about all of This. I mean, you're writing about the Hungarian model here and what is happening. But first, I want to ask you about this town hall and the reaction. Do you think some of the potentially autocratic moves that are being taken by this White House are beginning to penetrate even deep red districts as something is wrong here?
- [14:41]
Ken Delaney
Yeah, look, I think that the obvious attempt to smear the messenger, to attack Jeffrey Goldberg, to attack the Atlantic, to attack journalists, when it's very obvious that the administration made a mistake using the signal chat is something that people can see. That's a famous autocratic tactic. You know, don't accept the news, just change the subject. And I don't think it's working this time. I mean, it's a little bit too obvious. And the, you know, immigration, deportations, I mean, I think people were, you know, they were. Donald Trump said, we're going to deport criminals. And I guess people thought that was okay, to deport criminals. But it's also become very obvious that having masked men appear on a street, pulling a student who has a green card or a student visa off the street, bundling him or her away into some kind of unmarked van, I mean, that's something we see in movies, that's not something we see in the United States. And I think these are very obvious moves. They look like things that are uglier than what we're used to seeing in America or what we imagine we would see in America. And I think people are beginning to see the contrast between that and what the Trump administration said it was doing.
- [15:51]
Pablo Torre
So, Anne, let's talk a little bit more about the piece that you're writing about Hungarian model. You write in the piece that it's a very old, very familiar blueprint for autocratic takeover, one that has been deployed by right and left wing leaders alike. You point to Erdogan and Hugo Chavez. What are you seeing at the moment? Because I think everybody was looking to see what kind of model this would be under Trump 2.0. And they were looking at the courts, they were looking at the press. What are the signs that you're seeing in the structures of American government that make you think they are being shifted in such a way that would lead us to a more Hungarian model of democracy?
- [16:26]
Ken Delaney
So, first of all, I think Americans should understand that what's happening here is a lot more radical than what happened in Hungary. So what Viktor Orban did took place over a decade. He made small changes. He undermined the judiciary. He took more power for himself. He made little alterations to the Constitution. And this is called the boiling the frog model. You know, that you very slowly boil the frog until you wake up one morning and it's impossible to change your leadership because democracy is so altered here. Things are happening much faster. I mean, there was no equivalent to Elon Musk going into the treasury payment system and cutting programs that he personally dislikes, whether the President has said anything about them or not. And that's happened several times. And so the assault they're making on the civil service, on the press, and you know, that's a rhetorical assault, but it's also harassing and using libel suits against news media organizations. You know, the discussion of impeaching judges, you know, seeking to undermine the credibility of judges. All that is happening really, really fast. And the goal is to create ayou know, to create a system where it's just much harder for Americans to ever elect anyone else.
- [17:36]
Mika Brzezinski
Yeah. And we're going to get back to this. But one of the things that are happening here that may play into what Ann is writing about is so many things happening at the same time so that people are almost overwhelmed. This morning, Wall street is bracing for the launch of President Trump's massive tariffs, tariffs which start on Wednesday. Ahead of that, Trump is now saying he could care less if automakers raise prices following his pledge to impose 25% tariffs on foreign made cars and auto parts. Speaking to NBC's Meet the Press moderator Kristen Welker, Trump said, quote, I couldn't care less. I hope they raise their prices, because if they do, people are going to buy American made cars. We have plenty. When asked whether he warned top auto leaders against raising prices, Trump said, quote, the message is congratulations. If you make your car in the United States, you're going to make money, a lot of money. If you don't, you're probably going to have to come to the United States because if you make your car in the United States, there's no tariff. But some of the American cars made here have foreign parts. After the interview, a Trump aide followed up with NBC News to clarify. Trump was specifically talking about the price of foreign made cars, not American made. Aboard Air Force One last night, Trump doubled down on who he says will benefit from the new tariffs. The automakers are going to make a lot of money.
- [19:04]
Joe Scarborough
The American automakers or international automakers, if.
- [19:09]
Mika Brzezinski
You'Re talking about they're going to build.
- [19:11]
Richard Haass
In the United States.
- [19:13]
Mika Brzezinski
The people that are going to make money are people that manufacture cars in the United States, outside side of the United States.
- [19:21]
Jonathan Lemire
That's going to be up to Them.
- [19:22]
Joe Scarborough
I don't care too much about that.
- [19:24]
Mika Brzezinski
I'm not sure that's true. Let's bring in the anchor of CNBC's Worldwide Exchange, Frank Holland. Frank, last time I checked, even like I don't know, the truck I drive has foreign parts in it. How does this work?
- [19:38]
Frank Holland
Well, I mean, number one, I think you're hitting on something that's really hitting impacting the stock market this morning. We're looking at the futures right now lower across the board. The S and P looks like it would open up about 1% lower. Similar story for the Nasdaq, actually even harder hit. So I think there's a lot of concerns not only about the tariffs that are in place and what that could mean for consumer spending. Some estimates that these tariffs on cars would increase the average price for a new car by as much as $10,000. That's according to Edmunds. I've seen some other estimates that are lower. We do have to remember that a lot of times our cars are taken back and forth across the border, whether it be Canada or Mexico, several times to assemble parts to complete them. So there's just different steps that are most of our auto vehicles, even US Made auto vehicles from US Automakers, they go back and forth across border. So again it has a potentially inflationary effect. I want to turn back to the markets for a second. The markets are just really trying to digest number one, the inflation report from Friday. Also the expectations for the next five year horizon coming out from the University of Michigan. Consumer sentiment read that inflation will be the highest level over those next five years that it's been since 1993, over 30 years. And then of course, Liberation Day as the president calls it, or April the second, when these new tariffs are going to come into play. So really quickly just to get us on the same page because it seems like the landscape continues to shift. When we're looking at China, those tariffs would be about 20% across the board on all Chinese imports. Then we look at things like steel and aluminum, key commodities for building. And also for a lot of these data centers we're seeing in the tech world, those tariffs would be 25% as well. Also imports from Canada and Mexico, 25% on non USMCA goods. Remember the President himself actually negotiated the USMCA, but now 25% tariff there. And then back to what we were Talking about before, 25% tariffs on foreign cars and parts and imports. But again that would hit U.S. automakers. So again kind of raising the price of many vehicles that we use here in the U.S. or made here in the U.S. quote, unquote. But again, they're assembled across the border often. Some other reports that we look at the low end of vehicles, cars around 30,000, even below 30,000, those would be hit. So that's going to impact a lot of lower end consumers as well. A lot of those vehicles that are around 30,000 or lower are made outside the U.S. u.S. And automakers continue to say it's, it's almost not impossible but very difficult to make those vehicles at a low cost here in the US So we continue to see economic reaction to the tariffs also, market reaction to the tariffs. Also new this morning, we had Goldman Sachs, big investment bank come out with their expectations for a recession. They've raised it from 20%. Now they see it at 35%. They also raised their outlook for cuts from the Federal Reserve from two up to three. So a lot of questions about the economy, the reason for that raise and recession expectations. Also federal custom cuts, tariffs.
- [22:15]
Mika Brzezinski
Oh, boy. Okay. CNBC's Frank Holland, thank you very much. Everybody stay here. We're going to continue the conversation. There's so much going on and we're going to get to it all. Anne Applebaum, Richard Horst, stay right there. Still ahead on Morning Joe, President Trump says he's not joking about the idea of seeking a third term in the White House. We're going to run through those new comments that he made to NBC's Kristen Welker. Plus, billionaire Elon Musk campaigns in Wisconsin ahead of the state's highly anticipated Supreme Court election. We'll talk about what the race could say about Musk's influence in American politics. Maureen Jo is back in 90 seconds. Ooh, look at that beautiful shot of New York City. It's a foggy morning on this March 31st, the last day of March. Are we ever going to get to spring? All right, back to the news now. It is 24 past the hour in the weekend phone call with NBC's Kristen Welker. President Trump made several comments regarding Vladimir Putin and Russia, referring to reporting on Friday that Putin suggested a transitional government be put in place in Ukraine. Trump said that made him, quote, very angry, adding, that's not going in the right direction. He reportedly went even further, telling Welker that if a broad ceasefire deal isn't reached and he feels as if it's Russia's fault, he will put secondary sanctions on the country. Put that thought on hold for a second. Jonathan Le Maire, you had something to say about the tariffs and then we're going to turn to Richard on Russia.
- [23:53]
Jonathan Lemire
Yeah, Just one final beat on the tariffs. As of last night. Senior White House aides, including Kevin Hassert, who's like the head of the Economic Council, they do not know what tariffs are coming on Liberation Day, Wednesday, Donald Trump's day, because so much of this is going to be Trump's last minute, his whims, his last minute decision, and his personal feelings are clearly going to be involved here. So adding to Frank's point earlier about the instability, how no one markets businesses, no one can plan because nothing has been settled yet. So that is another piece here as we're watching.
- [24:23]
Mika Brzezinski
So now back to Russia, Richard, and I'll just take that at some point what Liberation Day means, actually what that means. And the use of that phrase itself in so many ways has some other meanings. But tell us a little bit about these specific comments that Donald Trump has made about Putin. What do they tell you and do they ultimately, in the big picture mean anything?
- [24:48]
Richard Haass
Look, the good news is the President for the first time evidenced some frustration with Vladimir Putin, who's clearly stalling. Yeah, you know, Putin has rejected the 30 day unconditional cease fires, putting out all sorts of other ideas with all sorts of conditions. He is not serious about bringing this war to an end because he believes, he believes time is his friend. He believes Russia is gaining a little bit of territory and he knows that US Support for Ukraine down the road is uncertain. So Putin wants to test that. The problem with what the President said is he has the wrong remedy. The answer is not secondary sanctions. That essentially means you would sanction China, India and Turkey, the three biggest importers of Russian energy. So we'd create bilateral issues with all of them without really having a significant impact on Russia's economy. Economy. We want to change Vladimir Putin's calculus. It's not that hard. What we need to do is announce that US Support for Ukraine with military support and intelligence support, will go on indefinitely so Ukraine can defend itself. This takes away from Putin the argument the time's on his side.
- [25:49]
Mika Brzezinski
Right.
- [25:49]
Richard Haass
This means we will support Ukraine. And if you do get to a ceasefire, we still need to support Ukraine. Why? Because Russia's going to continue to produce arms and get ready. We don't want a cease fire to be temporary. We want a cessation of hostilities to be permanent. The only way I know how to do this, Mika, is for the United States to step up and essentially keep the spigot open. We can argue about how much and so forth and, you know, to defend Ukraine. It's not going to liberate Crimea. But the United States needs to be steadfast in its support for Ukraine. That is the signal that Donald Trump needs to send to Vladimir Putin. Then he actually increases the chance of getting this piece he so properly wants. But right now, he has the right idea, but he's going about it in exactly the wrong way.
- [26:32]
Mika Brzezinski
President Emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass. Thank you, Jonathan.
- [26:36]
Jonathan Lemire
Yeah. So, Ann Appalbaum, it is, as Richard said, encouraging, I suppose, that President Trump, for once, has a crossword for President Putin. I guess my first question to you is simply, do you believe him? And my second is, okay, let's say that's the case. Everything in these pre negotiations right now, the White House has sided with Russia, sided with their negotiation stance, made Ukraine be the one to suggest there'll be concessions. So if it's not, you know, Richard says secondary sanctions, that's not going to get it done. So if actually we do believe President Trump wants to get this done and is willing to be tough with Russia, what does that look like?
- [27:16]
Ken Delaney
So, first of all, this story reminds me of the Oscar Wilde quote about second marriages. You know, it's a triumph of hope over experience. This is actually the fourth time that Trump has threatened Putin with sanctions or with something. And I would also draw your attention to something he said a little bit later, getting onto Air Force One yesterday. He said, I don't think he's going to go back on his word about Putin. He said, you're talking about Putin. And I've known him for a long time, so I would have some, you know, some doubts about whether this is the case. I mean, it is, of course, true that the Russians are blocking a cease fire. They don't want one. They still think they're going to win the war, either militarily or through diplomacy. And, you know, as Richard Haass says, the only real answer to this, the only one that makes any sense, is to present them with, you know, an unshakeable, you know, decision with us and our allies to continue supporting Ukraine so that the Russians don't win. And it's only when they conclude that they can't win that they'll stop the war. I just don't know whether President Trump sees that yet or not.
- [28:19]
Pablo Torre
Yeah, I was just returned from Europe and I was talking, Mika, to political scientists in Germany who spend a lot of their time watching the situation in Ukraine, and they're pretty despondent about the chances for any deal for Ukraine. That doesn't look, as they put it to me, either a bad deal or a very bad deal at this point coming from the White House. They just don't see Donald Trump wanting to put that kind of pressure, whatever he said this weekend. And as Anne said, it's not the first time that he has said things like this. Threats like this against Putin, he just doesn't follow up on them. In the end, he sides with Putin over Zelensky and over Ukraine. So let's see what happens there. But the mood certainly in Europe about Ukraine is pretty gloomy at the moment.
- [28:59]
Mika Brzezinski
Well, like what Ann Applebaum is writing about the Hungarian model, there's a lot of things happening at once, a lot of pressure points. And now to this one. Two more law firms have now filed a suit against President Trump, while another is striking a deal. On Friday, two federal judges who were both appointed by Republican President George W. Bush partially blocked the executive orders against the firms Jenner and Block and WilmerHale. The president sought to penalize those firms for taking up cases that go against his agenda and employing attorneys who worked on criminal investigations into Trump. The judges called the orders troubling and retaliatory. Perkins Coy was the first firm to sue the administration. Earlier this month, a judge temporarily blocked that order, calling the president's actions chilling. Meanwhile, the firm Paul Weiss took a different path, having its order dropped after agreeing to provide $40 million worth of legal services for the White House. Another firm, Scadden, followed suit last week, striking a deal with the White House in order to avoid an executive order. The White House announced that agreement on Friday in which the Firm will provide $100 million in pro bono legal services for the Trump administration. Ken Delaney, what is your latest reporting on this story? And I wouldn't mind hearing some analysis as well.
- [30:34]
Joe Scarborough
Yeah, Mika, this may be one of those things that isn't breaking through because we're talking about big law. We're talking about law partners that make millions of dollars a year, not exactly the things that regular Americans care about. But this is an enormous thing that's happening in the legal profession and in the justice world. And it is really roiling the people that I'm talking to. They're very concerned about it because they say that these orders, these executive orders that Donald Trump is issuing are patently illegal, discriminatory, unconstitutional. Two judges, as you said on Friday, have essentially ruled that way. And yet of the five law firms that have been targeted, as you said, two have settled, two have decided to pay some money and do some pro Bono work that Donald Trump wants them to do and to make statements about DEI and other things. And that has sparked resignations at both firms because people view that as capitulating to Donald Trump. And as you said, the reason he's doing this is in the case of Wilmer Hale, for example, one of the firms that is suing, it's because that was Robert Mueller's old firm. And one of his top aides, Aaron Zebley, is a partner there. So, look, this is the kind of thing we're seeing with this administration. They are. They're pushing as far as they can. And whether they get slapped back by the federal courts is almost immaterial, because the message that's sent is unmistakable. It's chilling law firms across the United States. And in fact, what these orders would do to these firms is essentially they would take security clearances away from some of the top lawyers. It would bar them from federal buildings. So they represent some of the major federal contractors who are calling them up and saying, wait a second, I don't know if we can continue with you, because we don't know if we can bring you into a federal building that is existential for these major law firms. And it's clearly retaliatory and the courts are now dealing with it. But, you know, some of these firms are choosing to capitulate. Nico.
- [32:30]
Mika Brzezinski
All right, NBC's Candelanian, thank you so much. And Applebaum, I'd love for it to wrap up with you there and how this plays into what you're writing about and also why it should matter to the American, the regular American citizen who believes he or she is living in a democracy.
- [32:49]
Ken Delaney
So if you think that ordinary Americans or any Americans have the right to a lawyer and that lawyers should be able to serve you regardless of what the president says or what any other politician says, then you should be concerned about this. What Trump has done by assaulting law firms is an assault on something very big, basic. It's the rule of law. It's the right of people to be represented. All of those things are under threat if this push towards authoritarianism isn't stopped.
- [33:20]
Mika Brzezinski
Staff writer for the Atlantic, Anne Applebaum, thank you very much. Her latest piece is on the Hungarian model, and it's available to read online right now. Coming up, 90 seconds to play.
- [33:34]
Jonathan Lemire
Jones drives. And Johnson, he somehow got through three defenders for the deuce.
- [33:41]
Mika Brzezinski
He did not quit on that play.
- [33:43]
Jonathan Lemire
And a free to Johnson.
- [33:46]
Mika Brzezinski
Auburn was just too much down the stretch for Michigan State as the Tigers advanced their second Final four with a 70, 64 win over the Spartans. Janai Broom led the way for Auburn with 25 points and 14 rebounds. The Tigers, who are the number one overall seed, were the last of the top seeds to advance to the Final Four. Earlier in the day, Houston dominated Tennessee in the Midwest Regional final. The Cougars tough defense held the volunteers to only 15 points at halftime, the fewest points in an Elite Eight game since 1979. Tennessee cut the lead to 10 points in the second half, but Houston hit a barrage of three pointers to pull away, winning 69, 50. So the men's final Four is all chalk with all number one seeds advancing to San Antonio. Both semifinal games are Friday night. Florida faces Auburn and Duke goes against Houston. Jonathan?
- [34:48]
Jonathan Lemire
Yeah, with some brackets largely intact because if you picked the favorites, you did okay. Joining us now is the host of Pablo Torre finds out on Meadowlark Media, MSNBC contributor Pablo Torre. Pablo, I will just say it. I know this happens every so often, right? Where you get a year where it's all for one seed. Think about 15 years ago, it happened last. But I feel like this is the precursor of a new era here in the Nil era and the transfer portal era. The rich get richer. It's harder for Cinderellas, it's for big teams. And I personally, just one guy, find it pretty boring.
- [35:20]
Anne Applebaum
Yeah. So I first need to apologize for Jay Bilis. I came on the show and made fun of Jay for being boring, picking all four number one seeds. And it turns out Jay Bilis may not have a lot of hair, has a lot of knowledge inside of that.
- [35:35]
Jonathan Lemire
This is what he does for a living. Yeah.
- [35:36]
Anne Applebaum
Inside of that chrome dome is a bit of wisdom, it turns out. Look, it's I think the beginning of something real. So, Mika, we talk all the time when I visit you guys. What's different about college sports now and the fact that there's a marketplace for players, a transfer portal in which there isn't any time to sit out and wait. You could argue that the SEC in particular, which had eight of the top 16 teams, two of the final four teams, certainly Florida looking like a favorite. Auburn playing them. You don't have as many glass slippers.
- [36:10]
Jonathan Lemire
These days, but as you know, TV ratings up. So people are watching. My question to you is we got not pictured in our montage there. Duke, who won of course on Saturday convincingly. They are not the number one overall seed, but they sure look like the best team in the country right now, probably with the best player in Cooper Flag, who's going to be the first Overall pick in the NBA draft this year. Is anybody stopping them this coming weekend?
- [36:34]
Anne Applebaum
I have Duke. I also had St. John's winning the whole thing and I look like an idiot. I feel like I got to disclose how bad my bracket is despite being the expert here that you consult. But the math on basketball is fairly simple to me when it comes to having the best player, you know, I want the guys going to go number one overall. I want Cooper flag of the four teams remaining in this tournament. But the counterargument is that these four teams, historically this is the strongest Final Four that we've had by the statistics. It just isn't. It's never been this strong. Four contenders this evenly matched. So we're talking about marginal differences here and I think seven foot talent like Cooper Flagg is the difference maker and.
- [37:16]
Jonathan Lemire
They should be two great games. Mikael Note Cooper Flagg from Maine, not exactly a basketball hotbed.
- [37:21]
Mika Brzezinski
That's kind of cool.
- [37:22]
Jonathan Lemire
He is the exception.
- [37:23]
Mika Brzezinski
All right. As for the women's tournament tonight, we'll find out who will get the last two spots in the Final Four. Number one seed South Carolina already punched its ticket to Tampa yesterday with a dramatic win over number two seed Duke. The reigning national champions rallied late to get the lead and then hit two free throws in the final seconds to advance. It was the third straight comeback win for the Gamecocks who are now in the Final four for the fifth year in a row. Yesterday, Saturday's other Elite Eight game also came down to the wire as number three seed LSU cut number one seed UCLA's once double digit lead to just three in the final minutes. But the Bruins answered with a big three pointer down the stretch and were able to hang on for their first ever trip to the Final Four. There it is. Tonight, number two seed TCU takes on number one seed Texas at 7 Eastern Time. That's followed by number two seed Yukon versus number one seed USC at 9:00. What do you think about UConn, Pablo? Are they going to do okay?
- [38:30]
Anne Applebaum
I think UConn is going to do fine. So Juju Watkins was the next replacement for Caitlin Clark and she's incredible. She is now hurt and so UConn and Paige Beckers who is I think the biggest star in this game. I, I like their chances. I like UConn to be, to be as good as they've ever been.
- [38:47]
Jonathan Lemire
Yeah, no, they did. What a remarkable program there in stores. Connecticut. Pablo, it is baseball season. Opening day weekend is behind us.
- [38:56]
Anne Applebaum
What a weekend.
- [38:57]
Jonathan Lemire
Let's hold on. What a Weekend Red Sox win opening day, then lose three in a row. There's some struggles there, but that's not what most people are talking about. So over this weekend, the New York yankees hit every 30 seconds, seem to hit a home run. They hit nine in Saturday's game. They hit a bunch more yesterday. And they're using a. Some of the players are using a new type of bat. It's called a torpedo bat. It's shaped differently, with a bigger barrel meant to increase how hard you hit the ball and the chances of hitting it hard. So give us your take on this, Pablo, and if you're. If your analysis is anything other than the words blatant cheating, you'll be asked to leave.
- [39:33]
Anne Applebaum
I like hearing a Patriots fan lecture me.
- [39:37]
Jonathan Lemire
We're not talking about them right now.
- [39:38]
Anne Applebaum
What the difference of scientific. Okay, so this is a real story. Story. It's a real story. It is quite legal so far. Major League Baseball has approved this torpedo slash, bowling pin slash, child's size softball bat. Kind of.
- [39:53]
Jonathan Lemire
You can see that it does look different.
- [39:55]
Anne Applebaum
Yeah, the barrel is fat. The barrel. The barrel has been reoriented in a way that an MIT physicist has recommended. And it's good science. And I, I will just remind everybody, as they blame the bat, the Yankees led. They led Major League Baseball in home runs.
- [40:12]
Jonathan Lemire
I blame the ballpark, too.
- [40:15]
Anne Applebaum
All right, sure.
- [40:15]
Mika Brzezinski
Wait, wait. Why doesn't everybody get to use the bat?
- [40:18]
Anne Applebaum
So thank you, Mika. They absolutely can. And so there are controversies in sports. The tush push in the NFL, for instance, where people complain and complain because a strategy seems too effective, but the solution, of course, is to copycat them. Try to do it yourself. And if you try it and it doesn't work, then maybe we're isolating the variable of maybe the greatest franchise in baseball having a natural advantage when it comes to their talent as well as their technology.
- [40:43]
Jonathan Lemire
Quick note on that, though. There seems to be momentum in the NFL to ban the tush push. So I do think that the bat here will be interesting. There are a lot of bitter people. Do other teams adopt the bat or does the league step in and say you can't use it? That's what we'll have to find out.
- [40:57]
Mika Brzezinski
They need to democratize the bat. So, okay, in your latest podcast. Hold on, have you talked about that?
- [41:03]
Anne Applebaum
No, no, he should.
- [41:05]
Jonathan Lemire
He should use the fat bat.
- [41:06]
Anne Applebaum
He needs the torpedo. Just when I thought it was safe. Just when I thought it was safe. It's a normal looking bat. The bat is completely normal. None of. First off, first off, this is how it feels like to pitch against the Yankees right now. You get dizzy, you might throw up. There's a weird guy from Boston pushing you around and failing largely to intimidate you. This is very familiar.
- [41:32]
Mika Brzezinski
Come filling in for Joe Scarborough.
- [41:34]
Anne Applebaum
I might need to.
- [41:36]
Jonathan Lemire
Joe, thanks for being here.
- [41:37]
Anne Applebaum
Is there a puke cup? I'm a little. I am a little dizzy.
- [41:41]
Mika Brzezinski
Stay away from my coffee at the moment. All right. Do you want to talk about the latest episode of Pop Up? The origin story of the George Foreman Grill?
- [41:49]
Anne Applebaum
Yes.
- [41:49]
Mika Brzezinski
Okay.
- [41:50]
Anne Applebaum
So speaking of, speaking of, speaking of technological innovation, we forget how omnipresent the George Foreman Grill is. Why is John Lanier laughing at my segue? This is a totally normal segue.
- [42:03]
Mika Brzezinski
Because I'm wrong.
- [42:04]
Anne Applebaum
Nothing. Nothing wrong at all. In no way am I uncomfortable or surprised by what has just happened to me in the last 30 seconds. Not more surprising than the basic fact that in the 1990s, the second most purchased home appliance.
- [42:17]
Mika Brzezinski
Yes, yes. I'm right here after the television, Mika.
- [42:22]
Anne Applebaum
Is the George Foreman Grill.
- [42:23]
Mika Brzezinski
I love the George Foreman.
- [42:24]
Jonathan Lemire
I like it too.
- [42:25]
Anne Applebaum
It is at a slope. There is a tray for all the fat runoff. And it is exactly what America needed and still needs today. And so I'm just here to tell the story on my show. Pablo Torre finds out, which is very familiar with being very close to the people that he co hosts the show with.
- [42:42]
Mika Brzezinski
I don't know.
- [42:44]
Anne Applebaum
No, very normal. It is an origin story that I believe America needs to hear. We should respect the legacy of a guy in George Foreman who was one of the great heavyweights. Of course you know that. And yet he's still underrated.
- [42:57]
Mika Brzezinski
You're a pro.
- [42:58]
Anne Applebaum
Am I being pushed away again? Very good.
- [43:00]
Jonathan Lemire
What's that?
- [43:00]
Richard Haass
Uh.
- [43:00]
Jonathan Lemire
Oh, careful.
- [43:02]
Mika Brzezinski
You can take him, Joe.
- [43:03]
Jonathan Lemire
Is he done?
- [43:04]
Mika Brzezinski
He is done. I can distract him. Okay.
- [43:06]
Anne Applebaum
Okay.
- [43:06]
Joe Scarborough
Say goodbye to him.
- [43:07]
Anne Applebaum
Is it bad that I am afraid to make eye contact with the people that I do the show with? Say goodbye to him.
- [43:12]
Mika Brzezinski
Pablo, thank you so much for being here. Thank you.
- [43:14]
Anne Applebaum
It's been a pleasure.
- [43:15]
Mika Brzezinski
Look at the camera.
- [43:15]
Anne Applebaum
Is this the watch?
- [43:16]
Joe Scarborough
Say goodbye, America.
- [43:19]
Anne Applebaum
Tell the world my story.
- [43:24]
Mika Brzezinski
Bye, Pablo. Thank you.
- [43:26]
Joe Scarborough
All right, Pablo, here you go.
- [43:27]
Jonathan Lemire
All right, you got him.
- [43:28]
Mika Brzezinski
Don't hurt him, Joe. All right. Still ahead, on my way, 27 rings. Still ahead on Morning Joe. This guy. And we'll speak with Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wickler about the crucial Supreme Court race there. Elon Musk's role in all of this and what's at stake in tomorrow's election. Pablo, it's time to go.
- [43:51]
Anne Applebaum
Hey, Pablo, baby, can you help? I'm like four inches away from outside of the studio.
- [43:57]
Mika Brzezinski
Oh, my God. Also ahead, Emmy and Golden Globe nominated action comedian Seth Rogen sat down with us to talk about his new TV series, the Studio.
- [44:07]
Jonathan Lemire
He's going to the break room.
- [44:08]
Mika Brzezinski
Sevens for the top of the hour. Time now for a look at some of the other stories making headlines this morning. Rescuers in Myanmar are still working to find survivors after a series of earthquakes shook the country on Friday. Military officials say more than 2,000 people have been confirmed dead and nearly 3,500 have been injured in the tremors. Early data from the US Geological Survey says the deaths could rise to above 10,000, while economic losses could surpass the value of the country's gdp. Judges in France found Marine Le Pen guilty today after the far right politician was accused of improperly allocating millions of dollars in EU funding. With the conviction, she could face up to five years in prison and a five year ban from running for public office, something that has sparked deep divisions across France and Europe. Prosecutors argued that no one is above the law, while Le Pen's supporters suggested the judicial system is overstepping its bounds. Although the judges issued their ruling this morning, they didn't immediately say what her sentence might be and how it might impact her political future. And this year's White House Correspondent's Dinner will no longer include a featured comedian. Amber Ruffin had been scheduled to headline the annual event. But in a unanimous decision, the White House Correspondents association board decided to pull back that invite in an effort to put the focus squarely on journalism and mentorship rather than politics.
- [45:57]
Joe Scarborough
John, any idea what happened here?
- [45:59]
Jonathan Lemire
I mean, she made some jokes over the weekend. The White House complained. Deputy chief of staff took to Twitter calling it out. She was then her invitation to host was then rescinded. The Correspondence association says these things were not linked, but the timing certainly has raised eyebrows. Looks like they're in the. Yeah, it certainly does. I think there's also, there's a real debate right now about whether this dinner should go forward. It does raise money for scholarships. It raises money for the Correspondence Association. That's important. But it comes at a time when this White House has curtailed press access. It banned the Associated Press from the pool. It has taken control of the pool rotation. It's now, per Axios reporting, gonna change the seating chart in the briefing room. So there are many members in, in the association, which of course does great work, but wonders if this is the year if it's appropriate to feel right.
- [46:48]
Mika Brzezinski
Let's have a fundraiser for the scholarships.
- [46:51]
Jonathan Lemire
But that is an idea that is gaining some momentum.
- [46:54]
Joe Scarborough
Why don't we have a non controversial comedian like Bill Burr?
- [46:58]
Jonathan Lemire
Yeah, that wouldn't raise any eyebrows.
- [46:59]
Joe Scarborough
Just talk about Elon for an hour.
- [47:01]
Mika Brzezinski
Listen. Okay, to be continued as of now.
- [47:05]
Jonathan Lemire
As of now, the dinner is still slated for the end of April.
- [47:07]
Richard Haass
April.
- [47:08]
Jonathan Lemire
But there's questions growing whether it'll happen.
- [47:10]
Mika Brzezinski
Coming up, we're going to tell you about the guest. Secretary of Defense Pete Hexseth, invited to a sensitive meeting with foreign military counterparts. A guest as he deals with the fallout from the signal. Group chat. Morning Joe. We'll be right back.
- [47:31]
Ken Delaney
Let's start the bidding on $5 million.
- [47:33]
Mika Brzezinski
Thank.