← The Beat with Ari Melber
The Beat with Ari Melber
Artists Revolt after Trump Adds His Name to Kennedy Center
00:40:49
Artists have canceled their upcoming performances at the Kennedy Center after its board voted to rename the performing arts venue to include President Donald Trump’s name. Melissa Murray reports.
Loading summary
Transcript112 lines
- [00:00]
John Kasich
Now is your time to get into a new Dr. Horton home by taking advantage of its national red tag sales event. This Friday, January 2nd through Sunday, January 25th. Stop by any of its participating communities and find select red tag homes at Incredible Pricing. So whether you're buying your first home or looking for an upgrade, you don't want to miss the red tag sales event. Starting this Friday. Discover the Dr. Horton Difference. Tap your screen now or visit DrHorton.com Dr. Horton, America's Builder and equal housing opportunity Builder.
- [00:30]
Dani Bensky
Did you know you can opt out.
- [00:31]
Melissa Murray
Of winter with VRBO? Save up to $1,500 for booking a month long stay with thousands of sunny homes. Why subject yourself to the cold? Just filter your search by monthly stays and save up to $1,500. Book now at vrbo.com welcome to the Beat. I'm Melissa Murray in for Ari Melber. We begin tonight with a major problem that could cost Donald Trump and the Republicans the midterm elections at the Kennedy Center. The traditional New Year's Eve concert has been canceled. As you know, the administration unilaterally renamed the Kennedy center to include Donald Trump's name, a move that lawmakers say was patently illegal. And some musicians have taken the president's actions to heart, refusing to perform at the storied venue. For some, it is a matter of principle over profit. As one musician put it, quote, losing my integrity would cost me more than any paycheck. Self indulgent vanity projects, though, have preoccupied this president in his second term. And the Kennedy center is merely the latest example of the president's edifice complex. His obsession with the trappings of autocratic grandeur extends to various White House projects ranging from the mundane, like gilding the Oval Office and remodeling the Lincoln bathroom and marble, to the absolutely outrageous, like paving over the Rose Garden and demolishing the East Wing to make way for a $400 million ballroom. And the president's DIY tendencies haven't been confined to the White House. Trump has festooned multiple government buildings with enormous banners bearing the image of his own face. And in his free time, Trump golfs or attends lavish parties at his Florida beach club, Mar a Lago. And that tone deaf behavior is setting off alarm bells. Take a listen.
- [02:24]
John Kasich
His obsession with those kinds of issues actually are a political problem for him. I mean, people are sitting around and thinking about how they're going to pay their bills, and he seems obsessed with gold and putting his name on things and, and, and, and remodeling buildings and Rebuilding, you know, monuments to himself. And I think this is a huge political problem for him. It's a symbol of his distraction. It's the Marie Antoinette thing that he's got going. He's not on the ballot in next November. But Republicans should be really concerned about what they're seeing.
- [03:01]
Melissa Murray
And Republicans are concerned. Some are still upset about the president's unwillingness to negotiate with Democrats during the government shutdown. And as all of this percolates, there is more potentially damaging information from the Epstein files that is coming out regularly. And many Republicans are distancing themselves from the president ahead of the midterms, while others are leaving Congress entirely, most notably Marjorie Taylor Greene, once a stalwart Trump ally. Greene now says she was, quote, naive for believing in the president's promises. Those kinds of schisms seem likely to widen as Trump continues to ignore serious domestic issues. And as the midterms draw closer, as the Atlantic puts it, quote, trump is suddenly looking a lot smaller. Joining me now to discuss all of this is former Ohio Governor John Kasich, a Republican who notably endorsed Joe Biden in the 2020 election. Also with us is Margaret Carlson, editor at large with Sarah Semaphore. Thanks so much for joining us tonight. Governor, let's kick it off. Is the Trump fever in your party finally breaking?
- [04:12]
John Kasich
Well, I think that the Trump fever in our country is kind of breaking a little bit. But, you know, Mark Twain said reports of my death are greatly exaggerated. And I think some of that is true when it comes to Trump. He still commands a lot in the party. But as I think as time goes on, as the economy doesn't recover, as we see healthcare costs increase, when we see these, what I just terrible ICE detained strategy here where they're like yanking people out of places who are, you know, never done anything commit a crime in the United States. I think there are Republicans are beginning to say, you know, enough. And remember, everybody who runs for reelection, they can't run on Trump. They have to run on the basis of can they win again? And they got to pick their issues. That's why you're seeing some things break here. But we're still still a long way off from seeing a complete shattering of of maga.
- [05:13]
Melissa Murray
All right, Margaret. A mixed diagnosis from the governor, but Democrats are feeling pretty bullish about their chances in 2026. Take a listen to Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi.
- [05:25]
John Kasich
So if the Democrats win the House back.
- [05:27]
Margaret Carlson
Yeah. No, no.
- [05:29]
Melissa Murray
When, when the Democrats win the House back, then we will. Right now.
- [05:33]
John Kasich
Yeah.
- [05:35]
Margaret Carlson
The Republicans in The Congress have abolished the Congress.
- [05:40]
Melissa Murray
They just do what the President insists that they do. That will be over.
- [05:45]
John Kasich
So that ends as soon as you have a democracy.
- [05:47]
Melissa Murray
That ends as soon as we have the gavel. Not if. When. What's your reaction, Margaret? Is she being too optimistic? Are the Dems spiking the football too early?
- [05:58]
Margaret Carlson
We miss her certainty and we actually, we miss Congressman Kasich. There's still a budget waiting to be balanced here, Senator. I mean, Congressman, if you, if you ever want to come back, you know, there's. There's been Abigail Spanberger, Mikey Sherrill. There was just a mayor elected in Miami, the first Democrat in 28 years. These are all good signs for the midterms. And I think some of the issues that you mentioned, Melissa, are ones that everybody understands that he just, he treats the White House like he owns it. At the very least, he owns it. Or he bought it to renovate it, and he's making excuses about the West Wing. Well, the law says you need to have permission to build, but it didn't say anything about tearing it down. I mean, these excuses, when you go past it, Melissa, it's just shocking to see. And you brought up the Kennedy Center. He said he was, quote, surprised and honored by having the center named after him after he filled the board with. Fired everybody, filled the board with his cronies and then had a vote. And by the way, it took minutes to get those letters up on the Kennedy Center. And so now it's the Trump and Kennedy. It is. It's kind of astonishing. And the Oval Office, of course, looks like he's decorating that like an Atlantic City casino and then putting his predecessor's pictures on the wall with plaques underneath, insulting each of them except for Ronald Reagan. It's kind of astounding. And I think people. It does penetrate in a way sometimes that the Cost of Living Index doesn't.
- [07:53]
Melissa Murray
Well, so, Governor, the behavior is certainly outrageous, as Margaret has detailed. Are the Republicans going to pay a price for the President's behavior? Are they courting a midterm shellacking like the one the Democrats experienced in 2010?
- [08:07]
John Kasich
Yeah, I've been saying for quite a while, not just the last couple weeks, and Margaret was saying this as well. I thought the Democrats were going to win the House a long time ago. Now, you know, when you take a look at these two ladies who won the governor's races, they were talking about affordability. They were not on fringe issues. You know, the Democrats have a. Have a challenge, and that is to stick on Things like health care, like the economy. But don't be getting on these fringe issues. You know, they can talk about ICE and the fact that ICE has been too aggressive. I think that resonates with people. But if they go start drifting into the fringe issues, they're going to have a problem for the Republicans. You know, they're sort of stuck with this MAGA thing. And I've been a Republican all my life, an American first, a Republican second. But I have to tell you, I don't quite know what it's all about. I don't know what's the positive message there. It seems as though it's a message about tearing things down rather than building things up. And that is never a successful way to get elected, to be just so negative and everything. So I think the Democrats are gonna win the House maybe by a significant margin, but they better be careful because they're very good at snatching victory out of the jaws of defeat. Or maybe I said it the wrong way, but I think the other way to say don't screw. Don't screw the thing up if you want to win.
- [09:31]
Melissa Murray
The bottom line is pretty straightforward. Margaret. Any path to taking back the House runs through ballot boxes in localities. And the Democrats are worried that the President might try to influence voter turnout in the midterms, but by doing things like sending in the National Guard or ICE agents to poll sites, which would suppress voter turnout certainly among some communities. Is that a real concern? And how should it be addressed? What should the Democrats be doing?
- [09:56]
Margaret Carlson
I mean, of course he'll try to do that. And, you know, if he doesn't get it done ahead of time, he'll do it after, just the way he did in the presidential by charging voter fraud, et cetera, et cetera. You know, he wants to get rid of mail in ballots. He doesn't want to get rid of them, but he wants not to have them count if they're not in by the second that the polls close. He has all kinds of picayune ways. He's going after states, rules on elections, which, by the way, those belong to the states, not to him. He will do anything he can to not make every vote count. You know, democracy, every vote counts in Trumpland. No, only his votes count.
- [10:42]
Melissa Murray
So Governor Marcus made a great point. There are real midterm insecurities in the White House, and they've already prompted the White House to take some extraordinary steps. There is ongoing a major mid cycle redistricting fight that the Supreme Court has essentially blessed by blessing Texas's redistricted map. And there's real concern that the president might not accept the results of an election that doesn't break his way. Are there anyone around him in this White House who could rein in those impulses and bring some order to all of this?
- [11:09]
John Kasich
Well, maybe Susie Wiles. I mean, it was pretty astounding interview she gave. And, you know, the president supported her, which was sort of surprising. Maybe she, and she seems to be someone there that people are inside the White House are intimidated by and also somebody who seems to have great common sense. So I think at the end, as Margaret was just saying, these elections that are coming up, they're decided state by state. It's a little bit different than when we saw the presidential election, which, by the way, he won this one and clearly lost the last one. I mean, my, my sense of this is that the redistricting and all that is just not going to be enough. If the Democrats stay on the right issue, this redistricting is not going to get it done. And by the way, how about Indiana? That said, we are not. The Indiana style is not to do partisan anything. It's designed to have fair play. So I, I just don't think the redistricting will really change the outcome here.
- [12:08]
Melissa Murray
All right, Governor John Kasich and Margaret Carlson, thanks so much for kicking us off this evening. Coming up, there is new heat on Donald Trump's so called border czar as exclusive new reporting reveals more details about the probe into his alleged bribery. Plus my conversation with one of Jeffrey Epstein's survivors as the fallout continues over the newly released files. And by the end of the hour, we will take a look back at the year in photos with the New York Times. All of that and more just around the corner when we're back in just 90 seconds. The lower federal courts are continuing to push back against Donald Trump's extreme agenda. Now he's ending 2025 with two major legal losses. A federal judge has ordered the administration to continue funding the U.S. consumer Financial Protection Bureau or risk violating an existing court order. And another federal judge has blocked the administration's attempt to deport South Sudanese migrants. The first year of Trump's second term saw a massive escalation in immigration enforcement as ICE raids made national news, resulting in the arrests of many immigrants without criminal records. And those arrests sparked protests around the country. And that public outcry was compounded by the administration's meager legal losses in the courts. Now, of course, it wasn't all losses for the administration. The administration actually posted a number of significant wins at the Supreme Court. And just this week, a lower federal court allowed the administration to share with ICE basic location and contact data of undocumented immigrants who are receiving public health benefits. This all comes amid a fresh scandal from within the administration. There's new reporting from Ms. Now that shows that border czar Tom Homan didn't receive a standard background check while he was being investigated for bribery. Despite that very significant omission, Homan was granted security clearance anyway. The White House calling it a blatant political investigation, but it's clearly not the beat. Spoke with Homan earlier this year about following court orders, and he had this to say.
- [14:29]
John Kasich
We're going to keep arresting them and.
- [14:30]
Melissa Murray
Taking them off the street. That's what I meant.
- [14:32]
John Kasich
I never said we're going to violate a court order. I said we're going to continue doing what we're doing and taking these people off the street.
- [14:38]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
That is what I meant when I said that.
- [14:40]
John Kasich
That's what you meant.
- [14:41]
Ankush Khaduri
Consistent with court rulings.
- [14:46]
John Kasich
President Trump has said he'll, he'll obey the rulings of the Supreme Court.
- [14:52]
Melissa Murray
And that has been fairly easy for the administration to do. So far, since the conservative majority on the Supreme Court has frequently ruled in favor of the administration. But the lower federal courts are continuing to stand up to this president. Joining me now to discuss all of this is Anpush Khaduri, former federal prosecutor and legal writer with Politico. Ankush, what's your take on the way the courts, the lower federal courts and the Supreme Court have handled Trump's immigration cases this year?
- [15:24]
Ankush Khaduri
You know, I mean, I, I think that this whole area of enforcement has been so controversial. And, you know, I share former Governor Kasich's assessment of the public's reaction to the really over the top and aggressive enforcement measures that this administration has undertaken. What we've seen, as you kind of indicated, is lower level courts kind of bristling at this and expressing hesitancy concern and the Supreme Court staying some of these orders, quite a few of them. So the administration can keep moving forward, in some instances sort of blessing the administration's aggressive tactics, most notably when they effectively legalized racial profiling in connection with.
- [16:04]
Melissa Murray
That was Brett Kavanaugh's concurrence. That was Brett Kavanaugh's concurrence.
- [16:09]
Ankush Khaduri
Right, Right. Well, he explained it. Right. He was the one who explained the import of their ruling. And it was a shocking ruling. And even he seems to have recognized that it went too far since he's recently been stuffing in Footnotes, efforts to kind of clean it all up. So I think that's sort of the disjunction we've been seeing.
- [16:26]
Melissa Murray
There's new reporting from your colleagues at Politico about the administration's efforts to close what they are calling a legal loophole. And specifically the loophole is asylum. The Department of Homeland Security is asking the courts to, quote, subm. Summarily, dismiss asylum claims without a hearing and send migrants to a third country where they can pursue relief. And that's even if the migrants have no connection to that third country. What do you make of the administration's efforts to shut down the asylum system?
- [16:55]
Ankush Khaduri
You know, it's really bad. It's a real, real serious attack on sort of the humanitarian legal framework, both domestically and internationally, that applies in these sorts of situations. And, you know, a good deal of this, including removing temporary protective status, as you noted, concerning some of the immigrants here, I find just transparently inhumane. I mean, some of these immigrants we invited here and told that they would be entitled to legal status, and then we just sort of yanked. Yanked the rug out from under them. And, you know, it's been a really just, you know, sad, I think, set of. But the one thing I would say to the administration, to the extent they're concerned about a quote, unquote, legal loophole, that's what laws are for. That is what Congress is for. That is why the White House is supposed to go to Congress when they want to change laws. Now, this administration does not have any respect for Congress, and the Republican majority in Congress seems to not care about legislating or providing any serious oversight of this administration. But that is actually how our Constitution and our legal system is supposed to work.
- [17:58]
Melissa Murray
Well, can I see a follow up on that? Earlier this year, the administration created a special asylum program for white South African farmers. How do they square that action with this latest antipathy for asylum claims more generally?
- [18:13]
Ankush Khaduri
They don't. I mean, they can't. I mean, they claimed that the people that they brought in from South Africa or are allowing in are there because they've been subject to some sort of discrimination in their. In. In their local, you know, in their localities. Plenty of other people make those claims, too, and the administration doesn't care.
- [18:31]
Melissa Murray
Yeah.
- [18:32]
Ankush Khaduri
Particularly when they appear to be from countries that are not largely, not entirely white.
- [18:36]
Melissa Murray
Well, ankles. I want to take a pivot for a minute and get your take on what's happening in and around Venezuela. We're learning today that last week the CIA conducted a drone strike on a port facility in Venezuela, marking the first known US Operation on land in that country. What are your thoughts on this?
- [18:52]
Ankush Khaduri
Look, this is yet another escalation of what I think is a campaign, a military campaign has very, very serious legal questions around it, both domestically, internationally. These were questions that were appropriate even when the administration was just doing the boat strikes, even before the double tap. Now, even before this apparent incursion into Venezuelan territory. Ordinarily, these would be considered acts of war. The administration seems to be very comfortable with that and perhaps even wanting to draw a conflict that they can then claim supports, for instance, their use of the Alien Enemies act and the like. I think this is yet another instance in which the administration is just running totally roughshod over Congress here. And it's remarkable to me the Republican majority has been content to go along with this. You know, I see no really serious legal justification for this. And the one thing I would mention, by the way, is that the administration's legal justification comes from a memo from the Office of Legal Counsel that I have very serious questions about. However, is related to a story that you mentioned at the top of this rundown, which is the decision that the court issued today rejecting the administration's position that they do not have to fund the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. As part of that opinion, the judge just took apart an OLC memo that the administration had created in order to try to justify their position. So my expectation is that the memo that they've created justifying their military strikes in and around Venezuela is about as legally competent as that memo.
- [20:26]
Melissa Murray
All right, Angush Khadori, thanks so much for that helpful context. Just ahead, new scrutiny on the Trump administration amid a brand new assault on women's rights. Plus, why Beyonce's ending the year on a high note. The but first, the fallout from the release of Jeffrey Epstein's files. One of his survivors joins me live in studio. That's up next. Donald Trump's DOJ is in hot water over its failure to release all of the Epstein files, which is required by law. The DOJ now says that they have a million more documents, and so far they have only released a portion of those documents, many of which were heavily redacted. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has moved to sue the administration for its recalcitrants. Last night I asked Congressman Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, about the committee's plans to hold the Trump administration accountable for these oversights. Here's what he told me.
- [21:35]
John Kasich
What's happening right now is completely illegal. These are illegal actions by the attorney general by the Trump administration.
- [21:43]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
It's not only the legal framework that.
- [21:45]
Melissa Murray
Is important moving forward.
- [21:47]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
It's also about holding those that are now part of this cover up accountable.
- [21:51]
John Kasich
And that is going to mean hearings. It is going to be a possible.
- [21:55]
Ankush Khaduri
Contempt action against the attorney general when Congress is back in session.
- [22:01]
Melissa Murray
Congressman Garcia saying that nothing is off the table, everything from legal action to contempt actions against Attorney General Pamela Joe Bondi and other members of Congress are also speaking out, including Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who notably split from Donald Trump over the Epstein scandal. In a bombshell interview with the New York Times, the Greene claims that after she said she would publicly identify some of the men who were accused of abuse, Trump replied, allegedly, quote, my friends will get hurt. Now the survivors are demanding transparency in a letter. Those survivors are calling on Congress to, quote, stand up for the rule of law and ensure the full release of the Epstein files. Joining me now to discuss these developments is Dani Bensky, a survivor of Epstein's abuse. She was one of the survivors to sign onto that letter. First of all, thanks for being here. I can't even imagine what it's like to be in the center of this firestorm right now. How are you holding up?
- [23:06]
Dani Bensky
Thank you for asking. And thank you for having me. Yeah, it's been a journey, for sure. I think this rollout, first of all, was never meant to be a rollout. It was meant to be a hard deadline, but it's done a number on all of us because it's just been handled so sloppily and names have not been redacted when they should have been. And then there are other names that were asking why their redactions are what they are. And so it's just incredibly frustrating to look through the files and not find what we're looking for at times.
- [23:37]
Melissa Murray
Yeah, right. So just the process itself has been kind of the punishment for you, another punishment on top of what you've already endured.
- [23:44]
Dani Bensky
It does feel that way. And I think something that we're finding is it actually moves to a point that those in power prey on the vulnerable. And that is something that we have seen time and time again. It is really at the heart of all exploitation. And when I think about my own abuse with Epstein, I think about there's just a small example. He at one point would pinch my fat on my body. And he knew that I was a dancer. He knew that my weight was really important to me. And so one tactic for manipulation would be to pinch me and tell me I was never going to be successful. If I didn't lose that, I would never go to the island like the other girls. I would never do all of these things if I had not, you know, done the things that he told me to do. So there was such a system, a systematic manipulation that was happening all the time. But everything was a power play. And now I'm feeling like this is a power play. Yes, this is a power play. You're talking about the President of the United States who is the most powerful person in our country and signed this.
- [24:54]
Melissa Murray
Law into law into law.
- [24:56]
Dani Bensky
And now it feels like, you know, he's talking to Marjorie Taylor Greene about that. We don't have the merit to be in the People's House, which, by the way, it's the People's House. This is not a country club with his name on the side of it. You know, there's no monogram. This is. It's just wild to me. Like, there's a statistic out there that there are one in four women who have been assaulted or abused. So when you think about that number across the U.S. it's absolutely staggering. So that when we say the People's House, you're talking about survivors. They make up a huge portion of our country. It's not just about this one case. And so it's just. It's so incredibly disheartening to constantly be in a place where he uses everything as a power play and the DOJ is using the same tactics.
- [25:43]
Melissa Murray
Well, one of the things that I think is really important to reflect on here is the law that was passed had specific protections for redactions and materials that were to be redacted, including included information about the survivor, so things that could be attributed to you. So one document that was released by the DOJ appears to have your name on it with an old phone number, and it's not redacted. So there are so many redactions here. But some of the most important things that should have been redacted don't seem to have been. So first of all, can you confirm that that's your phone number? That's your old phone number back in the day? Yes. Yeah.
- [26:17]
Dani Bensky
Yeah. And it's just frustrating that, you know, things like that are being found in the files. I just think that it just shows where the care is and the. And who is being cared for of predators. Right. And that is where we keep asking for the accountability. We keep asking for the transparency. And it's so important that this came out like we are. We're. I don't think that there's a single survivor who was like, no, we shouldn't have done this. No, it needed to be done the right way, and it's just not. And we've just been. Our lives have been handled very carelessly.
- [26:48]
Melissa Murray
What would you like to say to the lawmakers on Capitol Hill, not just those who worked assiduously to get this legislation signed, but those who are now in a position to hold this administration accountable for their failure to abide by the law that was passed by a bipartisan Congress and signed into law by this president.
- [27:04]
Dani Bensky
We need to hold him to account. I mean, I think it's so important. I think getting the Office of Inspector General involved in this is a really good choice. I think we just need some serious oversight, and we need him. I mean, at the end of the day, Trump signed this. He signed the law. It's a law. And so we need to make sure that people are upholding the law.
- [27:24]
Melissa Murray
Congressman Robert Garcia was on the show yesterday, and he said that they are considering in the Oversight Committee a range of different moves forward, including possibly holding hearings and maybe even contempt proceedings. What do you want to see happen? Do you want a public airing of all of this, or is that too much for survivors who have already borne the brunt of this firestorm?
- [27:46]
Dani Bensky
It's a really good question. I think survivors need to come together and have this conversation about what we'd like to see as a collective. You know, we're not a monolith. So there are varying opinions all over the place. But I do think that at the core of it, our fight has always been for transparency. And however we can get that, whether that means a hearing or multiple hearings, I think survivors will be all in.
- [28:08]
Melissa Murray
What do you want the public to know about what this has been like for you and the other survivors?
- [28:13]
Dani Bensky
Yeah, I mean, it's taxing for sure, but we knew that we needed to go, like, the only way out is through. And we really want to see change not just in the how we speak about these things, but also systemically, because we've just had so many systems fail us time and time again. And if we could make it better for the next generation, I think that's why we're here.
- [28:34]
Melissa Murray
All right, Danny, Betsy, thanks so much for coming in tonight and for talking about this. I know this has been a huge thing for you and for your family, and we thank you.
- [28:43]
Dani Bensky
Thank you for having me.
- [28:44]
Melissa Murray
No, it's our pleasure to have you. Thank you. Still ahead, a look back at the images like this one from Zoran Mamdani's historic campaign and the other amazing moments that defined 2025. But first, new exclusive reporting about the Trump administration's move to restrict women's rights. That's up next. We turn now to the Trump administration's renewed attacks on women's rights. Mississippi Now's Julianne McShane reports that the Department of Veterans affairs is, quote, quietly implementing further restrictions on abortion services following pressure from the Department of Justice. Now, to be very clear, by federal law, federal agencies like the VA were only able to provide abortions to veterans and their dependents in cases of rape, incest, or in circumstances where it was necessary to save the pregnant patient's life. But now even those carve outs are ending. A DOJ memo issued on December 18 ordered the VA to stop providing abortion services in all circumstances. And a second memo, this time from a VA official, told agency personnel that they must comply with the DOJ memo. That second memo was obtained by the nonprofit Democracy Forward and was reviewed by msnow. The memo emphasizes, quote, effective immediately, VA will no longer provide abortion or abortion counseling. The VA's press secretary confirmed the decision to msnow last week, telling msnow the agency will no longer provide abortions to veterans and their dependents in any circumstances. Again, the administration's actions roll back a carve out that provided abortion services to over 9 million veterans and their beneficiaries in limited circumstances. The policy's reversal could now threaten health care for the fastest growing group of veterans, the more than 2 million women veterans who are currently living in the United States. Joining me now to discuss all of this is MSNow reporter Julianne McShane, who wrote that article. Julianne, what are the top lines from this story? What should people know?
- [31:04]
Julianne McShane
So, as you said, the Trump VA is undoing this policy that the Biden administration put in place a few months after the supreme court overruled Roe vs. Wade in 2022, basically in an effort to try to do whatever they could to expand abortion access. And so they created a carve out, as you said, to allow women, veterans and their beneficiaries, of whom there are more than 700,000, to access abortion on their VA healthcare plans, cases of rape, incest, or threats to their health or life. And what the Trump administration has done is essentially revoke that. And they also did it in a, in a quiet way outside of the traditional rulemaking process.
- [31:45]
Melissa Murray
Let's talk about that part. So many Americans might not realize it, but when an agency implements a new rule, they just don't get to do so unilaterally they have to make the rule publicly available for what is known as notice and comment, where ordinary people can weigh in and say, I don't like this, I do want this. Here's something that you should think about. And the administration, as it has done in a number of different circumstances, did not provide for that required notice and comment provision.
- [32:10]
Julianne McShane
So they did allow for the comment period. They proposed the rule back in August and they gave people a month to weigh in. There were over 20,000 comments from people weighing in, you know, many of whom were opposed to this change. What they didn't do though is they didn't publish the final rule which creates, which then creates a 30 day period for people to basically get, get ready for this rule to change. The irony is they're actually planning to publish that rule tomorrow. So the draft is now available online. I read it before coming on here. And you know, they say in this draft there's, there's going to be a 30 day period. So, you know, veterans will, will have a period of time to adjust and figure out where they need to seek care. But of course, they've actually already implemented this rule following this DOJ memo on December 18th.
- [33:02]
Dani Bensky
Right.
- [33:02]
Melissa Murray
So we, we've already noticed that the VA supports a lot of different groups, veterans, but also their beneficiaries. And of course women veterans are the fastest growing group of vets. But there's also this question of the beneficiary. So there are a lot of people who are dependents of veterans who depend on the VA and VA services for their healthcare. How is this going to affect those people? So these are wives, children of veterans, whatever. How's this going to affect them?
- [33:26]
Julianne McShane
Yeah, so there are more than 700,000 beneficiaries, as you said, spouses, kids who are using VA healthcare plans. I mean, it's going to affect them in the same way that it's going to affect veterans in the sense that for people who are living in states that ban or severely restrict abortions who are on the VA healthcare plans, you know, that they had a limited opportunity to access abortion in these emergency situations through their VA healthcare plan that they otherwise couldn't access in their state if they live in one of these states that otherwise ban abortion, and so they now are losing that opportunity.
- [34:01]
Melissa Murray
I want you to take a listen to some sound from Representative Mark Takano, who's the ranking member of the Veteran Affairs Committee. He had this to say about the changes.
- [34:12]
Ankush Khaduri
The consequences of VA's cruel and short sighted proposed rule.
- [34:16]
Melissa Murray
If it is finalized, veterans will have.
- [34:19]
Ankush Khaduri
Fewer rights than they do right now. VA's extreme abortion ban goes to effect. Pregnant veterans will die waiting for the care they need.
- [34:30]
Melissa Murray
So this is the state of play here. Like this is actually going to be a matter of life and death for veterans, people who have put their lives on the line for the United States, for their dependents, gold star families who have sacrificed loved ones. What are the long term impacts of this going to be?
- [34:45]
Julianne McShane
I think that's a great question. I mean, the veterans I've spoken to are extremely disappointed and feel like the freedoms that they fought for for their country are now being taken away and from them. So whether this, you know, leads to long term recruitment issues or declines in recruitment for the armed services, I don't know. We're going to have to see. Time will tell. But, you know, in the meantime, I think that unfortunately we're probably going to see veterans who are dealing with threats to their health or life because of this policy.
- [35:19]
Melissa Murray
All right. Julianne McShane, Ms. Now reporter, thank you for that terrific reporting.
- [35:24]
Julianne McShane
Thank you.
- [35:25]
Melissa Murray
Up next, a turbulent year defined in photos. That's up next. The New York Times has released its 2020 five year end photos. This is a list of striking images that remind us of the turbulent yet triumphant year that was 2025. There was Pope Francis funeral in April. He was considered one of the most progressive leaders in the modern Catholic Church and his passing paved the way for the first ever American pope. There was the military parade in June that happened to coincide with Donald Trump's 79th birthday, in which tanks proceeded through the streets of Washington, D.C. then in October, the historic east wing of the White House was demolished to make way for the president's controversial ballroom. And that's just to name a few of the striking images. Joining me now to go through some more is Jeffrey Henson Scales photography editor for the New York Times. Jeffrey, thanks so much for joining us. And thanks for these amazing images. Let's talk about the first one. The year started off with horrific wildfires in California. So let's take a look at this image. And what does this convey?
- [36:46]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
Well, this is picture, as you can see by Kyle Grillo. This is in Pacific Palisades. And one of the things about these kinds of images of these tragic situations is they're also quite beautiful images to look at. And that's kind of the dichotomy of photojournalism. But you see this swimming pool with the sun setting and you kind of think of like these people had a very nice lifestyle that is just gone In a minute. You know, in a very wealthy community, which, you know, you can't escape things like the wildfires.
- [37:18]
Melissa Murray
Yeah. The beauty of the tragedy and the inevitability of all of it. Here's another image. This one, again earlier this year, documents the White House meeting between Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. This meeting turned into a shouting match, as Doug Mills from the New York Times captured here, what would the public take away from this particular image?
- [37:40]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
Well, that was such a moment. And Doug Mills is just like the expert in White House photography. He's been doing it for decades, and he captured the gestures of that moment where when you see it on tv, you hear them arguing. But to capture that in an individual image with the hand gestures, Trump pointing and Zelensky responding. So being able to capture that argument visually without hearing the sound, I think is really remarkable.
- [38:09]
Melissa Murray
Here's another image. This one a more jubilant moment in politics. So this is Zoran Mamdani's election of the first Muslim and first Indian American mayor of New York City. What do you think of this image and what does it capture and tell us about this moment?
- [38:23]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
Well, I love this image, the way it captured the enthusiasm of Mandami's supporters. And just, you know, they all have the cell phones or candles, whatever, cell phone.
- [38:34]
Melissa Murray
They're all a different generation.
- [38:35]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
Like, you know, it's like a rock concert. It is. And that really captured that, you know, and this is like, I think less than 10 days from the election. It was late October.
- [38:47]
Dani Bensky
Yeah.
- [38:47]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
But the photographer, his position, where he happened to be just captured that perfectly.
- [38:54]
Melissa Murray
Yeah, it's a great image. Then there's this final image, and I think this one's a little more somber. So this one is from Gaza. Can you tell us what this one's?
- [39:05]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
This was one of the most incredible images I thought of the year. And it was. It was powerful. It was painful. But to see this family breaking their fast, their Ramadan fast, amidst just this massive destruction, trying to find some normalcy in this tiny part of this devastated community and world, in this, you know, horrific situation that is none of their making. They were just trying to live right?
- [39:31]
Melissa Murray
So this is a moment of breaking fast in one of the holiest periods in the Islamic calendar, amidst the ruins of what was obviously a major crisis in this family's life. And they're just going on.
- [39:44]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
They're just trying to get some normalcy and, you know, keep on living. It's, you know, it's also, you know, a statement about people's ability to survive and, you know, endure.
- [39:56]
Dani Bensky
Yeah.
- [39:57]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
You know, with situations that can be horrible and photojournalists being able to make powerful images to bring this to the rest of the world. And I think that's so important with still photographs. Cause they translate history like no other medium. At least to me. Because it just captures that and it lasts like a document forever. Just those moments when they're done as well as an image like that.
- [40:24]
Melissa Murray
I don't know how you did this. Like, it took us forever to figure out which four to use for this broadcast. And you were sifting through thousands of images. Like, how did you make these decisions?
- [40:34]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
Hundreds of thousands.
- [40:35]
Melissa Murray
Hundreds of thousands. How did you make the decisions about which images captured 2025?
- [40:41]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
Well, we look at major news events. We have to sort of follow the news. And you look at images that just grab you when you're going through them. And the Times has a great.
- [40:55]
John Kasich
Group.
- [40:55]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
Of photo editors and photographers. So we tend to look at ones that are published. Because the time it's publishes hundreds of thousands of images every year. And almost all of the images in this particular year in pictures, there's 97 in the collection. And they're all commissioned by the Times, except for three. A Pierre Getty.
- [41:18]
Dani Bensky
That's correct.
- [41:18]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
And the editors do a fantastic job. But we, you know, me and my co editor, Tanner Curtis, and we just go over, we spend a couple of months and we just, you know, keep paring it down.
- [41:30]
Melissa Murray
Well, you did a great job.
- [41:31]
Jeffrey Henson Scales
Oh, thank you.
- [41:32]
Melissa Murray
Jeffrey Henson Scales. Thank you so much.
- [41:34]
John Kasich
Bubba Wallace here with Tyler Reddick.
- [41:36]
Melissa Murray
You know what's more nerve wracking than waiting for qualifying results?
- [41:39]
John Kasich
Waiting for the green flag to drop.
- [41:41]
Melissa Murray
Instead of pacing, you rev up with Chumba Casino's weekly new releases.
- [41:45]
John Kasich
It's like a fresh set of tires for your brain. Play for free@chumbacasino.com let's Chumba. No purchase necessary. VGW Group. Void where prohibited by law. CTC's 21 plus, sponsored by Chumba Casin.