← The Briefing with Jen Psaki
The Briefing with Jen Psaki
NO KING: Trump blows up his own case for tariff power with scattershot excuses
00:40:33
Despite Donald Trump's claim of king-like powers to apply trade tariffs by his own whims, a lawsuit being heard in federal appeals court argues that he is asserting a power no president has, and his claims of emergency powers are contradicted by his myriad non-emergency excuses. Neal Katyal, who argued the case against Trump in court today, talks with Jen Psaki.
Loading summary
Transcript75 lines
- [00:01]
Nicole Wallace
MSNBC presents the chart topping original podcast, the Best People with Nicole Wallace. This week, she sits down with political commentator Tim Miller.
- [00:11]
Tim Miller
Another way of saying I care about.
- [00:12]
Paola Kluat
You is by saying, like, I'm gonna fight the things that are preventing you from living the kind of life that.
- [00:17]
Nicole Wallace
You wish the best. People with Nicole Wallace. Listen now. For early access ad free listening and bonus content, subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. Start your day with the MSNBC Daily Newsletter. Sharp insights from voices you trust, standout moments from your favorite shows, and fresh perspectives from experts shaping the news. Sign up now@msnbc.com I need to start.
- [00:46]
Tim Miller
Tonight with a bit of an update, an update on something I said on this show about Donald Trump. Now, a couple of weeks ago, I opened the show by playing the clip of this completely bizarre moment when. When Trump said that his late uncle knew the notorious domestic terrorist Ted Kaczynski, better known as the Unabomber.
- [01:06]
Adrian Kluat
My uncle was at MIT, one of the great professors, 51 years, whatever. He was longest serving professor in the history of mit. Kaczynski was one of his students. Do you know who Kuczynski was? There's very little difference between a madman and a genius. But Kaczynski, I said, what kind of a student was he? Uncle John, Dr. John Trump? He said, what kind of a student? And then he said, seriously good. He said he'd correct. He'd go around correcting everybody. But it didn't work out too well for him.
- [01:37]
Tim Miller
I mean, that clip does not get any less bizarre. And I just love watching the face of the man next to Trump that's in the shot. But that aside, Trump said that his uncle taught the Unabomber at MIT and that Trump and his uncle had talked about what a good student the Unabomber had been. Now, at the time, I pointed out that this story was basically impossible. I mean, for one thing, there is no record that The Unabomber attended MIT. And Trump's uncle, who was a professor at MIT, died in 1985, more than a decade before the Unabomber's identity even became public. None of it made any sense. And I said at the time that all this seemed like just another example of Trump losing it. And believe me, you all know there are plenty of other examples of that nearly every day. But it turns out there might be kind of a reasonable explanation for this one, because Donald Trump really did have a close personal relation who reportedly claimed to have known the Unabomber back in his college days. It just wasn't Trump's uncle. I mean, this is from a 2019 interview that mother Jones did with a friend of notorious child sex predator Jeffrey Epstein. Here's what it said. Quote, Jeffrey once told me that he studied math with the Unabomber. Did you know that? Jeffrey told me that he studied math at UCLA with the Unabomber. So you see, I mean, Trump really did have a close personal relationship with someone who apparently claimed to know the Unabomber in college. It's possible. It's possible he just confused his beloved uncle with his good friend of many years, child sex predator Jeffrey Epstein. It is possible. And while we don't know if Epstein ever actually did meet the Unabomber, if they did, it almost certainly would not have been at ucla, given neither of them went there. But it seems still totally plausible that Epstein could have told the same story to his good friend Donald Trump. I guess. I mean, that's a simple mistake that anyone who had a long personal friendship with Jeffrey Epstein could have made. You know, confusing him with a member of your literal own family. Now, today, Trump's long relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is back in the news again for a very different reason, because the family of one of Epstein's survivors is demanding answers from Donald Trump about what Trump knew and when he knew it. Earlier this week, Donald Trump took a question about his friendship with Epstein and ended up talking about one of Epstein's victims who used to work at Mar A Lago, a young woman by the name of Virginia Giuffre.
- [04:05]
Adrian Kluat
He took people that worked for me, and I told him, don't do it anymore. And he did it. And I said, stay the hell out of here, Mr. President.
- [04:12]
Tim Miller
Did one of those stolen persons that include Virginia Jeffrey.
- [04:20]
Adrian Kluat
I don't know. I think she worked at the spa. I think so. I think that was one of the people. He stole her.
- [04:30]
Tim Miller
He stole her. It's a very chilling thing he just said. That is how Trump described one of Epstein's survivors. Virginia Giuffre, died by suicide earlier this year. But in the year 2000, she was just 17 years old, working at Trump's Florida club, Mar A Lago. It was while she was working there that she met Epstein's co conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, and eventually became one of the many young women Epstein and Maxwell preyed upon. Now, Trump claimed that he and Epstein parted ways after Epstein stole Giuffre from him. Again, a very creepy comment, but the public record suggests otherwise. Just two years later, Trump was lauding Jeffrey Epstein in the pages of New York Magazine. Calling Epstein a terrific guy and saying he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. Again, those were the comments he made two years after he claims Epstein stole Giuffre. Now, last night, in response to Trump's comments this week, the family of Virginia Giuffre released this statement. Quote, it was shocking to hear President Trump invoke our sister and say that he was aware that Virginia had been stolen from Mar A Lago. It makes us ask if he was aware of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's criminal actions, Especially, especially given his statement two years later that his good friend Jeffrey likes women on the younger side. No doubt about it. We and the public are asking for answers. Survivors deserve this. Now, part of the reason that Virginia Giuffre's family is choosing to speak out now is that Trump has repeatedly refused to rule out the idea of pardoning Epstein's co conspirator and Jeffrey's abuser, Ghislaine Maxwell. Every single time Trump is asked this question, he says only that he has the right to pardon Maxwell, but that he hasn't thought about it. And for every survivor and their family, that means he is dangling the possibility of freeing a woman who is a convicted sexual predator and abuser who may have tormented them or tormented a member of their family. Today, Virginia Giuffre's family sat down for an interview with NBC News where they urged the President to release all of the Epstein files and to rule out pardoning Maxwell once and for all. So you're saying, Amanda, that Virginia wanted to see these Epstein files released, that that was important to her, even right up until the end, she was fighting for that to happen right up until the very end? Yes. She wanted the public to know the crimes that they had committed. So then, sky, when it comes to this issue of potential leniency from Maxwell, do you need to hear President Trump rule out a pardon? Would that give you a measure of comfort? Yes, I think this is a beginning. I think what Amanda spoke about, with.
- [07:17]
Neil Katyal
The release of the files and giving.
- [07:21]
Tim Miller
Transparency to the public, I mean, this is being asked for. So when we are asked, what are.
- [07:27]
Neil Katyal
We asking for and would that give us comfort?
- [07:30]
Tim Miller
The answer unequivocally is yes, that would.
- [07:32]
Neil Katyal
Certainly give us comfort.
- [07:35]
Tim Miller
That's the family of Epstein survivor Virginia Giuffre responding directly to the President saying they want the Epstein files released and they want him to rule out pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell. Of course they do. As any survivor would. Donald Trump has never once acknowledged the pain of these victims, nor has anyone else in his administration. And it is abundantly clear that he desperately wants to move away from this story, but he can't. Because every insensitive and invasive thing he says makes things worse for him, in part because it prompts more people to come forward to set the record straight. And that is sort of Trump's M.O. these days. I mean, the Epstein story is a very good example, but it's not just the Epstein story. Even when the public is focused on the things he actually wants to talk about, I mean, the things he thinks in his mind are his big accomplishments. Story's kind of the same. Trump can't help but make the situation worse and worse. Which brings me to another big story we're following tonight. We're just hours away from the latest deadline in the rolling debacle that is Donald Trump's self inflicted trade war. At midnight tonight, Trump's latest round of disastrous global tariffs are set to kick in. And since we've been here before, we know that means Trump is either about to chicken out again or crash the stock market or a combination of the two. And in the lead up to this latest deadline, Trump has insisted that he is not changing his mind this time. But tonight, on the eve of this deadline, Trump released a new order announcing brand new, completely made up tariff rates, probably with the same fake equation that he has used before for a whole host of different countries. And shocker, these new tariffs make even less sense than before. For instance, he is raising the tariff on Canada from 25% to 35%, while at the same time exempting the vast majority of products that Canada actually exports to the United States. With every new iteration of these tariffs, Trump has injected more uncertainty, more chaos into the global economy and certainly the economy here at home. But today, we got a little sliver of hope that something might soon stop Trump from making this matter any worse. This morning, a federal appeals court heard oral arguments in a pair of lawsuits challenging Trump's authority to unilaterally impose these tariffs. And the judges in that case said sounded pretty skeptical about whether Trump really had the power to do all of this on his own. I mean, one judge told Trump's lawyers, quote, one of the major concerns that I have is that the law Trump cites for this authority doesn't even mention the tariffs anywhere. Another judge said that during these same arguments, quote, it's just hard for me to see that Congress intended to give the President the wholesale authority to throw out the tariff schedule that Congress has adopted after years of careful work and revise every one of these tariff rates. Yeah, I mean, that skepticism makes sense. After all, Trump's arguments for why he's allowed to impose these tariffs have never made any sense. He claimed that this is all about combating a national emergency. But what that emergency is keeps changing. I mean, one day it's rebalancing trade, the next it's about fentanyl trafficking. The next day it's about stopping the criminal trial of a fellow authoritarian coup plotter. Who knows what it'll be tomorrow. The only consistent theme is that Trump seems to think he can just impose whatever tariffs he wants for whatever reason he feels like on that particular day. That is what this is really about for Trump. He wants to rule like a king, doing whatever he wants, saying whatever he wants, consequences be damned. But as president, everything you do and say has real consequences. And when you try to rule like a king, you just end up making things worse. That was exactly how the lawyer arguing these tariffs began his arguments today.
- [11:14]
Jen Psaki
Thank you, Chief Judge Moore, and may it please the court. You just heard an argument in responses to Judges Hughes, Stark and Dyke that our federal courts are powerless, that the president can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, for as long as he wants, so long as he declares an emergency. That is as major a question as it gets. A breathtaping, taking claim to power that no president has asserted in 200 years. And the consequences are staggering.
- [11:39]
Tim Miller
That voice sounded familiar. That's because the lawyer who argued against these tariffs in court today was former Solicitor General Neil Katiel. And he joins me here to talk about that case in just 90 seconds.
- [11:56]
Nicole Wallace
Saturday, October 11th. From New York City, it's MSNBC LIVE 25. Join your favorite MSNBC hosts, Rachel Maddow, Joe Scarborough, Mika Bruszynski, Nicole Wallace, Ari Melber, Alicia Menendez, Simone Sanders Townsend, Michael Steele, Chris Haynes, jen Psaki, Lawrence O', Donnell, Stephanie Rule, and more. Visit msnbc.comlive25 to buy your tickets today. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts for early access, ad free listening and bonus content to all of MSN MSNBC's original podcasts, including the chart topping series the Best People with Nicole Wallace, why is this Happening? Main justice and more. Plus new episodes of all your favorite MSNBC shows ad free and ad free listening to all of Rachel Maddows original series, Ultra Bagman and Deja News. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.
- [13:04]
Tim Miller
Joining me now is Neal Katiel, one of the best legal minds out there who just Spent the day arguing a case. So I'm so grateful he's still here with us at 9:15. He is a former acting Solicitor General of the United States and is currently representing a coalition of businesses challenging Donald Trump's tariffs. So we just played a part of your opening argument there, which I feel like distilled it really, really well for people to understand. And Trump has now, for years, has now talked about his tariff plan, which is a power of Congress not to. Not the executive, but walk us through the legal argument of your case and what case you made today in court.
- [13:42]
Jen Psaki
Yeah, and I will do so. And it's such a privilege to be with you again, Jen. And what I want to do is I'm not trying to retry the case in the public media or anything like that, but just give our viewers a sense of what the case is about, what the stakes are and the like. And, you know, basically, Donald Trump imposed these massive. Trump, massive tariffs on Americans. Really the largest tax increase. So it's Bill Clinton in 1993. It's gonna cost every American family an average of at least $1,300 per year. And he did this on his own. His own say so without going to Congress, without a whiff of congressional debate, none of it. And what we argued in court today on behalf of small businesses across America and supported by entities as diverse as Chamber of Commerce and, you know, members of Congress and the like, is that that's not our constitutional system. We fought a revolutionary war, in part, about the idea that tariffs and taxation are tempting things for kings. And you can't have the executive have those powers. They have to be located in the branch that's closest to the people, which is the Congress of the United States. And so what I said was that this is the first time, really, in American history that a president has ever said, I've got these sweeping powers to tariff. It's literally never happened before. And if the president really wants those powers, he should do what he did in the first go to Congress and ask for them. He tried it the first time around. Congress said no, but he's got to try, and he's got to do it that way. He can't just do it on his own.
- [15:20]
Tim Miller
It's not like his own party doesn't control both houses of Congress. But he may want to just be a king. So let me ask you, Neil, because one of the things that we have been talking about a little bit is just the shifting explanations. It makes it really hard for the public to follow and understand, makes it hard for businesses to plan for the uncertainty. But some of this, you know, he threatened today not to negotiate with Canada if they recognize Palestine. He's been threatening Brazil because of a legal case against an aspiring authoritarian dictator. Over there, their count, there's a fentanyl. He extended that because of fentanyl. There's different explanations for the quote, unquote, emergency. That is something that's hard to understand from a public messaging standpoint and for businesses. But does it play into the legal argument?
- [16:06]
Jen Psaki
100%. And you heard the judges today at the nation's second highest court, the court of appeals, basically ask the government lawyer those questions, which is, what in the world is the emergency that's so unexpected and unusual? Once you say it's trade deficits, another time you say it's military readiness. Another time it's this, it's that. It reminds me of, you know, those shell games that you see being played on the street where, you know, people are constantly moving what's under the shell? And that appears to be what's been happening here. And I do think it, you know, it causes a grave amount of concern. I mean, maybe in the most extreme circumstance, Jenn, in which Congress isn't able to act and you have some new sudden emergency that you want to give the president some powers. But, boy, trade deficits is the opposite of that. I mean, the president's own executive order says trade deficits have been a persistent feature of the US Economy for every year of the. And the law that he's invoking to try and impose tariffs, which, as you said to our viewers and you showed the questions from the judges, the law doesn't even mention tariffs. The one thing it does mention is that the president must identify an unusual and extraordinary threat. And the president basically pled himself out of court today because his own executive order says these trade deficits are the opposite of what's unusual and extraordinary. They're persistent, they're commonplace. They're a routine fact of life in the American economy.
- [17:34]
Tim Miller
Before I let you go, Neil, I know you've had a long day. What's next here? A lot of people watching Trump just put out an executive order. It's very confusing, hard to follow. What's next? What can we expect from the courts?
- [17:47]
Jen Psaki
Well, we hope the court does give a resolution really soon because, Jen, these are, you know, yes, it's nice to talk about these abstract legal things, separation of powers, the Constitution, Article 1, you know, and the like. But at the end of the day, this is about you and me and small businesses across America and large businesses who are asking, what are the rules going forward? I mean, we've careened from one day to the next since January 20th when it comes to tariff policy. We need some certainty around this. And so my hope is that the federal courts will resolve this quickly. I suspect, you know, my personal view is this isn't a difficult constitutional legal question and that our businesses in America can go forward and understand what the rules are.
- [18:34]
Tim Miller
Neal Katiel I always love talking to you. Thank you so much for joining me, taking the time this evening.
- [18:39]
Jen Psaki
Thank you.
- [18:40]
Tim Miller
Okay. We're going to take a quick break after that. We're going to talk about a mother's harrowing experience, getting caught up in Trump's immigration crackdown and being separated from the infant daughter she was still breastfeeding. She and her husband joined me later this hour. But first, the White House held a press briefing today. So I'm going to put on my old press secret, have a go at some of the questions. That's up next.
- [19:05]
Nicole Wallace
Saturday, October 11th, from New York City, it's MSNBC Live 25. Join your favorite MSNBC hosts, Rachel Maddow, Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski, Nicole Wallace, Ari Melber, Alicia Menendez, Simone Sanders Townsend, Michael Steele, Chris Haynes, jen Psaki, Lawrence O', Donnell, Stephanie Rule and more. Visit msnbc.comlive25 to buy your tickets today.
- [19:39]
Tim Miller
It was a really short White House briefing today. So if you blinked and you missed it or just you were following other things going on, I don't blame you. But even in that short span of time, there were some pretty out there questions from some of the right wing characters this White House has invited to have a daily presence in the briefing room. So I thought I'd take another crack answering some of them. All right. Let's start with Emily Gooden from the Daily Mail. Why not? I wanted to ask about this report that the president wants to host a G20 meeting at Trump do rel. How is he going to do that considering all the preparations that have been going on in South Africa? And also, would that be seen as his businesses possibly profit income will kind of meeting? Would that be seen as his businesses possibly profiting? Yes, Emily, of course it would be. Now remember, President Trump tried to pull this before. Back in 2019, he wanted to host the G7 summit at his Darrell property. But there was so much pushback from both Democrats and Republicans back then, it was even bipartisan that he was forced to abandon those plans. In this term, though, his presidency is even more guided by how he can profit than the last time around and people are not really checking him. I don't know if you've notice. I mean, according to Bloomberg, since the start of the 2024 election, the Trump brand has driven more than $10 billion in worldwide real estate projects. Just to give you a sense of what they've been doing. And there doesn't really seem to be any checks on that anywhere. Again, nowhere. Okay, who's up next? Jennifer Jacobs from CBS News. What do you got? How much of the East Wing will be torn down? The entire East Wing or just parts of it? All right, that may sound an out there question if you haven't been following this. But for those just catching up, what Jennifer's referencing is today's big announcement from the Trump administration, the $200 million plan to renovate the East Wing into an enormous and dare I say, tacky ballroom. And even though those renovations will supposedly be funded by generous donations, not taxpayer dollars, I would really like to see those receipts, by the way, as I'm sure you would. Even though that it's still, that's what they're talking about today. And let's just take a step back and remember what's happening today. I mean, in just a few hours, broad, broad new tariffs will kick in for dozens of countries. The president is failing to separate himself from a notorious child predator named Jeffrey Epstein. Won't rule out pardoning his co conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell. Famine has all but been declared in Gaza and somehow Trump appears to be preoccupied with interior decorating. So there's that. East Wing has served presidents well for decades. It has incredible history. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. But, but I guess that's what he's focusing his time on right now. Okay, next, Joey Garrison at USA Today. Go ahead.
- [22:28]
Jen Psaki
What did Treasury Secretary Bessett mean yesterday when he called the new Trump accounts for newborns a backdoor to privatizing Social Security? Does the administration view this new Trump accounts as a way to, in the long term perhaps privatize Social Security?
- [22:46]
Tim Miller
Well, Joey, I think you answered the question for yourself there. Again, here is the literal quote from Scott Bessant yesterday. Quote. In a way, it is a backdoor for privatizing Social Security. I don't think it could be any more clear. The truth is he's probably, he's really just saying the quiet part out loud. I mean, privatizing Social Security has been a long stated goal of the Republican Party. Many in the Republican Party and Bess into, I mean the man has competition, but there are few people more disconnected from the American people. He's just saying what others have been planning in private, which isn't exactly comforting, but that's what it was all about. Okay, we have time for one more. Kelly Wright from the Christian Broadcasting Network. Go ahead.
- [23:29]
Congresswoman Gwen Moore
As you know, a lot of deportation has been going on. ICE has been going after violent criminals that are here illegally and rightly so. In the midst of that, there are some evangelical pastors who are stating that it may have gone to a point of being indiscriminate and actually getting innocent people like members of the clergy. Has the president and has ICE looked at that to see how they can actually go after those violent criminals, but also make sure that members of the clergy are still not being deported?
- [24:02]
Tim Miller
Kelly, I mean, I know the Trump administration has said repeatedly that their immigration rates are prioritizing violent criminals, but that is just not the truth. I mean, the pastor you're alluding to, Daniel Fuentes Espinal, was arrested in Maryland for overstaying his visa. He is not a violent criminal. He is a father and a community leader. But the overwhelming majority of innocent people who have no criminal records, over 70% of them, people detained by ICE, have no criminal record at all. Most of them are not clergy. We should care about them and ask about them, too. What the Trump administration is focused on is the numbers, which is why you hear harrowing stories like those of my very next guest. So hang tight and I'll be back with that story after a quick break. Paola Kluat was still breastfeeding her nine week old daughter when ICE arrested her. So for two months, her husband, Adrienne Kluat, drove a nearly eight hour round trip drive twice a week from their home in Baton Rouge to the immigration prison in Monroe, Louisiana, so their daughter could nurse and so their two year old son could see his mother. Powell is one of the many, many immigrants who believed they were following all of the rules, trying to gain citizenship legally, only to get caught up in the cruel dragnet of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. Adrian Kluat is a Marine veteran. He served this country for five years, serving in places like Korea and Japan and California, where he met Paola. The couple got married last year and started the process to get Paola a green card. Paola was brought to the US from Mexico by her mother when she was just 14 years old. And at the time, she was granted protection under the asylum system. But in the years that followed, she became estranged from her mother. So when her mother missed an immigration hearing in 2018, Paula didn't know about it. She only found out that her mother missed that hearing last year after she was married, when she was trying to apply for a green card. Now, days before a green card appointment in May, Paola learned that because her mother had missed that hearing back in 2018, that meant she, as in Paola, was subject to a deportation order. That made her understandably nervous, but she was still hopeful. She was married to US Marine veteran after all. So the couple went to the green card appointment anyway. Now, at the appointment, they told the federal staffer about the order while explaining that they were trying to reopen her case. The staffer then asked Paola and Adrian to wait in the lobby for some paperwork for a follow up appointment, which Adrian now believes was a ploy because soon after, ICE officers arrived, handcuffed Paola and took her away again. Her daughter was just nine weeks old at the time. She has no criminal record, and she's married to a Marine veteran. That was May 27th. Now, two months later, Paola has finally been released. And according to her family's attorney, her release was in large part due to the work of a. You may find a surprising ally. I kind of did. Louisiana Republican senator and staunch Trump backer John Kennedy. Emails reviewed by the Associated Press show that Kennedy's office said that it put in a request for Powell's release on Friday. By Monday, she was out. But even with a US Marine veteran as her husband and the support of a Republican US Senator, Powell was sent home with an ankle monitor that she will need to keep on until her immigration case is resolved, which the family's lawyer says will likely be a multi year process. Here to tell us what all of that was like firsthand. In their first national TV interview together are Paola and Adrienne Kluat. Thank you both so much for being here with us, for sharing your story. I'm so grateful and I think it's so important for people to hear. First of all, Paola, let me just ask, let me ask both of you actually, how are you doing? How are your kids doing? I'm a mom too. My kids are a little bit older, but. How are you all doing?
- [27:54]
Paola Kluat
We're doing great. I'm excited to have her home. I know she's happy to be home with the kids.
- [28:01]
Congressman Mark Pocan
Yeah, I'm happy to be back home with my kids and with my husband.
- [28:05]
Tim Miller
I bet you are. And I bet you they're very happy to be home with you, too. That two Year old boy now I'm sure is very happy, Adrienne, for people to understand. I tried to tell some of the story of what you have been through for the last two months. Your kids are so young, but how did you explain to your 2 year old? I know he missed his mom. And is there anything I missed about your story and what you went through over the last two months in terms of trying to help the kids see their mom and help them understand what was happening?
- [28:35]
Paola Kluat
No, I think you were very accurate. And as far as informing my son what was happening, it's more or less his mom's going to be home soon. I mean, he's too young to understand what exactly is happening. And I don't want him to grow up thinking my mom is in jail or something like that. So I just tried to keep hope alive and I still came to visit her as well.
- [28:59]
Tim Miller
Let me ask you too, Adrienne. You described the end of Powell's green card hearing in May as a ploy. I just mentioned this. And we're seeing stories like this, unfortunately, all across the country. Can you help us? Can you expand a little bit more on how that played out so people watching can understand? Yeah.
- [29:19]
Paola Kluat
We went in for the. The two interviews. One is to verify that our marriage is legitimate, and the other one is the actual, like, approval for a green card. And they decided our marriage is legitimate. And then during the next interview, they asked if we had a removal order, which we just found out about a week prior. And so of course, we were honest about it because I feel like lying would have hurt. Would have hurt us more. I'm sorry. And then the guy went to go talk to his supervisor, came back, completed the interview, told us we did great, and to wait in the lobby for paperwork regarding our next appointment where we were met by the ICE agents.
- [30:08]
Tim Miller
That's incredibly important for people to hear. That's how it went down. It's unbelievable in this country that this is what is happening. Let me ask you, Paola, and thank you both again so much for sharing your story. I know it's probably not easy to do and I'm incredibly grateful. You were in this detention center for two months. What was it like in there? Who else was in there with you?
- [30:35]
Congressman Mark Pocan
It is hard. It's difficult being, you know, it's like prison, you know, being the thing. No. Is it, you know, away from your family, from your kids, your husband? It is hard. And, you know, like, they have a lot of rules in their detention. A lot of rules, a lot. Like, it Is good guards and it's a bad one still.
- [31:05]
Tim Miller
And.
- [31:06]
Congressman Mark Pocan
And that's detention center is not like use people like without criminal record. They have like people with criminal record and people without criminal record altogether.
- [31:22]
Tim Miller
So it was mixed together. All mixed together. Staying together.
- [31:26]
Congressman Mark Pocan
Yes.
- [31:28]
Tim Miller
What were the conditions like? I mean, did you have a place to sleep? Did you have food to eat? What else can you tell us about what it was like in there.
- [31:39]
Congressman Mark Pocan
Is breakfast at 4am launch 10am dinner 4pm yes. We have a bunker beds, but they are like this kind of jail prison bunker beds. Like. Whereas the mattress is like this thing, you know, like small. Yes. We do have blankets, but it's like two blankets only. And they give us like two uniforms and they give you one pair of sweatpants and sweater. Used to be there.
- [32:21]
Tim Miller
You are out now and I know back with your family, which is so wonderful and a happy part of this story I mentioned. ICE is planning to put ankle monitors like the one you got sent home with on more than 180,000 immigrants. You are again a mother. You have no criminal record. You love your children. You're happily married. Your husband is a Marine. You were granted asylum when you were 14 years old. How do you feel? I can ask both of you this question about the fact that you are currently being required to wear an ankle monk.
- [33:00]
Congressman Mark Pocan
I feel sad. I feel bad about it. I feel like even that I'm not criminal person. I feel like I'm a criminal for the uncle. I feel like I did something wrong. I felt bad with myself.
- [33:16]
Tim Miller
I'm so incredibly sorry. That's how you feel. I want to just last note that Senator Kennedy, as I just noted, was instrumental in helping you escape you get out of this situation. Is there any message you'd like to send to lawmakers out there who are in a position to help and maybe reunite families like yours and people who have no criminal record who just want to be back with their families and are just trying to do the right thing.
- [33:45]
Congressman Mark Pocan
Yes. All I can say is don't lose the hop. Be positive. Be patience and everything will be okay. Be. Don't lose the hug. If you have kids, you know, like, think about your kids, that you will be okay.
- [34:11]
Tim Miller
I don't know how both of you. Oh, go ahead, Ryan. Go ahead. Go ahead, Adrian. Go ahead.
- [34:15]
Paola Kluat
As lawmakers, there needs to be just. Just a modicum of discretion used at the lower edge. Like the ICE agents that arrested my wife knew that she was a wife of a Marine veteran. They knew we had to. She was breastfeeding and they apologized to me when they made the like, they knew it was morally wrong, but they have a job to do. So the, the power to use discretion needs to not only be given to immigration judges and like the head of DHS and ice, it needs to be like the, the enforcement removal officers that can make that decision. Like, maybe we shouldn't have this person sitting in detention. And the ankle monitor thing, to me kind of boggles my mind because where is she going to go? Mexico. She wants to be here with her family. She's going to be here in the United States. She's here with me. But it is what it is. I'm just happy to have her home.
- [35:14]
Tim Miller
Paola and Adrian, I don't know how you both have so much light still coming out of you and you're so courageous in sharing your story. I'm so happy you're together. I'm sure everybody watching is so happy, happy you're back together. Thank you so much, both of you, for sharing your story with us and for being with us tonight.
- [35:30]
Paola Kluat
Thank you.
- [35:31]
Congressman Mark Pocan
Thank you.
- [35:33]
Tim Miller
Okay, coming up, Republicans are returning home for August recess and brave enough to hold in person town halls. Those who are are hearing directly from voters what they think of the Trump agenda. It's not good. Two Wisconsin Democrats who've launched their own town hall offensives join me to discuss right after the break. Republican Congressman Brian Stile of Wisconsin held a town hall today and it was the first time voters in his district had an in person town hall with their congressman since January. And here's some of how that went. Appreciate it. All right, all right, all right, all right, all right. Thanks you guys. Thank you. Thank you very much, Very much.
- [36:19]
Adrian Kluat
Thank you. All right, all right, all right.
- [36:23]
Jen Psaki
One of the biggest improvements that we.
- [36:25]
Tim Miller
Have seen is the success in securing.
- [36:27]
Jen Psaki
The US Mexico border.
- [36:31]
Adrian Kluat
Southeast Wisconsin has not been represented by you.
- [36:36]
Tim Miller
President Trump seems to run southeast Wisconsin through you. So that probably didn't feel so great if you're Brian Style. Not sure when he's gonna be out trotting out to another town hall, but he did receive a dose of good news today. It turns out Elon Musk is already ditching that whole America Party idea and is pledging millions to help at risk Republicans like style Democrats, for their part, are pressing on Republican vulnerabilities, holding town halls in red districts. Congresswoman Gwen Moore of Wisconsin was in Stiles district holding a town hall just yesterday. And Congressman Mark Pocan also of Wisconsin held a town hall today, today in the district of Republican Derek Van Orden and Joining me now are Congressman Mark Pocan and Congresswoman Gwen Moore, both Democrats from Wisconsin. It's great to see you both. It's great to hear what's happening and what people are talking about. So let me start with you, Congressman Pocan. What you've been out there. You were today in a Republican congressman's district, Derek Van Orden's, who you've had some battles back and forth with, which I've enjoyed. But what did you hear from voters? What's on their minds? What are they talking about the most?
- [37:45]
Neil Katyal
Well, they're afraid of what this big ugly bill now law is going to mean to their families. Losing health care, potentially having education funding cut, losing food assistance, what it means to add trillions to the national debt. Pretty much the same thing that I heard in my district. The difference is Derek Van Norden in two and a half years has never done an open public town hall. This is my fifth in his district because I feel like people in western Wisconsin have a right to be heard. And if their member of Congress isn't going to tout a bill that he says is so good, it doesn't pass the smell test, you know, if it's really a good bill, you get on the rooftop and scream about it. Instead, he's hiding in his basement, being a keyboard warrior on Twitter. And I'm going to his district, making sure that people are heard. And I can tell you they're not happy.
- [38:33]
Tim Miller
He didn't win by that much last time. He better be a little careful, get himself out there. Perhaps. Let me ask you, Congressman Moore, the same thing. I mean, I mean, you represent a district in Milwaukee, but yesterday you were in a red district in Racine. What did you hear? What have you been hearing from voters? You know, obviously the big ugly bill. Are there other topics too in addition to that that you're hearing from people that they're concerned about?
- [38:55]
I
Jen, thanks for having me. And hi, Mark. Yes, I was in Racine, a red district, the place where I was born, my hometown. And I know these people and they are very upset. They're very nerv. Very scared about Medicaid in particular. You know, we have 276,000 plus people in Wisconsin that are affected by Medicaid. And when I talked about Brian Stiles characterization of the type of Medicaid cuts that they're making, that they're just some little boy in the basement playing video games, asking his mom to bring some more potato chips down, that was what got the loudest sort of boo and cheer because that's not true at all. His notion, his theory of the case is that if we just get lazy people out of the basement that go and work, that somehow that that's going to resolve people's need for medical care. The fact is, is that, you know, 200. The fact is, is that, that there's going to be over a billion dollar hole in Wisconsin's budget for providing Medicaid. So the Affordable Care act, there will be hundreds of thousands of people that won't be able to afford the premium credits. People actually work who are on Medicaid already and if they work, make a penny more than the federal poverty level, they'll be working, but they won't have access to the Affordable Care act nor Medicaid. They have actually monetized the cuts in Medicaid. And it is indeed not little boys in the basement playing. These are real Wisconsinites that are going to lose out on health care. And people are terrified. They brought their disabled children, sat them in the first row, and they're terrified.
- [41:03]
Tim Miller
And as a reminder, just because this is not all implemented until after the election, people need to know what is going to hit them. And rural hospitals are already starting to close. Let me ask you, Congressman Bocan, I mean, we have been, everybody has been talking about covering, following the Epstein issue, of course, the release of the files, this potential of pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell, which is insane, has this. But it's important to know what people are talking about there. Has anybody brought this up with you? Is this a topic that people are talking about out there so far?
- [41:35]
Neil Katyal
You know, it was interesting. Someone actually, I brought up Jeffrey Epstein just once about releasing the files. And someone said, I wish Democrats would quit talking about this because they want to talk about what they talk about at their kitchen table. And it's not Donald Trump lying about releasing a list that his name may very likely be on. What they want to hear about is are they going to be able to pay their mortgage or rent? Are they going to have health care for their family? Can they afford a family vacation? That's what real people in Wisconsin actually talk about. And when you talk about the hospital closures in this bill that came up, we lost two hospitals in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, the only two hospitals already. And this bill is gonna make it even harder for those rural hospitals. They're gonna feel that squeeze. That's what people care about. Can they get healthcare for their family? And I think that's the issue. Democrats really need to ride home.
- [42:24]
Tim Miller
I hope you'll both come back. I know you're gonna both be doing town halls out there. We love to hear what people are actually talking about, what they wanna know. Congressman Mark Pocan, Congresswoman Gwen Moore, thank you both so much for joining me this evening. We'll be right back. That does it for me today. You can catch the show Tuesday through Friday at 9pm Eastern on MSNBC. And don't forget to follow the show on Blue Sky, Instagram and TikTok.
- [42:49]
Nicole Wallace
MSNBC presents the chart topping original podcast, the Best People with Nicole Wallace. This week she sits down with political commentator Tim Miller.
- [42:59]
Tim Miller
Another way of saying I care about.
- [43:00]
Paola Kluat
You is by saying, like, I'm gonna fight the things that are preventing you from living the kind of life that.
- [43:06]
Nicole Wallace
You wish the best. People with Nicole Wallace. Listen now. For early access ad free listening and bonus content, subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.