'No Kings Alliance' launches in wake of massive nationwide protests as movement's next step

Summary

The Briefing with Jen Psaki – Episode Summary

Episode: 'No Kings Alliance' launches in wake of massive nationwide protests as movement's next step
Date: October 22, 2025
Host: Jen Psaki (MSNBC)

---

Overview

This episode centers on the historic "No Kings" protests against the Trump administration, the subsequent launch of the "No Kings Alliance" as the movement’s next phase, and how recent actions in Congress reflect a deepening crisis in American democracy. Jen Psaki examines government dysfunction, congressional inaction, and efforts by activists and elected officials to counter dangerous trends. Key interviews include Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes and Indivisible's Ezra Levin.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Trump’s DOJ Payout Demand and Deepening Corruption

• [00:41–05:54] Jen Psaki outlines Donald Trump’s demand for $230 million from the Department of Justice, which he now controls.
  • DOJ officials positioned to approve or deny the settlement are former Trump defense attorneys.
  • Trump claims he would donate the money to charity, but Psaki points out his history of charity misuse.
  • Congress, particularly Speaker Mike Johnson, avoids holding Trump accountable or responding with oversight.

Notable Quote

Jen Psaki [03:00]: “Trump is on both sides of the equation. Here he is demanding money from the federal government. He is also the boss of the people in the federal government who will decide whether or not to give him that money.”

Speaker Johnson’s Non-Responsiveness

• [05:54–08:52] Speaker Mike Johnson repeatedly claims ignorance whenever questioned about Trump’s actions, border abuses by ICE, or political violence by January 6th rioters.
  • Pattern: “I haven't seen it,” “I don't know the details,” “I've been a little busy.”

Jen Psaki [08:52]: "He literally has a staff of communications and press people who are definitely telling him the details. But it is quite the convenient excuse.”

---

2. Dysfunction and Double Standards in Congress

Selective Congressional Representation

• [12:28–13:28] Mike Johnson refuses to seat newly-elected Democratic Congresswoman Adelita Grijalva, though he would welcome scandal-plagued Republican George Santos back.
• Jen Psaki [13:28]: “Funny how the system works one way for Republican members of Congress and a completely different way for Democrats. Speaker Johnson is not just burying his head in the sand, he is burying our representative democracy along with it.”

Legal Challenge

• [15:14–16:00] Arizona AG Kris Mayes sues Speaker Johnson for violating the Constitution by blocking Grijalva’s swearing-in.
  • The lawsuit argues that over 813,000 Arizonans are denied representation, amounting to “taxation without representation.”

Kris Mayes [17:11]: “By not swearing her in, he is depriving 813,000 Arizonans of representation. That’s called taxation without representation.”

---

3. Interview: Arizona AG Kris Mayes on Lawsuit Against Speaker Johnson

Main Arguments ([17:11–22:46])

• Johnson is violating the Constitution and the will of Arizona voters by refusing to swear in Grijalva.
• Urgency: A judge should act quickly to prevent harm to constituents needing representation (flooding, Social Security, veterans’ benefits).
• Precedent: Allowing this could let future Speakers reject seating opponents, threatening democratic norms.
• If Speaker refuses, court should allow a judge to swear in Grijalva.

Notable Quotes

Kris Mayes [17:11]: "...We fought a revolution war over that [taxation without representation]..." Kris Mayes [21:40]: “It's really scary... This is not a game and we’re not messing around. We are in this to win it... it could have serious implications for 2026.”

---

4. Interview: Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-CA) on Shutdown and House Dysfunction

Shutdown and Congress Going Dark ([24:17–28:49])

• Kiley is one of few Republicans in D.C. during the shutdown; criticizes Johnson for sending Congress home and paralyzing legislative work.
• Work on key education and rural bills is stalled.

Kevin Kiley [26:43]: “I believe very strongly that it’s the wrong decision because... the government has shut down. That's a terrible thing. We need to end that. But the decision to shut down the House of Representatives, that's completely independent of that and totally unnecessary.”

Epstein Files and Blocking Grijalva’s Swearing-In ([28:49–30:41])

• Kiley would vote to release the Epstein files but hasn't signed the discharge petition, calling it a "nuclear option."
• Calls Johnson’s refusal to swear in Grijalva “puzzling” and “bothersome,” cites his own experience as a minority legislator.

Kevin Kiley [29:56]: “Someone has just been elected to serve in Congress. They have a right to be sworn in and to represent their district… You can still swear someone in [during pro forma session].”

On Trump's DOJ Settlement Demand ([30:41–32:37])

• Kiley claims to not have heard of Trump's DOJ payout request until Psaki’s show.
• Suggests oversight is needed, points out the problem when Congress isn’t present to do its job.

---

5. Update: Paul Ingrassia Nomination Scandal

([32:41–38:54])

Summary:
Psaki details the abusive record and racist/antisemitic views of Trump’s pick for the Office of Special Counsel, Paul Ingrassia, who finally withdrew after a leak of repugnant comments.

Jen Psaki [38:25]: "...I guess Congressional Republicans are able to grow little itty bitty mini spines sometimes and defy the Trump administration a little bit..."

---

6. Segment: The "No Kings" Protests and Launch of The No Kings Alliance

Mass Mobilization Recap ([38:54–42:11])

• Across red and blue America, 7 million people marched in “No Kings” rallies against Trump's authoritarian policies.
• Growth: 3 million (April) → 5 million (June) → 7 million (October).

Interview: Ezra Levin, Indivisible

• Unveils the “No Kings Alliance” as the next stage: a coordinated rapid response and coalition.
  • Tactics go beyond protests: economic boycotts and rapid mobilization in response to regime overreach (example: Disney/Jimmy Kimmel incident).
  • Focus on transforming protest energy into actionable change, accountability, and ultimately electoral wins.

Ezra Levin [38:54]: “One day protests are important, but they are a tactic that needs to fit into a strategy... We want to reduce harm, fracture the coalition that is pushing this authoritarian overreach and regain some power so we can usher in an era of accountability and reform.”

Ezra Levin [40:38]: “We’ve launched something tonight called the No Kings Alliance... to produce that kind of rapid response. We need to change the conditions on the ground because we don't want this to be the Trump era. The Trump era is over. This is the no Kings era.”

Ezra Levin [42:33]: “The Tea Party’s always been a big inspiration... They knew how to take people power, apply it locally, and translate that into big electoral wins.”

Looking Ahead

• The movement is poised to impact upcoming elections including California’s Proposition 50, Pennsylvania Supreme Court races, and legislative races in Virginia and New Jersey.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Jen Psaki [08:52]: “He literally has a staff of communications and press people who are definitely telling him the details. But it is quite the convenient excuse.”
• Kris Mayes [17:11]: “That’s called taxation without representation. We fought a revolution war over that.”
• Ezra Levin [40:38]: “Celebration is an act of defiance, especially when the regime is trying to act like this never happened.”
• Kevin Kiley [26:43]: “The decision to shut down the House of Representatives, that's completely independent of that and totally unnecessary.”

---

Important Timestamps

| Timestamp | Segment/Topic | |-------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------| | 00:41–05:54 | Trump’s $230M DOJ demand, corruption, and Congress’s inaction | | 05:54–08:52 | Johnson’s ‘I didn’t see it’ excuse montage | | 10:41–13:28 | Double standards: Johnson refuses to seat Dem, welcomes Santos | | 15:14–17:11 | Lawsuit: AZ AG Kris Mayes sues to seat Rep. Grijalva | | 17:11–22:46 | Interview: Kris Mayes outlines legal/constitutional crisis impact | | 24:17–32:37 | Interview: Rep. Kevin Kiley on shutdown, Grijalva, Trump DOJ ask | | 38:54–43:12 | Segment/Interview: Ezra Levin, No Kings protest and next steps |

---

Tone and Language

Jen Psaki’s tone throughout is direct, urgent, occasionally sarcastic, and empathetic towards those facing disenfranchisement. Her guests—Kris Mayes and Ezra Levin—are assertive and resolute, emphasizing the stakes for democracy while laying out practical next steps.

---

Summary

This episode offers a forceful critique of current anti-democratic trends in Congress and the Trump administration, with an energizing portrait of a fast-growing grassroots opposition movement. The No Kings Alliance is presented as the coordinated next step for millions, connecting protest to lasting change. The episode is essential listening for understanding the intersection of protest, political dysfunction, and strategies for restoring American democracy.

Transcript

[Commercial Announcer]

With my job, I can't drink during the week. Weekends are a different story.

[Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes]

Ugh.

[Jen Psaki]

After eight hours of this, I have earned my wine. You know what I'm saying? My family is a lot. It takes me four beers just to hang out with them.

[Commercial Announcer]

Binge drinking isn't all college kids doing keg stands. Oregonians in their 30s and 40s binge drink at close to the same rates as younger people, raising our risk for long term health problems.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

[e-mail] An OHA initiative.

[Jen Psaki]

Hanaday presents. In the red corner, the undisputed undefeated.

[Commercial Announcer]

Weed whacker guy, champion of hurling grass and pollen everywhere.

[Jen Psaki]

And in the blue corner, the challenger, extra strength Hataday eye drops that work all day to prevent the release of histamines that cause itchy allergy eyes. And the winner by knockout is Patternay. Patternay. Bring it on. In a sign of the times we are living in, the speaker of the House got sued today over his refusal to seat a duly elected member of Congress. For weeks he's refused. And the person who sued him, I just mentioned her. Arizona Attorney General Chris Mays is standing by to join me in just a moment. She's my first guest. But I wanted to start tonight with another story. I just talked with Chris about the jaw dropping news out of the New York Times that Donald Trump is demanding that the Department of Justice, which is now under his complete control, pay him $230 million because in his mind, I guess he thinks they owe him that simply because he was investigated multiple times for a variety of things. I'm not even gonna list them all here. You all know what they are. And in case you were thinking, that's pretty outrageous even for him. I didn't even believe necessarily the push alert for a second. Well, when Trump was asked about the Times reporting earlier today, he confirmed he is in fact demanding money from the Justice Department, falsely saying that, quote, they rigged the election. He loves that one, doesn't it? I mean, I guess there he must be referring to the election that he himself tried to steal and overturn that aside. Now that even getting into how completely baseless that claim is or how justified the federal investigations into Trump were, which they were. Let's just focus for a second on how Trump is demanding this reported $230 million from his own Justice Department. As the Times put it today, Trump is, quote, negotiating in essence with his subordinates. According to the Justice Department manual, settlements of claims against the department for more than $4 million must be approved by the deputy attorney General or the person who oversees the agency's civil division. Now, the current deputy Attorney general just happens to, of course, be that guy, Todd Blanche, who is also Trump's former criminal defense attorney. The chief of the department's civil division is a man by the name of Stanley Woodward, who just happens to be the same lawyer who defended Trump's co defendant, Walt Nada, in the Mar A Lago classified documents case, among others in Trump's orbit. So those are the two officials who would decide whether the Justice Department should fork over $230 million of taxpayer money to Trump, Trump's own formal criminal defense attorney and his co defendant's former criminal defense attorney. Now, when the Times asked the Justice Department if either Blanche or Woodward will recuse themselves, a very justifiable question from overseeing this potential settlement because of their connections to Trump, a Justice Department spokesperson said, quote, in any circumstance, all officials at the Department of Justice follow the guidance of career ethics officials. Do they now? I mean, that sounds like a decent answer that in most administrations you could have given until you remember that just three months ago, Trump's Attorney General, Pam Bonney, fired the top Justice Department ethics official. So Trump is on both sides of the equation. Here he is demanding money from the federal government. He is also the boss of the people in the federal government who will decide whether or not to give him that money. And many of them once defended him or his lackeys in criminal cases. I mean, that is a pretty bad freaking look, right? Don't just take it from me. Here's something Trump said last week. At the time, we didn't know exactly what his comment was in reference to. It sounded a little out there, but now it seems pretty straightforward.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

I'm sort of suing myself.

[Jen Psaki]

I don't know. How do you settle the lawsuit? I'll say, give me X dollars.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

Right.

[Jen Psaki]

And I don't know what to do with the lawsuit. It's a great lawsuit, and now I won.

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

It sort of looks bad.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

I'm suing myself. Right.

[Jen Psaki]

Sort of looks bad. You can say that again. It's one way of describing it. I mean, Trump is demanding money from a department of the federal government that he himself controls. But it isn't his money he's asking for. It is your money. It is taxpayer money. Reportedly hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money. Today, Trump claimed that he would donate any money he got from the government to charity. But let's not forget, I'm sure you have not that Trump literally had to shut down his charity because of allegations that he and his kids were using it for their own personal and political benefit. Does anyone really think that if he were awarded $230 million from the government he runs, he would donate it all to an actual legit charity? Not going to be holding my breath on that one. Look, we've never been here before as a country seeing corruption like this as brazen at this magnitude in normal times, and we are definitely not in normal times. You would expect though Congress to step in and nip this settlement in the bud, or at the very least be very publicly mad about it. But no, it's not the case at all, really. I mean, instead, here's how speaker of the House Mike Johnson responded to a question about the potential settlement. Today the Times is reporting the president is asking DOJ to pay him 230 million for his past cases. Is that appropriate considering it's the department under his control?

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

I'm not going to comment on something I haven't read, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

[Jen Psaki]

I mean, he didn't look like he wanted to answer a question there. It's pretty simple though. Speaker Johnson Trump is personally demanding that, that his own justice department pay him $230 million in taxpayer money. It was a major headline in one of the biggest newspapers in the country. There's really not a scenario where the speaker of the House, even little Mike Johnson, wouldn't know about this, have seen it or have been told about it by one of his many staff. But this is his go to approach. I mean there has been a running joke in D.C. for years now that's pretty accurate that when President Trump does something inappropriate, Republican senators and representatives say they, they haven't seen the tweet, they didn't hear his comments, they haven't seen the article. It's their go to speaker of the House. Mike Johnson has taken that see no evil style response to a whole new level though. President Trump held a closed door event.

[Ezra Levin]

Thursday night for top investors in his private cryptocurrency.

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

Well, look, I don't know anything about the dinner. I was a little busy this past week.

[Jen Psaki]

Can you comment on the Wall Street Journal report about the letter that President.

[Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes]

Trump sent to Jeffrey Epstein years ago?

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

I haven't seen it.

[Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes]

I can't comment on it.

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

I've been a little busy today.

[Commercial Announcer]

The President yester that there are some.

[Jen Psaki]

Federal workers who do not deserve the.

[Ezra Levin]

Quote was to be taken care of.

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

I've been so busy with this I haven't had a chance to dig into it. I'VE been so busy on all this, I've not had a chance to dig into the details of each division and how it's, how it's happened. I don't know about that particular item. I haven't seen the details of it yet.

[Jen Psaki]

That performance in front of the generals that I didn't see it is so dangerous. Last Friday, Speaker Johnson was asked about a then day old report from ProPublica reporting that 170 US citizens had been held by Trump's federal immigration agents. Some have been kicked, dragged and detained for days. ProPublica reported that 20 of those 170 US citizens were kids. Johnson claimed he hadn't seen it.

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

I'm not, I don't know what you're talking about with the children. I do know that ICE is U.S.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

Citizens, according to ProPublica, have been detained.

[Ezra Levin]

By ICE so far since January.

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

Okay, I haven't seen that, so I'm not going to comment on it.

[Jen Psaki]

Today we got the news that one of the January 6th rioters that Trump pardoned earlier this year was rearrested last week, this time for allegedly credibly threatening to kill Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. When asked about the threat against his Democratic counterpart today, Johnson did broadly condemn political violence. He of course then falsely claimed that political violence is primarily a left wing issue. Another favorite false talking point. But when asked about the issue of whether Trump should have pardoned January 6th rioters, when asked whether that was a mistake, here's how Johnson responded.

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

I don't know any of the details of this at all. I don't know who's been alleged to have been involved in this. I'm not going to address it because I'm not sure the details of this. And I think we've said enough.

[Jen Psaki]

It's pretty incredible, right? He hasn't seen the article, he hasn't heard the comments. He doesn't know the details. He literally has a staff of communications and press people who are definitely telling him the details. But it is quite the convenient excuse. And it means that he, the speaker of the House of Representatives, one of the most powerful people in the country, second in line to the presidency, doesn't actually have to answer for his actions and inactions. He's just burying his head in the sand. And that means that Trump can demand $230 million from the Department of Justice. And he's not. Mike Johnson is certainly not going to allow Congress to be a check on that. But Johnson's head in the sand approach to power isn't Just weakening our nation's system of checks and balances, which it definitely is. It is actually directly hurting our country's system of representative democracy. The people who represent us. Let me show you what I mean. This is Florida Republican Congressman Corey Mills. Now, you might remember that Representative Mills, because this is a guy. Because earlier this year he was investigated by the D.C. police over a report of alleged assault allegations Mills vehemently denies. Or you might remember the allegations that Representative Mills misrepresented his military service, which again, Mills denies. Or how Mills is being investigated by the House Ethics Committee for allegedly getting government contracts while a member of Congress. Again, allegations Mills denies. Or how Mills was accused of failing to pay $85,000 in rent for his D.C. apartment, which Mills also denies. Last week, Mills got hit with a restraining order from an ex girlfriend who claims Mills threatened to blackmail her and physically harm her. Harm anyone she dated. Again, allegations Mills denies. But how did Speaker Mike Johnson respond when asked about that long list of allegations against Representative Mills? You guessed it, he doesn't know the details.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

Are you concerned about these allegations against Corey Mills?

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

Look, you have to ask Representative Mills about that. I mean, he's been a faithful colleague here. I know his work on the Hill. I mean, I don't know all the details of all the individual allegations and what he's doing in his outside life. You have to ask him about that. Let's talk about things that are really serious.

[Jen Psaki]

He's been a faithful colleague. Johnson is pretty much saying the quiet part out loud there, right? I mean, Congressman Mills is a reliable Republican vote in Congress. So not only is Johnson not considering expelling him, he's also turning a blind eye to the allegations against him. Last week, Trump had a similar quiet part out loud moment when he commuted the sentence of serial liar George Santos. I mean, just last year, Santos pleaded guilty to charges of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, conning people out of hundreds of thousands of dollars. But Trump commuted his sentence anyway saying, quote, at least Santos had the courage, conviction and intelligence to all caps, always vote Republican. I mean, Lord, that's saying the quiet part out loud. That is the calculation that is happening here. Fraud is fine. Allegations of assault and stolen valor and threatening ex girlfriends with blackmail. Those aren't serious. They're not serious enough to even learn the details about, apparently, as long as the member of Congress votes along the Republican Party lines. Here's how Speaker Johnson responded on Sunday when asked if he would welcome George Santos back to Congress if Santos ran again.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

This morning, Mr. Santos told Fox and.

[Jen Psaki]

Friends, he is not ruling out a.

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

Congressional bid in the future.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

If he won and you were still.

[Ezra Levin]

The speaker, would you welcome him back in the conference?

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

Well, of course. I mean, that's our system. I mean, if the people duly elect a representative, then we will welcome them into the body.

[Jen Psaki]

That was Speaker Johnson, 11am hour of Fox News this Sunday with my buddy Pete Doocy. Well, saying, well, of course he would welcome Jorge Santos back to Congress. Of course he would. Quote, that's our system. Is that the case? Is it really? Because nearly a full month now, for nearly a full month, Speaker Johnson has refused to seat Democratic Congresswoman Adelita Grahalva. She won a special election for Arizona's 7th district on September 23rd. But because she is a Democrat, Johnson feels very differently about the system he refers to when it comes to swearing her in. I mean, that last clip I showed you was from the 11am hour of Fox News this Sunday. This is from the 9am hour of ABC just two hours earlier.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

When are you gonna swear in Representative Elect Adelita Grijala?

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

As soon as we get back to legislative session, when Chuck Schumer allows us to turn the lights back on.

[Jen Psaki]

Why haven't you done it already?

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

Because this is the way the institution works.

[Jen Psaki]

You could swear in tomorrow, right?

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

No, not tomorrow. No, we couldn'. We wouldn't.

[Jen Psaki]

We couldn't. We wouldn't. Funny how the system works one way for Republican members of Congress in a completely different way for Democrats. Speaker Johnson is not just burying his head in the sand, he is burying our representative democracy along with it. He's made one set of rules for Republicans and another for Democrats, and in doing so, he is actively robbing Americans of their political representation. He is denying them their voice in Congress. But Democrats aren't just sitting there taking it all sitting down. They're not. I mean, today, Arizona's Attorney General Chris May sued Speaker Johnson to try to force him to swear in Representative Grijalva, arguing that the Speaker's refusal to seat Grijalva is depriving her more than the 800,000 constituents of congressional representation which it is. Arizona Attorney General Chris Mays is standing by. She's going to talk to me all about it in just 90 seconds. NetCredit is here to say yes, because you're more than a credit score. Apply in minutes and get a decision as soon as the same day. Loans offered by NetCredit or lending partner banks and service by NetCredit application subject to review and approval. Learn more at netcredit.com partners netcredit credit to the people.

[Commercial Announcer]

Imagine relying on a dozen different software programs to run your business, none of which are connected, and each one more expensive and more complicated than the last. It can be pretty. Now imagine Odoo. Odoo has all the programs you'll ever need, and they're all connected on one platform. Doesn't Odoo sound amazing? Let Odoo harmonize your business with simple, efficient software that can handle everything for a fraction of the price. Sign up [e-mail] that's o-o.com holiday PSA from DSW.

[Jen Psaki]

This is your reminder that shoes are a gift.

[Commercial Announcer]

Literally.

[Jen Psaki]

So unwrap something good, like boots that inspire your next big adventure, or cozy slippers that give you an excuse to stay in, or sneakers that feel like pure joy. Because shoes aren't just shoes, they're exactly what you wanted. Let us surprise you so you can surprise them. Find shoes that get you and everyone on your list at prices that get your budget at DSW stores or dsw.com late today, state Attorney General sued the speaker of the House over his refusal to swear on a duly elected member of Congress. And in that lawsuit, Arizona Attorney General Chris Mays did not mince words at all. Her lawsuit reads, quote, this case is about whether someone duly elected to the House who indisputably meets the constitutional qualifications of the office may be denied her rightful office simply because the speaker has decided to keep the House out of regular state session. If the speaker were granted that authority, he could thwart the people's choice of who should represent them in Congress by denying them representation for a significant portion of the two year term provided by the Constitution. Goes on to say, fortunately, the Constitution does not give that authority to the speaker or anyone else. Constitutional rights cannot be used as a bargaining chip. As I told you, she did not mince words. And joining me now is Arizona Attorney General Chris Mays. It's great to see you. Thank you for taking the time this evening. Last week you said this might be coming. I mean, you gave Mike Johnson two days to swear in Grijalva before filing this lawsuit, which is quite a heads up. He continued to refuse. So here we are. Explain for us. I gave a little bit ofi, read a little bit from it. But explain to us the argument you're making in this lawsuit and what will happen if a judge agrees with you.

[Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes]

Thanks, Jen. Well, basically what we're saying in this lawsuit, and it's really too bad that I had to file it, but we're saying Mike Johnson you're violating the law and you're violating the Constitution by refusing to swear in Adelita Grijalva, who was elected to Congress from the seventh District in Arizona now more than four weeks ago. And by not swearing her in, he is depriving 813,000 Arizonans of representation. That's called taxation without representation. Representation. We fought a revolution war over that. And so we're asking a court to declare that if Mike Johnson refuses to do his job, that a judge can swear her in, and then she would become a fully vested member of Congress, which she should be right now.

[Jen Psaki]

No question. I talked to her last week. As you said, there are tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people who rely on the representatives in her district. So it sounds like a judge could swear her in if the judge rules in that way. You just filed this today, but it has been weeks, as you said. When could there be a ruling? How soon do you think that could happen?

[Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes]

I mean, it's a great question. We don't know for sure. But I will say this. We are asking and will be asking for swift action. We would really like a federal Judge in Washington, D.C. that's where we filed this case, to rule on this. But quickly. Every day, every minute that goes by is a minute that Arizonans are harmed and that Adelita cannot get to work. You know, we've recently had flooding here. We, you know, that she would like to be working on. We know that she can't help people with their Social Security benefits. She can't help people with their veterans benefits. She can't work on the ACA issue. And of course, she is the final vote on the Epstein file discharge petition, which many speculate may be the reason that she's not been sworn in already.

[Jen Psaki]

I think it probably is the reason, but it also means, as you said, people rely on these districts and these offices for so much constituent services. That's what members of Congress do. And Mike Johnson is preventing her from being able to do that. He was asked about this today. I don't know if you've seen it, but I just want to play it and talk to you about it on the other side.

[Speaker of the House Mike Johnson]

I think it's patently absurd. We run the House. She has no jurisdiction. We're following the precedent. She's looking for national publicity. Apparently, she's gotten some of it, but good luck with that.

[Jen Psaki]

He's talking about you there, which you have a smile on your face and you're kind of laughing about it. I mean, he handled that a bit like a disgruntled child. But he also doesn't seem like he is budging. If a judge agrees with you and agrees to swear her in, I mean, is there anything he can do to refuse to abide by the order? Anything he can do to stop it?

[Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes]

No. And, you know, and that's the point. This is, this is serious business. You know, whatever Mike Johnson thinks about, you know, me, he has a constitutional duty that he is violating every day by not swearing Adelita Grijalva in. And just think about the precedent that this would set if we allowed this to happen. What's going to happen in 2026? Does Mike Johnson think he can refuse to seat whoever is elected on the Democratic side of the aisle in 2026? And so what happens in this case could become very, very important down the road. But, you know, this is really about Adelita. It's about the seventh district of Arizona and the fact that there are 800,000 people who are being taxed without representation for no good reason other than Mike Johnson is to clearly playing politics. And, you know, we'll see what a judge has to say about all of this.

[Jen Psaki]

It is definitely about Congresswoman elect or Congresswoman, as I called her last week, Grijalva. But you referenced the precedent and you referenced this. I read some of this in the introduction here, it seems, and I just want to call this out because this is important for people watching right now to understand. There is a very small margin. House Republicans have this precedent of not swearing her in. It feels like it could set a precedent for 2026 if Democrats win back the House by a couple of seats that he could refuse. How central is that and how much do you think people across the country should be focused on that as a possibility?

[Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes]

I think it's really scary and I think you're right to bring it up. And that's why I took this very seriously. You know, this is not a game and we're not messing around. We are in this to win it. It's an important, important case and it could have serious implications for 2026. And, you know, we, we know that the law and the case law are on our side. You know, court has already ruled that in the 1960s that no speaker of the House can deny a duly elected member of Congress from being seated. And there are only a certain. There's only a specific role for the Speaker. And once somebody has been elected, certainly once they've been certified, which she has, the speaker of the House must allow her to take the oath again. If Mike Johnson can't do his job, then we're going to be obviously asking a judge to allow Adelita Grijalva to get it done another way. We'll have somebody else do his job.

[Jen Psaki]

It's just, well, there's a lot of people who need to be doing his job right now for a variety of reasons. We'll talk about that more in the show. Arizona Attorney General Chris Mays. It's good to see fighting back and also that the speaker of the House is not all powerful. It's important for people to remember. Thank you so much for joining me.

[Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes]

Thanks, Jen.

[Jen Psaki]

Up next, Mike Johnson is desperately trying to keep Republicans in line and away from the Capitol during this shutdown. But one member of his own conference is openly defying his orders. Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley of California is standing by. He's in Washington and he joins me here at the table. When we come back.

[Ezra Levin]

Netcredit is here.

[Commercial Announcer]

To say yes to a personal loan or line of credit.

[Jen Psaki]

When other lenders say no, apply in minutes and get a decision as soon as the same day. Loans offered by NetCredit are lending partner banks and serviced by NetCredit application subject to review and approval.

[Commercial Announcer]

Learn more at netcredit.com partners NetCredit credit to the People Imagine relying on a dozen different software programs to run your business, none of which are connected, and each one more expensive and more complicated than the last. It can be pretty stressful. Now imagine Odoo. Odoo has all the programs you'll ever need and are all connected on one platform. Doesn't Odoo sound amazing? Let Odoo harmonize your business with simple, efficient software that can handle everything for a fraction of the price. Sign up [e-mail] that's O-O-O.com holiday PSA from DSW.

[Jen Psaki]

This is your reminder that shoes are a gift, literally. So unwrap something good like booty that inspire your next big adventure. Or cozy slippers that give you an excuse to stay in, or sneakers that feel like pure joy. Because shoes aren't just shoes, they're exactly what you wanted. Let us surprise you so you can surprise them. Find shoes that get you and everyone on your list at prices that get your budget at DSW stores or dsw.com does your job offer paid vacation days? How much PTO do you actually get? I mean, if you answered not enough, then consider, I guess, becoming a member of the United States Congress. I mean, this is the calendar showing the days that Congress has been in session since July in the four months since the start of July, Congress has only been in session for 22 days so far. Now, August, normally Congress isn't here. They're back in their districts, but only four, those four days in the calendar for late October are still tbd. I would just note that on the calendar, too. That is because Mike Johnson sent Republicans out of Washington first to avoid a vote on the Epstein files and then as part of his strange tragedy, I think, to navigate the government shutdown. I suppose I don't know what the strategy is, but not all Republicans are united behind the speaker right now. Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley has become a vocal critic of Mike Johnson's shutdown strategy. He's chosen to remain in Washington throughout the shutdown. He's also calling on the speaker to swear in Congresswoman Elect Adelita Grijalva to the seat she won 28 days ago. As Congressman Kiley told the New York Times recently, I'm never going out of my way to create conflict just for the sake of doing so, but I'm willing to do it when it's necessary. Joining me now is Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley of California. Thank you for being here. I appreciate it. Let me start by asking you about the shutdown. This is on the minds of so many people who are watching and so many people out there. You are one of the, as I mentioned, one of, if not the only Republican who is still showing up for work during this government shutdown. You told me you've seen a few people in the hallways. I know you've been pretty vocal on why you've been opposed to Johnson's decision not to bring people back. But why do you think he's doing it? Why do you think he's not bringing people back to negotiate and even be here to try to bring an end to this?

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

You know, I don't know that's the strategy that he's chosen. I can't really speculate as to his motives, but I can say I believe very strongly that it's the wrong decision because.

[Jen Psaki]

Do you think there is a strategy, though?

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

I think that the view is that the House has passed this resolution and so it's a tactic, I guess, to put pressure on the Senate. Maybe that'd be the best explanation I could come up with. But I haven't heard any explanation that makes any sense to me because in addition to this making it a lot more difficult for us to actually end the shutdown, it also means that we're not doing all of the things the House was supposed to be doing during this month. I mean, I'm the chair of the Education K12 subcommittee. We had a hearing a few days ago that we were supposed to have would have been a great hearing on career technical education. Didn't happen because we're not here. Or there's a piece of legislation called Secure Rural Schools which is vital towards rural communities in my district and throughout the country that we're trying to get passed as part of a farm bill. None of that can move while the House of Representatives. So that's an important sort of distinction to make. The government has shut down. That's a terrible thing. We need to end that. But the decision to shut down the House of Representatives, that's completely independent of that and totally unnecessary.

[Jen Psaki]

No work is being done. Tens of thousands of people are being furloughed, aren't getting their paychecks. There's a huge number of impacts here. Political reports say that some of your Republican colleagues are also growing frustrated with the strategy. One of the people they reference is Congresswoman Beth Van Dyne, who reportedly said on a call today that she thinks the Republicans shut down messaging is getting. I know. I think you agree with that. But are you hearing from other Republican colleagues that they're kind of over this, that they want the speaker to bring people back to negotiate, to put an end to this fake strategy or lack of strategy?

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

Yes, I think people are very frustrated. I mean, we were all elected to serve in the House of Representatives to represent our districts, to represent our states. And we can't do that because the body we were elected to serve in has shut itself down for a month. And this was a month in which we were supposed to be here. There are scheduled district work weeks which are very important time for you to be in your district with your constituents. But that's not what these last four weeks were. These were weeks in which we had committee hearings, oversight hearings, all the other ordinary business of the people. And on top of that, the need to get us out of this crisis of the shutdown and actually pass the full appropriations bills that are going to come due in a few weeks, even if this seven week continuing resolution became law.

[Jen Psaki]

Let me ask you about the Epstein files because you've said that you would vote to release them if the discharge petition came to a vote on the floor, which they have the votes if Adelita Grijalva was. Was sworn in. Why not just sign onto the discharge petition?

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

You know, I haven't signed a discharge petition since I've been in Congress. It's kind of A nuclear option. If I was ever going to do that, it would probably be something of paramount and unique importance to my district. And I think on something like this, because the issues are so sensitive, it is important to have kind of the typical vetting process for legislation to weigh those things. With that being said, I want as much transparency as possible here. I think that the victims deserve it, which is why that if this does come to the floor, I would be inclined to support it.

[Jen Psaki]

Well, the victims have been calling for people to sign the discharge petition.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

Right. So I know that they've heard a number of victims have weighed in. And, you know, that's why if it does reach the floor, I'd be very inclined to vote for it.

[Jen Psaki]

You've also been one of the few Republicans, I guess I'm going to keep saying that, calling on Speaker Johnson to swear in Adelitza Grijalva. If you signed the discharge petition, you would become the 218th vote. And. And there wouldn't need to be this holdup. Wouldn't that be a reason so that he would just swear her in?

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

Yeah, well, I don't know what the reason for this holdup is. And this one just really puzzles me and it bothers me, honestly. It's like someone has just been elected to serve in Congress. They have a right to be sworn in and to represent their district. Maybe it's just comes from my experience being in the minority or the super minority in California as a legislator there, that I don't like seeing things like this that strike me as not the way things are supposed to be done. So I think that the folks that she was elected by have every right to have her as a representative. And we were supposed to be in session each of the last few weeks. And so it's not her fault that the session suddenly got canceled. You can still swear in during what's called a pro forma session. This is just where basically you do the pledge and the prayer, gavel in, gavel out. You can still swear someone in there. So, yeah, I wish you'd just be sworn in and we could be done with that issue.

[Jen Psaki]

Well, you don't have to say this. I'll tell you that you would be the 218th vote and then I bet you he would swear her in. So that's just something I don't know if it's nuclear option level, but to consider. Let me ask you. There was a big headline today, I'm sure you saw. The New Times reported that Donald Trump is demanding that the Justice Department, which He controls pay him $230 million of taxpayer money as restitution for the criminal cases brought against him. You're on the Judiciary Committee. Do you think the Justice Department should pay him $230 million?

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

So I know you were saying at the beginning of your show that, you know, we always say I haven't heard about that, but that was actually the first I heard about that at the top of your show.

[Jen Psaki]

Oh, you've at the top of my.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

Show, so you'll probably play me in your next montage. I only just heard about it.

[Jen Psaki]

Well, let me read for you the beginning of the story because it kind of tells you President Trump is demand the Justice Department pay him about $230 million in compensation for the federal investigations into him, according to people familiar with the matter, who added that any settlement might ultimately be approved by senior department officials who defended him or those in his orbit.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

I don't know what the law is, whether there's even attorney fees available in that sort of context, but.

[Jen Psaki]

Well, it's taxpayer money. It wasn't his money.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

Yeah, well, I mean, there actually are provisions in law where you can get attorneys fees if you're the prevailing party in a particular type of action. I don't know whether that's what he's referring to or not. Again, I just learned about this from.

[Jen Psaki]

It'S 575 times his annual salary. He's asking the Department of Justice, for which he clearly thinks he over controls and does control.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

So I will say this, that I think that this is actually, you know, an example of where oversight might be conducted. And that's one of the things you lose when you don't have the House of Representatives in operation is doing the work that is the proper function of Article 1. And we've been without that for the last month.

[Jen Psaki]

Do you think the Senate Judiciary Committee should hold hearings about that to do that oversight, to learn more about it?

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

I mean, I don't know. I don't know the nature of the request. Certainly that's their prerogative. You have broad oversight authority as a committee in Congress, the Judiciary Committee has expansive jurisdiction and has direct jurisdiction over the Department of Justice.

[Jen Psaki]

Congressman Kevin Kiley, thank you so much for joining me.

[Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley]

Of course. Thanks for having me.

[Jen Psaki]

Okay, we're going to take a very quick break, but we have breaking news tonight. A Trump nominee saying he has a Nazi streak is apparently a bridge too far. Finally, I guess percent of Republicans. I'll explain when we come back. You may remember over the summer when we were covering the Trump administration's assault on inspectors general and whistleblowers. I mentioned this guy. I more than mentioned him. I talked about him a bit. Paul And Gracia, the 30 year old Trump loyalist currently working as the White House liaison for the Department of Homeland Security. And somehow with less than a year of government experience, he also became Trump's nominee to run the Office of Special Counsel, the key independent federal agency that investigates alleged ethics violations and protects whistleblowers. Now, if that pic already seems bad, buckle up, because back in 2023, Ingrazia worked with the legal team defending manosphere influencer and accused human trafficker Andrew Tate. Ingraz posted this picture of the two of them on Instagram. How sweet. With the glowing caption. Andrew Tate is an extraordinary human being, says no one but Paul and Gracia, I guess. Now, over on his X account, he shared a video of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones claiming that 911 was an inside job on the anniversary of the September 11th terrorist attack. And Gracia has said that, quote, being anti Trump is the biggest dog whistle in politics for anti white racism as well as exceptional white men are not only the builders of Western civilization, but are the most capable of appreciating the fruits of our heritage. Now, in addition to his Instagram and X posts in Grazia, who dubs himself Trump's favorite writer, has written his fair share on his substack, writing fawning pieces about Trump and arguing that the January 6 rioters were politically persecuted and deserve reparations. He's claimed that the LGBTQ movement has resembled a metastatic cancer that seeks to desecrate the public square of any and all innocent and has insisted that white supremacist and anti Semite Nick Fuentes was wrongly censored. And all of that was before Ingrazia joined the Trump administration. And none of that elicited much of a peep of outrage from most Republicans in the Senate. Now, since then, Ingrassia has been singled out in a lawsuit brought by fired FBI agents, alleging that he was asking inappropriate political questions during vetting interviews, including whether agents supported Donald Trump. And according to reporting from Politico, Ingrazia has been investigated for allegedly sexually harassing a lower ranking colleague. Yet somehow, all of that wasn't what finally derailed Ingracia's nomination. It was another damning report. According to a leaked Republican group chat reviewed by Politico in Gracia made several disgusting and racist texts. In one 2024 text, he wrote, MLK Jr. Was the 1960s George Floyd and his holiday should be ended and tossed into the seventh circle of hell where it belongs. In another, he used an Italian slur for black people to call for an end to holidays celebrating African American heritage, then said, quote, From Kwanzaa to MLK Jr Day to Black History Month to Juneteenth, every single one needs to be eviscerated. And In May of 2024, Ingrassia responded to a text saying that he belongs in the Hitler Youth with, quote, I do have a Nazi streak in me from time to time. I will admit it it in Grassi and his lawyers dispute the authenticity of those texts, but it appears to have been the final straw for at least some Senate Republicans. Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader John Thune put it plainly, saying he's not going to pass. And tonight in Grassi announced in a social media post that he has withdrawn his nomination to lead the office of the Special Counsel. So, I mean, I guess Congressional Republicans are able to grow little itty bitty mini spines sometimes and defy the Trump administration a little bit, at least noticing they're not going to get the votes when they want to. Let's be honest. Their line clearly should be, well, should have been well before a potential government watchdog official nominated by the president utters the phrase I do have a Nazi streak in me from time to time. When we come back, millions of Americans joined no Kings protest from coast to coast over the weekend. The question now is what comes the of out next? Well, indivisibles, Ezra Levitt held a call with thousands of people tonight to talk about just that. And he joins me next. Okay. By now you've seen the striking images. Massive crowds marching in no Kings rallies through some of America's largest cities like New York, Chicago, Boston and Los Angeles. And also in deep red Republican areas like Valley City, North Dakota, where Trump won by 35 points in Morganton, North Carolina, where Trump won by 41 points in Durant, Oklahoma, where Trump won by 58 points and in Guntersville, Alabama, where Trump won by 72 points. Now, across the country, organizers estimate 7 million people turned out and said no Kings in protest to the policies of the Trump administration. So the question now is, where does this go from here? Well, earlier tonight, the groups who organized those protests held a mobilization call to both celebrate this weekend's huge turnout and to game out how to grow the movement into something even bigger. Joining us now fresh off tonight's organizing call is Ezra Levin, co founder and co executive director of Indivisible, one of the leading organizers behind no Kings What a weekend. I mean, this was bigger than the second. No Kings protest bigger than the first. It's growing, it's in more places. I know that my colleague and your friend and mine, Rachel Maddow, did an incredible job covering this all last night. But tonight you did something really important. You had this call with more than 130,000 people who RSVP'd. It's so powerful to do this. People need to know when they're excited, what to do next. Tell us about the call and what you communicated to the people on it.

[Ezra Levin]

Look, Jen, I think this is the biggest movement call we've literally ever done. I think this is just a sign of how much energy there is there and how much people weren't treating this as just a one day protest. One day protests are important, but they are a tactic that needs to fit into a strategy that helps us achieve our goal. And our goal is simple. We want to reduce harm, fracture the coalition that is pushing this authoritarian overreach and regain some power so we can usher in an era of accountability and reform. But we don't do this by just doing one day marches. Successful movements evolve and grow and mature and engage in new tactics. So a lot about what we talked about on this call today was one, celebrating the win. Because in an age of authoritarianism, celebration is an act of defiance, especially when the regime is trying to act like this never happened. And two, talking about how we take this wind, this historic largest peaceful protest in American history and build on on it. Because as you said, we had 3 million people in April, we had 5 million people in June, and we had 7 million people on Saturday. The trajectory is up, it is growing, but growth isn't enough. We've got to then apply that power in a way that successfully pushes back against the regime.

[Jen Psaki]

What is that? We just all covered and watched, of course, the reaction to Jimmy Kimmel, the kind of economic boycotts of Disney for a period of time. How big a part of it is that and what people watching out there who were. Maybe they were there, maybe they're galvanized, maybe they're excited. What should they be doing now?

[Ezra Levin]

Jen, it sounds like you might have been in on our planning conversations. That's exactly what we're talking about. There are gonna be big protest days just like we saw on Saturday. That's true. But in between those days, there's gonna be regime overreach. And I think the Jimmy Kimmel Disney ABC News example is an excellent case in point of how people power can be applied, not just against this administration in the White House, not just against Congress, but against the pillars of democracy, media, institutions, businesses, universities that are getting pressured by this regime. In the Disney case, what we saw was the regime applied pressure, the institution buckled, the people responded in force, and then that institution saw that, changed course, and democracy sat up a little bit stiffer. We were a little bit stronger in that moment. There are going to be more instances exactly like that. So I think using our combined economic power in a rapid response, they do this, we do. That is necessary for creating the conditions of defiance all across the country. So we've launched something tonight called the no Kings alliance, which, which is an alliance of all of these groups working together all around the country in an effort to produce that kind of rapid response. We need to change the conditions on the ground because we don't want this to be the Trump era. The Trump era is over. This is the no Kings era. And this regime is just operating in it temporarily while we build up the strength necessary to usher in this new era of reform.

[Jen Psaki]

I've been thinking a lot about how much coverage the Tea Party got. And even Ted Cruz, of all people, said today he kind of warned that the protests could signal political peril for the Republican Party the way the Tea Party did for Democrats in 2010. We only have about a minute left, unfortunately. But what does it look like to translate all of this energy into votes in a few weeks and next fall?

[Ezra Levin]

Look, Jen, the Tea Party's always been a big inspiration of mine. Not because I agree with their racism or their violence or many of their strategies, but gosh, they knew how to organize local. They knew how to take people power, apply it locally, and translate that into big electoral wins. Here's what I'll tell you. I don't think we're going to have to wait very long to see the electoral impact of this movement. In just a couple of weeks, we've got Proposition 50 in California, we've got three Supreme Court races in Pennsylvania, we've got state races in Virginia and state races in New Jersey. You're going to see how people power expressed in the streets then get gets magnified at the ballot box very soon.

[Jen Psaki]

Just a few weeks from now, two weeks from tonight is elections. Ezra Levin, as always, thank you so much. Appreciate it. Coming up, a new episode of the Blueprint drops tomorrow. I'm going to tell you who my guest is and why I was so excited to talk to him when we come back. Okay, a quick reminder before we go, a new episode of my podcast, the Blueprint drops tomorrow. So I'm gonna ask you a very quick favor before we go. I'm gonna ask you to take out your phone and just open up your camera. Okay, you ready? Okay, here we go. Now point your camera at that QR code on the screen right there and that's gonna take you where you need to go to listen and subscribe. The episode that drops tomorrow is with Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, and he is the two term Democratic governor of a state Trump won by 30 points just last year. And he offers some great advice to Democrats on talking normal to voters and normal language and not abandoning their convictions at the same time. So this podcast overall is just really a place for us to talk about the future of the Democratic Party and how Democrats can win again. And given the success in such a red state, Governor Andy Beshear definitely belongs in that conversation. 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 Bluesky, Instagram and TikTok.

[Commercial Announcer]

Imagine relying on a dozen different software programs to run your business, none of which are connected, and each one more expensive and more complicated than the last. It can be pretty stressful. Now imagine Odoo. Odoo has all the programs you'll ever need and are all connected on one platform. Doesn't Odoo sound amazing? Let Odoo harmonize your business with simple, efficient software that can handle everything for a fraction of the price. Sign up today at odoo. Com. That's O D O o dot com.