← The Briefing with Jen Psaki
The Briefing with Jen Psaki
Trump brings signature ignorance, recklessness to U.S. nuclear stature
00:41:58
Jen Psaki shows Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson and Vice President JD Vance explaining out loud that the reason they don't want to fund food assistance to millions of Americans is because if they do, Democrats will have even less incentive to vote for the Republicans' budget bill, in effect admitting that they're deliberately causing pain to people they know Democrats care about as leverage to get their way on a bad budget bill.
Loading summary
Transcript86 lines
- [00:00]
Comcast Sports Announcer
Streaming is changing the way we watch live sports and your Internet connection can be the difference between catching the game, winning touchdown as it happens or hearing about it from your neighbor's cheers. That's why Comcast is building the network of the future. Using cutting edge AI and edge computing technology, we're bringing fans closer to the action in stunning high definition with ultra low latency. It's not just fast, it's game changing. Learn more@comcastcorporation.com sports just in thousands of.
- [00:30]
Nordstrom Rack Advertiser
Winter arrivals at your Nordstrom rack store. Save up to 70% on coats, slippers and cashmere from Kate Spade New York, Vince Ugg, Levi's and more.
- [00:39]
Jen Psaki
Check out these boots. They've got the best gifts. My holiday shopping hack join the Nordiclub.
- [00:44]
Nordstrom Rack Advertiser
Get an extra 5% off every rack purchase with your Nordstrom credit card. Plus buy it online and pick it up in store the same day for free. Big gifts, big perks. That's why you wreck.
- [00:57]
Jen Psaki
Okay, we are now 30 days into the government shutdown. We're gonna start tonight with some rare good news. I know, I love good news and I love starting the show with it. I guess I should describe it as tonight. We are anticipating good news from a federal judge in Boston because today that judge said that she would rule very soon on a lawsuit filed by roughly two dozen states that are trying to make sure people don't go hungry this weekend. And there's a real risk of that. I mean, that judge seemed utterly baffled by the Trump administration's argument that it cannot tap into emergency funding to keep money for food stamps flowing. As soon as we learn anything about that, as soon as we hear a ruling and we have an update, we're going to bring that to you at any point in the show. But there's a tremendous amount of urgency here because we are on the cusp of one of what I would consider one of the greatest failures of government in my lifetime. Because this Saturday, SNAP benefits, food stamps, are set to stop making it. That will make it much harder for 42 million Americans who rely on these benefits to get access to the amount of food that they need. This has never happened before, not since the program started all the way back in 1939. And we are already seeing the impact. Take a look at this video. I mean, this video you're seeing on your screen right now. This was the line today of cars today to get into a food bank in Phoenix, Arizona. Car after car after car waiting in line trying to stock up on food before SNAP benefits are cut off and There are pictures and video like that from all across the country. And all around the country, governors have been scrambling to divert funding to help bolster food banks and to do their best to temporarily fill the gap. At least 26 states have found some way to move things around and help. That's good news. But that still leaves millions of people, families with kids, seniors, worried they won't have enough to eat starting next week. And you would think, I mean, no matter what your political affiliation is, no matter who you voted for, if you had the power to do something, anything, you would be doing absolutely everything you could. You would stop at nothing to make sure this doesn't happen. Any human being would. Right. But that does not seem to be what is driving some of the most powerful people in government right now.
- [03:23]
Mike Johnson
On Saturday, things are going to become very dire.
- [03:26]
J.D. Vance
The American people are already suffering, and the suffering is going to get a lot worse. Not because the President of the United States has failed to make the shutdown painless. He's tried to do everything that he can.
- [03:36]
Jen Psaki
We're doing everything we can on our end, but there's not much more we can do because the rules of the road by which we have to play.
- [03:42]
Hakeem Jeffries
Should the White House not be able.
- [03:43]
Jen Psaki
To find some funding for the staff program if they've done it for all the.
- [03:47]
Mike Johnson
They certainly tried.
- [03:50]
Jen Psaki
I mean, come on, did they really try? Because throughout this shutdown, Trump's White House has found ways to move money around to pay for all sorts of things, some of them good things. I mean, they move money from the Defense Department's research and development funding to pay troops. They moved money tied to Trump's tariffs to pay for wic, a fund for women and children. And don't get me wrong, I mean, I am glad they moved that money around to fund those things. But there is money to fund snap, too. First off, there's somewhere between five and six billion dollars in a contingency fund, specifically for emergencies like this one. It's been used during past government shutdowns to help keep programs like SNAP funded when their normal funding is threatened. Then there's another fund of about $23 billion from Trump's tariffs, the same money the administration used to keep funding wic. But Trump's lackeys have been claiming that all of that is, for some reason, and I'm going to tell you why, off limits. I mean, specifically, they've been saying that it isn't just that they can't move those funds for snap. They've been claiming that it would be illegal to do so.
- [04:55]
Mike Johnson
The contingency funds are not legally available to cover the benefits. Right now, Democrat attorneys general are suing the federal government to try to compel SNAP benefits to flow despite the government being closed and despite the fact that, that there is no money to do that when it comes to snap. Some of the Democrats have argued that you can use this contingency fund, but the truth is there's no legal mechanism to do it. It is not legally available to do that. Believe me, the White House has already demonstrated over and over they would use it if it was available. It's not now.
- [05:26]
Jen Psaki
This is where today's potentially very good news comes in. As Speaker Johnson mentioned in one of those clips, earlier this week, 25 Democratic led states sued the Trump administration to compel the government to keep SNAP funded. And today a federal judge heard the. And as I mentioned earlier, that judge expects to issue a ruling at some point tonight. And the AP says she, quote, seemed to be leaning toward requiring the government to put billions of dollars in emergency funds towards snap. That's what those funds are for in these contingency funds. That she said is that she said is her interpretation of what Congress's intent when an agency's funding runs out. Yeah, that's what a contingency fund is for. And congressional intent is key here because the core of the Trump administration's argument is that they believe that tapping into these emergency funds would, quote vi that bars the government from paying for programs without congressional approval. Now, this leads us back to one of the dumpster fire events of last week. Trump got hundreds of millions of dollars from private donors to fund his new ballroom and the destruction of the east wing of the White House, which we all remember, he had no issue with the limitations of the law in that case. He also got a billionaire buddy of his to write a check for $103 million to the military. And believe me, we all want members of the military to be paid, but not by someone who may think they are owed something in return by the President of the United States. Both of those things I just mentioned would violate the very same law the Trump administration has been claiming inaccurately is keeping them from funding snap. The law is called the Anti Deficiency Act. And without getting too wonky, it basically means that the federal government can't spend any money without congressional approval, even if that money is donated for good reason. But here's the thing. SNAP funding does not even fall into that bucket. Congress has set aside a specific fund for programs like SNAP for emergencies. And as the judge Put it in federal court today, quote, it's hard for me to understand that this is not an emergency when there's no money and a lot of people are needing their SNAP benefits. I think it's really important to be clear about what Republicans were trying to do here. They were ginning up excuses to actively force 42 million Americans to lose their SNAP benefits when they didn't have to. They were choosing to take food away from 42 million of the poorest Americans while projecting, while trying to accuse Democrats of what Johnson and Republicans were actually doing. I mean, J.D. vance actually laid out what was happening really clearly today. Believe it or not, they are trying.
- [07:57]
J.D. Vance
To take a hostage and we can't reward that behavior.
- [08:02]
Jen Psaki
Taking a hostage, using food that tens of millions of Americans needed as a hostage to negotiate with. That is what Republicans in Congress were trying to do here, are trying to do here. And today, Mike Johnson laid out why here. Was Speaker Johnson earlier today responding to a question about why he wouldn't just move money around to fund snap. Take a listen.
- [08:24]
Mike Johnson
Because if you deviate from the goal of reopening the entire government, Chuck Schumer and the radicals over there will continue to play games with people's paychecks, their livelihoods, neighborhoods. And if you do just part of this, it will reduce the pressure for them to do all of it.
- [08:38]
Jen Psaki
There you have it. That is the game that Republican leaders are playing here. They are using Americans as leverage. They are trying to purposefully make the shutdown more painful on the poorest Americans, on federal employees too, to put pressure on Democrats to cave each time, lying and saying their hands were tied. I mean, right as the shutdown started, the administration used it as an excuse to try to lay off thousands of federal workers, saying they had to because of the shutdown. That was their arguments. Now, courts have since indefinitely paused those layoffs because they are very likely illegal. Remember, the core of this entire shutdown is that Republican leaders are refusing to extend tax subsidies that make health care affordable for millions of Americans. Costs could double or they could even triple for millions of Americans. And yet Republicans are refusing to acknowledge the very real pain that would be inflicted on Americans if those subsidies are not extended.
- [09:35]
Mike Johnson
They're out here decrying the so called forthcoming health care crisis. They say, I don't think this is.
- [09:41]
Hakeem Jeffries
Going to be any kind of gut wrenching problem if these enhanced subsidies just go away. Unless those tax credits are extended, those subsidies, the average plan will increase for Americans by somewhere around 115%. Do you believe that Congress should extend those subsidies so that most Americans do not receive significant increases in their premiums.
- [09:59]
MSNBC Announcer
Where'd you get that 115% number from?
- [10:01]
Hakeem Jeffries
Kaiser Family Foundation.
- [10:03]
MSNBC Announcer
They retracted that.
- [10:05]
Jen Psaki
That data was run inappropriately.
- [10:07]
MSNBC Announcer
They changed the messaging on it.
- [10:08]
Jen Psaki
Go back and look at the website now. That last clip was of Dr. Oz. Yes, that guy is still around. I try to forget sometimes. He's currently Trump's CMS administrator which handles the Affordable Care act and all of the health care coverage it provides. Now here is the Kaiser Family foundation website. They have not in fact retracted their data. The foundation still estimates that the average ACA enrollees monthly premium would more than double increasing by 114% of Republicans refuse to extend the subsidies. But they have a real problem on their hands because they are lying about things that directly impact the lives of millions of people. And that means millions of people in this country are starting to see the impact in their own lives and realize that what people like Mike Johnson and Dr. Oz and J.D. vance are saying is not true. If you use Obamacare, you can go to healthcare.gov right now and see how much your monthly premium is going to go up next year. When you see that number, you can decide for yourself if this isn't a problem like Republicans are saying it is a problem today. Journalists from Punchbowl News also reported that inside a meeting of House Democrats today, pollster Molly Murphy presented data on the shutdown. Data that showed that by a nearly 2 to 1 margin, voters said that preventing huge increases in health premiums for 20 million Americans was more important than ending the shutdown. The Mike Johnson plan here is not working. The Trump plan is not working. The JD Bands plan is not working. And that polling, by the way, was from more than a week ago. Now Republicans, leading Republicans, are trying to hold food access for more than 42 million Americans hostage. I don't think the American people, no matter who they voted for or what their political party is, are going to like that. But the question now is with a Republican Party that is willing to go to extremes like holding food hostage and who do not seem all too responsive to any political pressure other than from their boss and who are more than happy to just lie about everything they're doing, how do you negotiate with a party like that? How does this all end? House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries joins me live to discuss in just 90 seconds. There's a big change coming to this network, but I'll still be here asking the kinds of questions that I used to face. Only our name is changing Same mission, same place, new name.
- [12:35]
MSNBC Announcer
MSNBC becomes Ms. Now. November 15th. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts for early access, ad free listening and bonus content to all of 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 Maddow's original series, Ultra Bagman and Deja News. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.
- [13:19]
Jen Psaki
As promised. Joining me now is House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries. I just wanted to first start by saying I'm happy you're on set. I love having conversations on set. But you're supposed to be in New York right now. And part of the shutdown impact is what's happening in airports.
- [13:32]
Hakeem Jeffries
Yeah, I think there was bad weather in New York as well. In fact, there's some flooding in the district that I wanted to check up on. And also early vote.
- [13:40]
Jen Psaki
Yes, I know you want to get back for that. Let me start. But I just kind of tried to outline what the impact would be if SNAP benefits are cut off. And we're certainly look like we're heading for that. We'll see what the judge rules, of course. Tonight I want to start by asking you about the human impact. I showed some video of a long line at a food bank out in Arizona and Phoenix, Arizona. There are lines like that all across the country. I know you're hearing from members, you're paying attention to. Districts help people understand what the human impact is right now, what you're anticipating.
- [14:10]
Hakeem Jeffries
Yeah, it's extraordinary that Donald Trump and Republicans are threatening to cut off SNAP benefits to 42 million Americans, including 16 million children, 8 million seniors, and over a million veterans. And every single one of those individuals represents a real life impact. People who would otherwise struggle to put food on the table in the absence of these SNAP benefits. And there's absolutely no justification for Donald Trump and the Republicans to withhold SNAP. They have more than $5 billion in an emergency fund that will allow these benefits to continue through the end of November. They can also find funds for other things, just as they've repeatedly done. But they can't do it for snap. So that's extraordinary. It shows where their priorities are. And Mike Johnson actually said the quiet part out loud earlier today when he indicated that we're willing to starve, meaning Republicans, Republicans are willing to starve children and seniors and women and veterans and American families in order to put pressure on Democrats to continue Republican efforts to gut health care of everyday Americans. We're not gonna do it.
- [15:24]
Jen Psaki
We just played that clip, and it's exactly as you said. He's basically saying we're using it as a bargaining chip. We're using people who will not have enough food next week potentially, as a bargaining chip. One of the things that struck me is that hunger has never been a partisan issue. I mean, this program has never been shut down before since it was started in 1939. And now you have the Trump administration making a legal argument that they cannot use funding from other funds, which they can. There's also $23 billion they could use that they used for WIC. Right?
- [15:55]
Hakeem Jeffries
That's right.
- [15:55]
Jen Psaki
That they're making a legal argument which feels to me almost kind of immoral. But how do you. How are you digesting that, the legal argument they're making, given the human impact here?
- [16:04]
Hakeem Jeffries
Well, it's incredible that they would suggest that there are legal obstacles to doing anything when the Trump administration has been completely and totally out of control. But when it comes to actually meeting the needs of the American people who might otherwise go hungry, the Trump administration all of a sudden believes that they don't have the authority to do something that Congress has clearly given them the authority to do. But these are extremists who are willing to actually starve their own folks. One of the five states that would be most impacted if SNAP benefits are cut off is Louisiana, the home state of both Speaker Mike Johnson and Majority Leader Steve Scalise. But they could care less. After all, these are individuals who led the effort to pass the one big, ugly bill that enacted the largest cut to Medicaid in American history, which is part of the reason why we have this health care crisis. But in that bill, they also cut $186 billion from SNAP, the largest cut to nutritional assistance in American history, which is one of the reasons why. Why this hunger issue is not going away. And we're gonna have to grapple with it as part of reversing these Republican policies that are doing great damage to everyday Americans.
- [17:21]
Jen Psaki
We're waiting for this judge's ruling, and she seemed to indicate that she thinks their argument is absurd. Do you have a good understanding if she rules that they have to move forward with it, what the implementation of that could look like? Could that be implemented before November 1st, or. It wouldn't be that quick.
- [17:37]
Hakeem Jeffries
Yeah, it absolutely should be implemented by November 1. The money is available, and it's just a question of the administration doing what the law requires it to do. In other words, the extraordinary action is Donald Trump and Republicans stopping the benefits from flowing to millions of people all across the country. And so we look forward to the judge's ruling. She's correct. The arguments being articulated by the Trump administration are absolutely absurd. But that's been the case from the very beginning. They cannot defend their position. They cannot defend their refusal to extend the Affordable Care act tax credits, which is going to result in tens of millions of people experiencing dramatically increased health care premiums. The Republicans are now claiming, well, that's actually not the case. But as you pointed out, Jen, the reality is people from across the country are getting notices right now indicating that their premiums may go up by $1,000 or $2,000 per month. These are working class individuals. They cannot afford these increases. That's why Democrats are fighting on their behalf.
- [18:44]
Jen Psaki
I wanted to play. I don't know if you've seen this. You probably did. I know you pay attention, but I wanted to play one more thing Mike Johnson said today, because I would just remind people, I mean, he has been on TV a fair amount, but he has not brought his caucus back. You've had a brief conversation with him, but you haven't had negotiations with him. Normally, the speaker of the House is working around the clock. But let me play this. We'll talk about it on the other side.
- [19:07]
Mike Johnson
People keep commenting to me. You look so tired on tv. I am so tired because we're not sleeping a lot. We're working overtime.
- [19:16]
Jen Psaki
I want to know what he's working on exactly. I understand he's been on tv. He has not answered questions on a lot of news issues. But what is making him so tired?
- [19:26]
Hakeem Jeffries
That's a great question. Republicans have actually been on vacation for five consecutive weeks. Mike Johnson and Republicans have canceled votes week after week after week after week after week. They clearly aren't doing anything. There are no hearings, no legislation is being voted on. Nothing is being debated. And all we see is this parade, this malignant clown show that they keep rolling out day after day when Mike Johnson and Republicans are appearing before cameras, lying repeatedly to the American people.
- [19:57]
Jen Psaki
Trump is now back from his trip to Asia, claiming victory. Who knows why, but he's now back. It seems that Mike Johnson and John Thune are not gonna do anything unless Trump tells them to do something. Do you think any negotiations can start unless he's in the room? Does he need to be in the room for them or how does this happen from here?
- [20:17]
Hakeem Jeffries
Well, Donald Trump either needs to be in the room or he just needs to give Mike Johnson and John Thune the green light to actually sit down and do their jobs. But until they get, you know, a yes from the puppet master that they can sit and have a conversation with Democrats, unfortunately, nothing is happening. And that's why Leader Schumer and myself have maintained from the very beginning that Donald Trump needs to get engaged and focus on solving problems for the American people, as opposed to trying to enrich himself, destroying the White House and somehow finding $40 billion to reward his billionaire buddies on Wall street and bail out this right wing wannabe dictator in Argentina, but can't find a dime to make health care affordable for the American people or ensure that folks don't go hungry.
- [21:11]
Jen Psaki
Would you and we saw what happened last time. And would you and Leader Schumer go back to the White House if he invited you back there to negotiate?
- [21:18]
Hakeem Jeffries
Yeah, I think Leader Schumer have to have that and I have to have that conversation. But we've said repeatedly we're willing to sit down with anyone, anytime, any place. Cuz we want to reopen the government, we want to enact a bipartisan spending agreement, but it actually has to be an agreement that makes life better for the American people. And we need to decisively address the Republican health care crisis. And clearly the only way for that to happen will be for us to engage with Donald Trump and his administration. Because at this point, Senate Republicans and House Republicans are useless.
- [21:50]
Jen Psaki
There was a report today, I mentioned this too, about polling that was presented in the caucus meeting today. Trump seems like somebody, he's a lot of things, but somebody who responds to political polling. Do you think that is what this is gonna take for him to kind of move him? And what do you wish he would know about how the public is digesting this from just even a political standpoint?
- [22:11]
Hakeem Jeffries
Well, you know, Abraham Lincoln once famously said, public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail, without it, nothing can succeed. And so public sentiment clearly recognizes that Donald Trump and Republicans are responsible for shutting the government down, refuse to open it back up, because they are unwilling to make health care affordable for millions of Americans. And now they are threatening to visit hunger on millions more, including children in rural America, urban America, small town America, the heartland of America, and black and brown communities throughout America. At some point, I think it's going to become clear, maybe they'll wake up on Tuesday when the voters send a message that they don't like the direction that things are going under complete Republican control of government in America, and that they need to either get with the program or they will be thrown out of office.
- [23:11]
Jen Psaki
Johnson has now set another record for refusing to swear in a member of Congress. It's now been 37 days. I'm sure you're counting and well aware.
- [23:18]
Hakeem Jeffries
Yeah.
- [23:19]
Jen Psaki
How have you thought about the precedent this could set and what kind of trouble he could cause around the midterms or any other special elections?
- [23:27]
Hakeem Jeffries
Yeah, it's a terrible precedent in this instance. Cuz now I think it's been five weeks or so that Representative elect Adelita Grijalva has not been sworn in. It's clear that Johnson doesn't want to bring Republicans back because they'll be at each other's throats. They have no plan. Marjorie Taylor Greene has asked Johnson, where's the health care plan? Clearly, it's nowhere to be found. These are extremists who have voted more than 70 times to repeal the Affordable Care act. And now they're under pressure to renew the Affordable Care act tax credits, but they're unwilling to do so because they are extremists. And of course, Representative elect Adelaide Grijalova would represent the 218th signature on a petition that will force an up or down vote on the Epstein files. And Mike Johnson is doing his boss's bidding. Donald Trump, who clearly wants no part of the American people to see the Epstein files released. And so we're going to continue to put the pressure on House Republicans every single day until Representative elect Rojalva is sworn in as a duly elected member of Congress, as should have been the case weeks ago. And we're going to continue to keep the pressure on the Republicans to make sure they actually are serving the American people. And in this instance, that's going to require lowering the high cost of living. Partner with us to do that and fix our broken health care system to address. And by addressing the Republican health care.
- [24:55]
Jen Psaki
Crisis, sounds like very reasonable things that the majority of the public would like their elected officials to do. Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, thank you so much for joining me.
- [25:05]
Hakeem Jeffries
Thank you.
- [25:05]
Jen Psaki
Hope you get back safely tomorrow.
- [25:06]
Hakeem Jeffries
Thank you.
- [25:07]
Jen Psaki
All right, coming up, after a moratorium of more than three decades, Donald Trump has suddenly decided to test America's nuclear arsenal. That's what he's telling us he wants to do and nobody has any idea why. I have some thoughts on all that when we come back. There's a big change coming to this network, but I'll still be here asking the kinds of questions that I used to face. Only our name is changing. Same mission, same place, new name.
- [25:33]
MSNBC Announcer
MSNBC becomes Ms. Now. November 15th.
- [25:44]
Jen Psaki
Okay. Just before his big meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping yesterday, Donald Trump made, I mean, I guess you could call it a surprise announcement posting, quote, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our nuclear weapons on an equal basis. That process will begin immediately. Thank you for your attention to this matter. There you go. Just a totally normal president talking about nuclear weapons in a totally normal way. And what could go wrong. I mean, this announcement really came out of nowhere, and it's not even clear what kind of nuclear tests he means or why it's so urgent to do them now. And when reporters tried to get some clarity from the president, he only made things much more confusing.
- [26:26]
Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling
They seem to all be nuclear testing. We have more nuclear weapons than anybody. We don't do testing. We halted it years, many years ago. But with others doing testing, I think it's appropriate that we do.
- [26:39]
Jen Psaki
Also, others are testing. I mean, like who? We don't really have any idea what he's talking about because the other nuclear superpowers, Russia and China, have not detonated a live nuclear weapon since the 1990s. America itself has not detonated one since 1992, which is 33 years ago. So it's really unclear what exactly is motivating Donald Trump to do this right now, to put out that statement last night. What is notable and might not be a coincidence, that is that it comes just after the streaming service Netflix released a provocative new movie on this very subject. StratCom is asking for launch instructions right now.
- [27:20]
Hakeem Jeffries
I'm going to need you to breathe.
- [27:23]
Jen Psaki
We are talking about hitting a plan with a bullet. So it's a coin toss. That's what $50 billion buys us. Get in the car and just start driving. If we do not take steps to neutralize our enemies now, we will lose our window to do so. So that's the trailer for the Netflix movie House of Dynamite, which portrays a nightmare scenario in which the United States is revealed to be far more vulnerable to a nuclear attack than many would like to believe. That movie is, of course, a work of fiction, and yet the Pentagon was reportedly so anxious over that film, they issued an internal memo arguing all the ways that the doomsday scenario depicted in the movie is inaccurate. So clearly that movie struck a nerve inside the Trump administration. Could it have gotten under Trump's skin, too? Could it have prompted, let's say, a surprise announcement post about resuming nuclear tests? We don't know. What we do know is that the whole point is having of having a nuclear arsenal as deterrence when our nuclear strike capacity is what insurance America's enemies think twice before taking action against us. And yet Today, Vice President J.D. vance seems so intent on justifying the need for nuclear tests, the ones his boss announced he wants to do. So determined to defend Trump's decision that he actually suggested that America's nuclear weapons may not be functioning properly.
- [28:51]
J.D. Vance
I think the President's truth speaks for itself. We have a big arsenal, obviously. The Russians have a large nuclear arsenal. The Chinese have a large nuclear arsenal. Sometimes you've got to test it to make sure that it's functioning and working properly.
- [29:04]
Jen Psaki
Wait a minute. You're not sure that it's functioning properly? I mean, the last thing any member of any administration should do is cast doubt on America's nuclear capability. But that's exactly what the Vice President just seemed to do. And Vance seemed to realize that in real time, because just a second later, he walked it back.
- [29:24]
J.D. Vance
To be clear, we know that it does work properly, but you gotta keep on top of it over time.
- [29:30]
Jen Psaki
Okay, so now our nuclear arsenal does work properly. Okay, that was all in one statement. Look, we have no legitimate reason to believe that there are any problems with America's nuclear capacity. Even the Vice President walked his earlier statement back. But we have every reason to question how seriously this administration takes its responsibility when it comes to nukes. Remember, this is the same president who accidentally fired and then had to rehire all the members of the agency that oversees the safety of nuclear warheads in this country and then furloughed more than 1,000 workers from another nuclear safety agency during the government shutdown. So what should we make of this president's sudden decision to start testing our nuclear arsenal? Or his desire to. I guess I have just the person to ask. Retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling joins me here right after a quick break. We don't know why Donald Trump decided to announce he was resuming tests of America's nuclear arsenal. We don't know what kind of tests he wants to carry out. And frankly, I'm not entirely sure he does either. But let's not forget this is the same guy who said during his first term he wanted to literally nuke a hurricane. According to Axios, he brought up that idea on multiple occasions. It doesn't inspire a whole lot of confidence in his judgment or his comprehension of one of the most important responsibilities of the presidency. So Trump may think he sounds strong and powerful when he talks about testing nuclear weapons, but to everyone else, he sounds not only reckless, but like he doesn't really have A clue how any of this works, or that's my assessment. Joining Me now is Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, a 37 year army veteran who served as Commanding General of US Army Europe. He's the author of the upcoming book if I Don't A Father's Wartime Journal. Let me just start by asking you, I just wanna talk about kind of the risks here. I mean, the publication, the Scientific American spoke to a nuclear expert who explained that the US has other ways, of course, of testing our arsenal without exploiting an actual. I mean, we haven't done this in decades. He warned that the only countries that will really learn more if testing resumes are Russia and to a much greater extent, China. I thought this was really an interesting assessment or interesting flag, I guess. One of our producers shared. What kind of sort of data could Russia and China glean here if Trump did move forward with conducting explosive tests?
- [31:59]
Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling
Well, like you said earlier, Jen, there's a lot of potential advantages and disadvantages to this. And like you, my jaw dropped when I first heard him say it, especially five minutes before he met with President Xi. But, you know, you could say that as you mentioned earlier in the show, we haven't conducted a Test since 92, and that's because the nuclear force normally relies on simulations and subcritical tests, but they do it all the time. There is an aging fleet, as Vice President Vance implied, but not that old, and they're capable and accurate. But I think this movie has maybe caused some people to wonder exactly what the condition of the fleet is and how it would be executed. But to get to your question, a test would certainly trigger more reciprocal testing and arms buildup from places like Russia, China, India, Pakistan. I mean, name the nuclear power. And Russia has been threatening the use of nuclear weapons since 2022 when they invaded China, Crimea or Ukraine. But, you know, even an underground test would have, it would leak radioactive material. It would be extremely expensive, and our foes could gather a great deal from that. So just announcing that they were going to do testing before a plan was in place, in my view is not a very good strategy. These things, if you're concerned about the nuclear fleet, as it appears President Trump is, you say to your aides, hey, let's take a look at what we're doing and how we're doing it. So we don't have the confusion that was portrayed in that movie. And we don't basically message to our foes what we're doing so they can watch what we're doing and see the condition of our Fleet. So good questions. And I'm not sure why this is happening. It seems a little bit strange to me right now.
- [33:55]
Jen Psaki
Very strange. And to your point, Dmitry Peskov, who's one of the President Putin's longtime aides, suggested that, that they would test in response. He did that in the last 24 hours. I want to play for you what Speaker Mike Johnson said in reaction to Trump's decision today, because I think all of this is creating a lot of confusion out there. Let's play that.
- [34:14]
Mike Johnson
I haven't spoken to the president in about 48 hours, so I did not know he was going to say that. But I think it is an important, important thing for him to have said. Why? Because we have demonstrated even in recent days that the only way to maintain peace is to show strength.
- [34:31]
Jen Psaki
I wanted to play this because you have been in a position, you were in a position for many years at a very high level of the military. And it feels like testing of nuclear weapons is not actually showing peace through strength. It feels like it's doing something quite different from that. But what did you think of his comments?
- [34:49]
Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling
Yeah, that's the first time I've heard that comment. And it's, quite frankly, kind of blowing me away because for him to say that publicly, I mean, if you have doubts about the nuclear program, then this is something that you would bring the STRATCOM commander and others who are dealing with nuclear weapons into Congress and provide oversight. But it seems Speaker Johnson has been surprised by a lot of things the president has said in an ad hoc manner. And it just is not appropriate, I think, for him to say those kind of things. And it certainly testing of a nuclear weapon doesn't deliver the message of peace through strength. It creates a message that you're doubting your nuclear capability. And you're also trying to show the world that you've got a little bit of swagger, which is never a good thing used in the military.
- [35:40]
Jen Psaki
And it could set off a chain of events, as you already alluded to, which is certainly never the goal of any United States leader, Republican or Democrat, or it hasn't been. Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, thank you so much for joining us. Really appreciate it.
- [35:52]
Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling
Thanks, Jim.
- [35:53]
Jen Psaki
Up next, California voters appear to be about to deliver a huge defeat to Donald Trump. So, of course, his Justice Department is trying to cast doubt on next week's election. Senator Alex Padilla jumped headfirst into that fight today, and he joins me next, ready or not. We are now less than five days away from Election Day. And to prepare this Week, the state of California announced plans to dispatch state elections observers who have a very specific task. You see, these state election observers aren't going to be watching the polls themselves, but rather, they will be there to watch over the federal election monitors that Trump's DOJ is deploying in an effort to undermine confidence in a vote that could undo Trump's attempt to keep the House under his control and next year. So today, California's Democratic Senators, Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi demanding that she cancel those monitors and saying that her decision to deploy them is clearly linked to Trump's continued perpetuation of lies related to alleged fraud in our elections and his opposition to California's Proposition 50. Trump has made it abundantly clear that he does not want Prop 50 to pass. He does not want California to undo the damage Texas has done in the redistricting fight. Trump does not want the playing field to be leveled because he likely understands how unpopular MAGA and the Republican Party are right now as we head into next year's midterms. But Trump doesn't get to choose here. California voters do. And according to a new poll out today, 60% of likely voters in California support Prop 50. So he has a reason to meddle. Joining me now is Democratic Senator Alex Padilla of the great state of California. So let me start with Prop 50, because when you see a poll like that, or you hear a poll like that, when you hear reports that the Governor of California is saying, don't give us any more money. We have the resources we need, it leads you to assume that people like you are pretty confident about the outcome. But talk to me about what margin you'd like to see here.
- [37:52]
Senator Alex Padilla
Yeah, folks are obviously feeling good that Prop 50 will pass. So my hope is that we, in a way, kind of run up the score. We want an overwhelming victory, not a, you know, but by the narrowest of margins victory, to help send a statement like, what proposition 50 represents is so huge, not just for California, but for the country. The only reason California leaders put Prop 50 on the ballot, remember, is because Donald Trump made a call to Governor Abbott in Texas and said, find me five more Republican seats. Much like he when he called the Secretary of State of Georgia a few years ago and said, Find me 11,000 more votes. They're trying to cling to power because, you know, not just how unpopular the agenda has been, but how deep, dangerous, and devastating to the country it's been. Their only hope to cling to power is to Rig the next year's election before it even starts. And now he's trying to undermine this year's election before votes are even counted. He did it in 2016. He did it in 2020. He did in 2024. Trying to sow doubt about the integrity of the results when. Look, as California's former Secretary of State, I can assure you of the accuracy and integrity of the tallies when they're reported, when they're audited and when they're certified.
- [39:06]
Jen Psaki
You wrote this unn Senator Schiff to the two senators from California, wrote this letter, sent this letter to Pam Bondi today. I'm sure you have not heard back or tell me if you've heard back. It's basically saying, don't send us these election monitors. And I would just note this is very uncommon in an off year election. And historically when election monitors have been sent by the Civil Rights Division, it's been to ensure that people are able to vote and able to participate in the process. That's not what this is. Talk to me about this letter, why you felt the need to send this, what you think these election monitors are all about in the counties they're being sent to.
- [39:37]
Senator Alex Padilla
Look, this administration is not normal. Everything that they're doing is not normal. The way they have politicized and weaponized the Department of Justice is not normal. You know, to your point, in years past, the Department of Justice, we used to be able to count on them to help defend voting rights and access to the ballot. Not this case. I mean, you see what Donald Trump has done in terms of militarizing communities across the country under the pretext of either immigration enforcement or public safety. When he's sending troops into cities where crime is way down, it's not about public safety, it's about intimidation. That's what he wants. And so he's trying to, I don't put it past him to try to intimidate voters this election as a test case for how they could try to undermine and rig the outcome of the midterm elections next year. Because if we're able to flip the House or the Senate or both, that would be the ultimate check on this out of control administration.
- [40:42]
Jen Psaki
Because if they can intimidate people in say, Orange County, Los Angeles county, which are two counties where there should be, there probably will be competitive elections next year, then they can send them back and send them to more counties and do it in other parts of the country.
- [40:55]
Senator Alex Padilla
Right, exactly. Not just in California where there's going to be some critical seats that will help determine the majority in the House but to other states in the midterms and you never know, maybe two years after that in the next presidential in all the presidential contest swing states and as part of a comprehensive approach, we've seen what they've done through executive orders, what they've tried to do through legislation to make it harder for eligible citizens to register to vote. You know, we have the Department of Justice suing states for access to the personal information for voters as they try to systematically purge the voter rolls. The redistricting not just in Texas, but in other Republican led states trying to eke out a few more seats to try to cling to their majority. Why? Because of the damage of their agenda. I just wish Donald Trump would care more about people that are hurting in the United States because prices are going up. The people who are losing their nutrition assistance benefits in these tough times and less about bailing out the Argentinian economy and importing Argentinian beef to further decimate the domestic beef industry. On and on and on.
- [42:03]
Jen Psaki
I wish he was doing that too. And 42 million people who are about to lose their SNAP benefits. Senator Alex Padilla, thank you for pushing back. I think people need to know out there they can participate. They have the right to participate.
- [42:14]
Senator Alex Padilla
That's the best way to push back. Get out and vote.
- [42:17]
Jen Psaki
Exactly. Thank you for joining me. Coming up, one of the great mysteries of this election cycle is revealed and it involves two Bill de Blasios. I'm going to explain when we come back. The Times of London is part of right wing media mogul Rupert Murdoch's conglomerate whose US Outlets have been busily fear mongering about the frontrunner in the race for New York City mayor, Zahra Mamdani. So it raised some eyebrows earlier this week when the Times published an article containing anti Mamdani quotes from former New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, who endorsed Mamdani. De Blasio raised a big stink, saying he had never even spoken to the Times of London. So the paper apologized to him and erased the story from the Internet. But that set off a media mystery. If it wasn't Bill de Blasio, who did the Times of London talk to? At first the paper blamed an imposter for fooling them. But intrepid reporters from Semavar broke the case wide open, identifying the man who gave the anti Mamdani quotes as Bill de Blasio, a wine importer from Long Island. And this is a great detail. He wasn't actually home, but they interviewed him through his ring doorbell. The other de Blasio says he got an email from the Times reporter which he says never addressed him as the former mayor. And then, without identifying himself as the ex mayor, he offered his opinion. He told Semaphore it was all in good fun. I never thought it would make it to print, though. It did. So that is both a cautionary tale and an appreciation for good journalism, I guess. And for smart doorbells. Those too. 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.
- [43:56]
MSNBC Announcer
MSNBC presents the chart topping original podcast, the Best People with Nicole Wallace. Each week, Nicole speaks with some of the people who inspire her the most. This week, she sits down with Illinois Governor J.B. pritzker.
- [44:10]
Hakeem Jeffries
People need to step up, speak up, speak out.
- [44:13]
Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling
Grab a megaphone, a microphone, you know, soapbox, and get to the ballot box.
- [44:17]
MSNBC Announcer
The Best People with Nicole Wallace Listen now, wherever you get your podcasts.