← The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell
The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell
Lawrence: Any rational thing opposition says to Trump, Musk ‘bounces off the solid wall of stupidity’
00:42:02
Tonight on The Last Word: Democrats sound the alarm on Elon Musk’s unprecedented access. Plus, FBI agents sue to stop the reveal of January 6 investigators. And Trump’s freeze on foreign aid is wasting food and medicine. House Democratic Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, Christopher Mattei, Andrew Weissmann, and Rick Stengel join Lawrence O’Donnell.
Loading summary
Transcript46 lines
- [00:01]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Now it's time for the Last word with Lawrence O'Donnell.
- [00:03]
Rachel Maddow
Good evening, Lawrence. Good evening, Rachel. And I'm on Blue Sky 2 at Lawrence O'Donnell. And you know, Rachel, I was thinking, everyone at some point thinks they have a tough job. Some people have a tough job every single day. It's never not tough. How about Hakeem Jeffries? Joe? How about being the Democratic leader of the House of Representatives, the opposition party in the House of Representatives against this president and against first one ever to have to be the opposition leader against the richest person in the world?
- [00:36]
Lawrence O'Donnell
I gotta say, to me, it sounds like the best job in the world right now because he's got this tiny, tiny, tiny majority of Republicans against which he has arrayed the forces of a totally unified Democratic caucus. He is in the best position in Washington to give them maximum grief in. And he's leading in such a way that he is calling on Democrats in the House of Representatives to essentially use their constituents as force multipliers when he called on every Democratic member of Congress to go home and do constituent events and do roundtables and do town halls starting today. And if not today, later this week. And we will be keeping tabs on whether or not you do it. I thought this is a man who understands how mad the whole country is about what Trump is doing at right right now. And he's using Democratic members of Congress and that unified caucus as a tuning fork to make that thing ring. And I gotta say, I know it's a hard job. I don't envy him the job. But I also think he's got probably the most patriotic and important job in America right now.
- [01:46]
Rachel Maddow
Yeah. What you just described reminds me of the effort, the similar effort made when Republicans were trying to repeal Obamacare. That was an uprising out there. It wasn't an uprising in the halls of Congress. I mean, they participated in it, but they managed to get that uprising going out there, making it happen.
- [02:09]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Yeah. And when you can, through your own constituents, when you can channel something that is going on with your constituents and make it happen and make it into a movement, you make that, you bring that home to Washington and miracles happen. And right now, that's the power that the Democrats have, is that the country is, I think, broadly horrified by what Trump is doing. The Republicans are not holding town halls. Right. The Republicans are not holding constituent events to explain who the 19 year old is who may or may not be deciding to send you your Social Security check and may or may not have your bank details, your bank account number. Right. The Republicans do not want to talk about any of this, but Democrats do. And their constituents want people to talk to about it. And I think we are starting to see that eruption come from the ground up. Jeffries has seen it coming and is calling on Democrats to channel it. And I just think it's smart leadership and he's about to be riding the tiger.
- [03:04]
Rachel Maddow
Yeah. And you're reporting tonight on Bill Cassidy and others rising up against this blocking of USAID is so important. You know, Rachel, I'm traveling in Africa, especially on the smaller flights going into the remote areas. There are always, I mean, on every flight there are people who I'm pretty sure are Republican voters who are there with Christian organizations in the United States who are going there to do what they believe is their charitable duty in the work they are doing there. And they are from, you know, the most red states. And I talk to them all the time. Those people know exactly the value and the importance of what USAID does in Africa. And they bring those stories back to their churches in Republican districts. It's not a secret. And so there are possibilities here that really need to be leveraged. And that's Hakeem Jeffrey's job, is to leverage those possibilities.
- [04:08]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Yeah. No Republican politician in the Senate or in Congress or anywhere is gonna want to answer to his or her constituents who are asking them about babies being taken off of ventilators. Right. Who are asking them about malaria medicines being taken away, about people being taken off their HIV medication in the middle of the course so that they get drug resistant hiv, which they then pass on to their. I mean, like that's what we're talking about here. We're talking about malaria stuff stopping midstream. And there are a lot of Americans of all different ideological stripes who have seen that up close. It's indefensible. It's Democrats opportunity and responsibility to make sure that Republicans are forced to defend the indefensible or to turn on their dear Leader and tell them they're not going to take it either.
- [04:55]
Rachel Maddow
Yeah. Well, here we are. Thank you, Rachel.
- [04:59]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Thanks, Lawrence.
- [04:59]
Rachel Maddow
Thank you. Against stupidity, we are defenseless. That is a quote from Dietrich Bonhoeffer, an anti Nazi German theologian who was executed by Adolf Hitler in the final days of the Nazi regime in 1945. We were reminded of that quote in a recent New York Times column by David Brooks, the conservative columnist David Brooks writing about stupidity. The column was written at the end of the first week of the new Trump presidency. And in it, David Brooks wrote, we're going to have to learn a lot about stupidity over the next four years. It was, for me, the most welcome entry I've read in the New York Times in a while, because one of the words I have been using to describe Donald Trump's actions and statements since he first started lying about President Obama's birth certificate in 2011 is stupid. And it was a lonely position in the world of political commentary then to use the word stupid when most of the political media was still awed by Donald Trump's completely fraudulent image as a successful business person and they all believed that it's impossible for a successful business guy to be stupid. David Brooks wrote, I define stupidity as behaving in a way that ignores the question what would happen next. Donald Trump appeared to ignore that question when he threatened massive illegal tariffs against Canada and Mexico over the weekend. And right on schedule Monday morning, the stock market told Donald Trump just how stupid his idea was. David Brooks writes, stupidity is the tendency to take actions that hurt you and the people around you. And with the stock price of Elon Musk's Tesla dropping Monday morning, along with most other stock prices, Donald Trump then abandoned his threats of tariffs against Mexico and Canada. And before that happened, in his New York Times column on stupidity, David Brooks wrote, my big prediction for this administration it will churn out a steady stream of stupid policies. And when the consequences of those policies begin to hit Trump's approval rating, he will flip flop, diminish, or abandon those policies. And that's exactly what Donald Trump did with his stupid tariff idea. On Monday, David Brooks explained why Donald Trump doesn't have the slightest inhibition about being stupid. Publicly, David Brooks wrote, people who behave stupidly are unaware of the stupidity of their actions. Incompetent people don't have the skills to recognize their own incompetence. A Montreal newspaper needed only one word to convey the essential truth of Donald Trump's threatened trade war with Canada. Stupid. In his column, David Brooks said stupidity is nearly impossible to oppose because stupid actions don't make sense. And so reasonable arguments thrown at stupid ideas just bounce off a solid wall of stupid. But that is the job of our first guest tonight. Opposing stupidity. When you listen to Democrats in Congress railing against what Donald Trump and Elon Musk are doing, they can sound ineffectual because you know that every rational thing the opposition is saying to Donald Trump and to Elon Musk is just bouncing off that solid wall of stupidity. And so the leaders of the Democratic Party in Congress, like Hakeem Jeffries, and Democratic leaders of the House of Representatives who will be our first guest tonight have to run the risk of sounding ineffectual to you when they rise up in opposition to taking life saving medicine from babies around the world, as Donald Trump and Elon Musk have done this week. What are you going to do about it? Is the question that every Democratic member of Congress is getting from their constituents. What are you going to do about it? The Democrats in Congress are facing something that no other opposition party in Congress has ever faced in the history of this country. A president joined every day by the richest person in the world in publicly and flagrantly violating the law. When President Richard Nixon wanted to break the law, he did it in private. He didn't go out and do it publicly. He didn't do it at microphones. President Ronald Reagan, before he was ever elected to public office, was a very vocal opponent of Medicare. When Congress was debating whether to enact Medicare in 1965, Ronald Reagan said Medicare would destroy America. Ronald Reagan said behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country. Until one day, as Norman Thomas said, we will awake to find that we have socialism. Ronald Reagan was an anti Medicare fanatic. And when Ronald Reagan became president, he was the first Republican president who campaigned for the job as an opponent not just of the Democratic candidate, but as an opponent of government itself. He told jokes about how bad government was, about how government got everything wrong. But Ronald Reagan would not dare to try to abolish Medicare with a so called executive order. Ronald Reagan would not dare to fire all of the professionals working on Medicare in the executive branch of the government and replace them with idiots who hate Medicare and don't know how it works. Ronald Reagan wouldn't do that because he knew that would be stupid and illegal. Democrats spent days publicly arguing against the Trump threatened illegal tariffs on Canada and Mexico. Democrats spent days trying to teach voters that this would cost them enormous amounts of money and increase prices. During the presidential campaign, Kamala Harris tried to explain to people that the tariffs Donald Trump was threatening would cost them thousands of dollars a year. And none of that got through. And everything the Democrats said in opposition to the threatened Trump tariffs over the weekend turned out to be a complete waste of time because all it took was an hour Monday morning of the stock market dropping and telling Donald Trump what to do. And that's when Donald Trump dropped the tariff craziness. Of course, the Democrats were right to oppose those tariffs over the weekend. They had to do that and they now have the job every day of picking which illegal action of the President's today should they go after the hardest, which one should they emphasize? And what do you do on a night when Donald Trump says the single stupidest thing that any president has ever said about the Middle east, that the United States of America should own Gaza. Immediately the breaking news banners go up online and on TV quoting the words that Donald Trump said. Donald Trump saying everyone loves the idea of the United States owning Gaza. He actually said that it is impossible to respond to stupidity that deep and profound. Donald Trump said Gaza is going to be the Riviera of the Middle East. This is the guy who didn't build anything in the United States of America during his first presidency. Even though he had Infrastructure Week every month, the Infrastructure Week president did not build anything. None of the airports being rebuilt in America tonight, none of the roads being rebuilt in America tonight, none of the bridges being rebuilt in America, bridges that will save lives. None of the bridges of those are being rebuilt because of Donald Trump. Not one inch of infrastructure in the United States exists or is planned because of Donald Trump. Joe Biden did that and Hakeem Jeffries did that in the House of Representatives and Chuck Schumer did that in the United States Senate. And they have to listen tonight to the liar who talked about infrastructure Week all the time and never built a thing saying the United States is going to own Gaza and turn it into the Riviera of the Middle East. The United States is never going to own one inch of Gaza. Not one thing Donald Trump said about Gaza tonight will happen. Not one thing Donald Trump said about Gaza tonight is true. Donald Trump was asked, are the Saudis demanding a Palestinian state? And his answer was, no, they're not. Nope. And immediately after the President of the United States lied to the world in that press conference, Saudi Arabia issued a written statement saying, the Ministry of Foreign affairs affirms that the position of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on the establishment of the Palestinian state is a firm, unwavering position. And His Highness the Prime Minister has affirmed this position in a clear and explicit manner that does not allow for any interpretation under any, any circumstances. In other words, Saudi Arabia immediately called Donald Trump a liar after he said that about Saudi Arabia, after he said that Saudi Arabia is not demanding a Palestinian state. There was no news in anything Donald Trump said in that press conference, no real news, because nothing he said had any meaning. But he managed to hijack the programming of some news networks so that they are not talking about life saving medicine being blocked from children and they're not talking about starvation preventing food that the United States Agency for International Development is not delivering tonight because of Donald Trump and Elon Musk, who decided to illegally shut down that agency, stop all the employees of USAID around the world from doing their jobs. There is a famine in Sudan and USAID had food shipments on the way that Elon Musk decided to stop because Elon Musk does not believe those people in Africa should be fed. He apparently does not believe that they have a right to life. The richest person in the world decided that the poorest people in the world should starve. The richest person in the world decided that the poorest people in the world should die. And the President of the United States, United States, who lied about Gaza in that press conference tonight, was not asked a single question about why he is blocking life saving medicine to babies, to mothers, to grandmothers, and why he's blocking the delivery of food to starving people. Not one question. Because he threw out that madness about Gaza becoming the Riviera of the Middle East. And the reporters fell for it. The reporters chased it. The reporters all wanted to waste their questions on the Infrastructure Week goofiness of that press conference. Every single question they asked Donald Trump about infrastructure during his first presidency was a wasted question. And every single question they asked tonight about the United States owning Gaza was a wasted question. The starving people dependent on food from usaid, the sick people, dying people dying dependent on medicine and medical care from usaid, did not hear a question asked on their behalf tonight by the White House press corps. It is painful to be living under an administration that David Brooks identifies as being run by stupidity. That's the New York Times conservative columnist identifying them that way. But imagine how much more painful it is to be in Sudan tonight, hoping for food that never comes and not knowing why. Imagine how painful it is to watch your mother die or watch your baby die because the richest person in the world has decided to deprive them of medicine and medical care. I understand people wanting to turn away from all of this. Sometimes I wish I could. I really wish I could. But some people have taken an oath not to turn away. Hakeem Jeffries was 29 years old when he jumped into the competitive world of New York politics and was elected to the New York state assembly in 2006, where he served until he was elected to the United States House of Representatives in 2012. In a body where it used to take decades to rise to the top leadership positions, Hakeem Jeffries succeeded Nancy Pelosi as the top Democrat in the House of representatives in 10 years, he now has the most difficult job any Democratic leader of the House of Representatives has ever had, opposing on a daily basis the stupidity and the cruelty and the illegal conduct of a president who became a convicted felon in Hakeem Jeffries hometown of New York City. Leading off our discussion tonight is House Democratic leader, Congressman Hakeem Jeffries of New York. Thank you very much for joining us tonight. I understand how difficult your work week is these days and I really appreciate you making the time for us tonight.
- [19:41]
Hakeem Jeffries
Great to be on with you tonight, Lawrence.
- [19:44]
Rachel Maddow
And I want to ask you about where your points of leverage are coming up. Because in the House of Representatives, the minority has very few operative rights. You can introduce legislation, but it's impossible for you to get bills passed. You can't even get hearings on the bills and the committees run by Republicans. But it seems like the budget issues coming up, as far as I can see, are your first point of real leverage where you can negotiate real outcomes with Donald Trump.
- [20:20]
Hakeem Jeffries
Well, it's an all hands on deck effort from beginning every day, every week, every month. And that's been the case. That means that it's state, it's local, it's federal, it's the House, it's the Senate, it's the courts, it's the lawyers, it's the governors back at home. Certainly it's the people in the community with respect to the upcoming legislative dynamics here in the House as we approach the March 14th spending deadline that's currently being negotiated in a bipartisan way. But we have made clear to our Republican colleagues that they have to respect Congress's ability pursuant to the Constitution to appropriate funds and that we have to hold the executive branch accountable for laws that are enacted requiring funds to be spent on behalf of the American people. And that will certainly be part of our discussion, Lawrence, as we approach the March 14th spending deadline.
- [21:24]
Rachel Maddow
You know this what are you going to do about it? I know how challenging a question that is for members of the minority party in the House of Representatives. But the questions you're getting, and I know you're getting back in New York and you see it online, is the what are you going to do about it? And the question people are asking is what are you going to do about a president who simply doesn't care about the law? And no one in your position has ever had to strategize against that before. Yeah.
- [21:53]
Hakeem Jeffries
One of the things that will continue to be important is our partnership with lawyers and advocacy groups as part of the litigation strategy. We've seen a flood and an avalanche of outrageous executive actions that have been taken by the administration and by the current president. But that has also prompted a response of righteous litigation. There are more than 20 different lawsuits that have currently been filed challenging at least 11 of the unlawful executive orders that have been filed. And that will continue as we move forward. At the same time, of course, we have to continue the opposition where merited in pushing back against far right extremism here in the Congress. And we will. And we also have to make sure that we continue to win the battle for public sentiment. Abraham Lincoln made the point that public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed. And we've seen that in some of the forceful pushback that has caused the Trump administration to step back from their unlawful funding freeze and most recently to step back from the wide ranging imposition of tariffs on our North American allies.
- [23:09]
Rachel Maddow
Rachel made the point at the beginning of our hour here tonight that you are in a position with this extremely narrow margin in the House now to be able to exert a leverage that others in your position haven't had. Because that vote, that vote count of the two parties is so narrow. And at the edge of the Republican vote count there, there's certainly five to 10 Republican members who have to be very worried about their own ability to get reelected in districts that don't support this extremism.
- [23:46]
Hakeem Jeffries
That's exactly right. At the end of the day, the House Republicans have the narrowest majority of any party in Congress since the Great Depression. And as of the moment, it's 218 Republicans, 215 Democrats. There are certainly 15 or 20 Republicans who are in swing districts who should be held accountable for pushing back against the extremism that is attempting to overwhelm the sanity of the American people. And we've got to make sure that on every issue Republicans are held to account and that they can join us. If three Republicans, all it takes is three on any given issue to partner with the 215 members of the House Democratic Caucus to stop some of the madness from happening. And we've got to make sure that those Republicans are called to account on every single issue, including are they going to stand up for Social Security or not? Are they going to stand up for Medicaid or not? Are they going to stand up for Medicare or not?
- [24:50]
Rachel Maddow
New York's Hakeem Jeffries, Democratic leader of the House of Representatives, thank you so much for joining us tonight. I know people have been very very eager to hear from you. And, you know, they all want to know what you're going to do about it. And I'm sure they greatly appreciate hearing from you here tonight.
- [25:06]
Hakeem Jeffries
Thanks so much, Lawrence.
- [25:07]
Rachel Maddow
Thank you. Coming up, a lawyer who is suing the Trump administration on behalf of thousands of FBI agents will join us next. FBI agents filed lawsuits today to stop Donald Trump's Justice Department from collecting data on an estimated 6,000 FBI agents who believe they are at risk of being purged after working on cases related to the January 6th attack on the Capitol. Filing anonymously. The FBI agents say in the lawsuits that the collection and potential exposure of their personal information by the Trump Justice Department puts them at risk of retaliation and vigilante violence. Nine FBI agents filed the lawsuit as a class action on behalf of current and former FBI agent and employees who participated in some manner in the investigation and prosecution of crimes and abuses of power by Donald Trump or by those acting at his behest. They say that the intimidation is the point. Plaintiffs assert that the very act of compiling lists of persons who worked on matters that upset Donald Trump is retaliatory in nature, intended to intimidate FBI agents and other personnel and to discourage them from reporting any future malfeasance by Donald Trump and his agents. The FBI Agents association, representing roughly 14,000 current and former agents, asked for the court's protection from Trump administration's anticipated retaliatory decision to expose their personal information for opprobrium and potential vigilante action by those who they were investigating. The lawsuit notes that some of the most notorious January 6th convicted felons, including those sentenced for seditious conspiracy and assaulting police, have agitated for the retaliation of the FBI that the FBI agents now anticipate, including Proud Boys, so called Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and the violent rioter Chris Quaglin, who assaulted police with chemical spray. Joining us now is Christopher Mattey. He's one of the attorneys representing the Federal Bureau of Investigation Agents association in their lawsuit against the Trump Justice Department. Thank you very much for joining us tonight. How many plaintiffs are represented by these lawsuits?
- [27:37]
Christopher Mattey
Well, the FBI Agents association represents some 14,000 current and former agents. We have brought this lawsuit on behalf of our membership and obviously all of the active FBI personnel who may be exposed as a result of the disclosure of these names. And then there are several individuals who have brought lawsuits anonymously who are represented by separate counsel to vindicate their own interests.
- [28:04]
Rachel Maddow
So, and procedurally, are you asking for an injunction, some action that will block.
- [28:09]
Christopher Mattey
What'S happening yeah, We've moved for a temporary restraining order to prevent the Justice Department from disseminating the names and identities of the FBI agents who worked on the January 6th investigation. That's some 5,000 agents representing, I think, over 30% of the FBI enforcement workforce. Exposing them and then subjecting them as we expect was the plan to amass purge would not only result in the endangerment of the agents and their families, but would compromise the ability the FBI to carry about, carry out its national security and public safety functions. And so that's why we thought this type of urgent measure was required. We expect it'll be heard tomorrow.
- [28:52]
Rachel Maddow
So there's multiple stages of exposure here for your clients. The worst is publicly, is that those names are out there and every one of those people who were investigated by them can go hunt them down if they so choose, or hunt down family members of the agents. But the other is the very compiling of the list. The list exists now. It actually does exist. How do your clients feel about the existence of this list, knowing that it can be on Donald Trump's desk with him studying it whenever he wants?
- [29:25]
Christopher Mattey
Well, it's very concerning. I mean, it's designed to have a chilling impact across the FBI, is unprecedented. There's no legitimate reason to compile the names of agents who worked on a specific investigation. They work on different investigations every day. That's what makes them heroes. Not that they worked on the January 6th investigation, but that they go to the office every day to protect public safety no matter what they're asked to do. And so it is chilling and it signifies that the current White House and the acting leadership at the Department of Justice is out to get a significant portion of the FBI community. And we hope that that's not the case. We certainly are hopeful that once permanent leadership is in place, we can move past this. But for now, we had no choice but to protect their interests and their safety and the continued operation of the FBI.
- [30:22]
Rachel Maddow
Christopher Mattey, thank you very much for joining us tonight. And please come back with more progress as this case proceeds. Thank you very much. Thank you. Andrew Weissman, former general counsel of the FBI, will join us next. In their lawsuit filed today, FBI Agents association states, in addition to being unlawful, a mass unlawful firing of 6,000 FBI employees would be catastrophic to national security. Joining us now is Andrew Weissman, former FBI general counsel and former chief of the Criminal Division in the Eastern District of New York, MSNBC legal analyst. And Andrew, this point about firing 6,000 FBI agents brings us back to the first point of this hour. Which is stupidity, which is Donald Trump's stupidity. And as David Brooks in the New York Times defines stupidity, it is not asking what happens next. So Donald Trump, you fire 6,000 FBI agents, what happens next?
- [31:25]
Andrew Weissman
So this is. If your goal is not the safety of the American people, the functioning of law enforcement, if your goal is not that, but just pure retribution, these are the people. I want to say that January 6th is a glorious day for America. And I want to release all of the people who did what we saw before our eyes. They get pardoned and everybody who participated in holding them to account. So it's like the inmates go free. The people who are the good guys who are holding through account, they should be vilified. And that's what the list is to take a McCarthy era list of people who are not just doing their job, they were doing what Judy called them to do, which was their responsibility. So this is not Donald Trump not thinking. It's. I think his end goal is to actually eradicate this institution with the devastating consequences for our safety.
- [32:25]
Rachel Maddow
So you're a Republican who voted for Donald Trump, you're in a Republican state and there's a horrendous kidnapping in your community and the 6,000 fired FBI agents are not trying to solve that crime.
- [32:40]
Andrew Weissman
And the locals, I've been there when I mean horrendous things where the locals will call the FBI for help, the FBI SWAT team to save an abducted child. I still, I still remember this case where they managed to do it from somebody who had taken this kid and went down into a hole and they managed to get the kid out alive. That's the FBI at its best. And they do that day in and day out. I mean that helping locals happens all the time and that's just their communities. But you know what else happens? It sounds grandiose. You know, there's a reason that post 911 the FBI has been on the front lines here. And it's not just an issue in big cities. This is the issue of terrorism is a huge issue. International terrorism and domestic terrorism. And the FBI just does so much. This is just not thinking about our safety. And I keep on saying this, but it's Katrina. This isif you do notif you put in people who are not the best people. If you get rid of people who are supposed to be protecting us, there is going to be a Katrina. And we know where the buck should stop at that point, which is with.
- [33:56]
Rachel Maddow
The president legally in the lawsuits. What do you see as the next step?
- [34:01]
Andrew Weissman
There will be a hearing for A temporary restraining order. Both sides will be heard. There are two separate judges who may hear this unless the cases get consolidated. I would expect that should happen tomorrow. It's possible one or both judges issue what's called an administrative stay. So while both sides brief the issue, the judge says everyone just keep things on hold. And then they decide whether the application to not have this list be made public. What the, what the FBI agents and other personnel are saying is do not give this to the January 6th defendants so they can target us.
- [34:43]
Rachel Maddow
But there'll be no way of with this. The way this government is working, the likelihood of Elon Musk personally having the list and, you know, flying around in his plane with the list is very, very high. The likelihood of Elon Musk then telling convicted January 6th defendants here's the list is also very, very high. No matter what a judge says.
- [35:08]
Andrew Weissman
Well, okay, the issue if you this sort of doomsday scenario is if a says don't do it and you do it, this is you can go to jail. And that doesn't require the Justice Department to do anything. The judge can jail somebody for contempt. And so that's the risk of that.
- [35:29]
Rachel Maddow
Everybody out there is saying, but we know who the judge cannot jail and that is Donald Trump.
- [35:33]
Andrew Weissman
Yes.
- [35:34]
Rachel Maddow
And Donald Trump wants to just do a press conference and read off all the names after a judge has said don't do that. He knows nothing can happen to him because the Supreme Court has said nothing can happen to him.
- [35:45]
Andrew Weissman
That may be the case. That was the huge downside of that decision, to say the least. But you know what? If you're below that and you have a judge's order saying don't do it, I can tell you that the people of the Justice Department below Emile Bovey are going to be like, I am not violating a court order.
- [36:05]
Rachel Maddow
Yeah, they're not going to risk their careers on. Andrew Weissman, thank you very much for joining us tonight. And coming up, even some Senate Republicans are now objecting to the grotesque cruelty of Elon Musk and Donald Trump. That's next. The New York Times is reporting some of the suffering as a result of Elon Musk and Donald Trump's decision to freeze anything. All work done by the United States Agency for International Development. It feels like one easy decision by the US President is quietly killing so many lives, said a tuberculosis patient who said he was told to leave a U. S. Funded hospital in the largest refugee camp on the Thai Myanmar border. MSNBC columnist Michael Cohen reports. Because of Trump and Musk's Actions. Uganda's Malaria Council has suspended insecticide spraying and shipments of bed nets, one of the most effective tools in limiting the spread of the disease, have ended. Medical supplies to help pregnant women and save babies from dying of diarrhea are no longer reaching villagers. In Zambia, efforts to eradicate polio and stop an outbreak of the Marburg virus, which is similar to Ebola and has a death rate of up to 90%, have stopped the delivery of daily medications that are keeping alive 20 million people in 50 countries who are HIV positive is halted. In Sudan, staffers at a US supported aid agency faced an impossible choice, defy President Donald Trump's order to immediately stop their operations or let up to 100 babies and toddlers die. Republican Senator Bill Cassidy, a physician, posted this saying that about the HIV program in Africa. PEPFAR is the epitome of soft power. It is a Republican initiative. It is pro life, pro America, and the most popular US Program in Africa. Africa. There's even a waiver acknowledging this. Yet I'm told that drugs are still being withheld at clinics in Africa. This must be reversed immediately. Joining us now is Rick Stengel. He is a former under Secretary of State in the Obama administration. He's also an MSNBC political analyst. Rick, the richest person in the world has decided to starve the poorest people in the world.
- [38:34]
Rick Stengel
Well, Lawrence, I'm just very saddened and even bewildered by this attitude towards USAID and American international aid. I think it's one of the glories of American diplomacy. It's less than 1% of the federal budget. If the federal budget were $1,000, we'd be spending 6 cents on foreign aid. And it comes back to us in thousands of ways. We're feeding hungry children, we're combating disease, we're fighting terrorism. If we were not doing that, we would be paying much more on the back end. People think we pay seven times as much for that. Jim Mattis, who was Donald Trump's first secretary of defense, said in his congressional testimony. He said for every dollar we don't spend on federal aid, I have to spend another dollar on a bullet. It's a national security thing that actually makes people much better. If you look at that man carrying that sack there, and I'm sure you've seen this, Lawrence, around the world. You go to a place where people are poor, where there's a lot of sickness, and you see those USAID packages, those crates, and it says usaid, and it says the legend underneath, it says, from the American people, I'm So proud when I see that around the world. And I feel it is an example of American generosity. It's an example of American generosity that has been around since the end of World War II. It was started by President Kennedy and Senator Cassidy, by the way, talked about PEPFAR. PEPFAR, which was started by George Bush, 43, may be the most successful humanitarian program in human history. It saved 26 million lives. There are 8 million new babies born without AIDS as a result of that program. It's something the American people should be proud of, that we should glory in and that we shouldn't be cutting.
- [40:31]
Rachel Maddow
Yeah. And when President Kennedy started it and all presidents who've been supporting it since President Kennedy understood there was a geopolitical strategic point to it as well as just General Yes.
- [40:45]
Rick Stengel
They saw it as a national security program. I mean, remember, this was in the middle of the Cold War. We were competing against the Soviet Union. America was wealthy. We wanted to be humane. We wanted to be generous. We wanted to use our largesse around the world to create, you know, good public diplomacy for America. And it did. I mean, you know, the idea of the. They got around the idea of the ugly American by. By creating the generous American that combated that Russian image and that helped us for decades.
- [41:17]
Rachel Maddow
Yeah. And part of the point was, for Kennedy was to say we are not imperialists reaching out into the world the way the Soviet Union is trying to dominate other countries through military might.
- [41:30]
Rick Stengel
Yes, the Soviets were colonialists. They were taking over countries in Eastern Europe and even in Africa. Instead, we were giving donations to those countries. We were trying to help them heal. We were combating disease and we were preventing terrorism. That was the result of that program.
- [41:49]
Rachel Maddow
Rick Stengel, former Undersecretary of State, thank you very much for joining us tonight.
- [41:53]
Rick Stengel
Thank you, Lawrence.
- [41:54]
Rachel Maddow
We'll be right back. Former Undersecretary of State Rick Stengel gets tonight's last word.