Lawrence: Musk called Navarro a 'moron.' What does Musk think of Trump who follows Navarro’s advice?

Summary

Summary of "Lawrence: Musk called Navarro a 'moron.' What does Musk think of Trump who follows Navarro’s advice?"

Release Date: April 9, 2025
Podcast: The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell
Host: Lawrence O'Donnell, MSNBC

---

1. Introduction and IRS Commissioner Resignation

Timestamp: [01:04]

Lawrence O'Donnell opens the episode by addressing the recent resignation of Melanie Kraus, the acting IRS Commissioner. Her departure follows a controversial mandate requiring the IRS to share tax data of immigrants with ICE, a move that breaches the traditional confidentiality of IRS records.

• Lawrence O'Donnell: "Americans are all filing their taxes right now. Part of that is wanting to know that the IRS is competent and is going to treat us fairly... This is a fundamental break here." [01:54]

• Rachel Maddow: Highlights the troubling trend of the IRS losing leadership, noting that Kraus is the third director to resign within three months since Trump's second term initiation. [01:54]

2. Elon Musk vs. Peter Navarro: The Clash of Titans

Timestamp: [01:55]

The core discussion revolves around the escalating conflict between Elon Musk and Peter Navarro, Donald Trump's chief trade advisor. Musk's public denunciation of Navarro as a "moron" has significant implications for Trump, who has relied heavily on Navarro's advice for his tariff policies.

• Lawrence O'Donnell: Explains Navarro's past legal troubles, including his conviction for contempt of Congress and the irony of Trump possibly relying on someone he publicly disparages. [02:34]

• Musk's Attacks: Musk, along with his brother Kimbal, intensifies their criticism of Navarro and Trump's tariff strategies, leading to potential political and economic fallout.

  • Lawrence O'Donnell: "When Donald Trump reads that, even Donald Trump is capable of seeing how easily the name Trump could be substituted for the name Navarro in that tweet." [Various timestamps]

  • Kimbal Musk: Directly criticizes Trump's tariff strategy, labeling it as the "most high tax American president in generations." [Examples between [11:16] and [12:28]]

3. Republican Fractures Over Tariffs

Timestamp: [11:16]

The episode delves into the growing dissent within the Republican Party regarding Trump's tariff policies. Notably, Senator Chuck Grassley and other Republican senators begin to oppose the president's ability to unilaterally impose tariffs without Congressional approval.

• Sheldon Whitehouse: "If the purpose is to stall on negotiations in order to keep tariffs high for the sole purpose of feeding the US Treasury, I oppose that." [11:16]

• Rachel Maddow: Discusses the adverse effects of tariffs on consumers and small businesses, highlighting the bipartisan concerns emerging within the Senate Finance Committee. [11:31]

4. Economic Implications of Trump's Tariff Policies

Timestamp: [15:12]

Harvard economist Jason Furman provides an analysis of the long-term damage inflicted by Trump's tariff strategies, emphasizing that even if tariffs are rolled back, the uncertainty created will continue to hamper economic growth.

• Rumors of Policy Change: The stock market's reaction to potential tariff adjustments underscores the fragile relationship between policy moves and market stability. [26:55]

• Dan Ives: Argues that the current tariff rates are excessively high, likening the uncertainty they create to an even more detrimental form of taxation. [27:59]

5. Privatization of Federal Assets: A Critical Examination

Timestamp: [31:09]

Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury critiques the Trump administration's efforts to privatize federal properties, labeling it as a "get rich quick scheme" benefiting billionaires like Trump and Elon Musk.

• Melanie Stansbury: "They're going to privatize assets, they're going to take private contracts and then they're going to give themselves tax breaks on the back end with the help of their friends in Congress." [34:10]

• Rachel Maddow: Highlights the ill-timed sale of federal buildings amidst a struggling commercial real estate market, exacerbated by the administration's tariff policies. [35:36]

6. Judicial Pushback Against Presidential Actions

Timestamp: [38:50]

The episode concludes with a discussion on the judiciary's resistance to Trump's controversial policies, including a federal judge's ruling against restricting press access based on viewpoints and the Supreme Court's unanimous decision against sending an immigrant to a foreign prison without due process.

• Andrew Weissman: Applauds judges adhering to the rule of law despite political pressures, emphasizing the judiciary's role in upholding constitutional principles. [41:43]

• Rachel Maddow: Notes the significance of Chief Justice Roberts' expedited consideration of Kilmar Garcia's case, underscoring the courts' commitment to justice. [43:30]

---

Key Takeaways

1. Conflict Within the GOP: Elon Musk's vocal criticism of Peter Navarro signifies a broader fracture within the Republican Party, challenging Trump's longstanding tariff policies.

2. Economic Uncertainty: Trump's aggressive tariff strategies have not only strained international relations but have also introduced significant uncertainty into the American economy, affecting both consumers and businesses.

3. Judicial Independence: Despite numerous challenges, the judiciary remains a bastion of constitutional adherence, often ruling against executive overreach.

4. Privatization Concerns: Efforts to privatize federal assets under Trump's administration raise alarms about potential conflicts of interest and the erosion of public trust.

---

Notable Quotes

• Lawrence O'Donnell: "Peter Navarro now needs 42 more days in the Trump administration to match his 120 days in prison." [02:45]

• Sheldon Whitehouse: "Tariffs are a double-edged sword." [11:56]

• Melanie Stansbury: "What they're hoping to do is essentially what private equity does... They loot assets, they sell them off at a low price, they make a ton of money." [35:57]

• Dan Ives: "Uncertainty is like a tariff. It just stops everything." [28:55]

• Andrew Weissman: "This is a standard procedure to send something to the full court for its decision. That's what we've consistently seen." [44:46]

---

This comprehensive summary encapsulates the multifaceted discussions in the episode, providing insights into the political and economic tensions surrounding Trump's administration, the internal dynamics of the Republican Party, and the judiciary's role in checking executive power.

Transcript

[Alex Wagner]

Stay connected with the MSNBC app bringing you breaking news and analysis anytime, anywhere.

[Rachel Maddow]

Let's get up to speed. We've got some breaking news right now.

[Alex Wagner]

Watch your favorite shows live.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

There's a lot happening here in Washington as Donald Trump's second term starts to take shape.

[Alex Wagner]

Read live blogs and in depth essays and listen to coverage as it unfolds. Go beyond the what to understand the why. Download the app [e-mail] app MSNBC presents a new original podcast hosted by Jen Psaki. Each week she and her guests explore how the Democratic Party is facing this political moment and where it's headed next.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

There's probably both messaging and policy issues, but as you look to kind of where the Democratic Party is, do you think it's more a messaging issue, more a policy issue?

[Alex Wagner]

The Blueprint with Jen Psaki subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts for ad, free listening and bonus content.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Now it's time for the great Lawrence O'Donnell on the last Word. Good evening, Lawrence.

[Rachel Maddow]

Good evening, Rachel. We have some breaking news from the irs. Associated Press reporting that the IRS acting commissioner is resigning over the demand that they send immigrants tax data to ice, says Melanie Kraus, who had served as acting head since February, will step down or over the new data sharing document signed Monday by Treasury Secretary Scott Besant and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. The agreement will allow ICE to submit names and addresses of immigrants inside the U.S. illegally to the IRS for cross verification against tax records. And that is a new use of IRS data which has always had a kind of confidential sanctity in the federal government.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Yeah, I think it's also doesn't that make this the third director of the IRS since in less than three months since Trump has been sworn in? That's also very bad. I mean, Americans are all filing their taxes right now. Part of that is wanting to know that the IRS is competent and is going to treat us fairly. But it has always been the bargain with the US Government that we submit that information to the IRS specifically for the purpose of adjudicating our taxes and not for any other thing. And that's why people comply with tax law. This is a fundamental break here.

[Rachel Maddow]

And Rachel, you're so much sharper than I am off the top of your head. In my ear, it was just whispered to me by Melissa that yes, it's the third, which I did not know.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

So yeah, the first one going was bad. The second one going was really bad. This one is a five alarm fire.

[Rachel Maddow]

Yeah.

[Jen Psaki]

Yeah.

[Rachel Maddow]

Well, here we are. Once Again.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Yeah.

[Rachel Maddow]

Thanks, Rachel.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Thanks, Lars.

[Rachel Maddow]

Thank you. And so, as we come to the end of day two of the Musk versus Trump war over tariffs, Donald Trump think about this. Donald Trump will be trying to fall asleep tonight wondering when Elon Musk might be publicly calling him a moron. Something I, right here have to confess to having done myself in moments of rhetorical weakness when my imagination doesn't come up with something more elevated to use as a accurate description of Donald Trump. Donald Trump's chief trade advisor, Peter Navarro, will be trying to fall asleep tonight wondering if he will serve as many days in the second Trump administration as he served in federal prison for lying for Donald Trump. Peter Navarro, you might recall, tried to get away with the lie that he did not have to respond to a congressional subpoena from the January 6 committee because he was protected by executive privilege. That was a lie. And at his trial in federal court in Washington, D.C. that lie got him convicted of contempt of Congress and sentenced to federal prison, where he served 120 days. Peter Navarro was a private citizen when he was claiming an executive privilege that did not exist. Peter Navarro now needs 42 more days in the Trump administration to match his 120 days of in prison. And right now, Elon Musk is saying everything he can publicly say to get Peter Navarro fired immediately. Every day of Peter Navarro's life is now worse than the day before yesterday. Elon Musk's criticism of Peter Navarro was muted compared to today. On Musk's opening line of attack against Donald Trump's chief trade advisor was Navarro is truly a moron. When Donald Trump read that, even Donald Trump is capable of seeing how easily the name Trump could be substituted for the name Navarro in that tweet. And if Peter Navarro is truly a moron, what do you call the person who follows Peter Navarro's advice? Donald Trump has called Elon Musk a genius. And now, according to the Trump formulation, a genius has called Donald Trump's chief trade advisor a moron. And Donald Trump has chosen the side of the accused moron over the Trump proclaimed genius. So what does that make Donald Trump? There is only one president of the United States in history who would take Peter Navarro's advice on anything. There's only one president of any country in the world today who would take Peter Navarro's advice on anything. And Donald Trump's personal genius has called Peter Navarro a moron. Even Donald Trump can figure out how Elon Musk really feels about someone who would take a moron's advice. It got Worse for Peter Navarro, as Elon Musk and his brother Kimbal Musk, a member of the board of Tesler, joined in double team Twitter attacks of Peter Navarro. As the day wore on that included nastier words than moron that I cannot say. On this program yesterday, Elon Musk's brother, Kimbal Musk, directly attacked Donald Trump, saying, as I reported here last night, who would have thought that Trump was actually the most high tax American president in generations? Through his tariff strategy, Trump has implemented a structural permanent tax on the American consumer. Elon Musk's brother is a wholly owned subsidiary of Elon Musk, and as a board member of Tesla, can be fairly assumed to never say a word publicly that Elon Musk doesn't approve of. And so tonight, Donald Trump is just one Musk away from being directly attacked by the richest person in the world for creating the biggest tax increase in American history all by himself. And so, as Donald Trump rests his weary head on his pillow tonight, with his hair in whatever protective device he uses for sleeping, he has to wonder, when will Elon Musk turn on me? Donald Trump knows Elon Musk is not a patient person. Elon Musk has personally lost more money to the Trump tariffs than any other person in the world. In the first hour of the stock market's opening today, another day when Elon Musk lost more money, Elon Musk tweeted that Navarro is dumber than a sack of bricks. And then during the afternoon session when the stock market was sinking badly and Elon Musk was losing even more money once again today, Elon Musk tweeted, I'd like to apologize to Brics for calling Peter Navarro dumber than a sack of bricks. That was so unfair to brics. To which Kimbal Musk immediately jumped in with a moment of silence, please, for all the bricks that have been unfairly maligned when being compared to Navarro. So if Peter Navarro is dumber than a sack of bricks, that makes Donald Trump dumber than a sack of what, exactly? According to Elon Musk, we might be days or weeks away from finding out how Elon Musk will publicly complete the sentence. Donald Trump is dumber than a sack of blank. And so Donald Trump is desperately worried tonight. He is desperately worried about the crashing stock market, which has lost $6 trillion in value thanks entirely and exclusively to Donald Trump, following the advice of a person called a moron by a person Donald Trump describes as a genius. And now Donald Trump is worried that the person he thinks is a genius is going to be calling him a moron any day now. And Donald Trump is worried that he will then lose access to the unlimited amount of political money the richest person in the world has been willing to give Donald Trump and willing to use in Republican politics to threaten Republicans to stay in line with Donald Trump. Elon Musk's money is the single most important new element in Donald Trump's ability to continue to hold on to Republicans public loyalty. But that Republican loyalty is beginning to crumble thanks to Donald Trump. Following the advice of Peter Navarro. We all know just how cowardly every single Republican member of Congress is when it comes to anything involving Donald Trump. And so it is a hugely significant crack in the wall of Trump Republican loyalty tonight that the most senior Republican member of the Senate, Chuck Grassley, who has never been in favor of presidentially imposed tariffs before Donald Trump was elected, has introduced a bill with a total of seven Republican co sponsors to limit the president's ability to raise tariffs without Congress's approval. So that's seven Republicans willing to go public against Donald Trump on tariffs. And four more Republicans emerged today in the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over tariffs, taking shots at Donald Trump's tariffs during a hearing with the person who is supposed to be the President's chief international trade adviser, United States Trade Representative Jamison Greer. Here is a sample, just a sample of what Republican senators were brave enough to say today about the Trump tariffs.

[Sheldon Whitehouse]

If the purpose is to stall on negotiations in order to keep tariffs high for the sole purpose of feeding the US Treasury, I oppose that. Who pays, who pays these high tariffs.

[Rachel Maddow]

In the short, medium term? It will be the consumer. It will be the consumer. And so I'm worried about the inflationary effect. I'm worried if there is a trade war that we're going to have markets shutting down for American farmers, ranchers and manufacturers. And I hope you and the president are very sensitive about companies potentially going.

[Sheldon Whitehouse]

Bankrupt by these actions. Again, we want fair trade.

[Rachel Maddow]

But I hope you recognize, you know.

[Sheldon Whitehouse]

Tariffs are double edged sword.

[Rachel Maddow]

I would argue a somewhat blunt instrument. This is creating some anxiety, this current tariff posture.

[Alex Wagner]

Among some of my constituents in Indiana.

[Rachel Maddow]

Rural communities and export driven manufacturers oftentimes feel the consequences. And they feel the consequences first.

[Sheldon Whitehouse]

Some in Oklahoma, they're asking me about exclusions and exceptions and how this is going to be handled to say we can't buy it in America. This is the only place that's actually manufacturing it.

[Rachel Maddow]

Also hear from my producers that the mean tariff being selected to apply to a country may not account that For Rice, for example, the tariff is much higher for that particular product and that it is not adequate to address that which is taking place. I'm assuming this all got gamed out because it's a novel approach. It needed to be thought out. Whose throat do I get to choke if this proves to be wrong? When the day comes, Donald Trump will personally invite Senator Thom Tillis to choke Peter Navarro. The way this story is going to end is Donald Trump is going to back down on these tariffs. It could take several months for Donald Trump to back down. It could take weeks. It could take days. We don't know. But a year from now, these crazy Trump tariffs will be history. And Republicans will be running away from them as they run for reelection to the United States Senate and to the House of Representatives. And Donald Trump is going to fire Peter Navarro because Wall street will demand it. The problem now for Donald Trump is when does he back down from these tariffs? And is Wall street an American industry? How will they know that Donald Trump will not suddenly impose those tariffs again? And so Donald Trump will need proof for Wall street and for American industry and for Republican members of Congress that he is not going to ruin their lives again with tariffs. And that's why Peter Navarro's current high visibility is good for Donald Trump. Because the more visible Peter Navarro is, the more impactful and convincing for Wall street it will be. On the day that Peter Navarro is fired by Donald Trump, the stock market on that day will skyrocket, absolutely skyrocket the day Peter Navarro is fired. And Donald Trump knows it. The American people understand that Elon's a car manufacturer, but he's not a car manufacturer. He's a car assembler. In many cases, if you go to his Texas plant, a good part of the engines that that he gets, which in the EV case is the batteries come from Japan and come from China. The electronics come from Taiwan. When this is over, Elon Musk will still be a car manufacturer and Peter Navarro will be unemployed. Today, the White House press secretary said this about the war between Elon Musk and Peter Navarro that could lead to the complete political collapse of the Trump White House.

[Jen Psaki]

Look, these are obviously two individuals who have very different views on trade and on tariffs.

[Melanie Stansbury]

Boys will be boys.

[Rachel Maddow]

Boys will be boys. Those two boys have publicly lit the match to what could become the bonfire of the stupidities of the Trump White House. Last night, former Obama White House Chief of Staff and former Ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel told Jon Stewart what success of the Trump tariff policy would look like. This is supposed to be a manufacturing renaissance.

[Andrew Weissman]

Manufacturing is going to come back good.

[Rachel Maddow]

Screws next to Apple phones, as you said.

[Andrew Weissman]

No, no, no, we're robots.

[Rachel Maddow]

Elon Musk has a 20,000 person factory.

[Andrew Weissman]

In Shanghai, a 12,000 person factory in Berlin. When those get repurposed back in the United States, this is an incredible success. Until that time, it's an absolute failure.

[Rachel Maddow]

Dan Ives, who has made a lot of money as a strong supporter of Tesla stock for years, has been making the rounds on CNBC and Bloomberg TV this week telling investors what Elon Musk needs to do next.

[Jason Furman]

Look, I mean it's our view Musk basically needs to leave the government. I mean, because if you look at the brand damage, you just cannot deny it. I think there's 20% actually permanent brand damage in Europe, 10% at least in the U.S. unfortunately, Tesla's become a political symbol around the world, but in a bad way, right? I mean if any frustration toward Trump do tariffs globally. There's one symbol, it's Tesla. Tesla, in my view, it's been, it's been a sad few months to, to watch it because it's brand destruction by the hour, by the day. Can't deny it. He has to leave government. You need a CEO Musk in that seat as CEO of Tesla. You can't be spending 5%, 3%, 2% of your time there and the rest of the government. That's been the frustration because Musk is Tesla, Tesla is Musk, and to Elon.

[Rachel Maddow]

Musk, Tesla is much more important than Trump. Leading off our discussion tonight is Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island. He's a member of the Senate Finance Committee, the Judiciary Committee and the Budget Committee. Thank you very much for joining us tonight. Senator, I know you were at the Senate Finance Committee hearing today and you made some very good points, especially about small business. But what I wanted to show viewers tonight was exclusively what the Republicans had to say. I thought that was so important about what is becoming now this observable fracture in the Republican Party. Donald Trump finally, finally has some Republican senators voicing opposition questions, challenges to his policy.

[Sheldon Whitehouse]

Yeah, I think it's not the first time. I mean we saw a faction of the Republican Party get very unhappy about Trump when he mobbed up with Putin and took the side of the mobster Putin against the freedom fighters in Ukraine. That was not a great moment. In nominee after nominee after nominee, Republicans have been bullied into supporting incompetence and oddballs. And you know, that builds up and there's been an awful lot of political pressure applied that has not been very well organized or thoughtful to ram through the reconciliation bill, the budget bill that they're working on now. And then on top of it all, boom, come these really poorly thought through tariffs. And the next thing you know, you know, $6 trillion gone from the market, which gets CEOs attention. And so they're on the phone saying what the hell is going on? And I think the, you know, Lucy, you got some explaining to do moment is really here. And it's creating a lot of pressure within the Republican caucus and between the Republican caucus and the White House. And as you pointed out, even within the White House with the Musk Navarro feud erupting into plain sight.

[Rachel Maddow]

Yeah. And finally, Elon Musk agrees with Chuck Schumer about something. Senator Schumer, this guy Navarro, he is absolutely out of his mind about what tariffs are and what they do and how harmful they are with the American people. You gave some examples at the Finance Committee hearing today about how small businesses are in the indirect targeting area of the Trump tariffs and how they are hurt.

[Sheldon Whitehouse]

Yeah. Here's the thing. I mean, if you're a giant conglomerate and you can manage your way or shift your product lines or send in your lobbyists to go get an exemption from Trump, you can work your way through this. It may be bad for business, it may be annoying to have to be subject to such a stupid tariff regime, but you can work your way through. But a lot of small businesses do one thing and they do it very well, and that's why they succeed. And very often the one thing that they do requires a supply of something from another country or they're making it in America, but they're selling it to another country. We have a company in Rhode island that makes laces for boots in China because they're a really good lace maker. So when you have a small business, and that is what they do, and these tariffs blow it up, that small business has no place to go. They just take the punch full in the face and they have to go out of business. And I think that we will see in the coming months story after story after story from small states, many of them along the northern border where trade with tariff with Canada is so affected by these tariffs. And you're going to see these human interest stories of small businesses that have been very successful, kept family businesses going, kept workforce in place, and they're just going to have to go bust and there's no program whatsoever to help them out.

[Rachel Maddow]

Sarah, I want to get your reaction to the breaking News of this hour of the acting IRS commissioner resigning because of the Trump order to share IRS tax filing information with ice.

[Sheldon Whitehouse]

Well, you know, this is part of the corruption, the infiltration, the politicization of the IRS that Trump and his cronies are trying to accomplish. First of all, they want to knock it down as much as possible so that they're as few people as possible who could look into and audit the complex tax returns of billionaires. There was a time when they did more audits of poor people in Mississippi than they did of billionaires. And they would love to go back to those dates where you do a tax audit, because it's easy, because the small local person who is easy to audit is where you go, because you don't have the muscle to go and take on the billionaire and their accountants and their lawyers, and they're the ones who are the big cheats and dodgers. So knocking it down is very important. And then also turning what remains into a political weapon so that you can go after immigrants or Democrats or people in blue states or whatever it is, is the other piece of the puz. And it's a very dangerous abuse of the irs.

[Rachel Maddow]

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, thank you very much for starting off our discussions tonight.

[Sheldon Whitehouse]

Thank you.

[Rachel Maddow]

Thank you. Coming up, our next guest, Harvard economist Jason Furman, who served as an economic adviser to President Obama, says that the damage Donald Trump has already done to the American economy cannot be fixed simply by canceling the Trump tariffs. That's next.

[Alex Wagner]

It's President Trump's first 100 days, and MSNBC's Alex Wagner will be covering it all from the front lines.

[Rachel Maddow]

What issue matters to you the most?

[Alex Wagner]

Join her as she travels the country to talk to the people at the center of the president's policies and promises.

[Jen Psaki]

Do you think now that he's pardoned.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Everybody, he can count on this group of people again?

[Alex Wagner]

Search for Trumpland with Alex Wagner wherever you're listening and follow. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen ad free. The first 100 days, bills are passed, executive orders are signed, and presidencies are defined. And for Donald Trump's first 100 days, Rachel Maddow is on MSNBC five nights a week.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Now is the time, so we're gonna do it.

[Alex Wagner]

Providing her unique insight and analysis during this critical time, how do we strategically.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Align ourselves to this moment of information, this moment of transition in our country?

[Alex Wagner]

The Rachel Maddows show, weeknights at 9pm Eastern on MSNBC. Stay up to date on the biggest issues of the day with the MSNBC Daily newsletter. Each morning you'll get analysis by experts you trust, video highlights from your favorite shows.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

I do think it's worth being very clear eyed, very realistic about what's going on here.

[Alex Wagner]

Previews of our podcasts and documentaries, plus written perspectives from the newsmakers themselves, all sent directly to your inbox each morning. Get the best of MSNBC all in one place. Sign up for msnbc [e-mail].

[Rachel Maddow]

The Trump damage will not be fixed the day Donald Trump backs down on tariffs or the day he fires Peter Navarro, according to our next guest, Harvard economics Professor Jason Furman, who served as President Obama's chair of the President's Council of Economic Advisers. Professor Furman writes that a reduction in the volume of imports and exports would mean, quote, Americans would face higher prices, lower quality and a shift to worse jobs in import substitution industries from the higher productivity, export and service jobs to they are in now. Even if Trump backs down from his most extreme proposal, he will have succeeded in shifting the debate on tariffs and in building uncertainty, which itself can act like a tariff. It will be hard to put the evil genie back in its bottle. Joining us now is Jason Furman, former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers for President Obama. He's a professor at Harvard University. Thank you very much for joining us tonight. Talk about Wall Street. Seems to think, as you see, the way that the stock market spiked yesterday just on the rumor that Donald Trump might be softening his position on tariffs, that as soon as Donald Trump makes a move in their direction on tariffs, reduces his latest round of proposals, eliminates maybe the latest round of proposals that American economy's problems are over, stock market goes back up, American industry just soars. Yeah.

[Dan Ives]

Look, 93 minutes from now, we're going to have an average tariff rate on things coming into the United States of 28%. That is the highest in over 100 years. But here's what I think is is a little bit nutty. People are saying the president should compromise, he should back down, he should be reasonable. And the fantasy scenario is that we cut that tariff rate down to something like 12 or 15%. Well, if we do, we will be in the same league as Iran, Venezuela and a bunch of other countries that are much poorer than Iran and Venezuela. And so the reasonable fallback here is exceedingly still high tariffs.

[Rachel Maddow]

Yeah. But give us a worldwide perspective on tariffs and the history of tariffs in the United States. You make the point in your article that for the last 50 years, for example, a tariff movement of 1.1% in the United States was a big deal.

[Dan Ives]

Yeah. In the last 50 years, you've seen tariff move by 1 percentage point. Just once most every year, you've seen them move by maybe 1 or 2, 10. Now, we've already gone up 25 percentage points this year. And that's just guarantees uncertainty. Jaguar has said they're going to stop exporting to the United States. Now here's the crazy thing. They're going to stop those exports because they think maybe tariffs will come down. So why send the cars in now, pay the tariff. They can wait and not pay them. So uncertainty goes both ways. If you think tariffs might go up, you hold off. If you think tariffs might go down, you hold off. And that's this evil genie that is now out that we cannot get certainty back as long as this president is in charge of tariff policy.

[Rachel Maddow]

Yeah. That's the point you make about the uncertainty, about uncertainty is in and of itself, as you put it, a tariff. Yeah.

[Dan Ives]

It's like a tariff. In some ways, it's worse than a tariff. So the tariff, at least you get revenue. Uncertainty is like a tariff. It just stops everything. And you don't even get any money in exchange for it.

[Rachel Maddow]

And going back to your article, you describe a condition where when businesses are not sure what future policy will be, it can pay to wait until this is resolved before making big, irreversible investment decisions. The result is less investment and lower growth. And among those big decisions that you would wait on is, should I move my plant back into the United States, Should I build a plant in some other country? That's exactly the kind of decision you're saying industries will not make under these conditions. So the Trump theory of we bring manufacturing into the United States through tariffs can't work.

[Dan Ives]

I think it's not going to work. We're not going to get more manufacturing from this. I mean, we're raising input costs. We have countries retaliating against us. Mr. Beast today said it's going to be cheaper for him to make his chocolate bars outside the United States for sale outside the United States rather than having the, you know, imported inputs come in here and get tariffs. So if Mr. Beast is gonna move his chocolate production overseas, I think a lot more is gonna go overseas, too.

[Rachel Maddow]

Professor Jason Furman, thank you so much for finding some time to join us tonight. We're gonna need you more whenever you can join us on this story. Thank you very much.

[Melanie Stansbury]

Yep.

[Rachel Maddow]

Thank you. Coming up, the top Democrat on the House subcommittee, on a House subcommittee exposed how she believes Donald Trump's plan to sell federal buildings is really a get rich quick scheme for Donald Trump and his friends. That's next. Today, a House oversight subcommittee held a hearing on the Musk Trump plan to sell federal buildings. The top Democrat on that subcommittee, Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury, described the Trump plan this way.

[Jen Psaki]

Now, we all know that Donald Trump is a real estate developer. Let's not lose sight of that. And certainly he understands the significance of the disposal of properties in the most valuable real estate in our nation's capital. So I think it's important that we keep that in mind as we're thinking about is the intentions of what DOGE is doing. Are they actually in the public interest? I just want to say that it is quite rich to talk about the abuse of federal properties after Donald Trump used the historic Postal Service building just down the street during his administration to make millions and millions of dollars from foreign governments while they came and visited him in the Oval Office. Republicans are trying to pass legislation right now that would give billionaires permanent tax breaks on the order of $37 trillion over the next three decades. And in order to pay for that, they are looting the federal government and taking a page out of the playbook of private equity. Take public assets, privatize them, sell them for profit, lease them back, help your buddies make money. And that is exactly what we're seeing here today. And unfortunately, we've seen this occur the federal government since the Trump administration took office. In fact, we have been deeply concerned that the entire DOGE effort has been a front to help support billionaires who are trying to privatize public services.

[Rachel Maddow]

Representative Stansberry also said this about Elon Musk.

[Jen Psaki]

We have been deeply concerned that the entire DOGE effort has been a front to help support billionaires who are trying to privatize public services. And just this week we have seen as Elon Musk is on his exit out of the federal government, he has secured billions of dollars in new contracts across the federal government. Conflict of interest. Yes, absolutely. It appears that he has recently secured contracts and promises for contracts at the Department of Defense, NASA. He has installed Starlink at the White House and is asking to install it at other federal agencies. And we understand that there is the potential to to potentially deploy his AI technology across the federal agencies to replace the tens of thousands of federal employees that have recently been illegally fired. That is why we are deeply concerned about the non data driven fire sale that the Trump administration is proposing for federal properties such as the one we're in today.

[Rachel Maddow]

Joining us now is Democratic Representative Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico, thank you very much for joining us tonight. And thank you so much for this hearing. I learned so much, I have to say I hadn't seen through this scheme about selling federal buildings, selling the FBI headquarters, selling the Justice Department headquarters, which made no sense to me, but you have illuminated it. What else do we need to know about this?

[Melanie Stansbury]

Yeah, well, I think, as I said in the clip that was just shown, what we're seeing with this entire Doge effort is that it really does seem to be a front for the grift that we know well from Donald Trump. But now we're seeing it on a scale that we've never seen before with Elon Musk. And while they're claiming that it's to make the government more efficient, it's to root out waste, fraud and abuse, the real waste, fraud and abuse is what they're doing to the government. And we see this with the ways in which they're essentially trying to hold a fire sale on federal real property right now. So a couple of weeks ago, they released a list that went live for about 24 hours on a government website of over 400 properties, and it included the headquarters of every single major agency in Washington, Washington, D.C. and if you've spent any time here in D.C. those are properties that are right on the National Mall. They're near the Capitol, they're near the White House. And today in the hearing, there were Republicans talking about demolishing those buildings, selling them off to private developers, and then making money off of them. So it's very clear that what they're hoping to do is essentially what private equity does. They loot assets, they sell them off at a low price, they make a ton of money off of it, they privatize it, and then they get richer. And so we were trying to make sure that the public understand that that's what their plan is for these federal assets.

[Rachel Maddow]

Another hugely important point you made in the hearing we have on video here, but I'll just ask you about it, was how this is an absolutely terrible time to be selling a federal building, that this is the worst moment you could have picked in a while to sell a federal building because of market conditions now.

[Melanie Stansbury]

Yeah, I mean, anyone who is in commercial real estate right now knows that it's a bad time to sell. That's not exclusive to federal buildings. We're coming out of our Covid hangover. Many office buildings are under subscribed right now. This is not unique to the federal government, but it's a terrible Time to sell commercial real estate. So if they were to sell right now, they would get bottom dollar for these properties. But the other issue is that the market is completely tanked and bottomed out right now because of the tariff scheme, because of inflation and because basically this is a bad time for commercial real estate. So not only is this a bad plan from the idea of protecting public assets, it's not good for the taxpayers.

[Rachel Maddow]

And the only real possible tenant customers for these office buildings are the current tenants. It's not like the Justice Department. If anyone's been in the Justice Department building, it's a classic government building, built and well served for the purposes of a huge department like that. But you revealing today that what they would really want to do is just lease it right back to the Justice Department and then get the most reliable rent payer in the world, the federal government.

[Melanie Stansbury]

I mean, possibly they might also, I mean if they bought these properties at a cheap price, they could demolish them and build new real estate developments and make a lot of money off of them. I'm sure there's a lot of folks out there, a lot of businesses and lobbyists and others that would like to have property close to the Capitol. But the point is they don't even have a plan right. Right now the GSA is collecting data on what's happening with federal real estate, staffing, et cetera. And they're supposed to deliver that data in June or July. And we'll have a better idea just like every private company out there of what the federal footprint should look like. But that's not what this is about. They're just trying to sell off properties as quickly as possible and then claim those as savings that they can apply towards this big package that they're trying to shove through Congress right now to basically give permanent tax breaks to their billionaire friends. So it's all a very circular thing, right? They're going to privatize assets, they're going to take private contracts and then they're going to give themselves tax breaks on the back end with a friend of their, the help of their friends in Congress.

[Rachel Maddow]

Thank you for revealing it all today. Representative Melanie Stansberry, thank you very much for joining us tonight.

[Melanie Stansbury]

Absolutely.

[Rachel Maddow]

And coming up today, a Trump appointed federal judge ruled against Donald Trump in an important First Amendment case about the Gulf of Mexico. That's next with Andrew Weissman.

[Alex Wagner]

It's President Trump's first 100 days and MSNBC's Alex Wagner will be covering it all from the front lines. What issue matters to you? The most join her as she travels the country to talk to the people at the center of the president's policies and promises.

[Jen Psaki]

Do you think now that he's pardoned.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Everybody, he can count on this group of people again?

[Alex Wagner]

Search for Trumpland with Alex Wagner wherever you're listening and Follow subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen ad free. MSNBC presents a new original podcast hosted by Jen Psaki. Each week, she and her guests explore how the Democratic Party is facing this political moment and where it's headed next.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

There's probably both messaging and policy issues, but as you look to kind of where the Democratic Party is, do you think it's more a messaging issue, more a policy issue?

[Alex Wagner]

The Blueprint with Jen Psaki. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts for ad free listening and bonus content.

[Rachel Maddow]

Federal courts have never been busier in dealing with challenges to presidential authority. And today, a federal judge appointed by Donald Trump rebuilt rebuked Donald Trump for banning the Associated Press from some White House access because the Associated Press refuses to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico. Federal Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, wrote, the court simply holds that under the First Amendment, if the government opens its doors to some journalists, be it the Oval Office, the East Room or elsewhere, it cannot then shut those doors to other journalists because of their viewpoints. The Constitution requires no less. That's the latest in nearly 70 rulings that federal judges have delivered in cases against Donald Trump in the first 78 days of his presidency. Yesterday, all nine Supreme Court justices unanimously agreed that the Trump administration cannot send people to foreign prisons without due process. That's exactly what Donald Trump did to one Maryland immigrant whose case is pending before the Supreme Court. The Trump administration has admitted that they sent Kilmar Garcia to a prison in El Salvador by mistake, but they have refused to bring him back. Chief Justice John Roberts set an emergency schedule to examine Mr. Garcia's case, with both sides submitting their briefs within 24 hours. Joining us now is Andrew Weissman, former FBI general counsel and former chief of the Criminal Division in the Eastern District of New York. He's an MSNBC legal analyst. Andrew, just seeing those numbers today, 70 rulings, which is even more than 70 actual cases filed in 78 days of a presidency.

[Andrew Weissman]

Yes, and the point here, which I think people should take heart, is, you know, as outlandish as the actions of this administration have been, the courts continue to, by and large, hold up very well. And that is, as you noted, judges appointed by all sorts of different Types of presidents, Democrats, Republicans, liberal, conservative, and Donald Trump 1.0 nominees. And so Trevor McFadden joins many other judges appointed by Donald Trump who have ruled against Donald Trump. And so they're adhering to their oaths of office that they act on principle here. Trevor McFadden found a violation of the First Amendment. You have, as you noted, the nine justices, all nine finding a due process violation by again, this administration. Dabney Friedrich, another Trump appointed judge, also has ruled against Donald Trump in terms of the him trying to seek a sort of expansive view of the pardons that he's issued. She rejected that. And so you really are seeing the bench stand up for the rule of law. And it's, you know, at a time that we're not seeing Congress do that, we're not seeing people within the administration consistently doing that. It is very heartening to see people act out of principle.

[Rachel Maddow]

And Chief Justice Roberts taking under consideration this one individual's case and doing it on a highly expedited basis. What are you anticipating there?

[Andrew Weissman]

So with respect to Mr. Garcia, and you know, here, as we talked about last night, this is one where the government has conceded that it was an error and now they're saying they just can't do anything about it. That is simply a laughable proposition, as the district court and the court of appeals said. And given the court's ruling in the Judge Boasberg case that these people are entitled to due process and this individual, Mr. Garcia, was not given due process. I think the writing is on the wall. What I don't understand is when you lost the Wall Street Journal editorial page, which wrote today about this case saying they cannot understand why the administration does not throw in the towel because here you have a human being. There's an individual here who was denied due process. The court has basically said that last night. And so this is one where you don't understand the cruelty of the administration in keeping him in a prison where he should not be out of this country.

[Rachel Maddow]

And does the chief have the power by himself to decide the outcome here?

[Andrew Weissman]

I don't, you know, I think that he could, as a matter of law, do that. He will not do that. I mean, this is a sort of standard procedure is to send something to the full court for its decision. That's what we've consistently seen. It's a way of making sure that everyone weighs in on it. I want to make sure people understand just how remarkable it is that after they do that, having all nine justices reject the position of this administration, I mean, this tells you it's both good news, but it tells you just how far the administration's gone when you're losing all nine justices and the Wall Street Journal editorial page.

[Rachel Maddow]

Andrew Weissman, thank you very much for joining us tonight.

[Andrew Weissman]

Welcome.

[Rachel Maddow]

We'll be right back. Andrew Weissman gets tonight's last word.

[Alex Wagner]

As President Donald Trump returns to the White House, what will the first 100 days of the presidency bring? Follow along as his agenda takes shape with the new MSNBC newsletter, Trump's first 100 days, weekly updates sent straight to your inbox, and expert insight on the key issues and figures defining this second term.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

We're seeing a really radical effort to change the American system of government.

[Alex Wagner]

Sign up for Trump's first 100 [e-mail] TRUMP100.