Lawrence: Today Trump proved there is no way he can fake sounding smart about anything

Summary

Podcast Summary: "Lawrence: Today Trump Proved There Is No Way He Can Fake Sounding Smart About Anything"

Podcast Information:

• Title: The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell
• Host: Lawrence O'Donnell, MSNBC
• Episode Title: Today Trump proved there is no way he can fake sounding smart about anything
• Release Date: July 10, 2025
• Description: Lawrence O'Donnell leverages his political experience to dissect and analyze current political narratives, offering in-depth commentary on pressing issues.

---

1. Trump's Distraction from the Epstein Files

Timestamp: [00:48] - [08:46]

Lawrence O'Donnell opens the episode by addressing President Donald Trump's efforts to divert attention from the highly anticipated release of the Jeffrey Epstein investigative files. Trump had previously promised his supporters the release of these files, which allegedly contain a client list of prominent individuals involved with Epstein's crimes. However, recent statements by Trump’s Attorney General, Pam Bondi, have crushed these hopes.

• Quote: "It's sitting on my desk right now to review. That's been a directive by President Trump. I am reviewing that." — Pam Bondi [00:31]

The Attorney General's reluctance to release the files has caused significant distress among Trump’s base, who felt betrayed by this delay. O'Donnell criticizes the Trump administration for what he perceives as a stolen promise, emphasizing the potential dangers of withholding such critical information.

2. Leaked Investigations into John Brennan and James Comey

Timestamp: [08:46] - [21:10]

O'Donnell discusses a controversial leak regarding potential criminal investigations into former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey. According to reports, President Trump's Justice Department is probing these figures, though details remain scarce.

• Quote: "No one is going to be charged with a crime as a result of these investigations." — Lawrence O'Donnell [08:46]

He highlights the dubious nature of the leak, attributing it to individuals within the Trump administration known for dishonesty. The investigations appear to be baseless distractions from the Epstein files scandal.

Guest Contribution: Congressman Eric Swalwell

Congressman Swalwell criticizes the Trump administration's handling of these purported investigations, labeling them as political vendettas rather than legitimate legal pursuits. He underscores the misuse of federal resources and the detrimental impact on national security by diverting attention from critical issues like terrorism and espionage.

• Quote: "FBI agents were telling me that they were pulled away initially to look at the Epstein files because Donald Trump had promised that this would be released." — Eric Swalwell [25:48]

3. Trump's Tariff on Brazil and Constitutional Challenges

Timestamp: [21:10] - [35:11]

The discussion shifts to President Trump’s recent decision to impose a 50% tariff on Brazilian imports, justified by his dissatisfaction with Brazil’s treatment of former President Bolsonaro. O'Donnell criticizes the rationale behind the tariff, pointing out grammatical errors in Trump's official correspondence as a reflection of his incompetence.

• Quote: "Starting August 1, 2025, we will charge Brazil a tariff of 50% on any and all Brazilian products sent into the United States." — Donald Trump [10:21]

Legal experts, including MSNBC’s Lisa Rubin, weigh in on the constitutional issues surrounding the tariffs. The tariffs have already been deemed illegal and unconstitutional by the Special Federal Court for International Trade. O'Donnell predicts that the Supreme Court will dismiss Trump's justifications, as they clearly deviate from the statutory requirements of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977.

• Quote: "Any interpretation of the International Emergency Economic Powers act that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional." — Special Federal Court for International Trade [35:11]

4. Posse Comitatus Act Trial Over National Guard Deployment in California

Timestamp: [27:56] - [29:00]

A significant legal development is discussed where Judge Charles Breyer has set a trial date to determine if the Trump administration violated the Posse Comitatus Act by deploying the California National Guard in Los Angeles. The court has shown no leniency in extending trial dates, emphasizing the gravity of the case.

• Quote: "We're not gonna extend the time. It's gonna be August 11th." — Judge Charles Breyer [27:56]

Congressman Swalwell advocates for holding Trump accountable through legal channels, suggesting that aggressive legal action is necessary to curb Trump's overreach.

5. NOAA Budget Cuts and Implications for Hurricane Forecasting

Timestamp: [35:11] - [44:40]

O'Donnell addresses the Trump administration's proposal to cut the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) budget by 27%, excluding essential programs like climate research and ocean labs. The proposed cuts threaten critical hurricane forecasting capabilities, which rely on NOAA's advanced tools and research.

• Quote: "A 27% cut is going to have an impact because there's a definite ripple effect that occurs when that kind of funding is slashed." — Michael Lowry [43:18]

Hurricane expert Michael Lowry emphasizes the dire consequences of these budget cuts, highlighting how reduced funding hampers forecasting accuracy and preparedness, ultimately risking lives and increasing economic losses due to more severe weather events.

• Quote: "The National Weather Service costs the average American $4 per year in today's inflated dollars, about the same as a gallon of milk, and offers an 8,000% annual return on investment." — Michael Lowry [43:22]

Congressman Swalwell underscores the importance of maintaining robust funding for NOAA to ensure effective disaster response and mitigation.

---

Conclusion

In this episode, Lawrence O'Donnell critically examines President Trump's strategies to divert public attention from significant scandals and policy missteps. From the handling of the Epstein files and dubious investigations into political adversaries to unconstitutional tariff implementations and detrimental budget cuts to essential federal agencies like NOAA, O'Donnell provides a comprehensive analysis of the administration's actions and their broader implications for governance and national security.

---

Notable Moments:

• Pam Bondi on Epstein Files: [00:31]
• Lawrence on Investigation Leaks: [08:46]
• Trump's Tariff Announcement: [10:21]
• Judge Breyer on Posse Comitatus Trial: [27:56]
• Michael Lowry on NOAA Cuts: [43:22]

---

This summary encapsulates the key discussions and insights from the podcast episode, providing listeners with a thorough understanding of the topics covered without needing to listen to the full episode.

Transcript

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Look, if you've got prescriptions, the Walmart app is your place to manage them. Transfer your scripts, refill them and have.

[Michael Lowry]

Them delivered straight to you. Migraines, managed allergies, alleviated dermatology Derma delivered Ding dong. Is that your pizza?

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Nope. Walmart Pharmacy delivery with a refill. Switch to Walmart and manage your prescriptions in the app. The Walmart you thought you knew is now new delivery.

[Michael Lowry]

Not available for all prescriptions. Exclusions apply.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Avoiding your unfinished home projects because you're not sure where to start. Thumbtack knows homes so you don't have.

[Alex Swalwell]

To don't know the difference between matte.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Paint, finish and satin or what that clunking sound from your dryer is. With Thumbtack, you don't have to be a home pro, you just have to hire one.

[Alex Swalwell]

You can hire top rated pros, see.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Price estimates and read reviews all on the app. Download Today Donald Trump has spent the last 24 hours doing everything he possibly can to distract his most rabid supporters from one of the great gifts that they believed Donald Trump was going to give them if they just voted for him for president. The Epstein Files Donald Trump told his conspiracy minded followers during the presidential campaign that he was going to release the federal investigative files on Jeffrey Epstein, his rich friend who Donald Trump used to party with frequently and who ended up exposed as a rapist of children and sex trafficker who killed himself in federal prison during Donald Trump's first presidency when Trump officials were in charge of federal prisons. Donald Trump's Attorney General, who herself appears in the Epstein files as one of the lawyers involved in the case, told Fox viewers recently that she had the Epstein filed files client list on her desk. Trump Attorney General Pam Bondi was asked about the mythical or possibly real so called client list that Trump fanatics believe was kept by Jeffrey Epstein, listing the names of all the prominent people for whom Jeffrey Epstein provided sex trafficked young girls. The question she was asked was the Department of Justice may be releasing Jeffrey Epstein's clients. Will that really happen? To which the Attorney General said, quote, it's sitting on my desk right now to review. That's been a directive by President Trump. I am reviewing that. Donald Trump told her, according to her, to work on the Epstein files and she said on Fox that she was reviewing the client list specifically. Tears broke out among Trump fanatics when the Trump Attorney general decided that nothing in the Epstein files, nothing could ever be publicly released. I'm going to go throw up actually. And this only happens every few years when something really really bad happens or something. I mean, I'm physically going to puke probably right now. My mouth is watering right now because. Because I have integrity. And, you know, I just really need the Trump administration to succeed and to save this country. They're doing so much good, and then for them to do something like this tears my guts out. This is like the. This is honestly one of the craziest things I've ever seen in my entire life. And I just think it's very dangerous to play around with this stuff. Like, very dangerous. Donald Trump worries about those people. Donald Trump was clearly worried about the wrath of those fanatics yesterday in the Cabinet Room when a reporter asked the Attorney General sitting near Donald Trump about the Epstein files. Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein? This guy's been talked about for years. You're asking. We have Texas, we have this, we have all of the things. And are people still talking about this guy, this creep? That is unbelievable. Do you want to waste the time? And today, Donald Trump wants his fanatics focused on a different investigation, and so he gave them a different investigation. Trump World leaked to reporters a different investigation that should thrill those same crying fanatics who feel betrayed about the Epstein files. The trouble with a leak from the Trump administration is that everyone in the Trump administration in a position to deliver such a leak either is a publicly proven pathological liar or works for a publicly proven pathological liar in the White House or in the Trump Cabinet. And so the leak that I'm about to report to you has whatever value you choose to assign to a leak that is oozing out of a cesspool of pathological liars. And here is that leak. NBC News reports that Trump's Justice Department has opened criminal investigations into the conduct of former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey. John Brennan is an invaluable MSNBC contributor. Quote, details of what exactly they are being investigated for or how far the Justice Department intends on taking the probes are unclear. As for Brennan, a source briefed on the matter said CIA Director John Ratcliffe had made a criminal referral of Brennan to the Justice Department. Exactly what prompted the Comey investigation is unclear. Ratcliffe last week released an internal CIA review that criticized Brennan's handling of a 2017 intelligence assessment concluding that Russian President Vladimir wanted to help Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. Now, I have a spoiler alert for you on these investigations that will save you a lot of time because you need not read another word about these so called new investigations. No one is going to be charged with a crime as a result of these investigations. This is a leak four Trump fanatics designed to take their agonized attention away from Donald Trump and his Attorney General, breaking their promise to release the Epstein files. The Trump administration is fully corrupt enough to conduct utterly pointless federal criminal investigations of a former director of the CIA and a former director of the FBI. And the Trump administration is also fully corrupt enough to lie to their fanatics about conducting investigations that they are not conducting. The CIA review of John Brennan's role in investigating Russia's interference in the 2016 election revealed absolutely nothing new. And they didn't even question John Brennan about it in producing that new review. And that new review, as I say, reveals nothing new. But Donald Trump's CIA director, John Radcliffe, did publicly lie on social media about his own review, saying all the world can now see the truth. Brennan, Clapper and Comey manipulated intelligence and silenced career professionals all to get Trump. And nothing, Not a word. And CIA Director Radcliffe's report shows any of that that he put in social media. He is tweeting a big game to distract Trump fanatics. John Brennan, who was questioned for over eight hours by the Trump Justice Department during the first Trump presidency about this very subject and was never charged with a crime, had this reaction today for Nicole Wallace after Nicole's first question about the leak of this new investigation. Yeah, well, as Yogi Berra has famously said, it's deja vu all over again. It is hard to believe that here we are, eight and a half years afterward, we're still going over this ground that has been, I think, fairly well and exhaustively plowed.

[Alex Swalwell]

First of all, I should say I.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Know nothing about this reported investigation or referral to the DOJ other than what I've read in these press reports, these leaks, which are not really supposed to happen if there is an investigation investigation going on. Secondly, nobody from the FBI or Department of justice or CIA has reached out to me at all. So I am just waiting to hear more about what this might be. Russia interfered. They tried to help Donald Trump. They tried to hurt Hillary Clinton. They tried to undermine the democratic foundations of our country in terms of our election integrity. This has been validated over and over again. I stand behind the assessment. I think the assessment has stood the test of time and again. I point to those reviews that would done in a political, nonpartisan fashion. And it's interesting that it was. I think Fox News and New York Post are reporting things like this. So I don't know whether or not there's any validity to it if it was a referral, if there is an investigation. If there is an investigation. The very first leak of these maybe or maybe not investigations of John Brennan and James Comey was to Fox. And it was Fox's White House reporter today who, operating as usual as an energetic collaborator in Donald Trump's distraction games, did everything he could without a shred of embarrassment about his own revealed stupidity to help Donald Trump push his new distraction.

[Alex Swalwell]

Thank you, President Trump, James Comey and.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

John Brennan now under criminal investigation related to the Trump Russia probe. Do you want to see these two guys behind bars? Well, I know nothing about it other than what I read today. But I will tell you, I think they're very dishonest people. I think they're crooked as hell and maybe they have to pay a price for that. I believe they are truly bad people and dishonest people. So whatever happens, happens. What a babbling buffoon. And I mean the reporter this time, the Fox so called reporter. Do you want to see these two guys behind bars? That reporter used to be by far the stupidest reporter in the White House press corps, but he has now been outdone by the dregs of Trump worshiping media that have been allowed to join the White House press corps. So if you work at Fox and your father got you the job because he's the morning host there and you enjoy all of the white male privilege that comes from your father being a morning host at Fox for many years, you then become the Fox White House correspondent who thinks, do you want to see these two guys behind bars? Is a good question for a president. That incompetent buffoon probably has no idea that no president would ever or has ever answered a question like that prior to Donald Trump. If a real criminal investigation were actually involved here, and if a president did say he wants to see these two guys behind bars, they could never end up behind bars because they would be able to appeal any prosecution on the grounds of prejudicial presidential pretrial publicity with the President of the United States trying to publicly convict them before trial. Which is exactly why Richard Nixon immediately issued a corrective written statement after he once let slip into a microphone just for a second that he thought Charles Manson was guilty. In the middle of Charles Manson's criminal trial, in which Charles Manson was was eventually found guilty of multiple murders, Charles Manson tried to get a mistrial in the case by bringing a newspaper headline into the courtroom the next day saying, Manson guilty. Nixon declares, if you are a thinly educated in the law or presidential history, Fox guy. And your father gets you a job as a White House correspondent, you know none of that. And you brandish your stupidity every day with a kind of egotistical obliviousness that comes from the deep well of ignorance that you bring to your job every day at Fox and at the Trump White House. And in that same room today, we saw a White House reporter doing the job as it should be done. Sean McCreesh of the New York Times did something that most White House reporters never do. He picked up on a point illuminated by another White House reporter. Usually White House reporters want to go their own way when questioning Donald Trump, which is a huge mistake. They would be better off if they repeatedly followed up the unanswered question that Donald Trump just tried to evade with the previous reporter. That is the kind of illuminating teamwork that the White House press corps could do but usually doesn't do. It's as if they have some kind of pride of authorship in changing the subject for Donald Trump to help, in effect, Donald Trump evade with a cloud of meaningless words a response to the previous reporter. Sean McCreesh followed up on the good question asked by Kaitlan Collins yesterday to Donald Trump about the pause in weapons shipments to Ukraine.

[Michael Lowry]

To Ukraine. As you said last night, last week the Pentagon paused some shipments of weapons to Ukraine. Did you approve of that?

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

We want to put defensive weapons because Putin is not, he's not treating human beings right. He's killing too many people. So we're sending some defensive weapons to Ukraine and I've approved that.

[Michael Lowry]

So who ordered the pause last week?

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

I don't know. Why don't you tell me? I went on at length last night about just how stupid Donald Trump's response was to that question. I don't know. You tell me. And Here is Sean McCreesh's follow up question 24 hours later today.

[John Brennan]

Sir, yesterday you said that you were not sure who ordered the munitions halted to Ukraine. Have you since been able to figure that out?

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Well, I haven't thought about it because we're looking at Ukraine right now and munitions. But I have no, I have not gone into it.

[John Brennan]

What does it say that such a big decision could be made inside your government without you knowing?

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

I would know. If a decision was made, I will know. I'll be the first to know. In fact, most likely I'd give the order, but I haven't done that yet. Yeah, please. If you don't think that that string of English words made any sense, you are correct. It did not make any sense. John MacReese's question was, what does it say that such a big decision could be made inside your government without you knowing? That's the question. And Donald Trump says, I would know. But we just heard him say yesterday, I don't know. Why don't you tell me? And now Donald Trump says, I would know. He says, if a decision was made, I will know. I'll be the first to know. In fact, most likely, I'd give the order. Most likely, okay, but we're talking about the instances when you don't give the order, like the pausing of the weapons to Ukraine. If there's a shredder of truth in anything that Donald Trump said in response to Sean McCreesh today, it would be, well, I haven't thought about it. And that is the truth of everything Donald Trump does and doesn't do as president. I haven't thought about it. That is the theme of the Trump presidency. In your lifetime of listening to presidents, being asked questions about policy situations they are actively engaged in every day, you have never once heard a president say, I haven't thought about it. It takes Trumpian stupidity to say something like that. And when you're as stupid as Donald Trump, you have no idea how stupid your stupidity sounds. Donald Trump is trapped in his stupidity. There is no way he can fake sounding smart about anything, not even his lifetime passion and greatest expertise, golf, which he simply lies about. And today, Donald Trump put his stupidity in writing once again in one of his inane tariff letters, this time to the President of Brazil. Donald Trump actually told the President of Brazil that, quote, starting August 1, 2025, we will charge Brazil a tariff of 50% on any and all Brazilian products sent into the United States. And. And the reason, the reason this time is crazier than any other reason he's ever given. The reason Donald Trump gave for imposing a 50% tariff on Brazil was in the second sentence of the letter. It was this. The way that Brazil has treated former President Bolsonaro, a highly respected leader throughout the world during his term, including by the United States, is an international disgrace. We will consider later in this program how this drunk tariff letter will affect Donald Trump's case in the Supreme Court, when they consider the constitutionality of Donald Trump's tariffs, which have already been ruled illegal and unconstitutional by the leading judicial experts on tariffs in America, the Special Federal Court for International Trade. That case is being appealed and will surely end up in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court will not fixate on all the oddities of Donald Trump's improper use of capital letters in his prose writing. But everyone in the Brazilian president's office who sees this letter will know that it's the first one they've received from a president of the United States with absurdly childish grammar mistakes. There is no English language usage in which the phrase highly respected leader would have a capital H, R and l. And everyone who knows English in the Brazilian president's office knows that the word world and the word term in that same sentence also should not be capitalized. There has never been an explanation other than Donald Trump's inadequate education for his random use of uppercase letters. But when you send these things to foreign countries and heads of state, they know that someone who can't command his own language, the proper use of his own language, cannot possibly be taken seriously by on anything. Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman did a special post tonight on the Trump letter to Brazil calling it evil and megalomaniacal. The truth of how Donald Trump arrived at the tariffs on Brazil. And it is in his own statement about another point, and that is his confession today. I haven't thought about it. That explains everything in the Trump presidency. We'll be right back with Congressman Eric Swalwell.

[Michael Lowry]

I'm now switching my team to some fancy work platform that somehow knows exactly how we work. And its AI features are literally saving us hours every day. We're big fans, and just like that, teams all around the world are falling for Monday.com with intuitive design, seamless AI capabilities and custom workflows, it's the work platform your team will instantly click with. Head to Monday.com, the first work platform you'll love to use.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

MSNBC Films presents Season 2 of Leguizamo does America, an NBC News Studios production hosted by John Leguizamo. On the next episode, John explores Latino culture in Phoenix, Arizona. Phoenix is incredible.

[Alex Swalwell]

We're going to check out some sick lowriders, try some mezcal and chow down.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

On Native American fried bread, but with a little Latin flavor. Leguizamo Does America Continue? Sunday at 9pm Eastern on MSNBC. Start your day with the MSNBC Daily Newsletter. Sharp insights from voices you trust, standout moments from your favorite shows, and fresh perspectives from experts shaping the news. Sign up [e-mail] this is what Donald Trump is trying to distract his rabid followers from. The investigative files of the man who Donald Trump is hanging with here in this video. Jeffrey Epstein. Donald Trump used to party with Jeffrey Epstein all the time. He used to take Jeffrey Epstein to look at real estate. He used to party, hang out with them all the time since Jeffrey Epstein was revealed to be a child rapist and sex trafficker and then killed himself in federal prison while Donald Trump was in control of the federal prison system. Donald Trump has desperately tried to distract from the Jeffrey Epstein case and is now trying to distract from his and his attorney general's decision to not release any of the Epstein files, something his rabid followers have been demanding for years. Joining us now is Democratic Congressman Alex Swalwell. He is a member of the House Judiciary Committee. Congressman Swalwell, as we saw today, the investigation Donald Trump has tried to leak to his fans to get excited about instead of Epstein is this so called investigation that might or might not be happening of former former CIA Director John Brennan. You know this situation well from your time on the House Intelligence Committee. Also, this possible investigation of James Comey, there is nothing they could conceivably be being investigated for. Truth is, they might not be being investigated at all because this is the Trump team that's leaking. But what do you make about where we are in the Trump distraction game and what's going on with the former CIA director and former FBI director?

[John Brennan]

And I say this, Lawrence, as somebody who Cash Patel put at the very top of his enemies list. He listed 100 people and he said, of course, at the very top are Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell. So I live this every day and I don't want to speak for Comey and Brennan, but I imagine they are probably thinking, indict me. Like, don't investigate me, indict me, because they will beat him pretty swiftly at a jury trial. And you're going to see that with Lamonica McIver in New Jersey, my colleague who has already been indicted by the Trump administration for going to an ICE facility, her not guilty verdict can't come fast enough. And as soon as it goes to trial, I predict that's what's going to happen. So it's a waste of resources. FBI agents and DOJ prosecutors and I have talked to them, are being pulled away from terrorism cases, espionage cases, public corruption cases to focus on the president's vendettas. And by the way, Lawrence, what's really interesting is FBI agents were telling me that they were pulled away initially to look at the Epstein files because Donald Trump had promised that this would be released. And now, of course, who knows why Elon Musk has told his own theory. But for many months, FBI agents were pulled off terrorism cases, espionage cases, public corruption cases to work on the Epstein files. So they're just chasing around Donald Trump's conspiracies, and it makes all of us less safe.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

And there is so much that Donald Trump wants to distract from now, including his tariff madness and the big budget bill that they passed, which is the most unpopular budget bill that has passed, I think, since we've been watching Congress pass these things with horrible, horrible results in it, not just for your state of California, but for everywhere in the country. There's a lot that Donald Trump wants to distract from these days.

[John Brennan]

Yes. In fact, take the Brazil tariff as an example. Donald Trump said he was going to lower prices on day one. You and I know that prices have never been higher. Just go to Walmart or Home Depot and they're still going up. And now he's decided to tax all Brazilian imports by 50%. That's another tax that he's putting on us. And the reason, it's not because of the current Brazilian president, it's because his buddy, the old one, Bolsonaro, got thumped in the last election and wasn't treated fairly. That sounds crazy, but only Donald Trump would be idiotic enough to write it down and send it out as a press release. And so the way I see it is the way a person chooses tells you everything about him. And Donald Trump chose one Brazilian. Over 340 million Americans.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

And, Congressman, there's breaking news tonight that affects California and the whole country. Judge Charles Breyer, Northern District California has set a trial date to hear evidence and arguments on whether the Trump administration violated the Posse Comitatus act by deploying the California National Guard on the streets of Los Angeles. A bench trial scheduled to take place August 11th, 13th. And the judge, in his order had this pretty sharp last line saying the court will not entertain requests or stipulations for extensions of time. So there's a judge saying, we're not gonna extend time if you ask for it. And even if you both agree, both sides agree to extending the time. He's not gonna extend the time. It's gonna be August 11th, and that's.

[John Brennan]

The way you have to take on Trump. You have to put him on his heels, and you have to take him to court. And what I've also been told by folks inside the administration is sue us.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Literally.

[John Brennan]

Lawrence, Department of Justice lawyers have told me, sue us. And what they've told me is, we don't have the resources. Too many people have left. Too many lawsuits are coming in. If you take us to court, we. We can't keep up with these lawsuits. And so this aggressive nature is just one way to take on Donald Trump next week as we do what's called Defense Appropriations, you know, funding the Department of Defense. I will have an amendment, a yes or no, up or down vote on the House floor that would defund, you know, the National Guard to be used as immigration enforcement. And so I'm going to make my Republican colleagues decide and tell their constituents whether they can justify the 134 million taxpayer dollars that have already been spent in California for the president's political stunt.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Congressman Eric Swalwell, thank you very much for joining us tonight.

[John Brennan]

My pleasure.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

And coming up, we will consider how Donald Trump's tariff letter to Brazil could affect Donald Trump's appeal to the United States Supreme Court about his illegal and unconstitutional tariffs, which have already been ruled illegal and unconstitutional by the leading judicial experts on tariffs in America, the Special Federal Court for International Trade. That's next. Donald Trump is proving once again that no one humiliates Donald Trump better than Donald Trump. And later this month, the Trump administration will be in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Appeal, appealing the unanimous decision against the Trump tariffs by the Special Federal Court of International Trade. Donald Trump's tariffs were based on the International Emergency Economic Powers act of 1977. And in May, the Court of International Trade said what I've been saying since the day Donald Trump invoked that law to support his tariffs, quote, any interpretation of the International Emergency Economic Powers act that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional. The court rejected Donald Trump's claim of a national emergency to justify his tariffs, saying the mere incantation of national emergency cannot, of course, sound the death knell of the Constitution. And tonight, Donald Trump has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that his tariffs have absolutely nothing to do with national security. In his letter to Brazil's president asking for imposing a 50% tariff on goods from Brazil beginning on August 1. And in the letter, Donald Trump says the reason for the tariffs is the way that Brazil has treated former President Bolsonaro, a highly respected leader throughout the world during his term, including by the United States, is an international disgrace. Joining us now is MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin. And, Lisa, I read that, and I just thought the lawyers who will appear in the appeals process, including up to the United States Supreme Court opposing Trump's tariffs, now have this letter that they can read to Chief Justice John Roberts of Donald Trump saying, we are imposing these tariffs because we don't like the way a politician is being treated in Brazil. And, oh, by the way, we don't like the way your Supreme Court in Brazil is handling that case. So because of the way the Supreme Court of Brazil is behaving, we're imposing a tariff. And I'm just imagining Supreme Court justices here reading that.

[Michael Lowry]

Yes. And Lawrence, before they get to Chief Justice John Roberts, of course, there will be oral argument at the Federal Circuit. That's the United States Court of Appeals that hears appeals from the Court of international trade on July 31. Now, some of our viewers know that when you're involved in an appeal, there is a record on appeal. It's usually fixed, and there's nothing to do with things that are said after the fact. But there is a particular rule of appellate procedure that says you can ask to supplement authorities before an appeals court. And if I were the plaintiff's lawyers here, who were the appellees, I would be sending a letter to the Federal Circuit tomorrow invoking that particular rule of appellate procedure and letting them know that the president's own words are squarely at odds with the rationale and his executive order for imposing these reciprocal tariffs that were supposed to be all about sort of equaling the balance and correcting the trade deficit, notwithstanding the fact that that's not an emergency in the first place, that that doesn't fit within the statute that we're talking about. Nothing undermines a claimed emergency like the first paragraph of this letter that you and I have been talking about.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Yeah. And everything about the Brazil case is perfect to defeat Donald Trump in court, because we are actually, we have a trade surplus with Brazil. We're actually selling Brazil more American goods than we are buying Brazilian goods. It's not one of those countries like China where we have a trade deficit. And then there's this line at the end of the letter to Brazil where Donald Trump says these tariffs may be modified upward or downward depending on our relationship with your country. That is what the Supreme Court will be asked. Is that constitutional, that Donald Trump can just modify a tariff upward or downward, depending on how he personally feels about a relationship with a country?

[Michael Lowry]

I'm going to make a prediction here, and I'm going to say that this is going to be an occasion for judicial modesty, because when this case reaches the Supreme Court, they may not even have to decide the constitutional issues. This may just become one of clear cut statutory interpretation where under that Emergency Powers act that you were reading from of 1974, this doesn't cut the mustard. These are not the unusual and extraordinary threats to the United States that Congress had in mind when they authorized that use of emergency powers during peacetime. That statute also refers to the regulation of importation. The petitioners here, I'm sorry, the appellees, meaning the people who are challenging the tariffs, are saying nowhere does it even invoke a tariff. Regulating importation is not the same as a tariff, which is a duty or a tax. When Congress wants to authorize that, they say so clearly. And so I think you're gonna hear from people, you don't even need to think about the president's claim that he can do whatever he wants under his Article 2 powers. He has carte blanche to address foreign affairs and that sort of thing. All you have to is read the statute, read the statute, read the statute. And here you got this letter from the guy basically saying, I'm not doing what I told you I was going to do.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Yeah. It's just, it's astonishing. Lisa Rubin, thank you very much for joining us tonight. And coming up, our next guest says Donald Trump's cuts to the National Weather Service could mean, quote, the routinely detected hurricanes of today could become the deadly surprise of hurricanes of tomorrow. That's next.

[Michael Lowry]

When it comes to delivering flowers for life's special occasions, trust the name that's been setting the standard for nearly 50 years. 1-800-flowers.com from breathtaking bouquets to one of a kind arrangements, 1-800-flowers is your authority on quality blooms. Always fresh, always stunning, always delivered with care. And right now, for a limited time, you can save up to 40% off your bouquet and make someone's day. Save up to 40% off today at 1800-flowers.com sxm. That's 1-800-flowers.com. sxm. I'm now switching my team to some fancy work platform that somehow knows exactly how we work. And its AI features are literally saving us hours every day. We're big fans. And just like that, teams all around the world are falling for Monday.com with intuitive design, seamless AI capabilities and custom workflows, it's the work platform your team will instantly click with. Head to Monday.com, the first work platform you'll love to use.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Stay connected with the MSNBC app bringing you breaking news and analysis anytime, anywhere. All the stories that we're covering are live and happening as we speak. Watch your favorite shows live. What's happening right now is a hostile.

[Michael Lowry]

Takeover of the US Government.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

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 Donald Trump is the first president in history to nominate someone to run an agency who violated the scientific integrity policy of that agency. Neil Jacobs is Donald Trump's nominee to run the national oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Administration. Before now, he was probably best known for playing a role in the 2019 Oval Office incident where Donald Trump tried to defend a tweet he made about Hurricane Dorian's impact on Alabama by displaying this NOAA forecast map of the storm's path. The map appeared to be altered with a Trump Sharpie to include Alabama. Hurricane Dorian was never forecast to hit Alabama. And everyone at NOAA knew Hurricane Dorian was never forecast to hit Alabama. And that did not stop Neil Jacobs, who was then NOAA's acting administrator, from issuing a statement that supported Donald Trump's lie rather than the accurate National Weather Service forecast. That statement from Neil Jacobs was later found to have violated Noah's scientific integrity policy. Today, Jacobs had his confirmation hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee. Dr. Jacobs, the Trump administration wants to cut NOAA's budget by 27%. No. Climate weather, Sea Grant, Ocean Labs, many other programs exempted. Dr. Jacobs, yes or no, do you support these cuts? Yes, I support the President's budget. The cuts I believe you're referring to, a lot of that work is being.

[John Brennan]

Transitioned in from the research side to the operations side. So the National Weather Service, the National.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Ocean Service, their mission essential functions will continue. I have a disagreement with you. A 27% cut is going to have an impact because there's a definite ripple effect that occurs when that kind of funding is slashed because of weather readiness without funding is an hallucination. Our next guest, hurricane expert Michael Lowery, writes this about these, about those cuts. The National Weather Service costs the average American $4 per year in today's inflated dollars, about the same as a gallon of milk, and offers an 8,000% annual return on investment according to 2024 estimates. It's a farce for the administration to pretend that gutting an agency that protects our coastlines from tide of disasters is in the best interests of our economy or national security. Joining us now is Michael Lowery, the former senior emergency management specialist at FEMA who is now a hurricane expert at WPLG TV in Miami. Michael, thank you very much for joining us tonight. I want to begin before we get to the hurricane situation, since we're in the middle of hurricane season, to the situation in Texas and, and going forward, whether there were mistakes made on this one or not, going forward, are we going to get better at predicting, forecasting and warning people about floods like that?

[Alex Swalwell]

Lawrence thank you for having me. We will get better if we fund the programs and the tools that we use as forecasters to make those forecasts. I mean, I think the lesson that we can take away from what happened in Texas is that the forecasters are in the local office, were prepared. And the reason they were prepared is because they had the tools that NOAA makes available to them to see this in advance. I mean, they brought in additional people to staff that office knowing full well of the severity of the event that was lying ahead. But, you know, with these cuts that are being proposed by noaa, those tools are going to go away. And if we don't have the tools, then how are we going to make the forecast? How are we going to know the staff, those offices in advance? How are we going to be able to see these events? I mean, you see how terrible this tragedy is, and that's on a good forecast.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

So we are in the middle of hurricane season. You're in the middle of hurricane territory in Florida again with the budget that has just passed, with this rescission package that's going through. They want to try to cut more spending from the federal government. What do you forecast in terms of the weather service's ability to deal with and warn people about hurricanes?

[Alex Swalwell]

I mean, we're already facing the issue this hurricane season, Lawrence. We have the hurricane hunters that we rely on for critical data inside the hurricanes. I mean, hurricanes happen over the ocean. There's no people that live in the.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Middle of the ocean.

[Alex Swalwell]

You might get an unlucky mariner that's on a boat out there, but otherwise it's either the airplanes that are flying in or the tools we have from south satellites. And right now, the staffing cuts from NOAA are reducing the flights from the NOAA hurricane hunters by half this year. So we're already missing half of that data. And then the Department of Defense is threatening to get rid of half of our microwave satellites that we use to forecast rapid intensification to understand the structure of hurricanes. So we're not going to have that data available after the end of July. And we're headed into the peak months of the hurricane season, the worst of it, you know, being August, September and in the middle part of October.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Have you ever heard a theory that in any way supports these kinds of cuts and getting rid of this kind of information?

[Alex Swalwell]

No, no, it's, it's atrocious, it's reckless, it's nonsensical. It defies logic. You know, these. The amount of money that this country is Saving and forget the lives. The lives are more important. But the amount of money that we're saving from the programs that have been developed by eliminating the. There's a lab here in Miami, one of the world class climate research laboratories for hurricanes. NOAA is proposing to eliminate that in 2026. That's given us a savings of about 5 to 10 billion dollars a year each hurricane season. That tiny little lab that cost us $20 million is saving us $10 billion. It makes no sense and I haven't been given a good explanation as to why these cuts are necessary.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Michael, how does that lab save money?

[Alex Swalwell]

It saves money because the forecasts are a lot better than they used to be. I mean we even just 10 years ago or 15 years ago, our ability to detect these rapidly strengthening hurricanes that are making landfall and we're seeing more of these, Lawrence. I mean this is a proven fact and they're coming ashore stronger than they ever have. So that our ability to forecast that is because of the advances in the hurricane models, in the data that we're gathering in the skies. All of that comes from this, from these research labs that are being threatened. You know, this is a very much an existential crisis and it's not a matter of whether or not the forecasts are going to step stagnate, it's whether or not they're going to regress. And I think we're going to lose here, potentially lose a, you know, generation, 50 years worth of advancements that we've had in hurricane forecasting.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Michael Lowry, thank you very much for joining us tonight.

[Alex Swalwell]

Thank you Lawrence. Appreciate the time.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

We'll be right back. That is tonight's last word. Stay connected with the MSNBC app bringing you breaking news and analysis anytime, anywhere. All the stories that we're covering are live and happening as we speak. Watch your favorite shows live. What's happening right now is a hostile.

[Michael Lowry]

Takeover of the US Government.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

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.