Morning Joe - Ceasefire threatened as Israel strikes Lebanon

Episode Date: April 9, 2026

Ceasefire threatened as Israel strikes Lebanon To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The second thing Ghalibov said, which again, I found fascinating as he said, we refuse to give up the right to enrichment. And I thought to myself, you know what, my wife has the right to skydive. But she doesn't jump out of an airplane because she and I have an agreement that she's not going to do that because I don't want my wife jumping out of an airplane. We don't really concern ourselves with what they claim they have the right to do. We concern ourselves with what they actually do. and I think the president's been very clear on the enrichment question.

Our position on that has not changed. I'm just, I really don't want to hear about women's rights. Guy dives. And rights. You can't. And women. Well, I mean, if that's your takeaway. Don't start the morning that way.

My takeaway, Willie, is that that was such a confusing analogy. My teeth hurt right now. I'm still trying to figure it out. Yeah. I also didn't know you were allowed to give your wife rules of things she can. can't do. I need to write a few down. Who? Who? Who? Who told us that? Women across America have rules that I never grew up with, that kill them.

So that's where we are. Wow. Okay. Want to start the morning this way? Well, I guess that took a short turn. When JD fans is talking about his wife's rights. Yankees doing okay? Well, that's a tough one last night to the A's. He never wanted to lose to the A's, Joe. He went to the Red Sox yesterday. Yeah, I went to the Red Sox game. They won.

He got the funniest text from Jonathan Lamarer. He was 35 degrees. I happened to be seated next to the great and legendary. How cool is this? James Taylor and his wife, wonderful, and family. His family. Oh, just the sweetest, most wonderful guy and wife and son. They're just great people.

But halfway through the game, I guess they had shown us on on Nusson sitting there and I get a text from Wilmere and he said, you said, one of America's great singer-songwriters is in the house today. Also, James Taylor. So I said, thank you very much. He's a big independent council of funk guy. What can you say? He showed the text to him and I am.

Yeah, exactly. Exactly. We have Richard. I heard Richard there. We're going to, Richard, we're going to get you talking about the masters in a minute. And just, but before we do that, we're kind of in the middle of a mess right now. Seasfire, and I thought your column yesterday was great. You also have the Wall Street Journal echoing a lot of your sentiments that this ceasefire is, is questionable to say the least.

where a great Wall Street Journal article, and I know, I'm sure you've heard from people from the region, as I did all day yesterday, that they're horrified. Our allies, this is not where the war can stop. You have, and actually, there's no regime change. I mean, the regime is actually part of the old regime,

except it's more hardened. You've got the Revolutionary Guard, the most hardened elements running at, number one. Number two, you have no ridding of the 970, pounds of nuclear material. And by the way, a lot of people say it's nearly weapons grade because they're talking about 90%. No, the bombs we used Hiroshima Nagasaki were 60%, which is what Iran has right now. There were elements of 60% there. So they still have the ability to create at least a dirty bomb and level many, many cities with that with the nukes that they still have. And the

straight. I mean, let's just face it, we're in a worse situation with the straight now than we were before. Much better before the war started. Now, you have Iran either controlling the straight or sort of this quasi-agroman of the straight. Finally, I just want to end because you also touched on the fact that the remarkable reporting by Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan about how this war began. Netanyahu just walked us down the Primrose path. this war and and just played everybody. And it's fascinating that Marco Rubio even admitted we went to war because Netanyahu was going to war. So we had to go to war. And so that's how the war started. And right now this two-week ceasefire, which again is the most ambiguous ceasefire. We have no

idea what it really means. But now you have Netanyahu continuing his efforts to blow up half of Lebanon and refusing to adhere to the basic terms that Donald Trump said we could probably get to and saying he's not ready to end this war. And of course, Netanyahu will never be able to end a war because as everybody's been saying for several years now, the second war's end, he gets tried and probably goes to jail. So it's just been an endless war. And yes, that's something we have been saying for years now. That's something there's deep reporting on this. So we are still being let around by Benjamin Netanyahu. who does not want this war to end and will not agree to any ceasefire terms.

Yeah, we ought to be pushing back very hard against the Israelis in Lebanon. Joe, I can imagine intelligence coming in about, say, Iran changing the status of its nuclear material. And you might say, you should say that would be existential. The United States and Israel should be prepared to respond to that. But what the Israelis are doing right now in Lebanon, I would argue, is not, shall we say, existential. This is not something they have to do. So to be blunt, we ought to tell them to knock it off, remove the pretext from Iran for what they're now doing with the Strait of Hormuz. But we also ought to lean very hard on Iran.

And again, I still think the administration's making a major mistake by letting them get away with this. They are still getting revenue. More, as you pointed out yesterday, I think it was, more revenue than ever before because of higher prices and the fees they're charging. we ought to basically, again, say, knock it off, you're either going to let this straight be used by everybody freely, or you're not going to get to use it either. Put a blockade out there in the Gulf of Oman and just shut it down, give them a choice, and go to their buddies in India, Pakistan, China, and so forth, and say, hey, you guys are dependent on getting oil from Iran. We'll tell them to open up the straight for everybody. So going into this, we're just not setting up these talks, which are going to be really difficult. But one last thing, the J.D. Vance thing.

If the U.S. position is going to permanently, Iran can't do anything in the nuclear area, basically zero is the only acceptable outcome. I don't think we're going to get a deal. So at some point, we've got to decide whether we're prepared to accept some ceiling on Iranian nuclear-related activity with intrusive inspections, whether that kind of an outcome is acceptable. But if we basically say you can't do anything in this realm, I don't think there's an agreement then that's going to be possible. Yeah, and Willie, once again,

just a childlike actor over at the Pentagon a holding a press conference yesterday talking about how Iran's been humiliated and this and that. First of all, it's not true. Iran's sitting there going, wait a second, we're making more money now than we were making before the war started.

Okay, check. We also control the straight now. in a way we never could have dreamed of trying to control this straight before, check. We have now proven to ourselves we can take the toughest blows that the United States sends us, and we can stay in this fight and make their life more difficult than our lives. I mean, the idea, and this is something again that I heard from people across the region yesterday, the idea that these terrorists that are running Iran give a damn about whether bridges are blown up, give a damn whether the Iranian people are suffering, give a damn about anything but holding on to power.

That's as preposterous as saying Hamas was concerned about how people in Gaza were being punished for Hamas's sense. So, again, just wild miscalculations. And to see General Kane have to stand there, while Pete Heges is doing all of this, like, third grade chest thumping, like he's out on the back, on the playground. And then General Kane having said, well, you know, we're still, so basically at war and Americans can still die here. It's just, again, I just shocked.

I really am. The Donald Trump at this late stage with Pete Hagsuth humiliating him and the administration every day with his stupid routine, third grade routine. I'm just shocked. He's still allowed to go out there in front of a microphone because he just embarrasses himself. And he sets Donald Trump and this administration and this country up for continued humiliation at the hands of the Iranians. Yeah. I mean, he's talking yesterday and we've carried it live about a.

great military victory, effectively suggesting the war is all but one. And because of this great military victory, he's describing it forced Iran to the negotiating table, which is not quite how it played out, as we explained yesterday. And this 10-point plan presented by Iran that President Trump has called, quote, workable, is completely in favor of Iran. Everything inside this 10-point deal that now is the foundation of a negotiation favors every objective that the Iran in this regime has had for these decades and decades. So, you know, Pete Hagseth is one thing. We know from the reporting we saw in the New York Times yesterday on the front page that we talked about quite a bit, the General Kane in the room that day in the situation room

was one voice that did say in a direct quote in the piece, be skeptical of Israel in this. They are trying to lead us into this war so that they can continue the war. It appears on this day one of the ceasefire that that is what is happening. Also with us this morning, the co-host of the rest is politics podcast, the BBC's Caddy Kay and MS now senior national security reporter David Rode. Let's set the table a little bit where things stand this morning as that tenuous two-week ceasefire between the United States and Iran is already being tested hours after it was put in place. The Speaker of Iran's Parliament yesterday accused the United States of breaking three of his country's 10 conditions for an end of the fighting, objecting in part to the ongoing

deadly Israeli attacks in Lebanon. Iran's foreign minister also insists Lebanon be included in the truce, but both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the White House argue that was not part of the deal. Israel's offensive there shows no signs of slowing down. Lebanon says nearly 200 people were killed, hundreds more wounded just yesterday in one of the deadliest days for the country since the start of the war. Meanwhile, as we mentioned, the status of the Strait of Hormuz, the crucial waterway and key piece of this deal that carries about 20% of the world's oil supply remains unclear. Iranian state media yesterday claimed the strait had again been closed in response to Israel's

continued strikes on Lebanon. The White House, though, dismissed those reports while calling any possible closure completely unacceptable. As a ceasefire hangs in the balance this morning, President Trump issued a new warning, writing on social media that all U.S. military personnel and assets will remain in the region until, quote, the real agreement reached is fully complied with, adding that if it's not, attacks will be bigger and stronger than ever before. Vice President J.D. Vance asked yesterday about those claims made by the Speaker of Iran's

Parliament that the U.S. had violated the ceasefire agreement. Here's what he said. Let me just say this. I actually wonder how good he is at understanding English, because there are things that he said that, frankly, didn't make him. sense in some of the context of the negotiations that we've had. He talked about an attack that allegedly happened on Iran and how that was a violation of the ceasefire. Seasfires are always messy. An hour after the president announced the ceasefire, the Iranians launch a bunch of missiles. Then the Israelis responded. Then some of the Gulf Arab states responded. This is the nature of a ceasefire. No ceasefire ever goes without a little bit of choppiness.

Those comments come as Vance is set to lead a U.S. negotiating team to Pakistan for talks with Iran starting on Saturday. That delegation expected to include special envoy, Steve Whitkoff, and Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner. So David wrote, you sat here with us as we watched that briefing yesterday with Pete Hagsith and General Kane, describing in some ways a situation that just didn't match up necessarily from Secretary Higgs's side anyway to the realities on the ground. And things have changed even since we sat together less than 24 hours ago. I guess one question is there seems to be a disagreement about what the ceasefire is, what the terms of the ceasefire are right now.

Yeah, and it was concerning to me to have the vice president talk about, you know, does he understand English? It's not a good way to start talks, and it reminded me of Steve Whitkoff, not bringing his own translator to his initial meetings with Vladimir Putin. And so what clearly happened was within hours Iran asserted its new power. It's controlled the straightover moves and shut it off. And I'm just concerned about the basic competence of this administration and the ability of the president's advisors to give him bad news. And I, you know, this, I'm just what Joe was talking about with Hague, Seth.

He stated, you know, again, a total, you know, utterly, you know, Iran was incapable of resisting after they shot down two of our planes. But in terms of President Trump, no other president has shown the courage and resolve of this president. It's just astonishing if you're looking at Abraham Lincoln, you know, Ronald Reagan, FDR, it's crazy. And it's part of this as the Times reporting. As we look forward, are they, you know, competent to carry out these negotiations, given the way Vance is already moving into this? And then is anyone going to give the president the blunt advice he needs and deserves? Well, I mean, that's a problem. I mean, are they?

I mean, are they whether you talking about the Pentagon or, I mean, you saw what the acting attorney general said yesterday to Donald Trump. I love you. I love you. Even if you fire me. Even if you fire me. Willie, he says, even if you fire me, fire me, fire me, fire me, I love you. That's my message to Donald. I mean, no, they're not going to.

Give him the advice he needs to hear. It's good for America. It's good for the administration. It's good for Donald Trump. If someone will tell him the truth. Well, that's a problem. They just don't know. Maybe Todd Blanche does love.

I don't know. I don't know what kind of love it is if it's agape love. I don't know what kind of love it is. But Todd Blanche literally stood up and said, I know. I love you. It was really painful to walk. And then they asked another question.

And he said, wait, shut up. Shut up. You had me at hello. I was very moved. All right. Very moved by that moment. Oh, wait, no, I'm sorry. That was Jerry McGuire.

But watching Todd Blanche yesterday, he did sort of strike a Renee Zellwigger type figure. All right. Just play Todd. Play Todd. Play Todd. Todd or Jerry McGuire? I did not ask for this job. I love working for President Trump.

It's the greatest honor of a lifetime. And if President Trump chooses to keep me as acting, that's an honor. If he chooses to nominate me, that's an honor. If he chooses to nominate somebody else and I go back to being the DAG, that's an honor. If he chooses to nominate somebody else and asks me to go do something else, I will say, thank you very much. I love you, sir. We need to, we kind of need to play Springsteen in the background there. Yeah, let's just not.

Okay, back to... Look at Caddy, Caddy's crying. No, she's kind of like, we're all crying. It's so beautiful. But not for what you're saying. Mr. President, it's so disturbing for. Mr. President, he loves you. It's pathetic that they feel he needs that.

Do you feel better? He's grown men, I know. And if he needs that, that's pathetic. So it's kind of the circle of love there for you. Well, I always like. You've got in Willie, like after we go off track batting on the dogs and we win, I'll put my mom, I go, love you, man. But that's kind of different than what this guy did. Okay, so there's obviously growing concern about the situation with Iran. And I do think that there...

I have growing concern about Todd Blanche. Yes, I have a concern about making my next point without being interrupted. So here it is. I love you. There's a couple. Step up. I love you. Stop.

up? We're about to get to Wall Street. Can you believe this administration, the clowns in this administration? Well, actually, it's scary. Can you believe them? It's scary. I mean, it's actually scary. Because, first of all, where have the Republicans been during this whole, I'm going to decimate a civilization?

Yeah. Let's just say, what are they? What should be said at a moment? like this. When a president says something like that, you have to wonder about the stability of the individual and whether it is safe and whether what is being said applies to the Constitution or is actually a war crime. Republicans, this was a moment to do your job. Where were you? Where are you? Do you even exist? Are you that pathetic? Do you love him too unconditionally to the point will you put everything, everything behind you and only have him in front of you like he's some sort of

deity. Is that where we are? That's a very question. Is that where we are that you can't even say what's right when he threatens to decimate a civilization? Do you want to know what? I have to say, I feel bad for you because at this point, you have Trump adjacent and Trump supporting platforms that usually, quite frankly, are right there with you who are pushing back. And we're going to show some of them later on in the show, just vehemently cutting down what was wrong about what happened over the past few days. Actually saying what needed to be said. Actually saying what need to be said, saying what you can't say. Also, echoing our reporting yesterday, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that some Gulf states have grown concerned about the ceasefire agreement between the U.S.

and Iran. As the journal notes, America's allies and partners in the Middle East fear they will end up paying the price for a war in which the overwhelming military might of the U.S. and Israel failed to secure any political gains. Officials in the Middle East believe there is a significant chance the war will flare up again, possibly with even greater intensity. According to the journal, which spoke to analysts across the Gulf region, the speed with with Trump went from threatening that a whole civilization will die to accepting. Iran's maximalist 10-point demands a few hours later has left many in the Gulf questioning how hard Washington will push for a deal that achieves its objectives and protects America's friends.

Katty, our allies in the region and the Gulf opposed this war. It said quite openly they didn't want the president to go to war once the president decided because Netanyahu decided he was going to war to actually move forward with it. They said, okay, if you're going to start it, you've got to end it. You've got to achieve your goals or else you're going to make life in the region even more dangerous. And that's exactly what happened yesterday morning. Of course, we spoke to leaders in the Gulf region who were expressing deep concern about the fact that the situation is worse today than it was before the war started. And this is what the Wall Street Journal also reported on later in the afternoon that our allies in the Gulf region right now. Now, don't find the current ceasefire, the terms of the current ceasefire, acceptable for their national security.

You always know when there's a region that is unhappy with a situation because they start reaching out to reporters. And I also had a long conversation with the Gulf official yesterday morning, who also expressed the same thing, was wanting to say, look, from our point of view, there actually isn't a ceasefire. We're still being attacked. That was the status yesterday anyway. But the concerns that they have are basically for. They want the straits open. they want the nuclear material out of there. They want to enter Iran's nuclear program.

They want the regional proxies to be eliminated and not have access to Iran's missiles anymore. And they want Iran's ballistic and missiles program to be ended. So they're pretty clear on what they want. The problem is they're dealing with a president who's basically put his cards on the table. I mean, whatever he's posting this morning about the fact that the troops, the American troops will stay there and that they'll be bigger and better bombing, His relief at having ended it yesterday was so transparent. So it was so clear that he had moved on effectively,

even before this ceasefire had really taken hold, that no one is thinking that he has really the stomach at the moment to go back in there in two weeks' time if this ceasefire isn't holding. So let's see what this two weeks brings up. Let's see if the Pakistanis and the Chinese, who seem to be shuttling backwards and forwards, and J.D. Vance can come up with something that will hold. But the message from the Iranians this morning is still we think we have the right to enrich our uranium.

And they're not backing down on that. So there's so much that needs to be given on both sides for this thing to actually come together. Yeah. And, you know, Richard, first of all, there's a false deadline in the president's mind strategically. And that is his meeting with Xi. He wants this in the rear view of mirror by the time. He has that meeting. So much of what's happening right now can be, can be.

traced back to that. But secondly, I just, I sit here and I wonder, here's this, here's the president who has said, we're going to go in, we're going to go after the epicenter of terrorism since 1979, we're going to take out their nuclear program, you know, and we heard a year ago that took out his nuclear program. White House spokespeople were saying fake news, fake news, and people were saying that the nuclear program was not completely taken out. And then we have the president saying, oh, they're only two weeks away a year later from having. a nuclear problem. I mean, are we really going to get to the end of this war? And are the Iranians still going to have 970 pounds of nuclear material that can create a slew of dirty bombs that

they can place around the world? Are we really going to find yourself in a position where once again Americans are going to be sitting across the table from Iranians in a weaker position? Because we've already rung that bell of military threats trying to negotiate with the Iranians about their nuclear material? We are going to be in a weaker position, Joe. Let's just be blunt. It's the uncomfortable truth here. After five weeks of war, we are objectively and arguably worse off, vis-a-vis the

strait, vis-vis the nuclear thing. The ceasefire doesn't take into account Iran's proxies. This regime is more entrenched than ever, arguably harder line, than that. ever. And in the reporting you've given about the region, they are worried that at the end of the day they're going to have to face this angry, capable Iran, and they've learned we can't defend them. They're learning the hard day. They can't depend on us. So that I think is going to ultimately be the worst part of this, is that we're going to leave this critical part of the world, which is so central to the world's economy. We're so off with Iran with more rather

than less influence, even though it's been, quote, unquote, weakened on the battlefield. it is strengthened strategically. And that will be the historic bottom line of this war. Yeah, and I guess we've repeated this from day one. And it's something that Chuck Schumer, I think Republicans don't get, but when I was talking to Chuck Schumer, he didn't seem to get.

There are two sides of this. There's a military side, and our military has just done an extraordinary job, tactically. Military has done an extraordinary job, and then there's the political side. And I go back to what General Hurdling said on one of the first days of the war. He said, said, if you have great tactics and terrible strategy, that is the slowest way to lose a war. And right now, we have great tactics.

Our military is doing everything we could ask of them. It's an extraordinary military. No doubt about it. But from the very beginning, no real strategy. We were going to attack for a day or two, kill a couple of their leaders, and the people were going to rise up. The people haven't risen up. So regime change out the window. We were going to get rid of their nuclear program, which we were told was destroyed a year ago.

And then we were told a year later, it's two weeks away from creating another weapon. That's not happening either. I mean, the president's going to have to make, it seems to me, two really tough choices here. One is, how is he going to get the nuclear material? That's going to take boots on the ground. that's going to take a very large special ops force that's going to take American casualties. And he's going to have to decide whether he's going to do that. He's going to have to decide what he's going to do to keep the straits open.

Because trusting Iran puts him in a worse position actually than he was at the beginning of the war when he said we can't trust Iran. Except now, again, they're angrier, they're more radicalized, they're more ground down, but ready to fight back than ever before. And we've insulted our alliances once again, every step of day during this. So let's take a pause still ahead on Morning Joe, President Trump, as I said, criticizing NATO after a meeting with the Secretary General of the Alliance yesterday. NATO's not your problem, Mr. President.

We'll take a look at his latest comments. Plus, there's new reporting on a growing rift between the White House and the Vattigan. We'll have those details next. And as we go to break, a quick look at the Travelers' forecast this morning from Acuethers, Bernie Rayno. Bernie, how's it looking? Mika's looking sunny today. Your exclusive acuether forecast shows lingering chill, though. Portland, Boston, New York City, 61 in Washington, D.C., here's the warmth

in the Midwest. Spotty shower this morning in Chicago and Detroit. Spotty showers, thunderstorms, Florida Peninsula. Also watch along the Texas coast today, but from Dallas toward Atlanta, the dry weather continues. some minor delays across the Florida Peninsula. Other than that, though, looks good. To help you make the best decisions and be more in the know, download the ACU weather app today.

Beautiful live picture, Washington 633 on this Thursday on this Thursday, morning. According to a new report, Pope Leo the 14th, the first American-born pontiff, may not visit the United States any time in the near future. It's according to the media outlet, the free press, which writes that the relationship between the Trump administration and the head of the Catholic Church has been fractured for nearly a year. Pope Leo was invited by Vice President J.D. Vance to attend the 250th celebration in Washington later this year, but the Vatican indefinitely postponed that trip because of foreign policy disagreements. Since then, the free press reports the relationship only has gotten worse.

Earlier this year, the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy reportedly summoned the Vatican's then ambassador to the United States for a meeting at the Pentagon. There, Pentagon officials criticized a recent speech delivered by the Pope as too hostile toward Trump administration policies. That's according to both Vatican and U.S. officials brief. on the meeting who spoke to the free press. The vice president was asked about this new reporting yesterday. Essentially, the reporting by the three presses that they told him that the American

military has a lot of light and they can do whatever they want and the church should get on his side. Does that message sound correct to you? Is that something you would sign online? So one, with no disrespect to the cardinal, I don't know who Cardinal Christop Pierre is. He's the ambassador to the Holy See and the U.S. Oh, okay, okay. I've met him before.

Sorry, I just didn't remember the name. I've never seen this reporting. I'd like to actually talk to Cardinal Christopierre and frankly to our people to figure out what actually happened. I think it's always a bad idea to offer an opinion on stories that are unconfirmed and uncorroborated. So I'm not going to do that. MSNANN. MS.A.N.C.O.C.N.C.N. Mark, Mr. Miller, Mike, if you read through even further this reporting from the free press,

the Trump administration is offended that Pope Leo has spoken out against Trump administration policies on immigration enforcement, for example. More recently on the war, the call for a destruction of an entire civilization. They were hurt by that. So they call in represented from the Vatican and give a bit of a tongue lashing. And then if you read deeper in the reporting, kind of a veiled threat about the pressure that the United States government could put on the Vatican. What do you make of what you're hearing here? I make that they are once again clowning the atmosphere up, the Trump administration. The idea that they would try to intimidate Pope Lee of the first American-born Pope is just absurd. The idea that they would have anything to say critical of the Catholic Church or the Pope itself,

the Pope himself, is absurd, especially given the Easter morning tweet from the President of the United States, which was so deeply offensive to any breathing, thinking human being, that it's outrageous for the Trump administration to pose any problems that they allege they have with the Vatican. You know, Mike, it's incredible that here's an administration, there's got no problem when they weigh in on certain issues, whether it's abortion or other issues. But the killing of Americans in the street,

treats, suddenly these, quote, pro-life Catholics are offended by that. They're offended by the savage and inhumane and unchrised Christ-like treatment of migrants, of the strangers, as Jesus said in Matthew 25, these internment centers. there's this the savage un-Christlike inhumanity of all of that. They're offended by that. They're offended that when a president threatens to destroy an entire civilization, that the Pope would speak out on that. So the Pope's not actually able to speak out on things that are consistent with what Jesus

said, but it's all right for them to talk about abortion. It's sort of interesting. That's one issue where they're fine with the Catholic Church speaking. out of them, but they're not, Catholic Church is not allowed to speak out on pro-life issues for those actually born. Joe, I went to parochial school for eight consecutive years and I got thrown out nearly every year by the nuns, so, you know, every grade. You deserve it.

Stuff like that. But the one thing that you get to, can, to hold on to when you're raised Catholic, born Catholic, raised Catholic, especially by my mother, we used to call it my mother the nun, the one thing you retain, I would think, is that the theory of the Catholic Church is rooted in a simple phrase, the least among us. So if you look at the Trump administration's behavior toward the least among us, it is almost criminal. It is certainly a sin because they don't care for the least among us, and that we should all care for the least among us, because when we care for them, we care for ourselves. Richard, can you speak to how unusual this threat?

And it was, if you read through the piece, according to the reporting, it was a threat. They invoked the Avignon papacy of the 1300s where, effectively, a state put so much pressure on the church that had pounded it in a submission. And the Vatican took that as a direct threat, apparently, according to the reporting in this meeting. How unusual is this kind of conversation? On a scale of what to take? I don't know, maybe 23. I mean, of all the fights to pick, so we give Russia a free pass, we let Lorand doing half the stuff it's doing, we attack Europe and so far.

I go around the world. We give China a free pass, and who do we go after? We go after our Democratic allies, and then we go after the Catholic Church. That's our priorities for who we want to pick fights with. Unusual, Willie, is you've got a future in diplomacy. This is, Mike used the word absurd. This is preposterous that we are doing. And again, we're forfeiting the high ground.

There's actually a serious part of this. We are forfeiting the high ground. Why aren't we trying to build support around the world? The idea that you can do everything with bullets and bombs, you can do some things. But this war should have taught us saying more broadly, you can't do it all with, quote-unquote, hard power. There's a soft power thing here, and we are totally, we're just missing it completely. And David, the free press reports that the Pope took this as a direct threat and canceled a visit to the United States and reportedly has declined that invitation to ascend the 250th celebration this summer. There's a lot of Catholic voters in this country.

And it just goes back to the basic thing I mentioned earlier, basic competence in terms of running the government, this adulation for the president, defending the president publicly, and it seems probably as well. And then the way Vice President Vance reacted that, it's. It's just to bluntly lie. Elbridge Colby, the official who made this threat, infuriated Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee. They blocked several aides and other city wanted to get into Senate-confirmed jobs earlier this year. So this is just the latest example of a sort of incompetent arrogance that's backfiring on the administration. And by the way, I would be very clear. Mike Barnacle said it's the Catholic Church's teachings.

and who's beat into their heads. You were to take care of the least among these. There's a reason why that is a teaching in the Catholic Church. There's the reason why that's a teaching in Baptist Church. That's the reason why it's a teaching in all churches. Because when the disciples near the end of Jesus' life said, what do we need to do to be with you in heaven? Jesus says to take care of the least among these.

And Jesus said, truly I tell you, whatever you do for the least, among these you do for me. So all of this bullshit Christian nationalism, where you're just making up your own version of the Gospels, you know, to do that, you have to actually do

what Thomas Jefferson did and cut out the parts of the Bible that offended you. You can't actually live by Matthew 25, 31 to 46, because what Mike just said there is the complete antithesis of everything this administration has been

doing, and that is taking care of the least among us. And this is not a verse in Nehom. This is not a verse like in Levitic. This is in Matthew at the end of Jesus' life when he has asked, what do we need to do to be with you in paradise? Jesus said, you have to take care of the stranger. You have to take care of the least among us, because when you take care of the least among us, you're taking care of me. MS now senior national security reporter David Rode and President Emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haas. Thank you both.

And coming up on Morning Joe, the new reporting. Oh, wait, well, hold a second. Hold on. Yeah. Richard wanted to talk about something more important. Before you get to the Masters, Joe. Yeah, yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. But hold. Yeah. I have failed. Oh. Can we start the Bruce Springsteen thing? I'm trying. Can you start the Bruce Springsteen song really quickly, Q?

Wait, wait, Mike just said before we get to the Masters, before we get to the Masters. Are we going to play it? Hold on, we got to play it. Go, because I got to respond to Mike. Okay. Okay, I guess you can't take a cue. Here we go. Hold on.

Shut up. Mike? Shut up. You had me. at hello. How's that? I love you too, Mike. Yeah. Oh my God. What's wrong with these people? I'm not loving any of this. Okay. Okay. So with Springsteen in the background, Richard Haas, since talking about the centrality of Jesus' message in the gospel to take care of the least among us does not move you as much as green jackets. Give us a preview of the masters.

It starts today. We know that. We know that. We know that. My favorite, Scotty Sheffler heavily favored, not going to win. Not going to win. You're really good. You're not going to win. Cameron Young. I want to remember one name, Joe. Cameron Young, Best American in the Ryder Cup, about seventh in the odds table.

He's going to win. The other really interesting, yesterday, the head of Augusta, gave a long speech about how golf is being destroyed by distance. Really interesting thing. And basically said golf has got to rein in the technology of the equipment and above all golf balls. Of course, America, the world's golf courses were not made for people who hit the ball 350 yards, and it's destroying the sport. Yeah. There is a big debate going on in golf about how to protect the integrity of the game. Yeah, you know, Willie, we, you and I both have sons that play golf and their friends play golf.

No, I'm serious. And they come back to us with these extraordinary tales of these kids that go to high school with that are hitting the ball. 325 yards because of this technology that again has, again, it completely skews the game. I asked this morning when we walked in, Richard, where are people getting these balls that you hit too far? I'd like to have as many as possible because clearly those are not the ones I have in my bag, you know, off the tea. But I'm going, I like Scotty actually, because people are turning their back on Scottie right now. What's up with Scott? He's the favorite, but he just had a baby. He's inspired. You can see

the moment where, you know, the baby comes out on the green on Sunday with the back. It's going to be a beautiful table. He's not going to sleep. The baby's going to keep him up all night. He's not going to win this year. You can hear Jim Nance narrating underneath it.

Cameron Young. Just here. Remember that name. It's beautiful. All right. Perfect. I'm going to try and put an end to this. Coming up. By the way, I think when we have the Open, the British Open, we're going to actually have Caddy Report on the Open. instead of Richard. Okay.

Kennedy will know more than like when the opens start. We're going to still be talking at 10 o'clock tonight. Right we're going. It's time to get a recording from the Wall Street Journal. Thank you, that the Trump administration is weighing whether to punish certain NATO countries. We're going to go through what that could mean for the alliance. Morning Joe, we'll be right back. Ten minutes before the top of the hour, we're seeing some interesting reactions in conservative media

to President Trump's handling of the world. war with Iran. Here's Fox and Friends co-host Lawrence Jones, acknowledging that Trump has so far not been able to achieve any of his demands. That the president's demands, we have not reached any of those objectives. I have full confidence that the president is going to find some way to make this happen. But he said that we want to dismantle all major nuclear facilities. That has not happened. The end of uranium enrichment on the soil, they're still arranging. The transfer of the enriched Iranian stockpels out of Iran, that hasn't happened. The acceptance of intrusive international inspections, they're still not willing to do that.

And they have not suspended their ballistic missiles program. They're still firing them off to stop the production of the long-grain missiles. That's just a few of them on the president's proposal. You know, he actually, what he got to actually is what, at the end of the day, I think most people that would support this war, the easiest thing to go along with and to agree to is we can't have a nuclear Iran. Six presidents have said that. So I think what was important about what you just heard on Fox and Friends there was, again, a focus on the nuclear facilities, on the nuclear enrichment, on the inspections he talked about. And for our allies in the region, they're the most concerned about. Iran's ability to launch long-range missiles. So that is a message I think the president's probably hearing from a lot of Republicans. And then there's this earlier in the week, Megan Kelly harshly criticized President Trump's social media posts on Iran. I mean, I don't know about you, but I am sick of this shit.

I'm just, I'm sick of it. Can he just behave like a normal human? I mean, honestly, like the president, I, at 3D chess. Shut up. F*** shut up about that. You don't threaten to wipe out an entire civilization. We're talking about civilians. This is wrong.

It's wrong. He should not be doing it. I don't care that his negotiation tactic is to kill an entire country full of civilians, men, women, and children. An American president so that the strait of Hormuz will be opened. it's just wrong. It's not hard to say it. It's not hard to recognize it. I wish he would stop doing this. Like, he can't negotiate without doing this. What does that say about him? What does that say about the position that our country is in right now in these negotiations? He's got to say this. He can't be a dignified, strong leader without threatening a bunch of war crimes.

A couple things that are very important for people that watch the show that may never listen to MAGA Media or conservative media, whatever, however you wanted to find it. The first is that I think it was very important that people that the president listened to like Megan Kelly and Tucker Carlson came out and just said, Mr. President, we've supported you. You know, Tucker Carlson campaigned for the president. But he said, you don't say this. These are the sort of things you don't say. Which, yes, it seems obvious. Right. But I will tell you, those are two of the only voices really out saying it.

The fact that every Republican senator didn't come out and say the same exact thing. Maybe more diplomatically, I don't know. Starting with a post on Easter Sunday. And then the Civilization Post? You don't have a take on that? The fact that that Megan Kelly and Tucker Carlson said it, but Republicans that run the Senate didn't say it. Republicans that run the House didn't say that it's terrible.

And again, this will all be written down in history. It will, this is, no one will be able to escape history. They just won't. So that's my thing. I think, I think another thing that's very important, from what Megan Kelly said is it reminds me of so many of my friends and family members who voted for Donald Trump three times, many of whom still support Donald Trump, who will volunteer to me. Yes, I voted for him three times. Yes, I would still vote for him instead of voting for any Democrat. So, but why does he have to say things like that? Why, it exhausts them. And in exhausting them, I think you're saying, again, a lot of people who were very enthusiastic to vote for Donald Trump in 16, 20, and 24,

losing some of that enthusiasm right now. And you're not going to come out in 26, most likely, and vote for Republicans. So what she said is echoed by so many rank and file Republicans that I know that, again, are friends and members of my family who will say that. So let's bring in right now, though, to talk more about this, the founder and editor-in-chief of Simafore, Ben Smith. You know, Ben, we're talking about Megan Kelly and Tucker Carlson this morning because the president listens to them. I'm probably not as much as he watches this morning. Joe, I'm joking, Mr. President. But their voices have sway not only with the president, but also obviously with people who follow the president. We've seen a splendoring in the MAGA media universe.

but their voices matter. And it is interesting, after the civilization, the killing civilization through the social post, they both very quickly spoke out and said, you cross the line, this is something presidents don't do. Yeah, I mean, I think there are, you know, in some sense, two big problems for the president here. And one is that, you know, that he has this, I think, very deliberate policy that's been pretty effective for a while of marginalizing and ignoring a lot of the, legacy media in favor of this conservative media sphere that's online and that, you know, really loved him and to some degree needed him. And but what you're seeing now is that that's, you know, that's now his base and that group is turning on him. And there's not really anywhere else for him to

go other than, you know, as reasonably, effectively, just talking directly on truth social. The other part is that, you know, Meg and Kelly, Tucker Carlson, I don't doubt that these are sincerely held beliefs on their part, but these are also people who are very, very tuned into and responsive to their own audiences. And what you hear from them is, you know, very often a reflection of where they feel their pretty big, you know, center right, right wing, and just sort of heterodox online audiences are younger people. And so what you see coming from them is really a pretty good reflection of what the people who watch them think, what they want to hear. And I think that in some sense is the biggest red flag.

Patty, we've seen bursts of criticism from MAG on specific issues over the years. And I think one of the assumptions that Donald Trump always has made is they'll come back around. This is a moment in time, they're not where they're going to go to the Democratic Party? Who are they going to go support now? He assumes they'll come back. It's the old, I could shoot somebody on Fifth Avenue and get away with the philosophy that he's guided by. So is this a moment in time or does it seem that some MAGA people, because of the war, because of some of the things they've seen even on immigration enforcement, are drifting away from a guy who, as Joe said, will not be on the ballot anymore. It may not be as inclined to come out and supports, say, a candidate that he endorses or,

someone in 2028. Yeah, I take Ben's point that to some extent, people like Megan Kelly and Tucker Carlson are mirrors of the audiences who listen to them as much as they are leaders of those audiences. And so maybe they are reflecting something that is a growing movement. But you look at the polls, Willie, and up until very recently, the latest polls over the last weekend showed that Maga was still pretty much with Donald Trump, even over Iran. The bigger problem, as you point out, is the one for Republicans in the midterm elections when Donald Trump is not on the ballot. And then up until 2028, when he's effectively a lamed up president. And if the Democrats take the House, we'll go through all sorts of hearings that won't make him look so great.

And that is why it's interesting. It's the question you guys have been asking every morning. Why is it, even after what we've seen in the last few days, that we only have two or is it possibly three Republican senators, but I can count them on one hand, who have turned around and said, okay, this is not acceptable. And what does it take them, given the landscape they're facing,

where the president will not have the power that he's had over the party for the last eight years, what would it take them to say, okay, I have to look out for my own interests, and they're watching Wisconsin, and they're watching Georgia, and they're watching the hemorrhage of votes from Latino voters and young voters

back to the Democrats. It turned out that Donald Trump only really, rented that coalition. And what will it take them to think, actually, I've got to watch out for my own votes and get myself reelected because I'm going to be losing voters if I don't put some distance between myself and what the president is saying. And we're still not seeing them do it. What we see, I love you, Mr. President. I love you. Yeah, exactly. You know, the, it's interesting. Yes, some of these Republicans are worried about their political future. I guess it would be great if they were worried about America.

be great if they're worried about the United States reputation when the commander-in-chief of the United States of America says he's going to kill an entire civilization? I mean, that's... I mean, are you really going to say, oh, that's just Trump being Trump? That's a time to speak out. That's not Trump being Trump, and that's not something that you can walk down the hall quickly

and say, I'm sorry, I didn't hear it. No. Didn't see it. The whole world heard it, the whole world saw it. I want to get back, though, to Tucker Carlson and Megan Kelly with you, Ben. And again, I'm always, you know, it's like when people say, oh, this media or that media is driving outcomes of elections, Kamala Harris lost because of Joe Rogan and because of the bro, it's like, whatever. There are a million different things that go into elections. I will say on the margins, though, you look at Tucker Carlson's audience, you look at Megan Kelly's audience, you look at the number of YouTube downloads, you look at the people that are following them, the people that watch them every day. It is a very, very substantial. audience. And for politicians like me that are always thinking about the margins, you know, where we usually play between the 49 yard lines, when you have people with audiences as large

in the Magosphere as Tucker Carlson and Megan Kelly. And that Megan Kelly clip will live on YouTube and live in social media, Instagram for weeks, maybe months to come. That's not something that the president or the Republicans can just sort of push to the side. It matters. And they're talking to people who Trump also spoke to who are often outside the two parties,

who aren't people who always show up to vote, who aren't people who are consider themselves regular Republicans who are going to show up no matter what. And if there's any message that comes out of watching them right now, it's, this is hopeless, the system is totally corrupt

like you thought it was before and maybe go back to sitting these elections out, which is, I think, not what the Republicans need them to be saying right now. And even Joe Rogan this week has been repeating what he's been saying, which is he doesn't like the war, and he believes it still was a way to distract from the Epstein file. So Joe Rogan, in his big audience, focus there.