Morning Joe - Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and the fight for America

Episode Date: September 15, 2026

September 15, 2026: 8 am — Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and the fight for America 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 Supreme Court has rejected President Trump's attempt to restrict mail-in ballots for the November midterms. In a brief order issued last night, the 7-2 majority did not explain its reasoning for leaving in place a lower court order blocking the administration's plans. Instead, the majority wrote that the Trump administration was, quote, unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge to the lower court order. Justices, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. I am shocked. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a concurrence that there was, quote, at least a fair prospect. The administration's actions were within its authority, but it, quote, would be arbitrary and capricious to impose the changes in the midterms because state and local authorities would not

have time to implement them. The challenge stems from President Trump's executive order signed in. March that requires states to submit lists of voters approved to receive mail-in balance. And then, of course, it had the Postal Service interfere more. Right, right. This is, you know, we go back, the Supreme Court does some things, like dragging their feet that has been absolutely maddening over the last year. But when it comes these election challenges, they were 63 and O against Donald Trump in

2020. And here we are, back at that seven-two count for whatever Donald Trump steps over the line. and does something that is going to completely interfere with free democratic elections. It's usually seven to. Of course, Alito and Thomas perfectly fine with them destroying democracy. And yes, I just said that. If Donald Trump wants to destroy democracy, they're all in. They're cheering him on.

Yeah, they're cheering him on. It's inexplicable. As long as it hurts Democrats, they're for it. That's a great legacy for those two to have. I hope they live with it quite comfortable. Yeah, it's, first of all, it's good news. This is good news. This is a relief. There were even Republican-led states that had issued their own concerns about this with the

court. They had registered complaints. Ballots have already gone out in several states, including in North Carolina, clearly a swing state, and a very competitive state. And so this is a relief. It will not be the end, though, of Donald Trump's efforts to steal this election for the Republicans so that Congress will not hold him accountable. And this should have been unanimous. This should have been unanimous. But it's encouraging because I think many of the efforts

that the Trump administration is undertaking at various levels and at various agencies to undermine the election system, ultimately, if we see those through, if they try and play those through, they will end up at the Supreme Court. So this is a preview of what we could see where the Supreme Court is willing

to hold the line here. So that's a relief, but that doesn't mean that any of us should rest in our laurels. The fight continues as Donald Trump continues to try to interfere with fair and free elections. David French, though, I will say Amy Coney Barrett and John Roberts once again prove themselves to be conservative. The kind of conservative view and I are, the conservative with a small C, the conservative that actually reads a constitution, understands a constitution, understands that states are supposed to run elections, understands that a White House is not supposed to sees voter rolls. And if states don't give them those voter rolls and they're going to tell, you know, the United States Post Office how to run state elections. So it was nice to see, as we have seen before in these sort of election cases, Amy Coney Barrett and John Roberts.

And this time, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh actually being conservative with a small C, really conservative, not the bullshit conservative that passes for conservative these days in Trump's Washington. Well, look, I mean, this is the second time in less than a week that Supreme Court has stepped in on an election issue. We cannot forget the shenanigans that were happening in Missouri, where there was outright defiance of the Missouri Supreme Court, leading to a contempt ruling. But what really solidified the election fairness in Missouri was the Supreme Court turning aside, you know, a MAGA legal initiative to try to subvert Missouri law to redistrict. And so you've got two recent cases that also stand in the line of, remember going back to 2020, the Supreme Court was rock solid in the election challenges in 2020. So again and again, Trump and Maga are volleying up to the Supreme Court, these really radical legal theories

that would enable them to engage in really electoral manipulation in really extreme ways. And time and again, the Supreme Court says no, no, no, no. and it infuriates Donald Trump. It will continue to infuriate Donald Trump. But I don't think anyone who watches the court who's seen this history over the last few years is surprised at this outcome. I mean, this is, it's a no-brainer. Here you have the Constitution reserves for states and for Congress the regulation of these elections, states and Congress, not presidents. An executive order is not an act of Congress. This should not surprise anyone at this outcome. But we're only, Joe, we're only in the opening salvos here. It's just September. We're not in November yet. We're not in the immediate and we're not in the counting phase yet. And so there is a lot more to be concerned about. And these are just the warning shots. Circle January 3rd on your calendar. Yes. And see just how much Donald Trump tries to break democracy if Democrats run to victory. Joining us now, publisher of the contrarian, Norm Eisen. He's co-founder of democracy. defender's action, which took part in challenging the Trump administration over its mail-in voting restrictions. Thanks for coming on the show this morning. First year reaction to the Supreme Court,

rejecting Trump's mail-in voting restrictions. And what are your concerns moving forward? A sigh of relief that the Roberts Court did the right thing here. interpreting that very brief order, the statement that the Trump administration was unlikely to succeed on the merits can be read as, it's crazy for you to think you can rewrite Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution, which doesn't even mention the president gives this power to the states and to Congress. And the balance of equities that they're talking about. about is how can you do this right before an election? I would have thrown chaos into mail in voting.

But the larger significance, we made this point. We filed briefs here at the Supreme Court and in 13 cases. The larger significance is that when Trump tries all of the other activity, that he's signaling lies ahead that the rule of law, as it has so often serves as a bulwark. We actually won another injunction yesterday, extending the protection against this absurd USPS rule nationwide, prohibiting even voluntary compliance. So it's a feeling of relief that our elections remain safe, free, and fair.

And every voter watching can know that they could cast their back. ballot, whether by mail or otherwise, and vote early to express their will. That's the foundation of democracy. Coming up, FBI director Cash Patel is set to testify on Capitol Hill at the top of the hour. We'll get a full preview of what Senate Democrats plan to ask him when Morning Joe comes right back. Coming up, how the efforts to remake the judicial branch started long before President Trump, MS now senior political analyst Alex Wagner joins us with. her new book about the raid on America's courts. That's straight ahead on Morning Joe. Just now, President Putin denied having anything to do with the election interference in 2016.

Every U.S. intelligence agency has concluded that Russia did. What who, my first question for you, sir, is who do you believe? My second question is, would you now, with the whole world watching, tell President Putin, would you denounce what happened in 2016 and would you warn him to never do it again. My people came to me, Dan Coates came to me and some others. They said they think it's Russia. I have President Putin. He just said it's not Russia. I will say this. I don't see any reason why it would be. That of course, President Trump's response to my question back in 2018 in Helsinki when Trump took Putin's word over that of U.S. intel agencies about election interference two years prior. Now, in a new book, journalist, a New York Times bestselling author, David Korn, is taking a

close look at that moment and many, many others, as he investigates what he calls Putin's decade-long covert war against the United States, as well as how Trump may have helped. David joins us now. His new book titled How Russia Won Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and the Fight for America. David, thank you for being here. Congrats on this book. I mean, this remains. I mean, this remains. We have lived now with the Putin-Trump relationship for a decade, and yet it still holds such mystery. There's still such a thus, what exactly is behind this? Why is it going on?

You dove into it. Tell us some of the new things you've discovered. Well, when you asked him that question, that was about the 2016 campaign, and we've been arguing over that campaign ever since with Trump saying, hoax, witch hunt, Russia, Russia, and denying, as he did there,

that Russia did anything to attack the U.S. election back in 2016, which we now know did happen, according to many numerous investigations, including Republican-led committee in the Senate. Yes. So what I did was I looked at not just 2016, but Putin did it again in 2018, in 2020, in 2022 and 2024. This has been a 10-year-long covert operation directed against the United States and also against the West with disinformation and influence operations. So it's not just a one-off in 2016 about collusion then. It's what's been happening ever since.

And ever since Donald Trump and Republicans have continued to deny any Russian interference in American elections. You might remember in 2020, Rudy Giuliani had this massive smear campaign against Joe Biden. He went to Ukraine. He dug up information. Well, it turns out he was working hand in glove with a guy named Andre Dirkash, who was a Ukrainian parliamentarian, but also a Russian agent. How do we know this? Trump's own Treasury Department sanctioned Dirkash and said he was a Russian agent. So in 2020, you have the president's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, working with a Russian agent. Should have been a big scandal,

like many other things. And in 2024, we saw this massive disinformation campaign run by Russian networks attacking Biden, but then Kamala Harris and Tim Walls claiming that he engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior when he was a teacher, things that were completely false, but it reached tens of millions of Americans. And when this was, you know, when Trump was asked about this, he said, it's not happening. This is just more Russia, Russia, Russia. So we've had Republicans basically complicit with Putin's twilight war against the United States. There's a lot of intrigue. There's a lot of skodgery, which I try to get into it in the book. It kind of sometimes reads more like a spy story than a political book. But it continues. And just a couple of days ago,

this very network, MS now reported that one of the networks that I wrote about in the book is at it again, putting out disinformation with these fake videos of American Hollywood celebrities disparaging Democrats and saying you should vote Republican. So I think it's a prelude to what's to come in the next few weeks. Yeah, I mean, the threat's still very much real. The disinformation campaign, yes, but also the sabotage we're seeing across Europe. So give us an assessment, if you will. Putin has obviously misplayed his hand in Ukraine, but he's gotten some real victories elsewhere in the West here in the United States. Tell us what the Kremlin has accomplished. Well, this is, I think, his grand geostrategic ambition, is Russian imperialism, restore the Soviet Empire. And the big

counter to that is the West, NATO alliance, which once was led by the U.S. So his chief goal is to fracture that and create conflict. And he's done that by helping. He's not responsible for Trump being elected, but he's helped Trump get elected. And so Trump is destroying our alliance with Canada within NATO, and Putin at the same time is attacking France. He's been active in Hungary.

He was active in Brexit. And he's doing these sabotage operations now in England. And throughout Europe, they are saying we are in this sort of undeclared, non-kinetic war with, with Russia. But here, Trump won't recognize that. And we have, as we've talked about on the show, Donald Trump Jr.'s wedding being paid for by an oligarch close to Putin. Why is this guy doing this? Just because he likes Donald Trump? This is another way for Russia to kind of wiggle their way into the Trump clan, as they've done in the past. So we still, you know, no matter how all the investigations

we've had that have revealed all this and have revealed what has happened after 2016, it still is happening. And I think it's one of the big stories of the last 10 years that has not been fully recognized. So, David, you mentioned Donald Trump Jr.'s wedding recently. I believe that his new wife, Bettina Trump said, you know, a gift from a friend isn't always, you know, scandalous or something to that effect. Help us understand what the problem is in that example and how this campaign of influence actually works? And then also, do you think it ends with Donald Trump, or are there other efforts to undermine our political system through other means, other politicians? Right. Well, on the wedding, this is a Russian oligarch who's involved with a boxing international

organizations that's been called corrupt, be kicked out of the Olympics because of corruption allegations. He's very close to Putin. He only has his position because of Putin. Putin is a war criminal. Putin's been kidnapping kids. He's launched an illegal war, and a guy close to him, just suddenly, well, not suddenly, within a couple last few years, becomes friends with Donald Trump Jr. And such a good friend that he's offering to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to finance this lavish wedding in the Bahamas. You can see the photos of the video on the screen there. This does not pass the smell test.

Just imagine if Hunter Biden had gotten paid by Ukrainian oligar. hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is a way to sort of buy influence with the Trump family and make the Trump people even more amenable to Putin and Putin's agenda. And you ask what else may be happening. Up until Trump returning to the White House, the FBI had the foreign influence task force. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence had the foreign malign influence center. The State Department had a office that tracked Russian disinformation. All that has been eliminated. So while in the past, I mentioned what happened in 2020 and 2024, much of that was told to the public or conveyed to the public by government agencies. So we knew

a little bit what was going on. Now we're flying blind. And this is a unilateral surrender. So this, it really is a 10-year war that Trump has waived the white flag, says, it's not happening, and yet we face it, I think, going into the midterms, let alone what might happen in 2028. It is one of the unending questions of our time, this relationship and Russia's ongoing campaign. The new book titled How Russia Won Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and the Fight for America. Best Selling author and journalist David Corrin, thank you so much. We really appreciate it. Thank you. Up next year, morning, Joe, we're going to preview the Senate hearing for FBI director Cash Patel as he's just moments away from facing questions,

by the Judiciary Committee over his leadership at the Bureau. Keep it right here on Morning Joe for that and more. Welcome back, busy day ahead on Capitol Hill. The big issue of AIs being discussed by lawmakers with Republican Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana saying he's going to introduce a bill tomorrow that requires companies to build a kill switch for AI models. The bill currently doesn't have any co-sponsors and comes, though, as pressure mounts on Congress to regulate the industry. We had those apocalyptic warnings in recent days, but President Trump spent the day yesterday defending AI, suggesting it didn't need any guardrails. Also in the Senate,

a key procedural vote is expected today on the Clarity Act. On Sunday, Republicans released a revised version of the major cryptocurrency bill, which they say addresses democratic concerns over ethics rules and banking industry concerns about lending. It's still unclear, though, if it has enough support to reach the 60-vote threshold needed to pass. Meanwhile, a full vote could be coming later this week after the House Rules Committee approved bipartisan legislation to increase sanctions on Russia over its ongoing war in Ukraine. The bill would allow President Trump to sanction those who undermine peace talks and impose tariffs of up to 500 percent on Russian goods, unclear, though, whether Trump himself will support it. Also happening today on Capitol Hill,

testimony from FBI Director Cash Patel before the Senate Judiciary Committee. We're going to get a live report on that ahead of its opening gavel. That's next here, I'm Morning Joe. We are now just moments away from the start-up testimony from FBI Director Cash Patel in a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee surrounding the nation's lead law enforcement agency. It's going to happen right there in that room. We can see the photographers standing by waiting for the entrance of the participants. Members of the panel are expected to question Patel about his controversial tenure, including the departure of over 1,000 special agents last year.

Let's now bring in MS now, congressional reporter Kevin Fry, who joins us live from Capitol Hill, just outside that hearing of him. Kevin, good morning. So, you know, Cash Patel has certainly overseen a tumultuous tenure so far at the FBI. What are some of the questions you expect he's going to face? Yeah, I mean, look, obviously, this is his second time appearing here on Capitol Hill in a matter of months. He was here back in May. All indications are we're going to get, in some sense, a bit of a repeat performance. At the time, there were lots of questions about his consumption of alcohol, about his behavior in that position. But since then, as you just highlighted, we're probably going to be seeing some questions from Democrats on this panel about what's going on with the staffing shortfalls at the FBI.

Why are they lowering the requirements for individuals that are being hired, including removing things that are automatic disqualifications like soliciting sex, apparently, according to Senator Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on this panel? We also expect there to be questions about, for example, his use of the FBI jet and his travel to events such as, for example, the Olympics earlier this year where there was that kind of emblematic image of him in the locker room with the USA hockey team. We expect Democrats to once again go at him on his behavior in this position. Now, in terms of what we expect Patel to say, we already got somewhat of a preview of this. In a letter to the chairman of this committee, just in the last few days, he argued that he has changed policies at the FBI to try to save the taxpayer money by changing where the FBI jet ends up landing. We also know that he's going to probably be touting some of the crime statistics arguing that crime is down across the country and thus the FBI is doing a great job. But in general, reflecting on what happened in May when he was here before a different Senate panel, we expect that to be a repeat today.

Two other things to keep an eye on here, the two Republicans who both are not seeking re-election, who are not going to be on the ballot this November, Tom Tillis and John Cornyn, will they perhaps go somewhat rogue in their questioning and go after him? All right, we, of course, we'll be watching and bringing you coverage throughout the day here on MS Now. MS now is Kevin Frye. and thank you so much. Up next here, Morning Joe, MS now senior political analyst, Alex Wagner will join us.

We'll look at her new book, The Steel, four right-wing, hardliners, one Republican presidency, and the raid on America's courts. Morning Joe, be right back with that. You all want to miss it. Welcome back. We're happy to say joining us now,

MS now senior political analyst, host the podcast, Runaway Country, and the author of the substack. How the hell with Alex Wagner. Yes. Alex Wagner. She's out today with a brand new book titled The Steel. Four right-wing hardliners, one Republican presidency, and the raid on America's courts. Alex, so good to see you. Great to see you. Congratulations on this. This is absolutely, it's such an important topic.

It's so easy to just focus on the presidency and maybe down Pennsylvania Avenue. But one of the defining stories of our politics in recent decades is the movement of the courts to the right. You dive into it. Tell us a little bit about what you're... Well, I mean, we can see, based on the news last night, about mail-in-balance, just the insane accretion of power that's occurred in the judicial branch. I mean, they, in some ways, have more power than the executive brands, and in times certainly have more power than the legislative branch. This is a look at the secret, less-discussed plot to turn America's courts into a partisan weapon for the right. It takes place in the Reagan 80s. I'm going to hold it up

repeatedly, shamelessly. It's a great cover. It is a good cover. It's very good cover. It's very blip from the New Yorker, and it focuses on four riders of the apocalypse, four raiders. Ed Meese, who was a Reagan's attorney general, who sort of refashioned the Department of Justice in the image of conservative values and the Reagan agenda. Joe Coors, the deep-pocketed beer magnate, if you've ever had a Coors beer, well, if you're drinking it, especially in the 70s and 80s, a lot of that money was being funneled towards right-wind causes. Paul Weirich, who is not a household name, but is really the mastermind of, I think, where we sit today in terms of the conservative movement. He started something called the moral majority. He formed Alec, the legislative affairs

organization that writes legislation for states all over the country. And most instrumentally, he created the Heritage Foundation, which is, of course, I think people are familiar with Project 2025. That was the work of the Heritage Foundation. It began in the 1980s. And we also have Paul Wyrick, Edmese, Jokors, and Robert Bork, the ideologue, the the the the theologian, if you will, the man who mainstreamed the idea of originalism to become sort of the jurisprudence of the right. He's the guy that basically allowed conservatives to enact an agenda using the Trojan horse of strict textualism and going back to the ideas of the founding fathers as a way to unwind the civil rights and social progress of the previous decades.

I mean, we see the fruits of this harvest today with reversal of Roe, reversal of affirmative action and the Voting Rights Act. That's precisely why in the go with this. So first of all, we should just note this staggering statistic. President Reagan appointed 379 judges, which is nearly half the federal benches across his eight years. But it is resulted in a judiciary that often, and Roe is, of course, a great example of this, seems out of step with the public. But yet we're all living with the decisions. We, I think, think of the Supreme Court and their decision making as the result of these. sort of random strikes of time when a justice dies and someone's replaced. But in reality, it is the result of a concerted plot, a concerted strategy that took time, tenacity, and patience, and that was born in the shadows of the Reagan presidency. And these four men were the architects of it.

And to understand what is happening to us as a society today, we really need to see the origins of the heist as it was planned out in the 1980s. I mean, I honestly, I'll tell you, I am incensed by the injustice of this court. I don't understand how they could be so at odds with public opinion. And this, in writing it, it took way longer than I thought I would. An extraordinary amount of research went into it. But I really learned a lot about the discipline of the right and the way in which there were no losses. Every crisis really was an opportunity for them. And we see the results of that tenacity and patience paying off today. Yeah, Alex. I mean, what lessons can the small D Democratic Coalition, the pro-democracy coalition take from this movement. And how did the Democratic

Party in particular miss this? Well, so the analogy that I use is Republicans, sorry, Democrats were focused on toppling monoliths while conservatives were building a city underground. They understood that you have to build institutions. They took the energy and momentum of the grassroots and they built a pipeline into the institutions themselves. I think a lot of people on the left will look at this and say, is a horror story. I want nothing to do with it. But it actually is a story of building, constructing, patience, and focus. And as Democrats look towards 2026 and 28, a party that is fractured on the inside and figuring out what is the game plan, how do we execute on our biggest goals, and how do we move the country in a different direction? It's a useful template.

It's not, I don't know if I would use the word inspiring, but there are absolutely lessons for the left in the playbook from the right. If not inspiring, perhaps in strong. Yes. The new book titled The Steel, four right-wing heartliners, one Republican presidency, and the raid on America's courts. It's an essential read, pick it up. Alex Wagner, thank you so much. We appreciate it. Thank you, friends.

We appreciate it. And we'll be right back in just two minutes with more morning, Joe. Another live look at the hearing room on Capitol Hill, FBI director Cash Patel, to testify shortly. Once he does, we, of course, will have coverage for you here on MS. Now, Mara, your final thoughts for the morning. My final thoughts are, I hope that lawmakers in Washington take a hard look at what Americans are actually saying about their fears about AI. It's not only about the technology, but it's the leaders and the creators of the technology that Americans don't trust. And I think we should look there when we think about regulation first.

Yeah, and there does seem to be, you know, unlikely bedfellows, if you will. Later today, Bernie Sanders and Steve Bannon are appearing at an event together calling for AI regulation. We have seen lawmakers on the left like Brian Schatz, Senator of Hawaii, and Ted Cruz of Texas, he on the right, all saying the same thing. The person who appears out of step at the moment, President Trump. He has been defending AI, does not want guardrails. We'll see if he changes his mind before that high-stakes summit next week with China's Xi Jinping, a story we will be following. That does it for us this morning, but of course we'll see again tomorrow at 6 a.m. Eastern for another morning, Joe. Money, power, politics, and Stephanie Rule is up next here on MS now after a quick,

a two minute break.