Morning Joe - El-Sayed, Stevens make final push in Michigan Senate primary

Episode Date: August 3, 2026

August 3, 2026: 8am — El-Sayed, Stevens make final push in Michigan Senate primary 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.

All I can do is ask the question. 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. Can you rule out that Iran is behind that cyber attacks? I don't. No, I think Minnesota is behind it. You know what it's behind it? Minnesota, because they're grossly in government. I think the government are behind it. I don't think there was an Iranian cyber attack. They like to say, oh, it's Iran should be so lucky. Iran's got bigger problems than worrying about Minnesota. That first soundbite was President Trump back in 2018 in Helsinki, after I asked him who he believed,

Russian President of Vladimir Putin, or U.S. intelligence that Russia had interfered in the 2016 presidential election. Now, as you've just heard in that second piece of sound, eight years later, the president is disdemeanor. dismissing U.S. intelligence once again, after agency said that it was Iran who was likely responsible for these cyber attacks against Minnesota's water systems. Speaking of Iran, the president, once more, threatened large-scale strikes on that country, only to, yet again, walk it back, claiming a diplomatic deal is now in the works. We will dig into the significant skepticism surrounding

that claim. Meanwhile, Todd Blanche, the president, President's former personal attorney made concessions late last night that could clear his path to becoming Attorney General on a permanent basis. Plus, the Department of Justice finally admitted the truth about the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, saying it was a botched installation and not acts of vandalism that caused damage to that beloved monument. But President Trump yesterday on social media still refused to acknowledge the reality of the situation.

And also ahead, we're going to show you some of a combative interview with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., where the HHS Secretary had an absolute meltdown over Dr. Anthony Fauci, the COVID pandemic, and he refused to take any responsibility for an ongoing measles outbreak here in the United States. We will bring you a fact check just ahead. Good morning, and welcome to morning, Joe. It's Monday, August 3rd. As you can see, a busy, busy Monday. I'm Jonathan Lemire. thank you for starting your day and week with us. And we've got a great group to kick it off with us. We have former White House Communications Director under President Obama, Jen Paul Mary,

opinion columnist for the New York Times, David French, and U.S. national editor at the Financial Times, Ed Luce. My thanks to all of you for joining us now. So let's start with some breaking news. A lot of you waking up to this news this morning. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche issued an order last night that does terminate President Trump's 1.776 so-called anti-weaponization fund, which could have compensated January 6th insurrectionists. Blanche's order also clarifies that the president's settlement with the IRS for tax audit immunity for Trump and his family members only applies to claims open at the time of the settlement and does not protect Trump or his family from future tax filings.

Republican Senators John Cornyn of Texas and Tom Tillis of North Carolina had both demanded that Blanche put in writing that the weaponization fund was not moving forward as well as clarification on tax audit immunity before they would vote to advance his nomination for Attorney General. That vote now set for tomorrow after it was post. postponed last week. David French, let's start with you. We've documenting last week that this is the trouble you create, President Trump, when you target sitting Republican senators and say they should be defeated, and now their political careers come to an end, and it seems like they're willing, at least to a point, to stand up to you. And they did that last week, and they were achieved,

I guess, some sort of half measure of victory here, but, you know, getting in writing the guarantees about the weaponization fund against the IRS deal, which was so opposed by so many. So let's get your initial thoughts this morning about where this stands. Well, I'm glad you used the words to a point because this is some resistance. Obviously, I'd rather the weaponization fund go away. We would like to see this agreement in the absence of anything else. But again, in the absence of anything else, this is the best you can do. Because the real problem with Todd Blanche, the weaponization fund is only part of it. It's really only a small part of it.

I mean, this is a person who has been the president's hatchet man on his political vengeance tour. This is a person who has allowed the president to use the Department of Justice as essentially his personal law firm as his personal weapon. And the weaponization fund is just one manifestation of that, just one. And by the way, it's not going to stop January 6th defendants from filing frivolous lawsuits or making frivolous claims and perhaps receiving settlements on a one-to-one basis or on a basis that's outside of the scope of this imagined fund. So this is a small thing. It's a good thing that we have a small thing, but it is so woefully incomplete. And it shows the extent that even now, even now, Trump has just a hammerlock. on this Republican Senate when you've got the most alienated senators, and this is the best

they're willing to do. Yeah, it is remarkable. Trump's approval rating so low, and yet he does still largely control the Republican senators. And yes, Jen, it's good to see, you know, partial revolt here, but still not much. And now Republicans still have to. It's just more bad headlines for them. Like, you know, yes, they mitigated some of the damage here, I suppose, about the weaponization Fund, and again, this unprecedented and deeply unethical IRS protections.

But this is still, yet again, Trump signaling that he cares far more about his personal interests than anything about the party. Yeah, his personal interests and his family's personal financial interest. And I'm old enough from her. I work for Bill Clinton. Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama left the party in part because he did not get invited to a University of Alabama event at the White House, right? Like this is, these are two United States senators who, uh, who Trump endorsed their, Trump endorsed their, Trump endorsed either their opponent or, um, or, you know, a Tom Tillis case.

Tom Tillis had been at, has, you know, been at war with, uh, with Trump. And this is, and that their big concession is, you know, kind of relatively meaningless, trims around the edges of the weaponization fund and, um, you know, but still, like some pushback is good, but this is, it is, it's, I would say, I would think, I've been out in the country a lot. I don't feel the pull of Trump as much as you used to, but certainly in the United States Senate. And a little later in the show, we'll get into some of your recent travels. But also now, Todd Blanche, like, yeah, will be installed as permanent attorney general in the days ahead. And he's made it clear he will do whatever President Trump wants him to do. We'll have more on that later this show as well. But now we move to the latest with Iran.

President Trump once again, this weekend, said he canceled a planned attack against that country, citing as he so often does, he claims an emerging deal. Trump posted to true social late Saturday night that the potential deal would, quote, include the immediate, complete, and total opening of the Hormuz Strait and an end to Iran's nuclear threat. Now, Iran's foreign ministry has said this morning that Tehran is not currently holding talks with the U.S. Oh, we're doing it again. Over the course of the five-month-long war, the president has threatened to escalate attacks on Iran only to then walk back those threats.

He's done that at least nine times by our count. Trump's latest move to cancel strikes followed a phone call with Saudi's crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, MBS, who raised concerns about the U.S. potentially escalating the conflict with Tehran. That's according to the AP. Here's what President Trump told reporters

last night aboard Air Force One. It's asked you by Saudi Arabia, UAE, we're all set to go. It's about, I think, well, let's see. And the reason they ask is, I think there's a deal. There's a deal on Pormoz, and then there will be a deal of Iran. Now what we're doing is we're talking to them in the form of the show. I'd love to do that.

It's an unnecessary power. Ed Lewis, Trump went on to say that had the attack gone ahead, it would have been the biggest since World War II. Let's do a little fact-checking here. I think we can agree that Iran's neighbors in the region don't want return to full-out war. That part probably right. And we know that the MBS did make that call with Trump over the weekend. But the rest of it, how can we believe anything he's saying? We've been down this road so many times before where he threatens a big attack and then

walks away from it. Iran calls his bluff. Trump claims negotiations are coming. And then Tehran the next day is like, no, we're not even talking to them. Now, there are some mediators in the region who are trying to get some negotiations going again. Of course, inherently that would be a good thing. But it seems to me this is yet another example of.

of Trump having lost his leverage, and he's really stuck with no clear way out. He is. I mean, it's really interesting that it was a call from Mohammed bin Salman, as you mentioned, Jonathan, on Saturday, that persuaded Trump to back off. Because Iran has made it very clear that it is prepared to strike the energy infrastructure and other targets in Saudi Arabia, in Qatar, in countries that really, don't want to see this escalation. And Iran has been broadening the front of its, the zone of its activities, you know, to as far away as Egypt. There was a drone attack, an attempted drone attack

on a U.S. ship in Egypt. So Iran is not backing down at all. They're quite happy with escalation because they believe that ultimately this will deter Trump from pursuing this war. They're not backing down, which makes it all the more odd that Trump thinks that these kinds of threats, that this will be the biggest bombing campaign since World War II, are going to deter Iran. It's not deterrable at this point because its reading of this war is that the higher the cost it imposes on Trump and America's allies in the Gulf and beyond the Gulf and on the world economy, the less likely this war is to be resumed in full by Trump. So this, this bluster is not working, but he keeps trying to throw spaghetti against the wall. One other point is that,

you know, Israel was all locked and loaded and ready to join Trump in this, this new attack on Iran and wasn't informed that he had decided to cut it off. There's been a real swing. There's been a real switch since the beginning of this war. Saudi Arabia is now more influential than Israel. And that's a huge deal. Absolutely, a significant development there in the Middle East. For more, let's now bring in Staff Rider at the Atlantic covering national security and the Defense Department, our friend Nancy Yusef. Nancy, great to see you. First, let's just start this with, what's the latest we know about the situation there in the Middle East? And is there the possibility of talks in the days ahead? And is there any hope they could yield anything?

I think there's always the possibility of talks. We've heard that Qatar is mediating talks between Iran, Oman, and the United States over the future of the Strait of Hormuz. I think the challenge is what those talks yield. For all the threats and counter threats and climb down from threats, the Iranians are not signaling that they feel that they're in a weaker position. And in fact, they're saying they intend to keep supervising the Strait of Hormuz. And meanwhile, you have the president saying that the strait must be fully open. freely and fully open. And so even on the basic terms of what these talks are supposed to achieve, there seems to be a very fundamental disagreement. And so that's only on one of the four issues

that needs to be negotiated, the Strait of Hormuz, sanctions, the future of Iranian proxies, and of course, Iran's nuclear program. And so the supposition up until this point has been that the U.S., Iran, Amman, must agree on the future of the Strait of Hormuz before they can tackle those more complex topics. And even now, after a flurry of activity of these threats and counter threats, it doesn't seem that those very fundamental questions about what needs to come out of the Strait of Hormuz's part of the talks has been settled. So Nancy, you and I have a new piece in the Atlantic. We co-wrote, title, this may be Trump's biggest error in the war. And I'll read a little bit of it now. The Trump administration's greatest mistake in the Iran war, maybe it's persistent failure to

understand Tehran's priorities and motivations, and how much punishment the regime is willing to absorb to prevail. The convoluted and complicated war has swung almost weekly between peace overtures and fighting. Part of the confusion may stem from the fact that Trump himself appears to be of at least two minds about how he wants to proceed. He is vacillated between backing more military action and giving peace talks a chance. The U.S. cannot begin to understand its enemy if it has yet to settle on its own aims or how to achieve them. For now, there are no good options for Trump, and there is no clarity as to how two sides in a widening war can find off-ramps, particularly if they continue to misinterpret each other's

actions. Both sides seem to agree on one thing. There is no end in sight to the war. And Nancy, I mean, let's just say it. Pretty smart stuff there. But let's talk about, let's talk what could come next. Like, we've talked a lot about Trump has no good options. That's true. Okay, so he has bad options. Walk us through a couple of the bad options. Like, what are the ways that he could settle to try to get out of this?

So he could announce that the war is over and that he's won. The Ayatollah is dead. Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon. If they try to get a nuclear weapon, the United States will go back to war. I'm not sure that the stock markets and others would believe it, But he could declare that and announce that he's leaving. He could also escalate strikes on Iran. And he signaled that he thinks that this is an effective way to do it.

During the Camp David talks, he said that he thinks that they'll reach a point where Iran can't take it anymore. The idea being that you do just enough strikes to sort of tip the balance out of the regime control and lead to its collapse. But, of course, the question becomes what happens if that doesn't work and how does Iran retaliate? And by the way, those retaliations will demand the United States go through its dwindling supply of munitions and interceptors. And so there's a risk associated with that. Or he could go back to the negotiation table, as he signaled that he's been willing to do. But because the Iranians are not backing down, they are not acting like a nation that has come under attack, but one that thinks that it has the upper hand.

To go back to those negotiations, the United States would have to make some concessions that has so far been unwilling to make on things like the Strait of Hormuz. It might be that there's a negotiation that's reached, that the Iranians have more control of the strait than the president had wanted at the start of this war. And so that's why there aren't great options, because there are munition shortages that limit the U.S. capability militarily. The threats of strikes has cost the United States credibility at the negotiation table, and the president has in the past declared that he's won before,

only to then go back to war. And we should note that this is all against the backdrop of midterm elections coming up in less than 100 days and growing on popularity with this war. Can the president afford to restart fighting that could lead to a rise of oil and gas prices so close to a midterm election when that issue has become a key one for voters as we approach this election season? Coming up, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently made a number of claims that flat out contradict scientific evidence and research. We're going to bring in a medical expert who's fact-checking those remarks.

You're watching Morning Joe. We'll be right back. Welcome back. So Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made several controversial and often false claims about COVID-19, vaccines, and measles over the weekend during a contentious interview with CNN's Dana Bash. Many of his claims flat-out contradicts. established scientific evidence. Join us now to do some fact-checking. Dr. Omer O'wan, he's a practicing radiologist position in Baltimore, and currently serves as a professor and vice chair of education at the University of Maryland School of Medicine.

He's also a senior contributor for Forbes. We're grateful he is joining us this morning because we have a lot of fact-checking to do. It was a pretty outrageous performance. So let's dive right into it. Doctor, thank you. Here's what Secretary Kennedy said about the death rates in the United States. during the COVID pandemic. The damage to our country was the lockdowns.

The lockdowns that shut down 3.5 million businesses in our country with no due process, no just compensation, all of our churches closed our schools and our children are still paying the price for that. And yet we had the worst outcome of any country in the world. How so? We have the highest death rate from COVID of any nation on earth. I said it was accurate. We had the highest death rate from COVID-Banning

for now. There are other countries that had higher. Actually, not accurate. In reality, according to Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, numerous countries recorded higher cumulative per capita COVID-19 death rates in the U.S. That includes Peru, Bulgaria, and Hungary. And nine of the top 10 states with the highest

death rates per capita went for Trump in the 2016 election. In 2020, eight of these states went for Trump. Doctor, this is a blatant misrepresentation. Your thoughts? Yeah, it's a misrepresentation. It's not factually accurate. You know, we are not even in the top 10 for highest COVID death rates,

and partly because of the success of Operation Warp Speed and the vaccines that were disseminated that were life-saving. Remember that the COVID-19 vaccine saved more than a million lives, according to research. And those statements by Secretary Kennedy undermine actually the efficacy of vaccines. And he later goes on to say and says that he does not question the efficacy of other vaccines. But here he is clearly questioning the efficacy of the vaccine, particularly because he didn't understand that, you know, the United States did not have the highest COVID-19 death rate. So we'll get more to the vaccines in a moment. But first, Secretary Kennedy also placed a lot of blame on

President Biden and Dr. Anthony Fauci, particularly regarding the COVID lockdowns. He also claimed hospital ICUs were empty during the height of the pandemic, including here in New York City. Anthony Fauci was mismanaging the COVID pandemic and was doing it under the Biden administration. President Trump wanted to end the lockdowns. And in fact, in Anthony Fauci's diaries, he talks about how President Trump is calling him every day trying to get them to reopen the country. Yeah, well, the lockdowns were done by governors.

I mean, certainly Anthony Fauci and the president had opinions, but the lockdowns were done by governors and largely because, and largely because they were hearing from hospitals saying that their ICUs were overrun and they needed some help while that was happening. Well, that's not true. It is true. You're saying it's not true. No, they were doing it because Anthony Fauci

was telling them from the top, you need to lock down. There were ICUs that were empty all over the country, including in New York at the height. Kennedy's claim is false and frankly infuriating. In March of 2020, FEMA sent 85 refrigerated trucks to New York City to serve as temporary morgues because hospitals in the nation's largest city were at full capacity. Hundreds of bodies had to be stored in those trucks.

Additionally, the U.S. death toll from the coronavirus, surpassed 400,000 in Trump's first term, again, according to Johns Hopkins. I mean, doctor, this is such, and it's a lie, but also such an effort to shift blame and to frankly diminish the suffering and toll that these Americans who lost our lives and their families went through. Yeah, it's deeply concerning, John. I mean, you are sitting in New York City. I'm sure you remember that ICUs were flooded in New York City, and you saw probably

tents in Central Park dealing with and treating patients. And to put blame on Dr. Fauci, who is a public servant, I want to remind people that he spent decades of his life helping people like Americans and saving their lives, not just with COVID-19, but also with the infectious disease responses of things like HIV and Zika virus and Ebola. You know, we definitely owe a lot of gratitude to individuals like him. And to put blame and to shift blame on, you know, these public health officials, you know, that not only undermines science, but also, you know, it demystifies and really over-complexed. It shifts the over-complexity to the pandemic because it's more a result of, you know, vaccine hesitancy, you know, the polarization, the politicization of vaccines, you know, old age and people's age, socioeconomic status, health disparities. These are all reasons why a lot of people died.

So decisions were not made in a vacuum, and certainly it was a collaborative effort. So to pinpoint to scapegoat one individual, as has been incurring, is problematic. Dr. Omero-Wan, thank you so very much for being with us this morning. His invaluable fact-checked of RFK Jr. is available online now at Forbes. Coming up, the Department of Justice drops its felony charges against former Olympian David Hearn over allegations that he had damaged. the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. We'll talk about that case with Hearn's attorney. He joined us straight ahead on Morning Joe. The evidence shows, and we will prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that Hearn willfully destroyed property at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

We can state and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he caused damage, and that damage is over $1,000. And you're 100% sure that what happened with the liner was vandalism. You can prove it. Oh, yeah, absolutely can. And as we drain it, and we've got all the photographs we can see. I mean, there's no possible way. You're photographs of a person or people cutting a 300 or 350-foot gash in the bottom of the reflecting pool? Dana, I'm not sure why you and others in the media think that you want to keep trying to question. They cut it up with a box knife and tried to destroy it. These people are sick. they ripped a scar 350 feet long through the side of the reflecting pool?

Or maybe not. In a major reversal, the Department of Justice announced it is dropping felony charges against a former Olympian. After acknowledging that the damage to Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool was actually caused by flawed installation rather than any sort of vandalism. The motion to dismiss was filed by D.C. U.S. trade geneep hero. This was late Friday in a clear news dump. prosecutors concluded the damage attributed to former Olympian David Hearn stemmed from defects in the installation of the reflecting Pools liner. The filing stated that information obtained after the indictment showed the damage was caused by botched work performed by the project's contractor hired

by the Trump administration and not by criminal conduct. Now, the Trump administration has defended the $16 million no-bid contract by saying the work, needed to get done by July 4th for the nation's 250th anniversary. Hearn had pleaded not guilty to a felony charge of destruction of property after authorities alleged he damaged the iconic reflecting pool during a June visit to the National Mall. All right. Well, it's an embarrassing moment for all, but it's ended with Friday when Gene Piro said that charges were being dropped.

No, no, no, it didn't because in response, President Trump, he would not take no for an answer. He lashed out on social media, stating he disagreed, quote, 100 percent. what Janine Piro on the reflecting pool. I don't know what she was thinking. To me, it was a pure case of vandalism. Interior Secretary Doug Bergam echoed the president's message in a social media post of his own, writing, the evidence is clear.

Vandals have repeatedly caused damage to the reflecting pool. We should note that neither Bergam nor Trump provided evidence for their claims. Joining us now, a member of David Hearns' defense team, Norm Eisen. He's co-founder of democracy, Defender's Action, a bipartisan advocacy and legal organization to combat authoritarian threats. Also with this, former U.S. Senator MS. Now political analyst, Claire McCaskill,

opinion writer at the New York Times, Marge, and MSNANO, contributor Pablo Tori, back with us as well. My thanks to all of you. So, Norm, before we get to the president's social media postings, just take us through what U.S. Attorney Gene Puro actually put out on Friday, having to admit that there was no evidence that your client or anybody else vandalized the reflecting pool. Well, Jonathan, we've said from the get-go, including here on the show, Davy Hearn was innocent. The reflecting pool was no different after he touched it than before he touched it.

And the notion that Gene Piro and the Department of Justice did not know this is absurd. On July 10th, the day after the arraignment, we filed a motion with the court, the first of five filings. In that one, we pointed out that using the government's own evidence and other photographs, the section of the reflecting pool that they claimed Davy had damage was exactly the same in photographs before and after he touched it. While we're gratified that the Justice Department has made this filing, agreeing with us that a botched installation was to blame, and also agreeing that the damage was not over $1,000, and basically there's no proof beyond a reasonable doubt. what have we come to as a country where under Todd Blanche, Gene Piro, and Donald Trump, innocent people like Davey Hearn can be targeted.

Of course, it's not just him. We've seen a stream of others. We've worked on those cases at democracy defenders. Any American, and every American, should be concerned when you have an executive branch that behaves this way. And Norm, as you all know, your client has given interviews in what you said. This has taken a real toll on him, even though charges now dropped. But let me ask you this, with the president seemingly refusing

to let this go, clearly embarrassed by what happened, do you have any concern that some way, somehow the legal process could restart? We're ready come what may. We are considering all options to deal with this abuse and miscarriage of justice. And that's why we exist at democracy defenders. We've dealt with so many of these, whether it's birthright citizenship or the wrongful attack on Dr. Lisa Cook. We won both those in the Supreme Court with great teams. The reflecting pool, the Kennedy Center, the slush fund.

We represent those 35 judges who knocked it down in federal court in Florida. The injustice of this administration knows. no bounds. But the good news is both us at democracy defenders and the democracy movement have pushed back large. All right, Claire Baccarco, please take the next question, but let me just tee up by saying this president, for a decade now, we have seen him on the national political stage, try to assert his own reality. And at times, effectively so, at least with his base. But this one here, I mean, it would be laughable if it weren't, frankly, so serious. Yeah, it's really serious.

And I think it's really important. And Norm, I want to ask you about this, that we kind of put Donald Trump and his lies aside. And we put Doug Bergam, that joke aside. And we really just focus in on Jean Carrow and what happened here. I don't think the American public understands how way off her actions in this case are in our criminal justice system. First of all, you know, any prosecutor who looks at the evidence before they file a case has to be confident the evidence is there before they've ruined someone's lives with charging them. I mean, that is a heavy responsibility on a prosecutor. You do not file paperwork accusing someone of a felony in the federal system without having evidence that a jury will accept.

Talk a little bit about what she has done and what would typically happen. to a U.S. attorney who has done this in our criminal justice system, what would typically be the reaction of that system to her? The conduct here of U.S. Attorney Piero and the others involved in this in her office and in the Department of justice has been reprehensible. All remedies are on the table for that, Claire. And I think it's important that we know that she's done this in a Department of Justice headed by Deputy Attorney General, acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, where others have been targeted in the same way, including my client, Dr. Lisa Cook. I filed briefs in the Tish James and Jim Comey case. I was part of the team

that represented union leader David Huerta out in L.A., all unjust prosecutions in many instances where Blanche's Department of Justice again and again has attacked. And then finally, I have to point a finger. His nomination is before the United States Congress. When I was in the White House and you were a senator, you and your colleagues would sometimes call and say, hey, we've got to put our foot down. That's not happening in this Congress. So plenty of blame to go around. Co-founder of democracy defender's action, Normize and Norm, thank you very much. And Mara, let's take a step back and look big picture here. I mean, yes, the reflecting pool sort of become a national joke, frankly, national embarrassment. But this is more than just

a no-bid contract. This is the President of the United States and his Justice Department. and Todd Blanche is soon to be confirmed to be permanent attorney general, sort of carrying out the president's whims and wishes, no barrier at all, the traditional barrier between the White House of the DOJ, just doesn't exist. Well, first of all, that's right. So the Trump administration has totally weaponized the Justice Department, has inverted the mission. Another example of that would be using the Justice Department, which was actually founded to protect years ago, enslaved people who had been freed, now using it to stop all civil rights cases unless they involve protecting white people against discrimination. Another example. So there's the weaponization,

but I think if you also think about the politics of this, it's interesting because corruption can be hard, even lies, can be hard to kind of drive home the meaning of it, the consequences to just ordinary voters. But this is a case where that's not true, because everybody in America can see that it is President Trump's fault that he has destroyed the reflecting pool. Just like they saw the damage to the White House. And so that's the kind of corruption that you can touch, taste, feel. That, in addition to going after a private citizen in Davy Hearn, that kind of feels different than going after Democrats like Letitia James or even Lisa Cook, you know, a civil servant.

I think this is more similar to his targeting of the campaign officials in Georgia, the two black women. I mean, Americans don't like bullies and they don't like liars. And this is a case where you can just see very clearly that the president is lying. You have evidence that you can kind of live in. And now there's sad, I mean, people who are visitors to Washington, D.C. are, you know, talking about how they're essentially on a tour of Donald Trump's damage. to the nation's capital. It's embarrassing.

And I don't think that he realizes the political damage that this does. Anybody who's not in the MAGA cult is going to realize, you know, I can't take this seriously. It's dark, but it's going to be hard for him to get out of this one. All right. We've got to sneak in a quick break. Everybody stay, stick around. It'll be right back with more morning, Joe. Welcome back.

Tomorrow, of course, the closely watched primary in the Michigan U.S. Senate race. Pablo Polst Tight. We had a report from Ali Vitale who has to spend some time in Michigan earlier in the show. And there's seemingly a sense of like this is also sort of a proxy battle for the future of the Democratic Party. Yeah, the state of the union. I mean, it's funny to hear the David Heron thing resolve so cleanly and then realize that there might be a bit of a mess in Michigan. And so, Claire, you know, something that I'm curious about is what you think is at stake here? because there clearly has been this larger movement.

You can take it to the DNC. You can take it to every other race in which the incumbency of the party seems like it's never been more imperiled. And so you have Abdul al-Sayed, who represents this larger youth freshening up of this progressive wing and Haley Stevens,

who represents relatively incumbency. And I wonder if you see it along those terms. Yeah, I, here's the thing that's a little frustrating for me. The progressive wing of our party, I get the frustration because what's going on right now in our country is so enraging to all of us who have a D behind our names. All of us can't believe he's getting away with this. That frustration is spilling over into thinking we need to do something more radical. We need to do something different. When in reality, the math has been the master here.

We have not had the votes to do something different. We have not had the votes in the Senate or the House to stop a lot of the nonsense that Donald Trump has been engaged in. So that's what's fueling a lot of this. But the other frustration here is that the progressive wing has lost a lot of races. They just lost the other night badly in Georgia 13. They lost in Arizona. So it is not a clear picture that they are ascended. Now, I will admit this primary is going to be very, very interesting.

First of all, this guy is not new. He ran against Gretchen Whitmer for governor in 2018 and lost in that primary to Gretchen Whitmer. And I don't know how successful it's going to be calling her a corporate shill. Big Gretsch does not read corporate shill. Big Gretsch has been there for the people of Michigan, as have Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters and And Alyssa Slotkin, I mean, these are all strong, very good Democrats who have voted a progressive vote every time they've had the chance. So I worry most about what's going to happen after.

Will this party begin to unite after this primary, one way or the other? If Stevens loses, will everybody come together and get behind the candidate? Because if we lose Michigan and therefore lose the Senate with Abdul as the nominee, that will definitely have repercussions on the progressive movement in 28. Mara, you know Michigan really well. What are your final thoughts here on the race? Well, I think what's going to be most important is to watch how black voters, which way they go, they're about a fifth of the primary electorate, and they could be pivotal swing voters in this race. The spending by APAC and other groups is enormous. And I think that they may have, have something to weigh in. I think they want to weigh in on the future of the party too. And

whether they go with the progressive movement in Michigan, you know, that could tell us something about where black voters are going to be in 2028. Well, we'll certainly be having complete coverage of that primary tomorrow here on MS. Now, one last headline, a sad one before we go. Former Congresswoman Kaye Granger of Texas has died at the age of 83. Granger was the first Republican woman from the state to be elected to the House back in 1996. She served for nearly 30 years but did not seek re-election in 2024 because of health issues. Granger was also the first Republican woman to chair the House Appropriations Committee. Prior to her time in Congress, she made history as the first woman to be elected as mayor of Fort Worth, Texas. Our thoughts,

of course, to her family. That does it for us this morning. Thank you so much for watching. We, of course, we'll see again tomorrow at 6am Eastern for another morning, Joe. Money, power, politics with Stephanie. new rule is up next here on MS now after a short final break.