Morning Joe - Family of Renee Good sues the government over her killing

Episode Date: October 2, 2026

October 2, 2026: Family of Renee Good sues the government over her killing  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 next four and a half weeks have got to be focused. The Trump, team Trump needs to have a message of the day that it pushes every day and stops as much of this extraneous stuff. We don't need to hear about the president saying, I'm going to tear down the Kennedy Center if I don't get recognition. We don't want to hear about the, I got the great triumphal arch, and I've agreed that we're going to have drones and snipers and a whole bunch of sniper ammunition. But who are those snipers going to shoot? People driving down the parkway? I mean, we need to stay focused. And this starts at the White House, and it starts with the president's political operation.

And they've got plenty of good material. I mean, we talk about two of them here. I know. But, you know, they got to get focused. Focused? Please. That's like a dog understanding the concept of Denmark, Willie. It just is not going to happen.

That's little Jackson lamb riff. there, but Coral Rove been very active as have other Republicans and just saying that Donald Trump and the Republicans are in big trouble and they're big, in big trouble in part, not just because of the economy, because they're so unfocused. And last night, Donald Trump proved that again with just some really strange rambling speeches. He sure did. Texas and Oklahoma were the destinations yesterday. You'll be happy to know he did criticize Ken Paxson again. as he was sitting in the audience. He was talking about how he insult him effectively and said, is Ken even here?

There he is. I don't care. And then he got back to his speech. He was there ostensibly to rally support. But also, you know, there's a Wall Street Journal piece this morning. They're going to pursue the prosecutors in the Watergate investigation. It's just all these wild. Yeah, that's right.

I said Watergate from 1974. Yes. So they're chasing all these rabbits down these holes. none of them having anything to do what's really on the minds of voters. With gas prices, just a huge, huge hides, diesel, just crippling people in rural America. Well, and across the country, trucking companies going bankrupt, farmers, continuing suffering. And, of course, rural health care in crisis because of Donald Trump and Republicans in the massive cuts to Medicaid. It just goes on and on.

And last night, again, just some, John, some incoherent speeches. Again, Willie brought up his skin packs in here. I don't care if he's here. And then looking around and talking about all the things that he could walk down, what did he say? He said, round. I have the quote here, if you'd like me to read it. Could you read that?

Yeah, Donald Trump last night in Texas says, I can go ramp. I can go stairs. So this is in more. When he looked around, I think, I can go stairs, I can go stairs, I can go stairs, I can go. stairs. I can go ramp. Or I can go. It reminded me of that moment with Ronald Reagan at the Brandenburg gate. Yes. And Mr. Gorbachev, I can go stairs. I can go step. I can go stair, wall, down. Yeah, no, it's all very inspiring, but they just, again, they just aren't getting the message. No, he's not. I mean, it seems he continues to defend things that are deeply unpopular, whether that's

his immigration policy or data centers. The list goes on and on. He continues to rave about the golden age that the nation's economy is under when most Americans don't feel that. And I don't know, I mean, we haven't put a poll in the field about this, but I don't know that there's a widespread clamoring to reevaluate Richard Milhouse Nixon. Right. But yet Trump's DOJ decided that would be, this would be the right moment to look at that. Yeah, there's so many things the DOJ is doing wrong, so many things that they aren't even looking at, they need to be looking at. They're destroying entire divisions. But they want to go back and defend Richard Nixon. I will say, Speaking of justice, you had Renee Goods, parents, our family, come out yesterday and file a lawsuit against the administration and the ICE agent that killed their daughter and sister.

I was glad to see that because clearly not only to bring some level of justice and some fairness to the family, the fact is that we need to deal with the fact that this unarmed woman, killed brutally for no reason on videotape that there'd be some sense of justice for it to just go into history that this happened an oops of big mistake and there'd be no accountability is a danger to everyone so I was glad to see the family do it as they sell them struggle to suffer through the anguish of what happened but it gives some level of justice for them but some level of responsibility that the society at large And let's hear from the brother. This is from yesterday at the press conference. The fact that there's been no accountability, no investigation, no expression of condolence, no change in policy is completely mind-blowing.

What happened to America? Something must change now. It is our family's hope that today's lawsuit will accomplish our goal for Renee. Accountability. And I'm sure the pretty family is thinking the same thing. They want accountability as to. The dozens of other people have been killed and been killed in this brutal, brutal mass deportation effort that is felling miserably on all levels.

So they're not hitting the numbers they want to hit. But more than that, it's crushing the Trump administration politically. It's turned immigration numbers upside down. And it has made Donald Trump every gain that Donald Trump made in 2025. with Hispanics has been lost and been lost two-fold, three-fold, four-fold. And that could have a real impact, whether you're talking about in Georgia, Florida, Texas, or so many other states, Richard. So that's not going to help.

And also the war. The war's not helping either. And what did we hear yesterday? We got reports that Donald Trump's doubling down, that they're sending more troops to the Middle East. Yeah, on the immigration issue, it was interesting, the poll in the Wall Street Journal the other day, which said, yeah, Americans want to see a closed border and all that, but a surprising number of not just Democrats, we're Republicans, do not want to have people forced out of the country,

indeed want to have a path to citizenship. So it shows that the country's moved on this issue, and the president and Stephen Miller have missed it. And yeah, the war, we'll talk about it, but I think we're at a point where more, there's no reason to believe that more military force is going to give you more result. We've had now, we're in eight, by the way. We just entered month eight of this war.

And it just seems to me the administration still doesn't have an endgame or an exit strategy. Yeah, and it raises a question, what is planned after the election? Are they holding back from doing something before everybody goes to vote and then it actually gets ramped up even more? It's hard to say. But the numbers right now are looking so bad that yesterday we had a Republican senator talking about how 2026 is looking a lot like 2006. Now, somebody who knows something about 2006 is former

U.S.S. now political analyst, Claire McCaskill, who was elected that year. Claire, listen, if you will, to Republican Senator Steve Daines, Montana. He had this warning yesterday for his party ahead of the midterms. There arguably could be some similarities between

the 06 cycle and the 2006 cycle. Think about the condition of the country back in 06, an unpopular war. Six in ten Americans opposed the Iraq war at that point. Gas prices had doubled. Does it sound familiar? And we ended up losing six seats. That was a night, by the way, we lost some redder states. That's when Jim Talent lost in Missouri. That's when, by the way, Sherry Brown won in Ohio and beat DeWine. That's when in the state of Montana, John contester beat Conrad Burns by the narrowest margin. Those were three of the six pickup seats

that the Democrats got that night. Today, six and ten Americans oppose the Iran War. Gas prices, enough set on gas prices. And so there's an argument, if you look at history, that 2026 feels a lot like 2006. It's a good parallel. And, you know, Claire, you look at the farm states, you look at sort of this anti-incumbency, anti-Republican prairie area that seems to be sweeping across Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, suddenly, and even people are talking about Mike rounds having to defend his seat. I think that's a little bit of a stretch there. But again, in years like 2006, 1974, 1980, you never know. Yeah. And another, of parallel is that when I began running in 2005, most people didn't give the Democrats much chance

of taking the Senate. In fact, most Missourians gave me no chance of beating Jim Talent. But as the year went on, Bush got more and more unpopular. The war got more and more unpopular. The economy got worse and worse. And then within 30 days of election, all of a sudden, everyone was talking about taking the Senate. Very similar to this cycle where a year ago, none of us really believed in our bones that we were going to take the Senate. I think it's hard to find somebody who doesn't believe it now. The only difference I would say I see is Bush was very unpopular. The Iraq war was very unpopular. But I don't think you had the passionate anti-president sentiment among the Democratic Party like you have against Trump. I mean, people have a visceral dislike for this guy in the way he handles himself, his personality, his obnoxiousness, the fact that he's a crook.

I mean, all of those things are like the whipped cream and cherry on top of a very ugly Sunday. And I think that's going to motivate voters to get out more, even more perhaps, than 2006. Well, that's obviously showing up in the polls, clear, because I would tell you, every Democratic commercial I see. Actually, that's what I did, Bill Clinton in 1994. showed my opponent, showed Bill Clinton, morphed them together. And that was worth 62% for a guy that probably wouldn't have won any other year. This year, though, you have Willie in every single ad. You have Donald Trump.

They'll have somebody talking big and opening their mouth really loud and yelling, and then they'll do a split screen, and then they'll show Donald Trump doing the same exact thing, freeze them. But, you know, Mike Lawler, all the ads against Mike Lawler, He claims he's independent votes with Trump 100% of the time, always runs across the bottom of that ad, have them morphed together. He doesn't work for us. He works for Donald Trump. You hear that and all the other raises. Swazi, the guy he's running against, you hear the same thing.

So, and for Republicans, it's just hard. You have costs, inflation. The president's numbers as bad as any of us have seen in that AP poll yesterday. And then you combine that with the war that's extraordinarily unpopular with his base, even if you divide that from the prices. And then sort of the third leg of just this devastating tripod that is beating the Republicans right now and holding up Democratic chances, corruption. And it's all over the place. And we may have, I want to say when a family's already raked up $2 billion, $3 billion. It's hard to say this is the worst example, a most flagrant example of corruption, but it's

certainly up there with the president announcing this dinner for people that want to pay their way in. Yeah, you said announcing, and that's important because they're not hiding this stuff at all. I don't know that they ever were, but especially in this second term. President Trump is now offering investors what he's calling the most exclusive dinner in the world, and all they have to do is to buy at least a million dollars worth of his. cryptocurrency. It's part of a contest launched this week, which says the top 185 investors in the Trump meme coin will receive invitations to a dinner next month at a Trump golf club where three mystery legends will be in attendance. Meanwhile, the top 29 purchasers of that coin get a VIP

reception with the president and the four largest holders will be gifted a Trump 18-carat gold watch, which retails for around $899. The Trump. Trump meme coin currently trades at $2 down from its high of $70 when it was launched. Trump does not own the firm that runs the meme coin, but he has made $635 million from the licensing of his name, Jonathan Lemire. First of all, John, you know that watch is top of the line of his stakes and everything else or any indication, but also the fact that he is openly selling access to the president of the United States to the highest bidder.

This is a worthless meme coin. So all you're doing is buying access to the president of the United States. And doing it out in the open in a time, again, where people can't afford to buy gas or groceries or pay their rent or pay for their health care. But really, there'll be three mystery guests, so it'll be worth it. This is last week, President Trump had this lavish state dinner at the White House for Xi Jinping of China. And afterwards, there were members of his staff, including Dan Skivino, his deputy chief of staff, who posted these AI images. videos of Trump's staff members and family members, like dousing each other in champagne, like these over-the-top images, these of decadence and luxury.

And there were even some Republicans who came here this week, and I included this in the story I wrote yesterday, I think, what are we doing? What would they do that? And by the way, great Tucker Carlson imitation of the guy who does the imitation. What are we doing? What's that about? What's that about? Is that the new rule now?

That's the goal. That's the goal. So what are we doing, though? You're right. I mean, it's what Republican should be asking because while people are struggling to pay rent, while an increasing number of Americans are only able to buy their groceries, like on layaway. And there, I saw a clip and I didn't, you know, I didn't believe that it was actually on the account that it said it was on of champagne and women and all of this other stuff. like, you know. It's extraordinary. The origin of this is so people were, it was made afterwards. Elon Musk put something out because he just reactively and retweets whatever he, they sees. But then members of the White House, like Jan Skavino is on the White House payroll.

This is his official account put out a different version. He made his own and put it out because they were just so reveling in this. And Richard, I mean, so that was last week. And now next week, or later this month, we have this dinner, this exclusive dinner, Willie read through the prices. Here is the Skivino. Dan Skavino, that's him in the middle. And that's behind him, Eric Trump, the president's son and his wife.

They put this out. They're reveling in this. They want us to see this. And yet, it comes at a time when Americans are deeply concerned about affordability. And we keep coming back to this theme. It's not just that the White House is like trying to fight affordability and it's not working. They're not even trying.

in voters are just angrier and angrier. This is Marie Antoinette. This is Let him Eat Cake. The 30-year mortgage is now at 7.28. Yeah. Basically means housing is increasingly now priced out of the reach of most Americans. This is like Cash Patel on stilts. This is an out-of-control bunch.

And that just strikes me about it. It's the brazenness of this. It's the nakedness of this. So they're clearly living on a little bubble of their their fellow party goers and rich people at Mar-a-Lago, that this is some, this is frat-boy behavior. And these are people who are entrusted with the most powerful office in the world, and we're getting frat-boys. This is, and you just wonder when the country is going to turn on the way, and them,

the way Hungary turned on Orban. Right. But my sense is it's a question of when rather than if, and the sooner the better. Coming up, an update on the president's ongoing attempts to punish a former Olympian who the White House accuses without evidence of vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. We'll tell you what a judge now has said about that when Morning Joe comes right back. Coming up, our next guest went toe to toe with Rocky. Action star Dol Fulngren joins us with a new memoir about his time in Hollywood and the lessons he learned along the way.

That conversation straight ahead on Morning Joe. That's trouble. Don't be scared. You might recognize our next guest from the epic, classic, 1985 sports drama Rocky 4, portraying one of Rocky's all-time rivals, the Soviet boxer Ivan Drago. Four decades after rising to fame with that role, actor Dolph Lungren is out with a new autobiography, titled Fights Worth Fighting, Finding Strength and Struggle. And the book highlights the real-life battles that he has faced behind the scenes, including cancer.

And the actor, filmmaker, and martial artist, Dolf Lungren, joins us now. It's great to see you. Nice to meet you. Congratulations on the book. And we will turn to some of those more hidden chapters of your life in a moment. But we do have to start with your iconic role. And my question is, what is it like to be so synonymous with one character? I mean, of course, have this very deep breath of life.

But, like, that's the one that people are going to come up to you and say, I know that guy. Yeah, that's number one. You have He-Man, Masters of the Universe. They just had their remake of that. Of course, you have the Four Expanables movies, Aquaman. Yeah, to a lot of people, you know, people, they think of Ivan Drago because once you see somebody on screen the first time, it has a big impression. You know, if you're the Terminator, you'll always be the Dominator, you know.

So, yeah, it's okay. I made a hundred movies, so I don't mind. I mean, some stand out. I actually, I heard an interview with Johnny Depp. he said he did a film, Marlon Brando. And Brando asked him, how many movies do you make? How many movies do you make here? And he said, three or four, he says, best too many.

Like, you only have so many faces. So I think, you know, most careers you have three or four characters, people know. And I imagine a blessing and a curse to have a synonymous role like that. It's okay. Do people challenge you to fights? No, I'm too big. I was going to say, I would definitely bet on you. So, as you say, you've had a very lengthy and accomplished career.

Why is now the right time to put it on page and say, look, I want to share with my fans, I want to share with those who care about Hollywood the rest of my story. Well, what happened was I was working on the documentary. There was a documentary being filmed about my life. I started 2020, and I had a cancer diagnosis at the same time. So we had to recut the documentary. and at the same time, like when the treatments started to work, because the cancer treatments were not working that well,

and I wasn't sure if I was going to be around for the premiere of this documentary. And at the same time, I was approached by a couple of publishers, so I thought, yeah, I might as well tell the story, both with a documentary and book form. It's a different medium, you know. Sure. We should mention the documentary, Dolf, Unbreakable, comes out October 6th.

You know, I was struck by how candid you are in the book, particularly in the fight against cancer and even floating the idea that it may have been connected to, you know, choosing to use steroids and HGH to get the physique you needed for your roles and for your fighting. Yeah, that's right. Yeah, my oncologist says there's no conclusive evidence, but she did have other patients that had kidney cancer, that had used steroids like bodybuilders and such. So I think especially HGH is probably not a good idea, because if you have anything growing in your body,

whether it's your biceps or a tumor, you know, it'll make it grow faster. So what do you want people to readers who know you from the screen and now are picking up this book? What are some things that might surprise them about you? Well, chemical engineering. I guess there are not too many chemical engineers in the action movie business. I think I'm trying to be honest here and vulnerable and open about everything I've been through. Also, when I first came to New York, this lovely city, I was dragged off to Studio 54, ran into Andy Warhol, a few other people, and that's kind of an interesting part of my life.

But I think mostly I'm trying to sort of show that there's this real struggle behind the movies. there is a point in trying to be resilient to get up, no matter how many times you get knocked down and keep going, because life is beautiful. And certainly, I mean, the book details some of the struggles you have had, including there's a home invasion issues with abuse, with your family members. We will let people read it for themselves. But fighting is the theme for you. And, you know, in your life, but also, are you still in the ring?

Are you still, we see, we're seeing pictures here. You know, is that something that you're still doing? Yeah, I do. Hit the pads, hit the bag. I like to do it. Yeah. It keeps me honest. And I've done it since I was 13, so I enjoy it. All right. Well, as we mentioned, we have a clip actually of the new documentary. It's titled, Dolf Unbreakable. Let's watch a bit of the trailer now. Thanks. I've lived like five lifetimes in one. That is an extraordinary career. I will kill you. I will break you.

He has skills that other actors didn't have. And Dolf will give everything in a thousand percent. Well, I'd have to do what I had to do, you know. I had a feeling that it became too much. And as you saw there, the documentary includes interviews, the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, Jean-Claude Van Dam. Is there like a brotherhood of 80s, 90s action stars? I think so, yeah.

I'm good friends with Sline Arnold. And I look up to them. They're kind of mentors. and Jean-Claude I did three or four movies with. And I think, yeah, we all, some of us share a similar background and similar struggles. And I think both, I know Slice got a book coming out, I think, next week, about the first Rocky movie. And Arnold is doing a book, I heard. And we all have documentaries.

So I think we all, we kind of just walk, you know, shoulder to shoulder to the future. Big shoulders, we should note. Very big shoulders. The new book, Fights Worth Fighting, Finding Strength and Struggle, Available Now. And the new documentary, Dolf Unbreakable, debuts in all major streaming platforms, October 6th, author, actor, filmmaker, martial artist, and much more. Dolan, thank you so much. Thanks, man.

All right, and we'll be back here with more. Morning Joe. Welcome back. A federal judge has ruled that prosecutors cannot revive a felony charge against the former Olympian who was previously accused of vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. The judge said yesterday that President Trump's public rebuke of the decision to drop the case created the possibility that federal prosecutors could be pressured to refile charges. And he ordered the case dismissed with prejudice, which bars the DOJ from bringing it back. In a scathing decision, the judge wrote this.

The court agrees with the defense that in securing the indictment, the government shot first and asked questions later. Nothing about the grand jury process would prevent. it from giving in to the president's pressure and doing so again. U.S. Attorney Gene Piro had already dropped the charges on July 31st, admitting the damage to the pool was the result of botched renovations rather than sabotage, as officials had originally alleged. Trump scolded Piro on social media for that decision, insisting the major damage was caused by vandals without, of course, providing any evidence. Joining us now, former state of attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida, Dave Aaronberg, along with CNBC founder Tom Rogers.

Tom's also a senior advisor for Verson, MS Now's parent company. Also with us, MS now contributor, Huma Abiddeen. Great group. Thank you all for being with us. Dave, start with you. This was skating, to be sure. I enjoyed the shoot first, ask questions later line there from the judge, but I think rightly thought this was necessary because Trump is still banging the drum about the link Memorial Reflecting Pool, alleging vandalism, and we know that it's rare when those in his employee defy him. Jonathan, when prosecutors move to dismiss a case, it's almost always dismissed without prejudice, and that leaves the door open to bringing it back.

Judge Edelman here slammed that door a shot for good reason, because he concluded that it would be unfair harassment of David Hearn to leave him under the continuing threat of a meritless prosecution, especially in the face of presidential pressure. And this case grew out of President Trump's push to blame vandals for this embarrassing multi-million dollar reflecting pool renovation failure. So they indicted her and before they even got the crucial documents and the evidence they're waiting for. That's the shoot first ask questions later line.

And at the hearing on whether the case should be dismissed forever, the judge asked prosecutors what new evidence could ever justify reviving the case? and the prosecutor played coy and said, I don't know what the future may bring. None of us do. Judge Edelman rejected such philosophical clap trap and said that there was no chance of any successful prosecution in the future. And so he buried this case in the graveyard of bad ideas. And actually, Jonathan, I think the happiest people here aren't just the defendant and his lawyers, but also the prosecutors who can finally move on from this garbage case.

This is a huge burden lifted from their shoulders. and the U.S. Attorney Piro can blame the judge here, who was appointed by President Obama and hopefully avoid Trump's wrath as well as potential future bar sanctions. So, Huma, this obviously case seems to be over. And frankly, President Trump's promised retribution campaign has been pretty faltering to this point. But there is a sense among Democrats and some watchdogs that, especially if Democrats were to take at least one house of Congress and Trump's power sort of narrows and narrows, well, the One thing he still has as an executive is he can push DOJ.

Clearly, he doesn't care about any separation between the West Wing and the Department of Justice to further this. There's a sense here that these actually kind of retribution campaign might actually step up. Well, I think, first of all, this particular case, there are, there were seven people that were originally arrested and cited. I feel like, are we sure that it's going to, they're not, there's not going to be any, attacks, further attacks against the people who already arrested. And I'm surprised Janine Piro has not faced any more significant heat.

And I think that still remains to be seeing that she wouldn't. But I think it's just another, there'll be another distraction. There will be something else. There will be something about the reflecting pool that will cause people to have even more, kind of a more attack. So I just think it's just another step in the charge towards November. And also the reflecting pool we should note, still closed, still terrible, has yet to be fixed. Tom, you have a new column out for Newsweek on what you call another Trump attack on press freedom

that surrounds the legal battle between the Walt Disney Company and the Federal Communications Commission over the agency's decision to review ABC's broadcast television licenses earlier than usual. And Tom, we spent a lot of time on the show, obviously talking about Trump's assault on the press that has included lawsuits, that has included federal agents rating apartments, and then recently, of course, three outlets, including this one, being thrown off the White House grounds until the judge put them back. But this is a new front. Tell us more. Well, this case kind of faded into the background even before the whole White House credentials being pulled situation. This is a case where the FCC indicated it was going to investigate

Disney potentially leading to this early license review that could lead to revocation of its licenses. Now, revoking a television station group license hasn't happened in 50 years, and it's really the death penalty for TV stations, meaning that's it. You don't broadcast anymore. You lose the right with your TV stations to be able to reach your audience. And, uh, Trump, after his prime time speech about election irregularities, which ABC did not cover in prime time, made it clear he thought station licenses should be revoked for not covering them. And the FCC chairman has actually made comments about so-called fake news, and it's a time for stations to figure out how they're going to correct that

before their licenses come up for renewal. And what makes this case different than the White House credentials being pulled, and in some ways much more dangerous, is it's not a frontal attack on press freedoms the way that situation was at the White House. They're claiming here that Disney is violating its equal employment opportunity obligations at the FCC. In other words, they're claiming employment discrimination as the way to get at that. That's a whole lot harder for the courts to pierce than a clear press freedom violation. And the fact of the matter is the EEO rules at the FCC haven't been changed in 25 years.

And Disney's been living up to them. And so obviously with a Trump administration that is anti-D-EI, they're basically coming up with a pretext, a subterfuge, for trying to figure out how to go at Disney without frontally attacking them on press freedoms, which the court. courts obviously are highly attuned to. Dave, I wonder what your take is on this case and what do you think is going to happen next? Well, this reminds me of what happened in Florida. The FCC's action against Disney here reminds me of when Governor DeSantis attacked Disney because of its supposedly woke policies.

It's the Florida retaliation playbook exported to D.C. It had backfired in Tallahassee. I think it should fail in Washington. And I agree with Tom. This is a pretext used DEI here as the sword. Two years ago, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that government officials cannot use regulatory coercion or audits or even licensing threats to suppress disfavored speech enforcing ABC into some unprecedented out-of-cycle broadcast license review over news coverage and comedy monologue seems to cross a line from legitimate oversight into unconstitutional coercion and retaliation. Now, the defense here from Brendan Carr is procedural. He's arguing that ABC is in the wrong court at the wrong time. They should have pursued administrative review through the FCC and then gone to the courts. But the Supreme Court rejected the idea that a First Amendment plaintiff must always wait for the government's threat to become completed punishment.

It's already chilling in newsrooms editorial decision. So the process itself becomes a punishment. And one more thing on this, I think it is a lesson that appeasement doesn't work. When you have a bully here, you got to stand up to them. Remember when ABC cut a $15 million check to President Trump's library to settle Trump's lawsuits, something from comments made by George Stephanopoulos? When that happened, you have to believe that this administration smelled blood in the water. Tom, 30 seconds. Well, what really distinguishes this in another way from the White House press credentials case is the rest of the media industry rallied around MS now and CNN and Politico. in a very important way, saying, hey, we understand this is an attack on all of the free press.

There hasn't been much rallying around at all in this Disney case. And it's not only a much more significant economic penalty, the revocation of licenses, but the fact that only the National Association of Broadcasters, the Trade Association, has spoken up here. And we really haven't heard from the rest of the media industry in a significant way We really got to have the media industry rally around here because this is very dangerous. Let's hope that changes and changes soon. Tom Rogers, Huma Abiding, Dave Aramberg, our thanks to all of you.

And we'll be right back here with much more morning, Joe. We've got some news just in this morning. The jobs reports out, and it's a disappointing one. The U.S. economy added only 29,000 jobs last month. That is way under expectations. And the unemployment rate has ticked up to 4.2%. Again, the Wall Street Journal deems this far short of expectations. The Washington Post adds employers are facing growing uncertainty.

This is not the kind of number Republicans want heading into the midterms. In fact, I believe the last jobs report before the midterms here. President Trump, we've been talking about it all morning, all week, frankly, all year, remarkably out of touch when it comes to the state of the economy boasting that we're in this golden age, suggesting that the economy's booming. It's rather just the media isn't, you're to blame because we're not. telling the American people just how successful he's been. That just flies in the face of the facts. This is the latest number here. The jobs reports have sort of been up and down in recent months.

But this one here, the last one that a lot of Americans will see before they go to the polls or vote early, a very disappointing one for this White House. We'll hear from the president later today, I am sure, as to what he thinks. We appreciate it. So that we will stay with over, you know, for the weekend. and we'll revisit Monday morning at 6 a.m. for, of course, another brand new morning, Joe. That's it for us this morning. But money, power politics with Stephanie Ruhl is up next after a short final break. Have a great weekend, everybody. Thanks for watching.