Morning Joe - 'It’s the minority leader’s fault?': Joe slams Speaker Johnson for blaming shutdown on Sen. Schumer

Episode Date: October 10, 2025

'It’s the minority leader’s fault?': Joe slams Speaker Johnson for blaming shutdown on Sen. Schumer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

President Trump will end, the radical left's reign of terror in Portland once and for all. You look at Portland, and you see fires all over the place, you see fights and, I mean, just violence. This network of Antifa is just as sophisticated as MS-13, as TDA, as ISIS, as Hezbollah, as Hamas, as all of them. They are just as dangerous. They have an agenda to destroy us, just like the other terrorists we've dealt with for many, many years. Officers have to street battle against Antifa hand-to-hand combat every night to come and go from their building. Slide to the left. Slide to the right. Chris Crawl. You look at what's happened with Portland over the years. It's a burning hellhole. Too good. The Daily Show weighing in on the Trump administration's efforts to put troops on the

ground in Portland. Meanwhile, I've got to say also, there is now, and I was wondering why anybody had not done it before, but there's now a local station out there. I think it's K-U-T-A, and they have a live-cam. A live-cam. And so I check it two or three times a day, just because you hear from two different sides. You hear it's like it wasn't 2020, which really was really bad in 2020. On one side, and the other side, you hear that it's a bunch of furries running around.

I will say, in the times I checked, it's just completely quiet. 24-7 footage of that guy in the frog costume, just pouncing back in here. Mainly, and I'm serious, mainly senior citizens sitting in lawn chairs. Holding up a sign. Holding up a sign, you know, and just kind of scattered. So there's that. I don't see the hellhole there. I don't know if the National Guard will dance when they do.

What's that line dance? they were doing. Oh, right. Slide to live. The slide. Yeah, the electric slide or whatever it was called. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, so maybe the National Guard will get in with that. I don't know exactly what'll go on. So there's that. Meanwhile, a judge in Illinois is temporarily blocking the National Guard from the streets of Chicago.

That's an attorney general who's also in the news. Just ahead. Plus, now that, another perceived political enemy of President Trump is facing charges this morning will bring you expert legal analysis on the case against New York Attorney General Letitia James. Also ahead, the litus from Capitol Hill on the government shut down as there seems to be some dissent growing among Republicans over the strategy from leadership. You know, I don't know much. I don't know much because I think most people understand a simple country lawyer. This is the open of the show, Joe. fell off a turn-up truck.

I don't know if you know this, 19 years ago. I've never really been, by the way, I was telling me coming in. I've never really been comfortable at 30 Rock. It's just too big and corporate. But I'm kind of getting used to it. Yeah, I like it. After 19 years, I'm starting to kind of feel like an old year.

And so I'll stay here. That's good. I think I'll stay here for a while. Yay. Anyways, an old country lawyer, I don't know a whole lot. I do know, though, I do. I do, like, understand what panic smells like from legislators. And I don't know that Republicans are quite there yet,

but I was there during government shutdowns. And I know when they start to fray, you're starting to see it at leastophonic doing what I would have done in my district, which is, all right, you have your little shutdown if you want your little shutdown, but you're going to fund the troops. Like, she wants to get that bill on the floor. And so now you've got the Speaker of the House saying, no, we don't want to fund the troops.

No, that's a gimmick to fund the troops. No, like, that's a lose-lose situation for Mike Johnson. You get other people across the country, and, you know, people would come up to me when we had government shutting down, going, wait, let me get this straight. So you all have shut down the government, and you're getting paid, but I work at the Navy base, and I'm not getting paid. How does that work? It just doesn't. How does that work, Congressman? How does that work, Congresswoman?

They're starting to hear all that. And I would just say, just again, Donald Trump usually knows how to maintain the high ground politically as far as the ad, you know, I'm not saying he takes a high ground. He knows where the high ground is politically and he's usually in a pretty good place. Here, you have a speaker, that speaker right there, shut down Congress to avoid a vote on the Epstein files. Put him up for a second. That speaker, and these are just not political orders, he shut down Congress. to stop a vote on the Epstein files. He then was part of a shutdown of government

so people wouldn't get their health care back. Like Democrats are literally trying to get millions of people in Red State America, trying to get their health care back in Louisiana. You can say what you want about, Chuck Schumer. Chuck Schumer, Mike Johnson, and is trying to help your constituents. You're not helping your constituents

because Louisiana is going to take a disproportionate hit. That guy right there, a Yankees fan, for God's sake. A Yankees fan is trying to help constituents in Louisiana more than a representative and a speaker from Louisiana. It's remarkable how the dynamics of this have changed in the last week or so, where early on they thought the Democrats would cake. We had three senators that first night looked like they were going to, they did say they voted for the bill.

I was told a number of people on the Hill saying this is going to last a couple of days. Instead, Democrats are staying strong. They're saying the polls are with them and it's Republicans, Joe, for all the reasons you just outlined, people are realizing, wait a minute, this government shutdown is actually starting to affect my life with health care. We're starting to see it in airports. And we are now starting to see from Republicans dissent. And we had a couple of members last night say, we need to open the house.

Call the House back, Speaker Johnson. We need to be doing our jobs. And people know he has the power to do so. He went on C-SPAN, Speaker Johnson, and took calls. And this mother of two medically fragile children and the wife of a military that just laid it on him saying, you know, members of my family could die. This is the situation we are in. And you have the power to change it.

He said, I'm sorry for your situation. It's all the Democrats' faults. and then continued with what appeared to be untruths about this being all the Democrats' fault. Well, it doesn't work, and it doesn't work because Republicans own the House, Republicans own the Senate, Republicans own the White House, Republicans control the Supreme Court. I wouldn't have said that a couple months ago. She knew that. But right now, the Supreme Court is a wholly owned subsidiary of the GOP, because they're just

not making any rulings that will bring any order to the cities. That's on the Supreme Court. That really is. It's what they've been doing last three to six months is just unbelievably negligent. And so Republicans own Washington, D.C. And so to say, oh, it's Chuck Schumer. It's the minority leader's fault who has no power. Yeah, no, it doesn't work that way.

I want to bring it right now a guy who's actually there. I don't know if you were there during the shutdown, but you were working the hill when I was on the hill. And we have John Breznan. And, hey, John, you always see with these shutdowns. I mean, we could certainly see. We could figure out when things were going our way, and you can just smell it, and you can smell the fear in the air

when Bill Clinton got our number and figured out how he's going to win that shutdown. And we knew we were doomed. And even Gingrich basically knew we were doomed. Talk about the dynamics on the hill now, where you have Stefanik saying, well, let's at least find the military. which, again, something I would have done in my district if I were, if I were her, you have these

other members saying, we need to get back into town. They won't swear in a member that got elected. And he ran everybody out of town in the first place because of the Epstein files. This is, this is not good. And I'm not saying this to a bunch of liberals. I'm just saying what Republicans are thinking and what they're hearing, John, back in their districts. What are you hearing on the hill. Yeah, the things have definitely shifted. The debate has shifted. Ken Calvert, who's the defense appropriations chairman, the guy who funds the Pentagon,

he wants them to come back. Remember, the house has been gone since September 19th. Honestly, my colleague Jake Sherman and I have been writing about this kind of baffled by Johnson's strategy here of not keeping the house in, but there was other members of the House Republican leadership saying, look, we don't want those guys here because it'll be a problem for us. You know how members are when they've got, when they're all together and they, you know, they, you know, they, you know, it's a way for the leadership to control them if they're not here. But I do think it's getting to the point where members are openly complaining of like

Stephanie Bice from Oklahoma, you know, a good conservative member, somebody who's in the leadership or has the leadership's here, you know, she's saying, we got to come back, you know. So you're starting to see that the Senate's not going anywhere. And I agree with you, Joe. I just think, it's surprising to me, Trump hasn't tried to shift this now. He's, because this is on Trump. I know he's got a lot on his plate with Gaza and Israel. It's a huge deal. Right.

But think about this. The president of the United States may leave the country while the government shut down. And I can't think of a president who would do that. I'm not criticizing Trump for it because it is a huge deal. It's massive right. Yeah. Leaving the country. And that's it.

That's, you know, Trump is going to have to be the one that breaks, breaks the stalemate here. He's going to have to find a way to do this. Yeah, a lot of stuff going on. I mean, obviously the peace plan in the Middle East is massive. It's an extraordinary historic breakthrough, but he had enough time to send his hand-picked

U.S. attorney to indict Lettisha James or to have a grand jury do that. So he's juggling quite a few things right now. Gene Robinson, you know, again, I just, again, I lean on my personal experience because they've been through this. If you're in district like I was in,

and I would guess Elise DeFonic and other Republicans are, Ken Calvert, who I served with, other people that have bases in their district. You know, I have five, six military bases in my district, which meant I had tons of military retirees living in that district. I had tons of vets living in that district.

And when there's a government shut down, man, the VA ain't working. It's not working the way it is. The military bases aren't working. People who work on the planes, who work on the ships, they're not going to work. They're sitting home. They're not getting paid.

Like the idea that Mike Johnson thinks he can sit and C-SPAN studios and just say, oh, this is a problem of the party who has absolutely no power. Like, Americans aren't that stupid. And again, I'm not saying this for a left-wing audience, for a progressive audience. I'm saying this as a former Republican who helped shut down the government to balance the budget. And I'm telling you, man, it is after a while it's not sustainable, especially if you have a speaker, and this is a dynamic, who shut down Congress because of the Epstein files, and then shut down the government because he didn't want Americans in his state to get their health care back. Yeah, those things together do not a tenable position make. They really don't. You know, if you are the party, that controls Washington and there's a government shutdown, duh, you're going to get the point. You're not going to be able to just point to the Democrats.

And, you know, the key moment in this was really very early on when Democrats managed to make the issue not just, you know, shutting down the gun. government, but also health care, right? And there's been this enormous focus on health care and what's going to, you know, all these people, including in Louisiana and many, many red districts and red states that are going to be thrown off Medicaid. There's a focus on these Obamacare premiums that are set to double. And, you know, Marjorie Taylor Green has pointed to that. She's another person who, I guess, I guess, you know, Mike Johnson doesn't want to have to deal with here in Washington, but he can't just keep the house shut down indefinitely. He's going to have to open it back up. And the longer he waits, I think the more restive Republicans are

going to be, because they know they are now getting killed on this. They're going to have to, just saying, we're not going to talk about any of this other stuff and it is not working. That's not their job is, they have a job, right? They're in control. They're supposed to help their constituents. And they're not doing their job and that they can't just hope that people won't notice. Well, Brez, one of the reasons why Marjorie Taylor Green is doing what she's doing, first of all, is she raises a lot of money from smaller downers.

And so she doesn't have to worry so much. And also, she's sort of out magaing the MAGA crowd, right? I mean, she's actually fighting for her argument would be, and I know her district very well. She's fighting for working class voters in her district. She's fighting for Trump voters who depend on, again, a lot of this health care that has been stripped away. So Republicans can give trillion dollars in tax cuts to the likes of Mark Zuckerberg. So talk about how when one member does it and does it successfully, and it is very popular in your district when you do this to fight for your constituents over Washington. And also, again, the Epstein files. She's out there on the Epstein files as well.

Talk about how this suddenly puts her in a position where other members are looking going, this is not hurting her at all. In fact, maybe telling the truth about these health care cuts to our constituents might be a good thing for us. Yeah, you're exactly right, Joe. Like, Marjorie Taylor-Green, when she made her announcement that she supported, you know, an extension of the Obamacare said she cited her own kids whenever I think she has like a 26-year-old daughter saying her health care premiums are going to store. There was a big story yesterday in the Atlanta Journal Constitution talking about in Georgia, where Marjorie Taylor-Green's district is, these premiums, the silver Obamacare plans, they're going to soar in prices.

Like a family making under $80,000 a year is going to pay a lot more. Now, also remember, there's a huge Senate race in Georgia next year. John Ossoff is voting with the Democrats on this, even though he's in a swing state that Trump won, And, you know, he feels comfortable because he thinks he's on the side of, you know, he's got the right message here. And you're exactly right. Taylor Green has, Major Taylor Green has, she's got the two issues. She's got the Epstein files because Johnson has kept the house out and he won't swear in the new member from Arizona, Adelaide, Rahaba. They can't get the Epstein discharge petition. They can't get a vote on, floor vote on Epstein, releasing the Epstein files.

And then second, like this populist issue, you know, Green's making an appeal to Trump here. you know, Trump is the, Trump is the key to this. And I stay on this, and we've been staying as Trump is the key to this because she's making a populist appeal to a populist president and, you know, saying that the Republican leadership is not listening. Mr. President, you got to listen. And Republicans and the president have to break on this because talking about these premiums, people are not going to be able to afford them. They can't afford anything right now, anything at all.

They can't afford homes, food, anything, because inflation and prices are. so high, this will be devastating. Absolutely devastating and it will be on them. We've got a lot more to get to. Co-founder of Punchbowl News, John Brezhnehan, thank you very much. Thanks, Brez. Joe mentioned the major developments in the Middle East. President Trump says he plans to travel to Egypt later this week for an official signing of the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas. Israel's government voted to approve the deal early this morning at its cabinet meeting. Now Israel's defense forces will move behind agreed upon lines inside Gaza and the ceasefire will take effect. Once the IDF has moved to new positions, a 72-hour clock to release the

remaining hostages will begin. President Trump said yesterday he expects the hostages to be released on Monday or Tuesday. So Richard Haas, an extraordinary just extraordinary developments actually that started as we were talking about a good bit yesterday that started with the bombing in Doha and started a chain of events that have led us here to cusp of a deal that looks like it's it's moving forward I think this deal will happen you're right the overreach of the Israeli attack in Doha led to a very strong Arab and American reaction and it got President Trump to essentially confront the Israeli Prime Minister and say this has got to stop. How important was that to making this happen?

That was one of the missing ingredients here, Joe. I think the other element might have been the calendar, all up to now, B.V. Netanyahu, the prime minister, has been worried about compromising it all here. Why? Because it would bring down his coalition, his government. Well, guess what? He's got to bring it down anyhow. Israel faces elections probably early next year. And he can't win those elections without Donald Trump on his side. Without Donald Trump and also he's been the prime minister of war. Now we can argue I'm the prime minister who also got the hostages back. So actually this teased things up, I think, extraordinarily well for BB Nets and Yahoo.

So I think for him, it changed his calculation. Hamas was under pressure, obviously, from the Arab world. They want peace in the region. They want a more normal relationship with Israel. They're the ones who provide the money, a lot of it, to Hamas. So essentially the stars aligned, and President Trump, to his credit, ran with it. I used the word passive, a lot looking at how he had reacted towards BB Netanyahu in this war. He basically changed gears.

Instead of leaning back, he leaned in, and this is a really welcome development. Speaking right now, contributing editor for the Financial Times, Kim Gattah. She is also a contributing writer for the Atlantic magazine. Kim, it was a pretty extraordinary setting where you had Jared Kushner, Steve Whitkoff and the Qatari officials sitting down and deciding among them, there couldn't be a negotiation with Netanyahu or Hamas. They had to write up a 20-point plan and then basically the Qataris said, okay, we have Hamas. And Jared and Steve said, we've got Netanyahu. And here we are? There is a lot of relief in the Middle East, but there's also a lot of very cautious optimism.

The Israelis are not talking about this as a peace plan. They're talking about this in terms of a ceasefire, which is only applying the first phase of this deal. So as much as I think we should be relieved that the fighting has stopped and the ceasefire came into effect just about an hour ago in Gaza. The shelling has stopped and Israeli troops are starting to move to the agreed line. I think we have to be very cautious that this is only the first phase and that is, and that Netanyahu's coalition partners are making clear from their perspective, there is no peace deal, there is no 20-point plan. So this is going to require, a lot more follow-through

from the Trump administration than we got, when they declared victory last time and a peace deal or a peace agreement last time, which was January. I was also on your show to discuss that. And that ceasefire fell through because once, you know, everybody sang Kumbaya

and said, great, we've got a deal. People walked away, and Roy Wittkoff walked away, had other things to do. I think, I hope that Steve Whitkoff and now Jared Kushner, and others in the Trump administration have learned some lessons

from that first experience of trying to apply a ceasefire with two parties who both still don't agree on all the details. And once Netanyahu gets the hostages back, you know, he may not want to abide with the ceasefire because his coalition partners

will put pressure on him again. Meanwhile, Hamas, you know, doesn't necessarily want to disarm. They've agreed to this first phase. There's a lot of work that still needs to be done. And I really hope that everybody will apply themselves to make sure, including Arab countries, that this can proceed to the second phase. And if I may, just one last point, I think the reason why President Trump wants to come to the Middle East

is not only to say, this is my deal, and I got this on the table, and I did something that President Biden couldn't do. It is to, in essence, put Benjamin Netanyahu in a straight jacket and say, great, Now you go to the second phase of this deal. We need to get this done. Well, and that is what people in the administration have been saying, which is we have that Yahoo in a box. And they're not saying it, you know, passively.

They're saying it they're a tinge of, I won't say anger. But, yeah, after Doha, his options are far more. After a lot of things. Far more limited. But, yeah, we have, Kim's exactly right. Everybody needs to be very cautious about this because you have Netanyahu that doesn't want this deal. You have the hardliners in his cabinet that don't want this deal. And you have Hamas who doesn't want to disarm. You talk to Israel and supporters of Israel, they'll say, oh, we don't think Hamas will ever disarm. And you talk to supporters of our opponents of Israel.

they will say, oh, we don't think Netanyahu will ever abide by these 20 terms. So, yeah, a lot of, as Kim said, a lot of work ahead. Yeah, it's still very fragile. But to answer one of her questions, President Trump certainly, at least now, the White House is saying he's going, yes, to put his stamp on the deal, but also to send that message to Netanyahu, this needs to keep going. This can't be a one and done. We want this to continue. Now, we'll see if Trump has the follow-through in the weeks, months ahead, but that is the intent right now. We should also note the U.S. sending 100 or 200 troops to the region.

They won't go into Gaza itself, but to the region to help ease the process here, the ceasefire, to facilitate with the ceasefire, facilitate with the hostage releases, other nations doing the same. Kim, I wanted to go back to you here. The president, President Trump has portrayed this as an important step towards bigger, broader Middle East peace, suggesting this could be regional transformation. That's a big, big ask. on the ground there in the region, which you know so well, do people there share similar hopes?

Do they think this could be more than just a ceasefire in the end of this particular war? People are certainly hoping that it could be. I think that, you know, for all the criticism that we can have of President Trump and certainly, you know, listening to the first segment of your show, there is a lot going on in the U.S. that is worthy of a lot of criticism and concern. But, you know, if we separate these two things, the way President Trump tackled this issue this time with Netanyahu, he did something that no other president had done in a very long time since perhaps President Bush I, the father, where he said, you know, this is the deal. You need to go along with us. And if you don't like it, you know, you know the number. This is what his Secretary of State at the time James Baker said. And so President Trump shows. that with a, you know, strenuous phone call, putting boundaries, you could get the Israeli Prime Minister on board. But as I said, it is going to require a lot of follow-through. And I think that getting Arab countries on board will help as well to frame this as a

transformational, potential transformational moment for the region long term. And I want to pause here and think about the people who have been most affected by this. know, the families of the Israeli hostages, the remaining hostages, you know, they've been living through two years of absolute anguish and nightmare. And two million Palestinians in Gaza have been living through hell as well. And every little bit of respite for them is a welcome moment that we should all welcome. My concern at the moment are the detractors in the region, including Iran, and the potential that Benjamin Netanyahu will potentially want to move forward with phase two of this deal, but show he is still capable of putting up a fight. And I think that

the odds of a strike against Iran are going up again, another strike against Iran. Contributing writer for The Atlantic Magazine and contributing editor at the Financial Times, Kim Gattas. Thank you very much for being on the story. Thank you so much, Kim. So Richard, if you were advising the president about the things to worry about, the people. pitfalls ahead. What are they? That Hamas is not going to disarm. They're never going to fully disarm and you couldn't monitor it or verify it that if they did. That's the lesson of we had with Northern Ireland getting the paramilitaries to give up arms. Seas fire may break down. You can imagine a situation where the word won't go out or some people in Hamas are going to disagree with the

guys who negotiated. Then Israel might see that as an opportunity to use military force against the breakdown. So what do you do? I want to go back to number one. What did you do in Northern Ireland? What do you in Gaza with Hamas if they're not going to disarm. You put the focus on maintaining the ceasefire. That's something you can monitor. You can watch a ceasefire. You know if that's working. Giving up arms, Joe, they're going to stash away arms.

You'll never get 100% of their arms. But you can get 100% compliance with the ceasefire. So I would focus on that. So how do you do that also, though? I just want to ask because they keep thinking about Northern Ireland. You have people like Jerry Adams, Martin McGinnis. You had strong people who had been in the middle of the war, who basically the paramilitary groups feared Jerry Adams and Martin McGinnis

crossing them more than they did. Like, there was peer pressure on the most extreme radicals in Northern Ireland to put down their guns because they were to face the wrath of their own. Where does that happen with Hamas? That's one of the, you asked me what can possibly go wrong. That's another thing that's missing here. What we're missing on all sides is leadership that's willing and able to bring this forward. We don't see it on the Hamas side. It's weak. It's divided and so forth. Obviously not on

the Israeli side. Other Palestinians in the West Bank. So in order to make peace work, you've got partners who are willing and able to deliver. So it's good we got this first phase. But this is, this is the end of the beginning. This is not the beginning of the end. This is not peace. It's a significant breakthrough. And the challenge for the administration is going to really to keep it from unraveling at the same time gradually to try to push it forward. But that 20-point plan gets really vague as to what's at the end of it. And again, we're going to have to go through elections a lot. Right.

A lot to focus on. I guess the main leverage comes from Qatar who's been funding them, often at Benjamin Netanyahu's bequest. So. Richard Haas, thank you very much for coming on this morning. I've got to say, even with everything going on, I've got to say, this Jackson Dart guy, played well last night. I never saw it coming.

He did not play. He was not a difference maker at Ole Miss at all. We had come so far. far. He was not a difference maker, but man, the Giants looked good last night. Giants looked very good. He's the real thing. Okay. I'm excited. Thanks. Still ahead on morning, Joe. We'll go through the indictment of New York Attorney General. Did you see you were out of town? Did you see how the Yankees stood, by the way. Joe, you couldn't resist. Joe, you couldn't resist. Okay. No, I'm just curious. You were in Germany. Did you see, did you tell me, did the Yankees win?

Joe, Joe, Joe. They did not. Oh, okay. It's really good to be back. It is really good to be back. It's great to be back. I missed you both. I'll do this again. Go in peace. Godspeed, Richard, us. Still ahead.

We're going to go through the indictment of New York Attorney General Letitia James, which comes two weeks after the indictment of former FBI director James Comey. Morning, Joe, we'll be right back. There is a new Democrat that's been elected that does deserve to be sworn in. If it's to avoid the discharge petition, why drag this out? That is going to have 218 signatures. And so I say, go ahead and do it and get it over with. Prices have not come down.

That is a reality. People's wages have not gone up. That's another reality. And so Americans are continuing to have a very difficult time getting by. That's Marjorie Taylor Green. Keep that up. You'll be dancing with Bad Bunny at the halftime show. Welcome

Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Welcome back A grand jury in Virginia has indicted New York Attorney General

Letitia James on bank fraud charges Following intense pressure from President Trump to bring the case According to the indictment James was charged with bank fraud

and making false statements to a financial institution The charges were presented by acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan, who also secured an indictment for former FBI director James Comey two weeks ago. Halligan is Trump's handpick choice to replace the previous head of the office, who resigned after the president threatened to fire him for resisting pressure to charge both Comey and James. I couldn't find anybody in the office to bring the charges either. Yesterday?

Was she an insurance lawyer? I don't know, but she doesn't have experience in this. Halligan presented evidence against James alone, after a senior supervisor in her office indicated to colleagues that they did not see probable cause to seek an indictment against James. As the New York Times reports, career prosecutors in Virginia found little evidence to indicate Ms. James knowingly, misled banks or was dishonest in her loan paperwork.

In the meantime, James Legal Team said the indictment amounted to political retaliation against the New York Attorney General, who last year secured a civil fraud verdict and a nearly $500 million penalty against Trump. James forcefully denied the charges against her in a video posted to social media. These charges are baseless. And the president's own public statements make clear that his only goal is political retribution at any cost. The president's actions are a grave violation of our constitutional order and have drawn sharp criticism from members of both parties. James is due in court for her first appearance on October 24th.

If convicted, she faces up to 30 years in prison and up to a one. $1 million fine for each count. Joining us now, MSNBC Justice and Intelligence Correspondent, Ken Delanian, former federal prosecutor, MSNBC analyst, Andrew Weissman, and NBC National Security Editor, David Rode. It's good to have your... So, Ken, lay all this out. Give us your reporting, but I do want you to underline just how extraordinary it is in both the Comey case and in this case.

they could not get prosecutors in these offices to bring the charges or to even show up in court because they were such bogus charges. And it seems that everybody in those offices understand that when Donald Trump's no longer president of the United States, they will be held accountable for what they are doing today. It is absolutely extraordinary, Joe. It's unheard of for no career prosecutor in the office to be willing to sign on to a case, and the U.S. attorney goes forward anyway. Now, this is a case about a property that James bought in 2023 that was not the one that everyone thought it would be,

was not the subject of that referral from Bill Pulte. It was a different issue here, which is essentially they're alleging that she bought a home and she said it was going to be a second home and instead used. it as a rental property. And so the difference in interest rate there was she would have, she would have qualified for a 3.8% interest rate, according to the indictment, and she got a 3% interest rate. And so what they're saying, the crime here was the ill-gotten gains was just under $19,000. And they lay out the technical pieces of evidence and the documents. What the key issue, obviously, in this case is going to be, do they have evidence of criminal intent? Do they have

evidence that she knowingly misrepresented to the banks? Or was it just a paperwork error? Or was it inadvertent? Or did she or people associated with her not understand the rules here? All of those are possibilities. All of those are defenses. Anyone who's filled out mortgage documents knows this is a complex world. But look, this is serious. As you said, bank fraud carries a penalty of 30 years in prison, not that a person convicted on a first offense would get that sentence. but it's an extremely serious use of the Justice Department to prosecute someone for what looks like a technical violation. And again, the ill-gotten gains alleged here, less than $19,000. Under circumstances, which we can all see, are highly, highly questionable, guys.

Yeah, I, you know, I think it's extremely serious. It's kind of a soft way of playing. I mean, this is a clear case of, show me the person, I'll show you the crime. Letitia James prosecuted Donald Trump. Therefore, he was going to prosecute her for something. And they looked and looked and no actual prosecutor could find anything to charge her with. And so the same with Comey. And so Lindsay Halligan was appointed to get it done, just to do it. And so she did it.

So I have a question for Andrew Weissman, which is, what happens now? these charges, both against Comey and now against to shame, seem so utterly manufactured. Is it likely to seem that way to a judge? How far are these manufactured cases likely to go? Make it all the way through a judge, make it all the way to a jury, to conviction? And what do you think is likely to happen? Well, the first thing that's going to happen, we know from the arraignment in the Comey case, and it's going to be the same model for sure in the Letitia James case, which is at least two motions are going to be made by the defense. One is vindictive prosecution. And while we don't know exactly what the evidence is in both of the cases, although as everyone's noted, there's lots and lots of reasons to be skeptical of the evidence. The one thing that seemed absolutely clear is if there's ever been a case of vindictive

prosecution, it's going to be this. If I were arguing this, I would say if not here, when. And so that's the thing that we really know is going to be filed by the defense team. They're going to ask for discovery on that issue, which means they will want to know about all the memos that were written by career people saying that the evidence is insufficient. They're going to want to know about communications between the White House and the prosecution office about you need to go forward no matter what. Those kinds of things are going to be sought that could be extremely embarrassing to both the Department of Justice and to the White House. The second motion that will be made will be challenging the appointment of Lindsay Halligan as the U.S. attorney.

This is an issue that's cropped up across the nation, and judges have been finding that this effort, to sort of get around the Senate confirmation process and to just keep on appointing people for short durations to never have to have a Senate confirmation is improper. And so here, if that happened, the results that the defense will want and could get is that the indictments in both cases would be dismissed. In James Comey's case, that would be highly significant because the government really can't go back to re-indict because the statute of limitations has run already. So President Trump during his campaign promised retribution. White House officials downplayed that for a while. It's here. It's clearly here. We just showed the true social he sent

a few weeks ago. Wall Street Journal last night confirmed by White House officials, but we've all suspected David wrote. That was indeed a direct message to the Attorney General of the United States. We could pause for a second and just note this wasn't that long ago. We had a whole presidential campaign based on a defining issue of sensitive materials and, you know, should we classified information? This is not classified, but it's like U.S. secrets, important things. And the President of the United States sent a direct message on his third rate social media site to his attorney general. So let's, that's, that's just putting that out there, but it's the content of the message that's so disturbing. He named three individuals who he thinks

should be prosecuted. James Comey, that's how. happened. Let's Mr. James, that's happened. Senator Adam Schiff, I would think would be next. Talk to us just about, is this something that he can just keep going? Is he now have a compliant prosecutor in Virginia who could just indict whoever he wants beyond these three? Yes. I mean, that's the simple answer. I think this will continue going. And we're sort of back to the Nixon era and the Hoover era, where you're literally using the federal government. I mean, one of the interesting notes in the indictment against James is her tax returns. And I think prosecutors get access to those anyway, but it's, and the head of the mortgage agency, the main federal mortgage

agency referring these cases. So it is finding alleged criminality by your rivals and prosecuting them. And this was the whole process after Watergate to have independent career prosecutors who wouldn't just carry out political prosecutions. Those are the people who are declining to bring the charges now. But I think this will continue. Trump will argue he was the victim of the same lawfare. The criticism there is that he was accused of much more serious things, trying to reverse the results of a presidential election, refusing for more than a year to hand back classified documents. But this cycle has started, and who knows where it ends.

Well, I think we're very critical of people on Donald Trump's side, supporters, very critical of the lawfare from James, from Alvin Bragg. I mean, you know, we were critical just around the table of, I still don't understand his charges against Donald Trump. and but they try to and then all of fanny willis's problems but they try to sort of mesh that together with what happened in the justice department where merrick garland was actually attacked by democrats for not being aggressive enough but it is something i'm i'm now awaiting republicans saying basically what tom tillis is saying which is okay great we're creating a new

bottom for lawfare and whatever standard this is and this is when i keep trying to warn my friends, whatever standard you live by today, you know, you will have to live by when Democrats are, again, my big fear, the billionaire independent megalomaniac, whoever, you know, becomes that president, this is standard Republicans will be held to later, and it is a dangerous standard. Yeah, I spoke to half a dozen legal experts, and there is criticism of those state and local cases that Ph. Ph. Ph. Willis and Alvin Bragg sort of piled on, and the most serious cases were the two federal cases, and obviously those weren't carried out because he won the election. But they all said it's a very dangerous cycle that we're entering, where there's

this, it becomes a normal, a matter of course that when a new president comes in office, they throw any charges they can at their enemies. And it's very divisive and just, I think, dangerous for this country, which is already deeply, deeply divided. Yeah. Or sure. NBC's David wrote, thank you so much. Greatly appreciate it. His book, where tyranny begins, the Justice Department of the FBI and the War and Democracy is now out in paperback. And MSNBC Justice and Intelligence Correspondent, Ken Delaney, and thank you. Ken, what are you looking at today? What should we expect on this Friday? We're just trying to do some more reporting on what's happening at the Justice Department,

Joe. Every day is a new adventure. There are lots of these kinds of webinization cases that are bending out there. So we'll keep you posted. All right. Thank you so much. Just absolutely great reporting. Andrew Weissman, stay with us, if you will, because up next, we're going to dig into yesterday's hearings on whether the Trump administration can legally deploy National Guard troops in Chicago and Portland. Just an absolute patchwork of legal decisions. One day, the Supreme Court will decide to end the chaos in the streets of America. Morning, but that day is not today. Morning Joe, coming right back. Ten minutes before the top of the hour, the Republican governor of Oklahoma is breaking with President Trump over the deployment of the Texas National Guard to Illinois.

Kevin Stitt, who chairs the National Governor's Association, said the president's move violates his belief in states' rights. noted how people in his state would, quote, lose their mind if Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker sent troops down to Oklahoma during the Biden administration. As the New York Times reports, Stitt said he is worried about the precedent that was being set by the guard deployment and how it could be used by a president from another. Where have I heard that before? Yeah. Well, exactly. And Gene Robinson, this is what we keep talking about. And again, it's, it's, It's, you know, not to sound like a broken record, but these Republicans, again, are setting up precedents that they're going to absolutely lose their mind on when, I don't know. Let's say the state of California decides in 2029.

They're going to send National Guard troops to make sure that a trans athlete can be escorted into a swim meet in Dothan, Alabama. Yeah. Right. I mean, come on. I mean, seriously, this is like, this is insanity, especially for the party that talks about state. States rights, states right, states right, states right. I'm glad the governor actually spoke up and said, hey, Republicans, wake up. This is really bad.

Absolutely. And Governor J.B. Prisker of Illinois has been calling from the National Governors Association to say something. You know you don't like this. Say something. And so, to his credit, Governor did. look, what you do unto others will be done unto you. And that is, I mean, that's like a basic law of how, how this whole thing works. And nobody should want to see this. This is not necessary.

This is certainly not normal. It is not healthy for our federal system. There's always a balance between federal and state rights. But clearly, and by the way, Gene, this is, again, just so people look, everybody is so like obsessed with what's right in front of their faces right now this has always been the case i remember during impeachment in 99 i would say to my you know republican uh friends who are like we're going to get bill clinton we're going to do this we're going to i said it's 99 we don't know who's going to win in 2000 but one day there will be another it doesn't seem like a now but there will be another republican president and you need to make sure however you vote

understand that standard will be applied to the Republican president. Yeah. I mean, this is basic. And yet Republicans, whether you're talking about lawfare, whether you're talking about National Guard going to different, all of these things, they're setting themselves up for a hard fall down the road. Yeah, just go back as far as you want.

This is the way it works. This is what happens. And the guard against doing that is, is norms, right? There are norms that are part of our system. And this administration, you know, breaks them willy-nilly, and the Republican Party will regret this down the road. It's just as simple as that.

I think in the minds of many voters, too, even those with strict views on immigration, connect all this with the ICE arrests that they're seeing, and it's not popular. In fact, it makes a lot of people very, very, comfortable, and that's an understatement. Meanwhile, a federal judge in Chicago has granted a request to temporarily block a National Guard deployment in the city, saying the move violates the U.S. Constitution. Appearing frustrated at times, U.S. District Judge April Perry ruled yesterday

that the Trump administration's recent deployment of troops in the Chicago area violated the 10th and 14th Amendments. Andrew Wiseman, where does this go? So she is now joining judges on the West Coast, both in San Francisco and in Portland, who have ruled the exact same way with respect to the administration's use of the military. I do think that the way that you've been first talking about this,

which is not as a legal matter, but sort of as a policy matter, the idea of using the military unnecessarily, and what standard that sets is the right way to look at it, because it's sort of, this is so unusual in this country, and I think it sort of normalizes it to start getting into the weeds on the law points. But since I'm a lawyer, the law point here and the real thing that is notable is that Judge Immigate in Portland and now Judge Perry in Illinois are basically saying, in judicial words, that they just don't believe that Trump.

administration that what they're doing is untethered to the facts on the ground. In other words, that there's nothing that is happening in either location that would justify bringing in the military. All right, former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissman. Thank you so much for coming on this morning. Thank you, Andrew. Eugene and Robinson, thank you as well. Thanks, Jean. I just want to get back to you. You talked about immigration. I did, yeah. And again, these ice arrests are horrific. Again, I hate to sound like a broken record. Hot stove.

Yep. Don't put your hand on it. Separating families, hurting people. And I've been talking about dragging them. My entire adult life. Out of cars. Go ahead. It's so upset.

The back and forth and the back and forth. One party overreaches, the other party wins two years later. That party overreaches, the other party wins two years later. On immigration, Gallup is reporting. A record high, 79. percent of Americans. A record high, 79% of Americans say immigration is good for America. By the way, that's the Ronald Reagan position. Reagan was one of the biggest advocates for immigration. That number has skyrocketed straight up over the past six months. Gallup says this is the highest number ever recorded in a

American history. Why? Because people are seeing moms being dragged out of cars as they're taking their children to school. They're seeing veterans

having to escort their mothers, their mother to a hearing because they don't want something bad to happen to their mom. they're seeing these heinous pictures. And again, I just want to say again, for Republicans,

if you're anti-immigration, you, I'll use an official NASA term. You're screwing the pooch. Yes. You're doing the exact opposite of what you want to do to win. I want to say it again, 79% of Americans, the highest number ever support immigration. Why? Because what they've seen on TV over the last six months. Wanting to close the southern border is one thing.

What we're seeing here, these images, these terrifying images, massed agents, guns, wandering American streets, pulling people out. That is a very different thing. And we should also know, speaking of polling, President of the United States' signature issues, supposed to be immigration and the economy. He's underwater on both.