Morning Joe - Jimmy Kimmel nabs highest ratings in over a decade with post-suspension episode

Episode Date: September 25, 2025

Jimmy Kimmel nabs highest ratings in over a decade with post-suspension episode Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

What I'm going to show you, a real unedited text messages some of my coworkers got while we're off the air. This was to, Rachel, who's one of our segment coordinators from her aunt, when she got the news that we were off the air. She said, hey, sweetie, is it Kimmel or Fallon that you currently work for? Sadly, it was me. This was the Catherine, associate producer here on a text with her mom and sister. CNN says you're canceled indefinitely? Who knows? Absolutely disgusting.

So her mom sends her a link to job openings in New York and then says, what does this mean for you? No clue. Are you at work? What are people saying? It said starting with tonight's show. Yes. They just said our show for tonight and tomorrow is canceled.

Just now or long term? No clue. No one knows. Wild. I'm sure you do know. So do you still go into work? No, we don't know. This message was for Scott or head utility guy from a friend.

I can't believe this. Hopefully they just changed hosts and keep the show. This was to Jamie from, it was one of our writer from her college RA named Taylor. Hey, I just saw the news about Jimmy Kimmel. Does that mean you're out of a job? Not sure. Well, that sucks. You were always funny, but I heard there are like no jobs out there.

Cool, thanks for checking in, Taylor. And then Jamie got another one, a better one from. her mom, I'm a wreck over this shit. I cancel my vacation and come back. I can't think of any other jobs for you. You won a big math award in middle school.

Oh, no, that was Joe. It's not canceled. You don't need to come back. And I did win a math award, actually. Her mother says, well, what good does that do you now? That's a rough crowd. That's hysterical. That is a rough crown. That was just some of Jimmy Kimmer.

from last night building off his return to the air on Tuesday night, which we now know was watched by more than 6 million viewers. That's the highest number for a regularly scheduled episode of Jimmy Kimmel Live in over a decade. And that is despite the episode not being seen, not airing, in more than 20% of U.S. households. As Nexstar and Sinclair, two major owners of ABC affiliates, continue to preempt the show. Disney says the initial data does not include streaming viewership, and Kimmel's return monologue racked up more than 26 million views across YouTube and social media within 24 hours, according to Disney.

That's unbelievable. That's a lot of people. Those numbers are just staggering, especially considering that some right-wing, right-wing places wouldn't play it. I mean, these syndicated, yeah, that are trying to gain favor with Donald Trump weren't playing Jimmy Kimmel, and he got all those numbers. It's funny, those texts remind me of things that I would get when there was in Congress for my mom. Yeah, definitely. Who loved me very much. But, you know, disinformation, Willie, before it got spread on X used to get spread by emails.

Yeah. And so there's this email that was always going on. Did you know? something three hundred and forty eight members of congress are bankrupt two hundred and ninety eight members of congress have sexual assault charges against them one hundred all these just like first of all crazy horrible thing all of them also so unbelievably false i'd send it back to my mom hey mom i'm up here this is a lie those the emails always were in like each sentence was in a different font and a different color too and it was always sort of like the the modern equivalent of that

is a Google alert that your mom will get and say yes did you leave christina for an alien i read that somewhere exactly we're good we're good we're rock solid we're together rock solid also jimmy kimball and this is a sort of thing i've said it before i don't expect anybody in the oval office to hear me this morning when I say it. But when you do this, when you strike out at your perceived enemies and you're president of the United States, you always help your perceived enemies. We're going to be talking about James Comey, possibly being charged. And of course, probably won't even grand jury or probably laugh at it. All you do is help James Comey. All you do is help Jimmy Kimmel. All you do is help these people.

You turn them into a mortar. And one of the things that when we were down in Moralaga, we talked to President Trump about, we said, retribution, you're here. You won in large part because your base all rallied behind you because you had these charges brought against you. And they saw you sitting at a defense table. the summer of the campaign. There's always blowback. And I just, again, it's like, oh, you're going to cancel Stephen Colbert? Okay, you've just now turned him into a media god.

And then you've forced South Park, who also works for the people that fired him, to go even further, harder against you. It never works. never works. It's why presidents in the past have just said, I'm not going to even give it oxygen. Yeah, it's beneath the level of the presidency to go after TV hosts. That used to be the prevailing view, but Donald Trump, the president of the United States, can't help himself. And in fact, the White House put out an official statement yesterday, continuing to go after Jimmy Kimmel and said, well, maybe he got ratings one night, but he's a no ratings loser, shining a light on the

massive ratings he got in responding to Donald Trump. I think it's just. just a case of this president cannot help himself. If someone crosses him, if someone insults him, they have to be attacked, even if it elevates the person. Yeah, well, it always does elevate the person. Yeah. So our other top story this morning, we're learning more details about the deadly shooting at an ICE facility in Dallas yesterday and the suspect behind it. Investigators say one person was killed and two others critically wounded in the attack. No ICE officers were injured and the shooting victims were all detainees. Their identities have not been released. Authorities identified the gunman as 29-year-old Joshua John. He died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Now,

DHS officials say John fired indiscriminately at the facility from the rooftop of a nearby building. The motive and the target of the shooter was not immediately clear, but the FBI is calling the attack an act of targeted violence and FBI director Cash Patel posted an image of bullets the bureau says were found near the shooter's body, one with the words anti-ice written on it. NBC News spoke with the gunman's older brother who said the suspect was not interested in politics on either side and that he did not have strong feelings about ice. Public records show John was registered as an independent in Oklahoma and voted last November. According to the New York Times, John voted in the Democratic primary in Texas back in 2020 and had an extensive online history, but showed

little interest in politics posting mostly about video games, cars, and drugs. The shooting is the third instance in recent months of a targeted attack against a Department of Homeland Security or related facility in Texas. Trump administration officials pointed to the incident as another example of political violence motivated by the left, blaming the Democratic Party's rhetoric for the attack. FBI director Cash Patel posted on social media

that initial review of evidence at the scene was ideological in nature, including, as we mentioned, the image of the bullets that have the message anti-ice. in his post. Homeland Security Secretary Christy Noem also weighed in on acts, writing, quote, these horrendous killings must serve as a wake-up call to the far left that their rhetoric about ICE has consequences. And White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt posted this Democrats must stop demonizing the heroic men and women of ICE who are just doing their jobs to keep Americans safe.

In a truth social post, President Trump wrote he's calling on Democrats to stop their rhetoric against ICE and America's law enforcement. Vice President J.D. Vance echoed that sentiment when speaking to a crowd in North Carolina yesterday. But if you look at the political violence in our country over the last couple of months, the last couple of years, it is not a both sides problem. It is primarily on one side of the political aisle. So if we are going to truly go after the political violence in this country, we need the Democratic leadership of Washington, D.C. to look in the mirror. Yeah, another lie. I really don't understand why at times like these, the vice president feels like he needs to go out and lie about things that are obviously false. I always talk about the need of support law enforcement. We talked yesterday about the attacks against ICE in July, two times in July of this year.

Talked about how heinous this shooting was yesterday. It's three migrants that were shot, by the way. And all of, I mean, while people were still bleeding. Yeah. You had politicians pointing fingers at Democrats. You had politicians. trying to blame other people before they knew anything. And then you have J.D. Vance saying something, again,

that he clearly knows is false. As we said before, the Coke-funded Cato Institute, a libertarian institute that has always been seen as aligned with the Republican Party for the most part. certainly not with the Democratic Party, talks about politically motivated terrorism in the United States. You have 3,120. That's 9-11. And then on the right, 391, killings 65 from the left.

You have Willie CSIS did a more expansive study of even more recent years. and the overwhelming number of killings are from the right. Now listen, if they were a Democrat that was blaming the Republican Party for these killings, we would be very critical of them. But what is wrong with these people that they go out and they immediately start pointing at Democrats saying, oh, this is where all the violence is coming from,

when they know it's not true. And where were they? When the speaker, the most powerful Democrat in the House in Minnesota, was assassinated in her own home, her husband. Do we have her picture? Her husband was assassinated. This summer, she was shot. This woman was shot dead in her own home. Her husband was assassinated by a man that had a hit list of 40. two Democrats, a state senator, Democrat, another powerful Democrat, shot in his home eight times, his wife shot nine times. Their dog killed. And that is a tragedy.

Just like every political killing is a tragedy, just like the Charlie Kirk. killing. But the question is this, where was J.D. Vance after that happened? Did he go around making speeches nonstop? Where were right-wing media outlets when all of these things happen? I mean, my God, look at the first two things here in political acts of violence in the United States. You still can't get anybody on the right to admit that there was actually a kidnapping plot against Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of Michigan. They'll go, oh, that you can you have the eye thing. And as far as Paul Pelosi having the hell beaten out of you by a man who was looking to kill Nancy Pelosi, a man who came in shouting the same things that they were saying

on January 6th, where's Nancy, where's Nancy? Beat the hell out of Paul Pelosi almost killed him. He'll never be the same. For those of us who know, Paul, he'll never be the same. And what did the right do? Did they condemn him? No, they made fun of it. Donald Trump, continually made fun of political violence because it was Nancy Pelosi's husband. I haven't heard any Democrat that's elected. No Democratic leader making fun of any political violence. I hear the California Republican Party just die laughing, cheering, laughing when Donald Trump was making fun of Paul Pelosi.

having the hell beat out of it. And why? Why do they do this? Like, why is it so important for them? Instead of trying to bring the country together, why is it so important for them to try to tear us apart? Why are they doing this? Why is J.D. Vance continuing to lie when Cato, when CSIS,

when every other study shows that the predominance of political, violence in America has come from the right. And again, you don't hear me saying, oh, this is all the Republicans' fault. But you hear me saying is these people are crazy and we, the 90% of the same people in America, we need to come together and move the country beyond this and be a better example for all. I don't know. That's leadership. What we saw from J.D. Vance is not leadership. His job in this moment is not to seize a political opportunity and make an active choice to divide. You're not a podcaster. You're not some activist. You're not a social media influencer. Cherry picking the horrible, horrible incidents that have happened, whether it's the

assassination of Charlie Kirk, the attempted assassinations twice of Donald Trump. We can talk about Steve Scalise. We can go down the list. But this shouldn't be about keeping score. This be about condemning political violence in all its forms and not just picking the ones that affect your side especially with immigrants one is dead and two are bleeding in the hospital well that's the other after the shooting exactly and that's the other question if this person was a sniper on top of a building you can identify ice officers pretty or distinguish them at least from migrants so there's still a lot of open questions about what happened here but again it's one thing for a podcaster it's one thing for an activist to try to make hay and get clicks and raise his or her profile in a moment

like this. But when you're the president or the vice president of the United States, to immediately leap to politics, to immediately leap to division, it's just grossly irresponsible. Let's bring it right now, politics bureau chief and senior political columnist of Politico, Jonathan. Martin, Jonathan, you know, there are great Republicans who say, hey, let's come together. It's time to come together. You saw the Charlie Kirk Memorial Service. So extraordinarily moving in places. Extraordinary movie. You know, Erica Kirk presenting just an extraordinary example for Americans, for Christians, for

evangelical Christians, watch what we do, Erica Kirk basically was saying when something like this happened. We forgive because Jesus has told us, has commanded us, to love our enemies to, love our enemies to pray for those who persecute us. And then at the same speech, you had politicians going up, trying to make political hay of it, trying to point at Democrats saying we're going to, Stephen Miller, my God. It's just, it was so, so discordant with the messages of love, faith, and hope that were presented at that service.

And here we are, an immigrant is shot and killed. two migrants are bleeding out and immediately some of these Republican officials are running to X to immediately start trying to make political points by attacking Democrats, by attacking Democrats because this gamer

Right, exactly. Yeah, I mean, it's just, I don't know, Jay Martin, we've been around Washington a long time. I've just, I've never seen anything like this. Well, and the sad part is that we've become totally a nerd to it, and we aren't terribly surprised anymore. Of course, they're not going to want to address the more complicated, less easy issue to demagogue Joe, which is radicalized men under the age of 40 who are spending their lives online or on video games and creating their own twisted versions of reality in which taking human lives is somehow justifiable

and doing so because of easy access to guns. Whoa, that's a more complicated issue, a little harder to stand up and blame that on one side of the other. But Joe, when you were talking, you know what I thought of was two decades ago, and you guys will recall this well. When Paul Wellstone tragically died

in a plane crash before the 2022 election, there was a memorial service for him in Minnesota that was before the election. It was fairly political in nature. And oh my gosh, you would have thought it was the biggest scandal of the age. And days and days of outrage that this funeral became politicized. Now we almost expect it.

I mean, I think we all would have been surprised if the Stephen Miller of the world didn't use their speech at Kirk's service to politicize things. And I think it's sort of a sad sign of the times, but it's not surprising. Yeah. We've got a lot to get to this morning beyond this conversation. still ahead on Morning Show. The Justice Department is weighing a potential indictment of James Comey. We're going to dig into why prosecutors are considering filing charges against the former FBI director.

Well, because the president of the United States told Pam Bondi to and fired a U.S. attorney who didn't have enough evidence to do it. I don't know. We'll get into that. Plus, one of our next guests says we are living in an authoritarian state. state. The Atlantic's George Packer will join us to explain what he calls America's zombie democracy. Also ahead, the latest on the battle to pass a funding measure as the Trump administration tells federal agencies to prepare for mass layoffs if the government shuts down next week. And a reminder of the Morning Joe podcast is available each weekday, featuring our full conversations

and analysis. You can listen wherever you get your podcasts. You're watching Morning Joe. We will be right back. 23 past the hour. President Trump's Justice Department is weighing potential charges against former FBI director James Comey. This is a surprise. Three sources familiar with the matter.

No, it's not. Because Donald Trump ordered his attorney general to do this. last week and fired a U.S. attorney because the U.S. attorney couldn't get evidence to go after his political enemies. Resources familiar with the matter tell MSNBC. The department is considering charging the former bureau chief with flying to Congress for his response to Senator Ted Cruz of Texas during a judiciary committee hearing back in 2020. At the time, Comey stood by his prior testimony to the committee that he did not.

as FBI director, authorize a leak of information to the Wall Street Journal for a 2016 article. Cruz questioned Comey over former FBI deputy director, Andrew McCabe's insistence that Comey was aware of McCabe's decision to leak. Chairman Grassley asked you point blank, quote, Have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation? you responded under oath, quote, never. So your testimony is you've never authorized anyone to leak. And Mr. McCabe, if he says contrary, is not telling the truth. Is that correct?

Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine is the same today. As Joe mentioned, this comes just days after President Trump fired and replaced the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia who opposed charging Comey. Former Trump lawyer, Lindsay Halligan, was sworn in this week for the job. If she decides to move forward with the case, she will have to move quickly. The five-year statute of limitations will expire early next week. Two sources familiar with the situation tell MSNBC the case against Comey is far from strong. Okay, now, those words, I think that is classic understatement. Far from strong. It's weak. This is a Janine Piro special, where

where a grand jury does something, a grand jury never does, looks at all the evidence, I guess, nah, I don't think so. Yeah. Try again. Halligan was presented this week with a memo by prosecutors that suggested the case was too weak to pursue, and they did not believe they had sufficient evidence to convince a grand jury to indict. Comey is one of the critics that President Trump specifically mentioned by name

in this social media post from over the weekend. The Post was widely interpreted as a call for the Attorney General and DOJ to charge his political rivals. Again, I really appreciate the understatement of our riders. Far from strong. Far from strong. It was seen by some as some might say. Joining us now former U.S. Attorney and MSN.BC contributor Barbara McQuaid, the co-host of our fourth hour and staff writer at the Atlantic, Jonathan Lemire,

MSNBC analyst and former Republican Congressman Carlos Carbello of Florida and staff writer at the Atlantic, George Packer, his latest piece is entitled America's Zombie Democracy. And that's going to be some uplifting readings for you later on this afternoon. We're going to get to George in his second. Barb, I had a torts professor who said you should see the outcome of this case coming at you like a freight train slowly. moving out of the mist. Like this is obvious. Like it's coming straight at you. I've got to say

on this Comey thing, it is, we've talked about this before. When you have the President of the United States ordering a legal attack on his political enemies, where does that usually end up? Well, Joe, one of the things that comes to my mind is the term selective prosecution, which means even if somehow the prosecution, the prosecution, in this case are able to get past a grand jury and get an indictment despite very, very weak evidence from what is apparent publicly now. I think they are teeing up a motion for selective prosecution, which is a due process violation and a grounds for dismissal. What it says is, you've charged me not because of any interest of justice, but because of some arbitrary motivation

like politics. I think one tell is the fact that we're now running up against the statute of limitations. These events occurred almost five years ago. It's not a complicated question. Either he did or didn't lie five years ago. And it was related to testimony and occurrences that had happened in 2016. And so the fact that they're looking at it now, I think that also tells you how weak it is. So, Barbara, the sequence of events, just to like cut through all this, is the Trump appointed U.S. attorney effectively says there's no case here, gets forced out of his job, replaced by Lindsey Halligan, a personal attorney for Donald Trump who has no prosecution. experience. She becomes the U.S. attorney is immediately met with a memo from prosecutors who

say, yeah, there's not much here. We don't think we even have probable cause. So how does this go forward from here? Well, it'll be interesting to see because, of course, a grand jury has to not just review this case, but agree that there's probable cause. And there are a couple of weaknesses there. One, the inspector general has already looked at this and concluded based on the same evidence that Comey did not authorize any leak. Also, based on that clip we just heard, listen to the questions. Cruz asks him whether Comey himself served as a leak. And then he points out what McCabe said.

And then what Comey says is, I don't know what McCabe said, but I stand by my prior testimony that he did not serve as a leak. Now they're talking about whether he authorized a leak. Those are the kinds of discrepancies that can tank a prosecution. But it is concerning that it is suddenly a switch in personnel that would change the recommendation of an indictment. All right. former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuaid.

Thank you so much. Greatly appreciate it. And again, everything's in the public here, right? There is no Watergate. There is no Iran-Contra. There is just truth social. This is what we're going to do.

We're going to attack our political enemies. It's all right here. And while that may feel good for the president to do at the time, I just, I don't know a judge. It's not going to. say this is selective prosecution they got an IT report what are you doing why are you wasting my time and that it's he always puts his attorneys in these positions where you know and again i always use rudy as a great example he'll do the press conference outside the courthouse and then he'll go in the

courthouse and go well no we're not saying the election was stolen i mean and now he's fired a u.s attorney he's hired a new u.s attorney and the question is does she want to to you you know, put herself in an extraordinarily difficult position as a lawyer, just because the president wants to get back in his enemies. Yeah, Truth Social has made reporters jobs a lot easier. It's just right there. Oh, okay, that's what we're going to do. You don't have to be Woodward and Brits.

You don't have to go into the basement or go into a parking garage to be here. What's the White House thinking? Hold on as long as you've got cell service out here. Yeah, no, as you have cell service, you can do it. I actually do, there's been a theory long since the beginning of the Trump era. because so much of it is out in the open, it has almost less of an impact if it was dug up secretly. If the story sometimes maybe would have more legs if they were uncovered, we were in Bernstein style as opposed to just being put there on the phone.

But I think that we're seeing this. This is a president who promised retribution, a president whose White House has said for those first months of his term, oh, no, no, we're not doing that. Well, we're now we're seeing it kicking the gear. They're kicking the gear, and whether it's direct orders, in this case it clearly was, or just a tone set by the president, that he is seeing people, he wants them, carry out their, his wishes. And even if this doesn't go anywhere, it's still for James Comey. It is expensive. It is exhausting. It is stressful.

I wonder if there's a legal defense fund out there for people like James Comey who are targeted by the president. One wonders. I certainly, I mean, James Comey has his, you know, not too many fans on either side of the aisle, truthfully, but certainly there will be people who see this and say, this is unfair, this is unjust. You know, we could help out. But this is part of the idea. As a private citizen with his litigation, his propensity for lawsuits, he knows he can outlast people, he can spend money, he can make their life miserable, even if there's facts don't support him. You know, George, talking about, like, not trying to hide the ball here, I think your piece is very important because sometimes critics of Donald Trump will sort of over, over,

reach the mark. And their rhetoric won't, you know, people say, this is like Nazi Germany. People are going to go, no, no, it's not like Nazi. This is like Musil. And they're like, no, this is not Italy 1928, right? You're talking about a zombie democracy. And it's, there's so many parallels. And you talk about this to like Hungary. And again, Donald Trump told us, I love Orban. He's, strong man. We need a leader like Orban. Well, looks like we might get one. Yeah, if you're waiting for, you know, goose-stepping stormtroopers to go marching down Constitution Avenue. I don't think that that's likely to happen. If you're looking for, you know, millions of people to be chanting his name, it doesn't happen. As I wrote, people leave his rallies early when they get

bored. No one left the Nuremberg rallies early. So, It's not the parallel to look for. The parallel is today. It's in Hungary. It's in Venezuela. It's in Turkey. It's in India. It's democracies that erode that don't collapse overnight, that erode.

And what happens is, one by one, the checks on the leader's power disappear or fold. Congress becomes a rubber stamp. That's happening. The civil service has turned into a legion of toad. And by the way, that's something Anne Applebaum said was extraordinarily important, whether you're looking at Turkey, hungry, and her twilight of democracy book that you're like five, six years ago. And has educated me about this for sure. It's extraordinary. If you read that book, she's saying the first thing you do is you get the bureaucracy and you replace competence with loyalty.

With loyalty, which has happened. You get rid of all the independent offices, whether it's inspectors, gentlemen. general prosecutors who are independent, federal commissioners, for example, on the FCC, central bankers, federal reserve, and you replace them with loyalists. And then society beyond government, and we shouldn't forget about the courts. The lower courts seem to be acting as an independent judiciary. I'm a little worried that the Supreme Court has become a kind of firewall for the administration whenever there is a real, a direct legal threat to its power. And society itself begins to atrophy. Even the press, we're here criticizing the administration. I don't think

they're going to be coming in and hauling us off to prison. But journalists start asking themselves, what will be the consequences of this story? Are we going to get sued the way the New York Times is now facing a $16 billion utterly frivolous lawsuit? Am I going to get investigated? Am I going to get investigated? Am I going to get named and abused publicly by the president, which brings a lot of hurt onto me, perhaps my family? These questions start to gnaw. And meanwhile, the major media are one by one falling under the control of the president's friends, until, which happened in Hungary, until eventually there's really not a whole lot of independent media left, some small outlets. So when you get beyond the day's outrage to the kind of cascading effect of all of these

erosions of checks, you begin to think, what's the limit to his power? For me, it's largely his attention span. So that describes authoritarianism, not the 20th century version that we all grew up studying and fearful of, a modern version that is more born. boring, more cynical, but to me just as dangerous because democracy has this blood in its system, and if you cut off the blood flow, it starts to die. And then Carlos, there's the institution where you served and where Joe served, which is the United States Congress, which has become a rubber stamp for President Trump, which has

totally given up its Article I powers and just signed off on whatever he wants from tariffs all the way down the line. they've given up their authority to the president so much of what he's doing he couldn't do without that fact as well that's right willie and look it was nice to see in this whole jimmy kimmel incident the likes of ted cruz and rand paul come out it does seem that there are some red lines there but without a doubt this is a republican party that is fully owned by the president and they are very shy about speaking out i mean the greatest fear for any republican is being attacked in their primary by President Trump.

So as long as that's the case, it's going to be very hard for a lot of them to speak out, right? As long as it's the most important thing is to get reelected to get through that primary, it's going to be hard for them to speak out. Now, I'll tell you, this is an issue, this weaponization of government. The president campaign against this. And by the way, he made a case to the American people that he was targeted. He said that that shouldn't happen. a lot of people kind of looked at the evidence and said,

okay, we believe you. And now they're doing the same thing. I mean, what an opportunity to turn around. Well, he did. But he said, I'm going to stop the weaponization of them. We're going to stop the government targeting people based on their political beliefs. And, you know, to turn around and do the same thing where, you know, imagine another world where the president says, you know, I felt like I was targeted and we're going to stop this.

We're going to heal the country. I mean, what would it do for his image, right? And what would it do to actually heal the country and stop this race to the bottom? I mean, a lot of what you're talking about, my family went through in Cuba. I mean, they lost their country because little by little, you know, the government was weaponized against opponents. People were silence. There was a lot of political violence. So, I mean, we're not there.

We're not there. We're not there at Cuba. Are we heading in that direction? it sure feels like it you know it's uh j mort irony is dead uh when it comes to the republican party when it comes to the maga coalition as carloat said they what do they do they campaign against the weaponization of government and now what do we have we have the weaponization of government we have the president saying weaponize my government to go after my political enemies irony is dead because breaking news breaking news the FBI has reported

that there were documents found at John Bolton's office that had the word classified on them. I'm just thinking of Moralago. Like, the boxes stacked high. And then, oh, we're going to be champions of free speech. They're tough on free speech. It's why we only read the free press, free speech. Suddenly, free press is dead. Free press, for MAGA, it's like free press is what we say free press is, right? And same thing with cancel culture. It's trying to feel a little better by calling it consequence culture, but it's cancel culture. Let's see how many late night hosts we can cancel. Let's see how many professors we can cancel. Let's see how many people that we can track down in their place of work that may not have said something glowing about Charlie Kirk and get them

fired. Let's go after Pam Bondi, the attorney general. Let's go after office. Depot if they don't print flyers. Yeah. Come on, man. Come on, man. Merrick Garland, hold my beer. Exactly. I mean, imagine the Biden DOJ rushing in a new U.S. attorney from the Eastern District

of Virginia because you only got 72 hours before the statute of limitations ends on trying to find charges on one of your opponents. You know, I think that would cause some outrage. And by the way, justifiably so, it would. No, Joe, what's striking here to me is not just the irony or hypocrisy. It's amazing. The language is the same. It's not cancel culture.

It's accountability culture with a furrowed brow. Like, we literally heard the exact same phraseology from the left five years ago. The challenge that the MAGA crowd has is that Trump always. gives up the game because he just says it out loud. So like all these folks climb out on a limb and say, look, it's the private market at work. Kimmel was lousy. He wasn't getting ratings. This is pure accountability. Markets work. And then Trump rushes in and says, nope, I want the government to actually cancel these shows and yank their licenses. Oops, what are you going to say now? Yeah. You know, George, one of the things, Meek and I, we love each other desperately, and we

rarely fight and will you hold my hand on TV okay so anyway so but but one of the things that that really bothers her about me is how optimistic I am about this country and true and I think the reason why is like I'm going to explain blinders she thinks I have blinders on yeah and that that comes from having a father who was chased out of of of Poland in 1938 a mother who escaped Czechoslovakia in 1938. And it was something that her father believed, right? And also Kissinger. Nothing's permanent.

You're constantly fighting. Democracy is a constant. Well, as Ronald Reagan said, every new generation has to fight to keep democracy alive. But I do think there's some green shoots at times. I think Ted Cruz and Rand Paul going, no, no, no, this is not how the FCC works, because they'll do that to us later. I see a lot of lower court judges going, no, no, this is not going to happen. And you're right, the Supreme Court on issues of presidential authority have been far more expansive than I'm comfortable with. But they've held a lot of those people have held their view since law school.

But the lower court federal judges, and then you do have grand juries. They're like, no, this is not going to happen. So, anyway, I, balance, balance that with what you've written. Look. Oh, one more thing. I'm so sorry. Okay. You get rid of Stephen Colbert and you get South Park instead.

Even in the last bastion of a free society. Well, I'm saying, even in popular culture, you try to hammer Jimmy Kimmel down. He comes back bigger than ever. This is a big, rowdy, ornery country that doesn't like to have its mouth shut. And when you say shut your mouth, that is pretty much the most dangerous thing you can do in politics. That's just simply something Americans are not going to be told to do. What I'm seeing is the not so subtle and not so slow erosion, more of the institutional barriers to presidential. authoritarianism. Yes, Jimmy Kimmel's back. Yes, South Park is fun. Yes, there are lower court judges

who are following the law. And yes, there's lots of people who are just saying what they think and who are not giving up. And you can't give up. You cannot give up or else it is over. But that can distract you from this eight-month reality, which is assault on institutions. Yeah, that the president's power is enormous today and that it doesn't seem likely to be checked in the future except by the public. That's the last barrier to authoritarianism, is the public. Now, are the public sufficiently engaged?

Do they see these things and say, we can't let this continue? There doesn't seem to be any coherent opposition. There's opposition here and there, but it's not organized. The Democratic Party seems to have lost all faith in itself. The public has lost a lot of faith in the Democratic Party. We don't know if next year's elections are going to be completely free and fair. I worry about that.

And if they're not, then that really does take down the final check on presidential power. So I just stepped back and saw all these things and thought, what's the difference between us and Hungary right now? It may be a matter of a few years. They've had more time to consolidate it. but Trump administration's moving really fast. And I'm not saying give up. I'm saying I'm ringing a little alarm bell.

Right. Of course. And for good reason, for good cause, really quickly, Carlos, you served in Congress. You know, a lot of Republicans. Do you have faith at some point that they will step up and we'll see more incidences like we saw this past week with Ted Cruz and Rand Paul? I do, Joe. I think I'm more on your side of the ledger here. comes to optimism, you know, while being realistic and concerned for sure. But look, we know

what Republicans say privately, okay? Congressional Republicans speak very differently privately than they do publicly. And there are red lines there. There are more people like Ted Cruz, like Grandpa, who on certain issues would be willing to speak up, even on some of the president's policy agenda. And why aren't they now? I mean, I swear, I swear. I swear. There's no way I would not be able to speak out on... Because things are different now, Joe, the biggest factor motivating members of Congress. And I'll tell you, in this case, Republicans are in the spotlight, but it happens on the left, too, is fear.

Fear of primary challenges, fear of your own. That has become the biggest motivating factor in Congress. Hey, I believe this or that, but I'm not going to say it because I'm going to get a primary opponent. want to work with a Democrat on an issue, but I'm not going to do it or I'm going to wait to do it until after my primary because I don't want to feel that kind of heat. That's the big problem. Can you explain? I've long had this question. What is it about the prospect of defeat that makes elected officials so paralyzed that they're willing to betray everything they speak for? I don't understand it because I lost and my life is great. Well, you know, I don't understand it because

I went after everybody. Like, I was part of the coup to take Newt Gingrich out of the Speaker's chair. Yeah. Voted twice to impeach Bill Clinton, went back to my district, explained why, and said, and I keep trying to tell Republicans this, said, this is what I did. This is why I did it. If you don't like it, vote for him. Yeah.

And guess what? They ate it up. No. They love it. The truth is nice. They're like, that, like, that's power. When they see you don't fear defeat, they're like, I'm voting for that guy. He's going to go out there, vote, and he's going to fight for me.

But people tell me, oh, that doesn't work anymore. I don't think human nature changes that. I would tell people the same thing. I said, look, my parents came to this country so I didn't have to be afraid. So I could say what I think and express myself and be myself. But, you know, it just doesn't happen. Staff writer at the Atlantic, George Packer. Thank you so much.

His new piece, America's zombie democracy is available. online right now and former congressman carlos kerbello and senior political calmness at politico j mart hold my beer j mart thank you here's the bumper sticker jay mart that we'll be seeing it along the redneck graveyard in 38 merrick garland hold my beer yeah i'm gonna trademark that this morning i'm going to the patent office job before it's too late you should get to the floor of bama they they'll they'll make a bumper sticker out of that way coming up thank you j mark coming up the Federal government will shut down next week if lawmakers cannot reach a funding deal by Tuesday night. Morning Joe, economic analyst, Steve Ratner joins us with charts on the major issue dividing Congress.

It's very impressive. We'll explain what we call that the Southwest Wall. Next on morning, Joe. It's like the green monster. Wow. Even pretending as if they want to find common ground. The only path forward at this moment is for us to have a bipartisan conversation as to a spending bill that would actually meet the needs of the American people.

And we were on track to have that conversation in the White House until Donald Trump and the Republicans backed out. They're running scared. They have no defensible position. And that's why, unfortunately, they're marching us to a government shutdown. By the way, speaking of indefensible issues, I saw a story last week about this big, beautiful bill they call it. I call it the biggest budget-busting bill in American history, but it doesn't flow as easy, his big beautiful bill. But it is far more accurate, but really underwater.

Republicans are scared how unpopular that is. The president even said he's going to stop calling it big beautiful bill because it's so unpopular. And he came there talking about an indefensible position Republicans have. Now, I read, I don't know if this is accurate or not, but I read that Donald Trump canceled the meeting because the speaker and the Senate Majority Leader John and Mike Johnson told him not to take the meeting. Is that correct? Have you heard that? Yeah, there had been some back and forth about this meeting or not. Republicans think they can win the political, you know, conversation about a possible show.

shutdown, which defies normally how that works when the Republicans, the Republicans have the presidency, both houses of Congress. Your power, you tend to get blamed. But certainly, you know, that was meaning was on track until Trump blew it up with that true social post the other day. But here's a tell in terms of that bill, Joe, also, which is, of course, shaping the backdrop to a lot of these conversations. President Trump is known for his first term, obviously, crisscrossing the country, barnstorming and supported his stuff. He is not taken one, not one to, trip in support of this bill. It cuts health care.

It gives billionaires the biggest tax cut ever. It gives multinational corporations the biggest tax cut ever. It gives monopolists the biggest tax cut ever. And it raises the federal debt the most ever. Who would want to go out and campaigned for that? And that's why the White House told members of Congress, don't hold town halls either, because they were seeing those events where lawmakers would get yelled at by their constituents because of all the things you just said.

But why, Mike, do you pass such a horrible bill? I mean, politically, and now they're trying to say, hey, we're going to call this a working class bill. No, no, no. You gave Larry Ellison, you gave Elon Musk, you gave Mark Zuckerberg, you gave all of these gazabillionaires. You gave them all tax cuts, and you gave multinational corporations tax cuts, and you gave people that run monopolies in Silicon Valley tax cuts, and you stiffed working class, middle class Americans. Well, the answer to your question was answered in the prior segment by Carlos, who was defeated in his election re-bid. It's fear, fear of primary opponents, fear of Donald Trump. Republicans will march lockstep under Donald Trump because they are afraid of him.

And they will march lockstep under him until the impact of what you just refer it to cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, cuts huge increases in Obamacare bills, things like that affect ordinary people and their health. Mike, we're coming up on the top of the hour and I know all the kids all across America. Well, they gather. Across the Flores, as Rush Limbaugh would say, they've all run. They're all in front of the television set. They've got their howdy duty wear on. They're ready to see Steve Ratner with his charts. But I want to follow up with something that I think is going to be a sleeper issue this year. There is.

Look at that. Yeah. By the way, this guy, by the way, he gets more YouTube hits than Jimmy Kimmel on his return. It's amazing. So anyway, we can even have the split screen just to keep the kids there if we want. I think one of the sleeper issues this year, and Democrats are starting to know about it, health care costs. And I want to talk specifically about something I've heard you talk about over the past 15 years.

And that is insurance companies. Insurance companies that deny, deny, deny. And then if they finally let somebody go see the doctor they need to say, see, sometimes it's six months later. And then four months later, they yank the approval. and then you have to start all over again. And you're talking about, you know, you're dealing with basically AI rejections a lot of times. You're dealing with people on the phone that, I mean, it's, we used to always complain about Canada. Oh, you can't get an operation for six months.

Welcome to the United States of America run by big health insurance companies. You can sum it all up by saying it's fear of the postal service that's going to be the biggest issue. comes in the mail, the increased in bills, the increase in auto insurance, the increase in life insurance, the increase in electric bills, which are going to be astronomical in another five or six months. It's how people live. And when they can't pay their bills, they're going to take it out on someone, and that someone's going to be the Republican Party.

I think health care is going to continue to grow as a massive issue. I mean, people's insurance rates go up. The number of denied requests continue to go up. I think it's going to be a huge issue. Well, right now, the White House is telling federal agencies to prepare for another possible round of mass firings unless Congress can pass a measure by the end of Tuesday, which is when government funding is set to expire. As we said, one point of contention dividing the two parties is funding for health care. For more on that, let's bring in former Treasury official and Morning Joe economic analyst. Steve Ratner and Steve, your first chart takes us through projections on how many Americans could lose their health insurance from the proposed budget cuts.

What did you find? Yeah, look, as you said, Mika, health care has become the major issue in this shutdown. And for good reason, as I'm going to show you, you haven't heard Republicans say lately, let's repeal Obamacare. Have you? I don't think I haven't heard. You probably haven't heard it because it's not popular to say that. So they've been doing it surreptitiously, piece by piece. They are dismantling Obamacare. And that is what the Democrats are fighting for in this go-round. So let's take a look at the numbers. ObamaCare started right about in here and about 45 million Americans uninsured at the time. We brought it all the way down here to 25 million. In other words, 20 million Americans got insurance largely, if not

entirely because of Obamacare. And now a combination of changes is going to bring that back up here. And it's going to take away 70% of the people who got health insurance under Obamacare are going to lose it, both because of what's in the big beautiful bill and because of what's on the table right now, which I'm going to explain. And you can see it breaks down over a few pieces. These are the changes made in the big beautiful bill. That's 10 million of this 14. And now what's on the table for this shutdown would be 4.2 million more people losing their health insurance if the Republicans get their way. I'm not going to go through this whole chart, but the point of it is to basically say they did it a whole bunch of

different ways, very nerdy, very in the weeds, things people couldn't really get angry about because they don't really, frankly, understand most of them. You know, something like a work requirement, which is the biggest of it, you may say, sure, people should work to get Medicaid, but the fact is, many people who qualify for the exemption from work don't know how to fill out the forms, don't know how to do it. And so a quarter of those 14 million people would be people who lose it because they don't know how to take advantage of their exemption from the work requirement. So, Steve, as we move to your second chart, there are these tax credits, enhanced tax credits that boost coverage that are set to expire at the end of the year? What impact will that

have? Yeah, so that's what's on the table. The Democrats have a long wish list, but when you talk to them privately, what it comes down to for the moment, they're not going to get the big beautiful bill unwound. But it comes down for the moment is another provision set to expire at the end of this year, unrelated to big beautiful bill. A bunch of extra tax credits that were passed during the Biden administration under the American Rescue Plan to both provide more and to deal with an original kind of little design flaw in Obamacare. So this is the percent of income that people have to pay for health care. This is the income level starting at the bottom, obviously, and going all the way up here.

And under the ACA, there was this cliff where if you got above $60,000 a year of income for a single person, the amount you paid suddenly went up like that and then eventually decline. The provision that was put in during the Biden administration provided what are called enhanced subsidies and took your costs down to here. And so if this expires at the end of the year, as it is currently scheduled to do, for all these folks, the percent of their income that they're going to pay is going to go back to this pink line. And that's what's really at stake at the moment. And you can see that those enhanced tax credits were very, very popular. the number of people taking it went from 10 million all the way up here to 20 million as they

came into effect. Most of the people who get it are people down here, which is 250% of the poverty line is about $40,000 a year. So these are people for whom buying insurance would be very, very costly. And so we were providing a wonderful benefit to them that is going to go away in the course of this year if there is not some agreement. So then you're going to have fewer people on the insurance rolls. And Steve, what does that do to premiums, ultimately? I'm hearing the concept of even premiums tripling. Yeah, so fewer people on health insurance means that health insurance companies raise prices for everyone who's buying through these marketplaces that were created under the ACA or Obamacare, because fewer people, it just makes it

more expensive for them. And so you had 312 insurers already file for their rates for next year. And they're assuming that these things expire. That's what they have to. That's the current law. And when you look at these are all the different ones, but the point of it is 18% proposed rate change, not just for the people that I was talking about before, but for everybody who buys their insurance through the Obamacare marketplace. And then if you want to take a look at what this means for a representative family, take a 55-year-old couple making $85,000 a year. Their insurance bill at the moment is $7,225, thanks to the subsidies that we talked about. The subsidies go away. Their bill goes to $20,792. But then you have what I talked about a minute ago, that premiums just

go up in general because fewer people are on insurance. So their premiums actually. go to $24,535. You tell me how a couple making $85,000 can afford to pay $24,000 for their insurance. Hence, you see all those people dropping off of the insurance rolls. Mike. Wow. I have a question for you, Joe, as a former member of Congress, how do you, in good conscience, cast a vote knowingly to eliminate or reduce people's health insurance? I don't know. And I mean, I'll give you great example when we first got up there. We had a 95 contract with America, and it was term limits, it was balanced budget, it was making Congress apply, you know, it was tax cuts, it's regulatory cuts. And I voted for most of them, but one of them was cuts in Medicaid.

And this was at the height of like, and I go, wait, this. And the argument was that this is welfare for, this is health care welfare. And I just remember saying, and again, remember, we would go on to be the class that balanced the budget four years in row. The only time it's happened in the century. And I said to my freshman brothers and sisters, I said, listen, if you're going to make the argument that we have deficits because the poor people are getting away with too much, like you live in another country than I do. And I say to them, go to the hospital in your hometown at 11 o'clock at night. And look at the single mom with three kids that are using the emergency room is their primary care facility. And then vote to cut against Medicaid.

I couldn't do that in 95. I don't know how anybody did this in 2025. I really don't. I especially like these Republicans in swing seats and seats that Biden won and they're trying to justify it. Because listen, they thought they were smart by pushing parents. the election, the cuts, the midterms, the cuts. No, no, no. Hospitals and their home districts have to start planning now. So what do they do? They shut down neonatal units. They shut down nursing homes. They shut down all of these services. There has been, we've been talking about

in the show for some time, an emergency in rural health care, a crisis for the past decade. This has expedited it in a way that, again, I guess Republicans from rural America just didn't know how much their vote was going to savage health care. But this is one of those things where do you really fear Donald Trump so much that you're going to vote against the interests of farmers and, you know, small business owners in your own district? In this case, they did. Yeah. Well, anyway, on that happy note, Morning Joe, Economic Analyst and YouTube star in a massive way. And I think we all are shocked. I still haven't figured it out. Lamere's doing something for the Atlantic on this. For some reason, he's really big in South Korea and Azerbaijan. Okay. Cross demographics. Yeah, all across demographics. I know. Okay. Steve Radner. Thank you as always. Come over and give us a hug. Yeah, no, he won't do that. He just walks out. He stays away from it.

I don't know.