Morning Joe - Mika: Have Noem, Miller, Bessent been held accountable for jumping to ICE’s defense for no reason?

Episode Date: January 28, 2026

Mika: Have Noem, Miller, Bessent been held accountable for jumping to ICE’s defense for no reason? To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

People have to protect themselves. I'm a Second Amendment person, very simply. People have to be able to protect themselves. You can't have guns. You can't walk in with guns. You just can't. And you can't, listen, you can't walk in with guns. You can't do that. But it's just a very unfortunate incident. President Trump with a hypocritical take on the Second Amendment following the deadly shooting of Alex Prattie in Minneapolis. will go through the preliminary report on his death, which does not support statements made by members of the Trump administration immediately after he was killed and in the days after.

Plus, border czar Tom Homan is now in command of operations in Minnesota. We'll bring you the latest on how he's impacting operations there or not. Meanwhile, the Trump administration says ICE agents will be at the Winter Olympics in Italy. We'll explain what role they would have there. Also ahead, a look at the president's latest poll numbers as he kicks off a new campaign ahead of the midterms, holding a rally last night in Iowa. We'll bring you a live report from Des Moines. Good morning and welcome to Morning, Joe. It is Wednesday, January 28th, along with Willie and me.

We have the co-host of our 9am hour, staff writer at the Atlantic, Jonathan Lemire, And MS Now, senior national security reporter David Rode joins us once again. And Willie, our top story continues to be in Minnesota with so many seemingly moving parts. Yeah, the fallout continues this morning, Mika, from the fatal shooting of 37-year-old ICU nurse at the VA, Alex Preti. MS now has obtained the first official timeline of the incident, which undercuts many of the statements made by Trump administration officials in the immediate aftermath. of the killing. Preliminary review from U.S. Customs and Border Protection makes no mention of Preddy brandishing a weapon or intending to do maximum damage and kill law enforcement as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Cristino and other officials claimed. The report, which was sent to

lawmakers yesterday, also reveals two federal agents fired at Preddy after they say he resisted arrest. Questions remain about what exactly led agents to fire the fatal shots. When it comes to the investigation, sources tell MS now the Justice Department has decided there will be no civil rights probe into the shooting. Instead, a Customs and Border Protection Office will investigate its own officers and another DHS unit, which normally focuses on human trafficking and national security threats, will look into whether Preddy broke any laws. Minnesota's Bureau of Criminal Apprehension says it is separately investigating the shooting, but has not been given access to any evidence or information. from federal agencies. Meanwhile, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller appears to be distancing himself from the Department of Homeland Security amid growing criticism over Saturday

shooting. Miller, who initially labeled Alex Prady as an assassin and a domestic terrorist, now says Customs and Border Protection agents in Minneapolis, quote, may not have been following proper protocol. The statement shared yesterday with MS Now, Miller wrote, the White House provided clear guidance to DHS that the extra personnel that had been sent to Minnesota for force protection should be used for conducting fugitive operations to create a physical barrier between the arrest teams and the disruptors. We're evaluating why the CBP team may not have been following that protocol. David wrote significantly politically because Stephen Miller is the architect of all of this, that he would distance himself in any way from what's happening in Minnesota. To go back to the investigation for just a moment, this follows the pattern of the shooting death of Renee Good, which is federal agencies say, we'll handle this, we'll look into this. And as much as the Minnesota local and state officials are trying to investigate it, they're still not getting cooperation from the federal government.

Yeah, I came here this morning, wanted to talk about some of the big changes that have happened. The president has changed his tone. That's very significant. And you've got more Republicans following that way, speaking out in Congress like they haven't before. the attempt by Stephen Miller to separate himself from this, given what he said, given what he has said now for more than a decade about immigration is false, I would say, or just unrealistic. And he was one of the primary backers of Christyneum and Bovino and others who carried out these aggressive tactics. So it's really Miller's responsibility here. It'll be interesting to see the dynamics inside the administration.

And on the investigation, you're right. this is going to lead by keeping it so small, by not sharing information with the state's officials, it's just going to lead to perceptions it's a cover-up. There should be a civil rights investigation. That's a higher level. Did they violate Alex Preti's civil rights? And that opens up a whole other way of investigating this and possibly prosecuting these officers who shot them. Fascinating intrigue inside the White House, Jonathan Lemire, with Stephen Miller putting a little distance

anyway, for now, between himself and what happened in Minnesota. And also you have Homeland Security Secretary Christy Knoem. We got called into the principal's office on Monday night to talk to President Trump. He yesterday was speaking in support, effectively, of Secretary Nome, trying to shoot down some of the rumors that say she's on thin ice, she's about to get fired, even Republican senators now saying she should resign, but President Trump, at least publicly supporting her for now. What's your sense of how long she may last?

is she secure in the job? A couple Republican senators have Tillison Murkowski said that she should resign. White House telling me yesterday as well, I put this very question, and they say, no, the president has full confidence in Secretary Nome. Now, that's a phrase that doesn't always mean a heck of a lot

when it comes to Donald Trump, but we know that he's tried to not have anywhere near the turnover that defined Trump 1.0. He'd like to keep his people in place. But you're right. There are real divides opening up within the administration here. Miller, even going on to say that his statement right after the shooting,

that this was a would be a, assassin, meaning Preti, was because of the information he was supplied by Border Patrol agents on the scene. So he's sort of pointing the finger there. You know, the head of Border Patrol, Rodney Scott has had a difficult relationship at times with Secretary Nome and Stephen Miller. Tom Holman and Nome have had issues, I am told, over the last year or so, about the right approach to how to carry out operations like this. But Mika, there's no question that Holman met with legal, local officials yesterday in Minnesota, trying to take the temperature down. He said, we have some disagreements, but we're trying to make this work.

Right now, there's clearly an effort to step back a little in Minnesota. We should not, however, read into that as a broad course correction on immigration operations throughout the country. It's just simply way too soon to know. Well, the mayor and the governor want ice out. They want ice out. The thousands of ICE agents that have descended upon Minneapolis alone have created a chaos that they believe led to this moment.

some might ask, you know, have we heard anything more than words from the president on down and Bovino? Words in Bovino. But what actually has changed? It's only been a few days, but it's still possible to make sweeping change to do things that show actionably that things are going to change. What has happened? Is Holman moving people out? How many? How many ICE agents are still operating in Minnesota and Minneapolis specifically?

Have the two ICE agents apparently now, two who fired shots that killed Alex Pready? Have they been put on administrative leave? Have the nine or so agents who were all swarmed around him and taking him down to the ground? Are they on administrative leave, which would be proper procedure? Something that Tom Holman said that he respected. He thought it was unprofessional to rush to judgment. I would also wonder about procedure. being followed. When you have a

officer involved killing, usually that officer is put on administrative leave so you can bear out the investigation and also not have a traumatized offer out in the field. So we'll see about that. And also, I think it's fair to ask

before I get to Barbara McQuaid, have those in the highest power? Christine Nome, Stephen Miller, J.D. Vance, Scott Besson, been held accountable for jumping to the defensive of ICE when they had absolutely no reason to, no information that would lead them to say what they said, and quite frankly, mocking Second Amendment rights, have they apologized? Have they not just

sort of walked it back and talked about something else? Have they said they were wrong to rush to judgment and possibly defame this potential victim in a killing? Let an investigation bear out to see what really happened. If you don't know what happened, you can't really. You can't really say that someone is an assassin like Stephen Miller did. So that's another thing. And also mocking him and criticizing him for using his Second Amendment rights, carrying a weapon, the president, Scott Besant, still sticking to that, which is curious. So let's bring in former U.S. Attorney and MS. Now Legal Analyst, Barbara McQua, Barbara, I'm just curious from your analysis, what has changed legally in the federal or state arena on this?

Is the state going to be allowed to do an investigation, which I believe they have a right to, or are the Fed still holding this close? And what about evidence from the scene? Does the state get to examine the evidence? What's going on here? What has really changed? You ask all the right questions, Mika. It reminds me of when a football team fires its head coach, when it's having a losing season, and then tries to appease its fans to say, there, now the problem is solved.

But you've got the same old players in the same old playbook. Nothing is going to change with the success of the team. And so I think we need some sizable changes on the ground in Minneapolis. And frankly, at the leadership levels all the way up the chain, I am concerned. I worked with ICE as a U.S. attorney with its various components, and I worry that what they are doing with ICE in Minneapolis is such an abuse of law enforcement protocols that it's just going to have to be either renamed or dismantled. They are doing decades of damage, and not only to ICE, but to every other law enforcement agency, because public trust is so critically important to its ability to work

with law enforcement. But the idea that there's going to be no criminal investigation by the Department of Justice here is absolutely absurd. We have so many unanswered questions about what happened here, and the likelihood of some criminal liability certainly exists in light of what was happening with these agents on the ground. You know, there's a very high bar for holding law enforcement officers criminally accountable for mistakes, poor judgment, panicking, those kinds of of things. It has to be an intentional deprivation of civil rights. But at this point, we don't know. What were the conversations? What is the evidence? There hasn't been access. And in light of what we're seeing in the federal response, I think it behooves the state to conduct a full investigation.

As you say, although we have a court order now requiring federal law enforcement to preserve the evidence, there has been no indication that state actors are going to have access to it. And getting that access immediately is critically important. Months or years later isn't going to do them much good. And Barbara, under normal circumstances, the department would want to reestablish or at least attempt to establish some credibility, some good faith with the public, given that it had told all these lies in both shootings initially about domestic terrorism and assassin and the sequence of events that people can see with their own eyes was not true, did not match

the video. So what is your sense of why in this second? case after everything that happened with Renee Good with Alex Preti, why they wouldn't want to at least, we'll have our own internal investigation, but yes, of course, DOJ should look at this as well, and we can get the truth out. I think, really, you know, very cynically, that the goal here is really just to show force. It is to create intimidation. It is to stoke fear. It is political theater. If you were engaging in genuine law enforcement to protect public safety, the approach to this entire operation would be completely different. What we're seeing is just 3,000 agents on the streets of

Minneapolis, a blue state with a very small percentage of immigrants in their community. What you'd see instead is targeted enforcement in states like Texas or Florida, where we have more significant numbers of immigrants. And what I mean by targeted enforcement is what ICE has done throughout its history before today. That is, they use intelligence, they use records, they use data to identify people who do have serious criminal records when I was serving as U.S. Attorney. What they would do is compile lists of people with a prior criminal record of aggravated, serious violent felonies. And then they would spend resources to go find those people and deport them. What we're seeing instead on the streets of Minneapolis is, let's just go around to places where we might find

them. Of course, these Kavanaugh stops with the Supreme Court has now approved at least temporarily is we can base our reasonable suspicion on language or appearance or location or somebody's job and just question people in a dragnet situation. That may yield large numbers, but it isn't going to yield the kinds of people who actually pose a threat to public safety. Former U.S. Attorney and MS. Now legal analyst, Barbara McQuaid, thank you very much for your analysis and answers this morning. So new polling shows President Trump's approval rating has fallen amid the growing unrest in Minnesota. The latest Reuters Ipsos poll finds just 38% of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing, tying the lowest level of his current term. approval of Trump's immigration policy has fallen to a new record low.

39% of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing on immigration, while 53% disapprove. And 58% said ICE agents have gone too far in their crackdown, while 26% said agents' efforts were about right. Let's bring in CEO and co-founder of Axis Jim Van de High. It's great to have you back, Jim. I guess my, my, my. My questions are going to be about your take on where Republicans stand. We're watching Republicans beginning to push back a little bit. But are they going to fall once again, and they've done it before?

Are they going to fall for a change in tone and leave it at that and leave the people who responded to this poll, the people in America who are calling for change, who are calling to feel safe and free once again in their country? are they going to leave them invalidated by this Congress? Or are they going to take this to a level that will restore the public trust? I feel like I say the same thing every time we talk about this topic. I don't think there's that many Republicans who are being critical of the president. You have Tom Tillis, you have Senator Murkowski, so yes, you have a couple,

but they tend to be the same people who speak out publicly all the time. It just shows just how scared Republicans are to say what they really think, especially at a moment where I've never seen the president and his staff this panic. You have the president of the United States blaming Christy Noem. You have Christy Gnome blaming Stephen Miller and the president. You have Stephen Miller blaming people much lower in the bureaucracy. And so you have all this finger pointing, well, why? Because the president himself is quite rattled by this. He looks at those images. You can't look at that video and come to any other conclusion. And for those that are still skeptical, go to the New York Times

and look at that recreation they did yesterday. There's no way you can walk away with any other interpretation of what happened. And we have this great quote. We just posted in a story that Nome staff passed along to us, that she's telling people, everything I did, everything I said, was done at the direction of the president and Stephen Miller. So ultimately, this is about leadership. If you think about, just step back and think about how did we get here,

this is the president's decision. Unilaterally decided to go into a Democratic city and a Democratic state. He decided that he wanted to have this kind of bellicose tone, both in the language that they use, the policies that they deploy, but also even the costumes that they wear. Remember, you had the Secretary of Homeland Security, like dressed up in fatigues, like this tough guy, you know, feeling and projection. You had memes that were being posted by people in the administration with pictures of bringing people to their feet and handcuffing them and doing the tough guy thing. So then when you have these people that are on the ground, boots on the ground in a tense situation, and that's the environment, this is inevitable. Everyone's known it's inevitable. Everyone's been saying it's inevitable. And will they change?

I've not seen a single piece of evidence that they're going to change. Like you said, Mika, just because you rhetorically call somebody in or you rhetorically say, hey, maybe we have to reevaluate, you can't say that and not condemn the fact that you had members of the administration, some of the most powerful people in the country on the record calling a U.S. citizen who was shot down a domestic terrorist or an assassin without any evidence, without any evidence. And the president has undercut them because he won't say the same thing. He says, wait.

Shouldn't everyone have waited? In every circumstance to figure out what the hell actually happened before you make a determination. That's the second U.S. citizen this has happened to in a matter of weeks. The second. They do the same thing. They jump, jump to conclusions, calling the person a domestic terrorist an assassin. I mean, these people are not serious. But underline what you said, Mika.

Underline what you said. U.S. citizen. U.S. citizen. You're not talking about a violent thug. You're not talking about a violent criminal. And I think people are too detached because too many things are happening too quickly. These are U.S. citizens that are being killed in awful situations that didn't have to be. There are other ways to go after and enforce U.S. law. And in fact, if you go back other than the last couple of months,

we've kind of had decades of precedent in how you do this. You want law enforcement. You want enforcement of laws. We've always wanted that. We have a rule of law. But there's a way you can go about it that doesn't cause chaos and ultimately cause death of, underline it, U.S. citizens. And mix in the lack of accountability that there's a certain level of impunity that ICE officers believe they have after they watched Renee Good. And they didn't see much accountability there, again here. So there's no reason to believe that they will continue to conduct themselves this way. to point out again this morning, the Wall Street Journal has an op-ed by one of its writers in the editorial page, Jason Riley, saying, effectively, Mr. Trump, it's time to walk away from this issue. Declare victory. The border is secure. That's what you promised during the campaign. But now you've replaced chaos at the border, which has been quieted with chaos in the streets. It's not good politically. It's not good for the economy. Just walk away. That's from the Wall Street Journal

again this morning. President Trump spoke to supporters in Iowa yesterday, delivering a speech speech touting what he claims the success of his economic policies, the president did not mention the recent fatal shootings of those two people, those American citizens in Minneapolis by federal agents. But he repeated his claims that protests there are being put on by what he called paid agitators. Joining us now live from Des Moines, Iowa, senior White House reporter at MS now, Vaughn Hilliard. Vaughn, good morning. You were at the rally. What did you hear? There is an uncomfortability in the denial of the reality, Willie. Being in saying, of that room yesterday outside of

Des Moines, it felt like we could have been standing in 2024. Not a moment in which the country was reeling from the video in which Alex Pretti's death has led to protests in sub-freezing conditions across Minneapolis and other parts of the country.

There was no mention of Renee Good. There was no mention of Alex Pretti. There was no direct mention of the operations and the uncomfortable questions about the constitutional rights of Americans and individuals in this country that may be here on a legal status basis or even undocumented. But instead, what you saw from the president was him dancing to the YMCA.

And I think it's notable one week ago, guys, we had a conversation about protests happening in countries overseas and places of longtime U.S. allies. And some of those foreign leaders standing up and expressing that this was the moment to no longer allow leniency for the American president. And while we are seeing that happen in the streets around America, inside of that room last night, the likely U.S. Senate candidate out of Iowa was standing there cheering him on. The likely gubernatorial candidate from Iowa was there. Two Republicans in Congress who faced tough battles this November were in the room. Marionette Miller Meek, she won her race in 2024 by just 800 votes.

But when she spoke before the president from that podium, she told the folks in that crowd that she felt. like giving the middle finger salute to the protesters outside of the venue. We were out there right before the president took the stage, and there were hundreds of Iowans protesting his arrival with signs about the killing of Alex Pretti and these deportation operations that are unfolding. And we saw that there were two protesters in that room that were kicked out. There was one of them dropped his phone, and a supporter of the president picked it up and smashed it to the ground, the president calling the protesters paid agitators, a sort of lack of humanity or humility for what the country has been watching very clearly. I want to let you listen to two folks that we

talked to away from the event venue, random folks that had previously voted for Donald Trump, Marcia and Michael in their reflection on what's been unfolding. Take a listen. He had talked about mass deportations, immigration, crackdowns. Is that something you wanted at one point? Not like they're doing. Not like this. Not like this. This is horrible. Just horrible.

I'm sick to my stomach. Does what you see make you uncomfortable? Yeah. Yeah, I mean, I think anytime someone gets shot in the street, you should be uncomfortable. And ask how we got to that point and what we can do to not get to that point again. It's happened twice. So something clearly isn't working. The rules are there. They need to be enforced, but can't be shooting people in the street either.

And guys, we've been over the last decade talking to folks and asking them to effectively respond to words and actions of this president in his administration. And we have seen, in turn, the president try to condition his supporters, whether it be through the pandemic or whether it be and how they respond to the January 6 attack on the Capitol. But this moment is different because like those folks that you talk to, everybody has seen the images and understands, as Lana, another past Trump supporter told us the way that she says that she feels like he did a great job during his first administration,

but now he views himself as gods, as a god. Those were the words of Lana, former Trump voter here in Iowa, who in these conversations that folks are reckoning, with the reality that there are Americans that have been killed in their streets for simply protesting. And I think that this is a moment that clearly, based off of the responses from the likes of the president himself, but also Stephen Miller, there is a realization that folks on the ground, months before these midterms, are viewing this in a way that the president, a decade into his political tenure, is having a hard time convincing Americans to not believe what they're seeing

with their own eyes. MS now is Vaughan Hillier with great reporting on the ground there in Des Moines, Iowa. Vaughn, thanks so much. We always appreciate it. John, as you know better than anybody, Donald Trump's philosophy often has been just survived the day. There might be a firestorm today. We'll change the subject tomorrow. These things pass that go away in our current political media culture.

But this isn't going away. And as much as they want to dismiss these protesters as paid agitators, these are people upset about what's happening in their communities, upset about watching U.S. citizens effectively executed. in the streets of their cities. So is there any chance that he listens to the Wall Street Journal? Is there any chance he listens to Fox News hosts or some Republican senators? Not a lot of them, some of them, who say, the border is secure. You did that job.

Bravo to you. But this is not working for you. No, at least not yet. I mean, the border is secure and they take a victory lap on that. But that's only a piece of his plan. It was these deportations, mass deportations. That's what they had to do. And they very quickly went beyond just putting out the worst of the worst.

It's just people who have lived in many cases, people who lived in America a long time, being plucked from school lines or home depots or the like. There is a acknowledgement, though, this is a bit of a political crisis. And as I wrote for the Atlantic last night, it's not that there were all that many Republicans who spoke up angrily, but there were just so many. It wasn't about anger. It was about volume. There were so many who put out just statements of concern.

You know, we should have an investigation. this should be re-evaluated, that eventually that sheer number caught the White House's attention. The pushback from the NRA, and we'll get into that a little later about his comments about guns, also really spooked Trump. People close to him have told me. And they recognize the images out of Minnesota, which, look, Trump, like all the rest of us, David, spent the whole weekend, battered by a winter storm, snowbound many of us across the country. What do you do?

You're inside. You're stuck watching television. You're looking at your phone. Trump saw the images, and he saw how people on his staff tried to describe the image. and they simply didn't match up to reality. Now, publicly, Trump, as he always does, he's trying to downplay, is trying to move on. But I'm told that's what led to some of these changes in Minnesota

that we don't know what happens next. And I think there's a change. The big challenge for the president is how he carries out his policies. Stephen Miller set a quota for ICE arrest. That's the key thing driving so much of this approach. And there was an idea of just scaring people into leaving the country. And to go back to Greenland last week. and now Iran, we'll talk about later, Trump is about, you know, escalation, threatening and

menacing people. And that doesn't actually solve so many of these problems. And it seems to be alienating so many Americans. And Europeans stood up to Trump, if you will, last week over Greenland, and he backed down. And Americans, people in Minneapolis stood up to Trump this week, and he's backing down. And he's just, it's this core question about Trumpism. Can he implement? He's got this tiny circle around him, much smaller than the first term, and what's happening in that at Echo Chamber. All right. So coming up on Morning, Joe, the Department of Homeland Security has confirmed ICE agents will accompany the U.S. delegation to the Winter Olympics. Setting off concern among Italian officials will get a live report from overseas.

Plus, Democratic senators Angela Alsbrooks and Chris Coons will join us this morning. to weigh in on the fight over DHS funding ahead of a potential government shutdown. Also ahead, one of the biggest stars in the NBA says he's concerned for his safety mid the ongoing ice operations across the country. We'll tell you who that is. And as we go to break, a quick look at the Travelers' Forecast this morning from Accuethers, Bernie Rayno. Bernie, how's it looking?

Cold, cold, cold, meka, but at least it's tranquil. We're going to keep you updated on that weekend storm that's going to try to come up the coast. You're active with the forecast today. Sunshine 25 in Boston, 23 in New York City. Harrisburg in at 19 degrees. Not quite as cold in Atlanta today with Sunshine 49. Still some power outages in Tennessee, Nashville coming in at 33 degrees today, sunshine across Texas. If you're doing any traveling, hey, it's cold, but you're not going to be seeing any delays. To help you make the best decisions and be more in the know,

Download the Akiwether up today. San Antonio Spurs superstar Victor Wembeñama, who stands 7 feet 5 inches tall, weighed in yesterday on the recent actions of ice in Minneapolis. The French-born NBA star telling reporters the events have left him concerned about his own safety. PR has tried, but I'm not going to sit here and give some politely correct, you know. I know, I mean, I'm this, every day I wake up and see the news and I'm horrified.

I think it's crazy that some people might make it seem like, or make it sound like it's acceptable. Like the murder of civilians is acceptable, you know? Every day, I mean, I read the news and sometimes I'm asking very deep questions about my own life. But you know, I'm conscious also that saying everything, you know, that's on my mind would have a cost that's too great for me right now. So it's, I'd rather not get into it to me. details. You know, I know I'm a foreigner. You know, I live in this country. I'm, I am concerned, for sure. So John Wemby is from France, as I said, incredibly smart and thoughtful guy, as he's

shown again and again in his first couple of years in the NBA. And there are so many foreign-born players in the NBA in Major League Baseball, of course, professional soccer. The list goes on and on. I think speaking in an honest way that some athletes aren't always willing to do, but I would say in the last several years more so, speaking out. particularly about issues like ice being in their cities. I mean, you're certainly right about the high profile for and born athletes in the NBA. When I'm as a transcendent star, Major League Baseball, the NHL. The list goes on. Good for him for speaking out like this, but it's reflective of two things.

One, I think, are genuine fear that a lot of people feel, but also how this particular story has really broken through. It's left the bubble just that we talk about in political shows like this one. We spent yesterday about how Charles Barkley and other sort of, you know, Bill Simmons, other like apolitical figures felt they had. to speak out about this. Other athletes, Tyrese Halliburton was among the first, said, like, what happened was a murder. And I have to weigh in on this. And we also, I remember thinking about as a foreign-born athlete here, I keep going back to the idea, how is this country going to pull off a World Cup in a few months, you know, sharing it with Canada and Mexico, but the bulk of the games

are here. We've already been told the administration says they're going to have ice patrols at stadiums, you know, how, you know, ICE is going to help with security. when we're hearing some significant people overseas saying, look, I don't think I'd travel the United States for these games. I just wouldn't feel safe. Yeah, the former head of FIFA said, effectively, if it's me, I wouldn't go to the United States to watch the World Cup next year. That's a huge statement saying the coverage is great, stay at home and watch it there. And then there is the Olympics, less than two weeks away from the start of the Winter Olympics in northern Italy. The Department of Homeland Security

confirmed yesterday ICE agents will join a security team from the state. Department at the Games, quote, to vet and mitigate risks from transnational criminal organizations. Let's bring in MS Now international reporter Inez Deliquiterra live in London. Innes, so let's talk, first of all, about why this is happening. Is there any further explanation about how unusual this may be to send ice to the Olympics in a foreign country and how local officials in Italy are responding to it? Hey, good morning. Yeah. So surprise and outrage in Italy over this news. I think people across the board in Europe have been watching the images coming out of Minnesota, really in horror. Now, we are learning, according to Italians' interior ministry, that we're talking about a branch of

ICE known as Homeland Security Investigations. This is a branch that is separate from the branch that is currently on the front lines of the immigration crackdown in the U.S. This is a branch that is already present, we understand, in roughly 50 countries at the moment. They deal with anything that ranges from drug smuggling to human trafficking to the smuggling of cultural artifacts as well. in this case, they're going to be working on security. They will not be carrying out any type of immigration enforcement operations. We understand they're going to be stationed at a control room within the U.S. consulate in Milan. They're going to be working alongside other U.S. law enforcement agencies. That part of it is not unheard of. So I will say I covered the Paris Olympics. I remember seeing LAPD officers on the Chances Lise. I went into the U.S. Embassy in Paris to see that control room where all the different law enforcement agencies from the U.S. were working together to keep Paris safe. So that's what we're talking about. this time around as well. But of course, the very fact that ICE is going to be involved in any way here is being met with really strong pushback from the local population. I will let you listen to what the mayor of Milan had to say. As mayor of Milan and as an Italian, I would not like

it at all if this de facto private police corp would be coming to Milan. It is a police force that acts in complete illegality, apart from the fact that they kill. Illegality means also they enter houses of citizens without any warrant. They sign their own warrants. So they are completely incompatible with our ways of dealing with security. Now, we do expect Vice President J.D. Vance to attend these Olympics. It's unclear whether the public will even notice these ice agents on the ground in Milan, whether their presence will be visible at all. But I will say the pushback we're seeing, I think, really underscores the really tense relationship at the moment between the U.S. and its close traditional allies.

especially in light of everything that happened with Greenland. MS now international reporter, Inez, De La Quaterra, live from London Force this morning. Inez, thank you so much. If nothing else, David wrote the tone deafness, given what's happening in this country to announce that ICE will be following and traveling with our Olympic athletes to a foreign country where they're not welcome is striking. It's astonishing and it's just, you know, these images, this tragedy in Minneapolis, it's just devastating for the U.S. image around the world.

And the other dynamic in terms of Trump, I just want to say this is just in terms of lying. When he went and gave that speech in Davos, he lied about so many things, how much, you know, NATO countries are helping in the past and in the future, you know, Russia's goals and here. And then again, the initial lies about what happened to Alex Petrie. And the difference is the world's changed. We know he was, you know, shot after he had been disarmed because of all these cameras. And the world is watching those videos also. And what you see here as an example of it, it's tone deaf, it's aggressive, it's, you know, Trumpian, and it's just backfire. So Jim Vandehy, to that point again, when you see the reaction to President Trump, sometimes, and I'm being kind, not telling the truth, whether it be on the world stage or in Iowa, whether it be about Joe Biden or the economy.

or the shooting of U.S. citizens on the streets of Minneapolis, seems that the shooting has really broken through internationally. And I'm just wondering, can he split the difference politically and still get people to believe him when the lies start becoming so bold face, so obvious that maybe, I know you said only a few Republicans have spoken up, But the shift we're seeing, I do think, indicates behind the scenes. He might be hearing from more. Yeah, I think Jonathan Lemire hit it on the head earlier.

This is spreading outside of like our bubble, sort of news obsessives, right? So in some ways, culture and celebrities are a canary in the coal mine. When you start to see athletes speak out, when you start to see even CEOs tentatively, but you've now had Sam Altman at OpenAI, you've had Dario Amadee, at Anthropic, you've had Tim Cook kind of sort of speak out from Apple. You had a lot of CEOs in Minnesota. In some ways, this is the first moment since the George Floyd killing of many years ago, also in Minnesota, where you have so much pressure on celebrities and on CEOs to finally speak out and to state something that might offend President Trump. And they're kind

of sort of doing it. And I think that is important. And if that pressure, continues and that pressure continues from that nice woman you had on from Iowa saying, you know what, I love the idea of maybe cracking down on immigration, but not this way. That's when members of Congress will respond. I've always thought this will be a very slow build. But sitting underneath that is the numbers that you showed earlier today. Consistently the president's favorable ratings have been under 40 percent. Consistently as immigration policies have been under 40 percent, even though people agreed

with him on the border, if that happens long enough. members of Congress start to think that, holy hell, this might cost me my job. This might cost me the support of my constituents. Only then do they start to speak out. Fear is a powerful motivator in D.C. right now. But ultimately, survival is more powerful than fear. Yeah, and you bring up the sports celebrities and CEOs. That's reaching different audiences. Those are audience that want to buy stuff and not worry about things and get to their job and feed their kids. And people who are watching sports, they want to break from politics. So when politics and what happens, events that politicians are responding to break through into the sports world, that's a completely new audience.

That's raising a whole new level of consciousness about what's going on at the top. Co-founder of Axis, Jim Vandahai, thank you very much. Once again for coming on this morning. And coming up, President Trump says Iran is ready to make a deal after the arrival of a U.S. Carrier Strike Group in the Middle East. But what kind of deal is he talking about? We'll dig into that next on Morning, Joe. Beautiful live picture of the White House, 649 on this Wednesday morning. President Trump says he believes Iran wants to make a deal as the United States continues to build its military presence in the Middle East. In an interview with Axios on Monday, Trump said the combined forces of Iran, he wants to make a deal as a deal as the United States. in the region already are larger than what was used in Venezuela.

Axios reports the president will consider this week whether to strike Iran. The outlet says Trump came close to ordering strikes earlier this month as Iran cracked down on protesters there. The president meanwhile says diplomacy is still an option and that Iran has called to negotiate on numerous occasions in his words. With us this morning, the President emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haas. He's author of the Home and Away subsect. with us on this story still as well. Richard, I'll begin with you. The president telling Axios, we have a big armada next to Iran, bigger than Venezuela.

They want to make a deal. I know so. They called on numerous occasions. What is the goal here? What are we looking at with sending the Abraham Lincoln, the aircraft carrier, in that direction? What's he trying to do? I actually think both sides want to make a deal. We're sending the armada, but this is coercive diplomacy, gunboat diplomacy.

I really don't think the president wants to start using military force. It's not clear what kind of results it'll have in Iran. And if a little bit of military force doesn't work, whatever your goals are, and then you start doing more. So I think, you know, and Iran obviously is interested in a deal, doesn't want to be attacked. The real question, will, is what's the deal? What are the, what's our definition of success here? Is it to finish what's left of the Iranian nuclear program to get them to cooperate, say,

with inspectors? Is it to get limits on the Iranian drone program? the Iranian ballistic missile program, Iranian support for proxies, or is it to do something about the internal situation to stop the Iranian massacres? And these have been massacres. We're talking tens of thousands of people have been mowed down, according to the most recent numbers. Is it to do something about that?

So the real question is, what is the United States say we demand from Iran in order not to use force? And what is Iran prepared to give up? None of that's been talked about. So it's really, it's a big mystery right now. And David, as you've covered this story, the threat from the United States to Iran is, if you don't do X, we're going to strike you militarily. Does Iran believe that President Trump actually will launch a military invasion or at least strikes on Iran? I think there is a credible threat of strikes. It's just what will they achieve? He could try to kill the

Supreme Leader, Ali Hamine, but the sense in the region from diplomats there is that that won't topple the regime. The Israelis killed 50 top revolutionary guard commanders and they were able to get new people in there. and they were clearly strong enough, sadly, to kill all these protesters. And Vallinosser, who's a great expert on Iran, said exactly what Richard said. What is the endgame here? What's the strategy? And this goes back to this small circle around the president, the lack of a large national security staff. Maybe Secretary Rubio will explain something when he appears before Congress today. But we just don't know what the administration's end game is here.

And just lastly, we're running Venezuela. We're going to take over Greenland. we're going after Iran. We have drone strikes in Nigeria and Somalia. That's a lot. And Gaza, Gaza has still not been solved. So jumping around like this instead of focusing on very specific goals and specific places is part of the problem. Furthering the Axios report, I've been told that were enough assets in place, the president was prepared to strike Iran a few weeks back, but couldn't because we were just spread too thin because of so much was already in Venezuela. Richard, there's definitely a day after problem. There wasn't, you know, the same issue

was in Caracas, even more so now. So what, let's say, force is not authorized here, if it is just pressure, if the Trump wants them to make a deal, what sort of a deal could that be like? In fact, your hand, that this is probably the weakest this regime has been four decades. And that's an important point. The Iranian regime economically is in worse shape than it's ever been since the revolution in 1979. It's probably the weakest that's ever, which is not the same thing to say it's ready to collapse. Both points are possibly true here. I think the real question is whether the administration focuses on what you might call traditional foreign policy. We can get some limits on their military capabilities or what they do say, support for Hamas, support for

Hezbollah. That's one bucket. I think the Israelis, for example, would like to see that. And then, but given the tens of thousands of people who have been killed, and by the way, the administration, let's be blunt, they have more than a little responsibility for it. We encourage people to go out in the street, and then we left them naked. We left them defenseless. and the security forces in Iran have a near monopoly on the power.

So the real question then is, does this administration, big question, which doesn't care about democracy, doesn't care about human rights, the national security strategy doesn't mention it, do we suddenly say, we'll cut a deal with Iran on foreign policy issues, and we're just going to ignore what they do at home? My guess is the administration might be prepared to do that, but I think if they do that, tremendous outcry around the world, particularly, by the way, from the Iranian resistance, for leaving these people in the lurch. I think the administration actually has a big, difficult decision

because they've talked a big game, but they haven't acted a big game, and they don't want to act a big game for just for reasons David was saying. They like using military force, but in really small ways. They do not want to go to war. They want to threaten the use to military force

or have a three-hour strike. They do not want to do something big. And the problem here, Iran's a country of 92 million people. A little bit of military force is not going to have a big issue. impact. That is the dilemma facing Donald Trump. We'll be watching it closely. President Emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haas. Richard, thank you as always. MSNOS now is David Rode covering a ton of ground for us today. David, thank you too.