Morning Joe - Morning Joe 10/20/22

Episode Date: October 20, 2022

Judge says Trump knew his voter fraud numbers were false, orders ex-lawyer to give more emails to Jan. 6 committee

Right here in Georgia, there were tens of thousands of illegal votes cast and counted. We're up 10,315 ballots were cast by individuals whose name and date of birth matches an incarcerated felon. 4,502 illegal ballots were cast by individuals who do not appear on the state's voter rolls. That's January 4th. Donald Trump, two days before the January 6th attack on the Capitol, speaking in Georgia and making those claims about election fraud in Georgia, he knew were false. And now a judge says Trump and his legal team also knowingly made those false claims in court. That's a problem. We'll have some new reporting on that. Plus, an eye-opening conversation with Pennsylvania Democrats.

Is abortion really a make-or-break issue for them in the midterms? And should President Biden run for re-election? We'll play for you what voters are saying in a new focus group with Elise Jordan. And when asked if he would vote for Trump if he runs for re-election, former Vice President Mike Pence dodges the question. Instead, hints at his own possible run. We'll have that for you in just a moment. Plus, Republicans split over whether to continue providing aid to Ukraine if they win control of the House in the midterm elections. Meanwhile, President Biden is speaking out after Vladimir Putin declared martial law over parts of Ukraine

that Russia is now claiming illegally as its own. We will have the latest there. Good morning. Welcome to Morning Joe. It is Thursday, October 20th. Along with Joe and me, we have former aide to George W. Bush, White House and State Department's Elise Jordan. She's also an MSNBC political analyst, the host of Way Too Early, White House bureau chief at Politico and author of the bestseller,

The Big Lie, Jonathan Lemire, and associate professor of political science at Fordham University, Christina Greer. Mika has the morning off. Guys, good morning. Welcome to all. Joe, we'll just get this out of the way at the top. Yankees did fall in game one of the ALCS, 4-2 to the evil Houston Astros last night. I was talking to Jonathan earlier. The cheating jokes are fun.

They are real. They are true. But the fact of the matter is the cheating jokes are fun. They are real. They are true. But the fact of the matter is the Astros are just really, really good. Well, I'm not so sure about that, Willie. I don't know if you ever saw a movie called It's a Wonderful Life. But at the end, Jimmy Stewart holds his daughter up and she goes, listen, daddy, every time a bell rings, an angel gets his wings. Well, I held up little Jack last night, you know, who's like, yeah, he is. And I said, hey, Jack, look, every time the Astros win, America loses part of its collective soul.

And so, yes, a part of this all dies when the cheaters win. We all we all die bit by bit by bit. No, it was a good game. But I mean, really, seriously, how do you ever get past that when you know, you know, this is going to really help us in Houston? I'm sure there are probably two or three guys on that team that should have been banned from baseball or at least taken out for a couple of years. Cheating at the highest level at the American League Championship. So, yeah, I mean, it would have been a lot easier to get past this if the Astros had gotten past this several years ago and said,

we really, really screwed up. We cheated. We're sorry. El Tuve, you have to put him at the middle in the middle of all that. And by the way, I don't even I don't even like the Yankees. And I'm saying this and I'm not going I'm not going to Lemire because Lemire rooted against the Yankees right after September 11th when Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the manager for Arizona. So, I mean, how can we even talk to Lamir about this?

I don't even know why he's up right now. But anyway, so I said it, Willie. You don't have to say it. No, no, no. And by the way, the buzzer at the beginning, I was flinching every time Trump said something wrong. But that was me in every math class after eighth grade. What's the correct answer, Joey? All bad.

But should we let Lemire talk on this Yankees thing or not? Well, let's just, again, put on the record, he was the only non-Arizona resident rooting for the D-backs. Remember, this is October of 2001. Remember how you felt in those days and weeks after 9-11? The world was rooting for the Yankees. Right. From Paris to Berlin, everyone was rooting for the Yankees. All over.

Except for Jonathan LeMire, rooting for the D-backs. Unless you're from Arizona or an active member of Al-Qaeda, everybody else was pulling for the New York Yankees. And I even think you had to be like one of the top three to be so cold hearted, to be cheering against the Yankees right after September 11th. But Jonathan, that was you. That was you. I'm sure you were through last night. What say you? So I'm going to offer a contrarian view here. At a time of crisis, I do think it teaches thrilled last night. What say you? So, Joe, I'm going to offer a contrarian view here. At a time of crisis, I do think it teaches you who you are. And then September 11th, it taught me that I really hate the Yankees.

And I'm going to say last night, I know there's been some comparisons here, this Yankees-Astros series. They've said it's measles versus mumps. Our friend Sam Stein called it Iran versus Iraq. Like, this is unlikable teams. I'll say the only comparison I have is 1980 U.S. Olympics men's hockey team. The Soviet Union and the New York Yankees are so evil that we have to rally as I can't do the bit anymore. The Astros are terrible and they cheat. That said, I have my entire life rooted against the Yankees. I am not going to start pulling for them now. I didn't in 2001. I'm not going to do so now.

And to Willie's point, and this may be the New England Patriots fan in me talking here, just because they're accusations of cheating doesn't mean you're not really, really good. And this Astro team is really good. And I will say, they fired their manager. Their general manager got suspended. They drummed out a bunch of people involved in that scandal. None of the players did. That's certainly true.

But they are still a terrific organization, though an extremely unlikable team. For me, though, they have my support for this week and this week only, and then I'll root against them in the World Series. Joe, this is a negative partisanship that is destroying our nation. Joe, I don't know if I can get over this.

Did Lamir even support going into Afghanistan? This is changing the way that I look at you. Wow. No. It is a baseball-only conversation. But yes, if Al Qaeda were to play the Yankees, I probably would be forever. Okay, okay.

Here we go. I'm going to pull us out of this. Yeah. So, you know, Willie, you and I often, when we go down to the orphanage early in the morning before the show, a lot of times we try to, you know, we'll read Bible verses, but also sometimes we go on Instagram because the gram sometimes has, you know, has some real keen insights that help us, I don't know, just kind of figure out how to get through the day more effectively. And, you know, I love Adam Grant.

And Adam just posted yesterday something that that applies to Jonathan's stuck in the mud thinking. And I want to read this just posted yesterday by Adam. Yeah. Adam says confirmation bias. Jonathan is twisting the facts to fit your beliefs. Critical thinking is bending your beliefs to fit the facts. Stop rooting for cheaters, Jonathan. Get over it. Willie, you're up to the news. Go Astro.

Wow. As you can see without Mika here, it's going to be a long morning. We'll have more baseball for you in just a minute here. But we do want to begin. And Adam Grant. And Adam Grant. We begin with new evidence connected to Donald Trump's effort to overturn the 2020 election. According to a federal judge, Trump signed legal documents claiming voter fraud in Georgia, knowing the information was false.

The case is part of a records dispute between the House Select Committee investigating January 6th and the architect of the plan to overturn the election, Attorney John Eastman. The judge ordered Eastman to turn over 33 new documents, including four emails, that the judge says demonstrate an effort by Trump and his attorneys to press false claims in federal court. According to the ruling, one of the documents includes an email exchange in which Eastman tells other members of Trump's legal team that these statistics they were about to cite alleging voter fraud in Georgia were false. Even Eastman knew they were false. In a December 31st email, Eastman writes this, quote, Although the president signed a verification for the state court filing back on

December 1st, he has since been made aware that some of the allegations have been inaccurate. For him to sign a new verification with that knowledge would not be accurate. But Trump signed the new verification anyway, swearing under oath the false information was correct. According to the judge, quote, the emails show that President Trump knew the specific numbers of voter fraud were wrong, but continued to tout those numbers both in court and to the public. The court finds that these emails are sufficiently related to and in furtherance of a conspiracy to defraud the United States. An attorney for Eastman and a spokesman for Trump did not immediately respond to requests for comments. So, Joe, here we sort of see in writing what we knew all along that Donald Trump knew he lost

and was searching and fishing for information, even if it was completely invented to make his point that he won. Now, it's still stark, though, when we get the documentary evidence, when you actually see it written down on the page, when the judge says what we all know, but says it in a court of law that Donald Trump lied to the court. He knew he was lying to the court. He did it anyway. This is also the same judge who back in March said it's more likely than not that Donald Trump committed crimes trying to stop the vote on January the 6th. Let's bring in right now New York Times congressional reporter Luke Broadwater. Luke, a lot to digest here.

A federal judge saying Trump lied to the court. He knew he lied to the court. And the same judge saying earlier that it's more likely than not that Trump committed a crime on January the 6th. Yes. Hi, good morning. The the ruling is really striking for a number of reasons. One, I think, was that email you highlighted from John Eastman. You know, viewers may remember him as the architect of the plan to overturn the election. This is a guy who was advising Donald Trump on every way possible to try to stay in office and even was sending emails to Greg Jacob, the lawyer for Mike Pence, as the Capitol was under siege, blaming Mike Pence for the Capitol siege, not Donald Trump. So the fact that John Eastman would send in an email saying Donald Trump should not sign

these false claims because we now know that they are false, I think was quite striking. And it does line up with all the evidence we've seen from Bill Barr, from other top officials at the Justice Department in the White House counsel's office who told Donald Trump directly that the things he was saying about widespread election fraud were just flatly false and that he should stop saying them. So, Luke, I guess the question for a lot of people is where are the consequences for this? There's just such a mountain of evidence. You've got Donald Trump on tape talking to the Georgia secretary of state saying, find me the 11,000 some votes to flip the state. Now you've got

these emails, the documentary evidence showing his own attorney saying, yeah, we're just kind of making up these statistics to support a false claim. So where does the rubber meet the road here? Who's building this case? And will Donald Trump ever have to face it? Right. Well, I think what we've seen so far is that the January 6th committee's actions have served as a roadmap for both the Justice Department and for local prosecutors in Georgia. And this specifically is something that concerns Georgia. So I assume that they will take high interest of these emails, which are now ordered to be released by a federal judge. We know that a group of attorneys for the January 6th committee has been tasked with coming up with a criminal referral, whether there should be one,

exactly what the charges should be, and what is the evidence that supports those charges. So we could see that coming out of the committee to the Justice Department as well. And so this same judge who said that he believed Donald Trump more likely than not obstructed an official proceeding of Congress and defrauded the American people now is putting more evidence on the bone to support one of those charges. So, you know, we haven't seen all of these emails yet that the judges ordered to release, but the one that was included in the ruling yesterday is quite revealing as to Donald Trump, what he should have known, what he did know and what John Eastman should have known and did know. Luke, what are the potential repercussions for knowingly

signing a false document? If Donald Trump did know and he continued to push this information forward through the legal system, what are the consequences potentially? Right. Well, you could see there have been a number of consequences against Donald Trump's lawyers. There have been complaints that have been filed with various bars across the country seeking to disbar or discipline many of them. Some have been hauled in before grand juries to testify. Whether there will actually be consequences for Donald Trump himself, since he did sign this document, I think, you know, remains in question. There are many arms of the Justice Department and other investigations that have been looking into Trump, but to yet no one has really pulled the trigger or gotten too close to the former

president to hold him accountable in any way. And so I think a lot of the country is asking that same question. Can you get away with things again and again and again over a number of years and there not be any consequences? And, you know, I guess we're going to have to wait and see exactly what law enforcement will do about this. Again, Trump did sign the document anyway, knowing it was false, that verification. New York Times congressional reporter Luke Broadwater. Luke, thanks so much.

We appreciate it. Blake Hounshell, the editor of On Politics, the newsletter for The New York Times, has new analysis for the paper this morning about the midterm elections. They quote, the Democrats fear red October has arrived. Blake writes in part this quote, here's the thing about elections. When they break, they usually break in one direction. And right now, all the indicators on my political dashboard are blinking red, as in toward Republicans. He continues, First, there's inflation. It hasn't gone away as the Biden

administration had hoped. Then there's crime, which has rapidly moved up the ladder of issues that matter to voters. Democrats have bet heavily that widespread anger over the Supreme Court's reversal of Roe versus Wade would drive voters away from the Republican Party. Democrats' strategy might have been a smart move in an otherwise brutal year for the party, but it has also come at a cost. All those abortion ads have taken resources away from whacking Republicans for opposing the policies Democrats passed in Congress this year. Finally, there's the historical pattern of midterm elections, which tend to be referendums on the party in power. So as the polls move the GOP's

way, this election is looking a lot more normal than it might have seemed over the summer. For Democrats hoping that this midterm election might be different from most others, normalcy is bad news. Joe, we're going to get Elise's focus groups out of Pennsylvania that illustrate this point as well, that perhaps abortion, while red hot over the summer and still important to some voters, may not be as persuasive a voting issue as Democrats had hoped it might be. Yeah, and you're hearing it everywhere. It actually is fascinating. The last couple of days in particular, Democratic consultants from Oregon to New York State in the near near state of panic. Yesterday in New York State, we heard about a new poll showing that the governor, Kathy Hochul, actually in trouble and and congressional candidates concerned in close races across New York.

That's actually dragging them down. We've heard it in in Wisconsin. trouble and and congressional candidates concerned in close races across New York, that that's actually dragging them down. We've heard it in in Wisconsin. Things are going Ron Johnson's way and dramatically right now, according again to consultants, Pennsylvania has gotten really tight. The Republicans feel good about Georgia, feel good about Ohio, feel good about a lot of a lot of races there. But there there is a caveat. And I always bring up caveat these caveats because I remember in 1998 during impeachment, Democrats were preparing for a massive loss. Everybody in the political world was saying that it was breaking hard for Republicans and it was going to be devastating for Bill Clinton and the Democrats. Democrats had a fantastic night, cut losses. And Newt Gingrich,

who was crowing a few days before the election about how great the election was going to be, was actually run out of Washington a couple of days later because Republicans performed so badly. And, you know, Christina, even in 2000, I heard one report after another. Everybody else heard one report after another that Republicans were going to get destroyed. People in leadership in the House leadership said the polls were bleeding against them so badly they thought the Democrats might pick up 30, 40 seats. And we saw just the opposite happen. So again, yes, things look like they're breaking Republicans way. But again, as Tom Brokaw told us in 2008, you know, sometimes you have to just wait till voters vote to see what happens. It's once again, turnout, isn't it?

Always, Joe. First things first, go Mets. Secondly, I think it's really important, though, that the Democrats make sure that they held home that, you know, this is always about turnout. And so while the Roe v. Wade decision is incredibly important to Democrats, you know, we know that most voters go to the polls based on their pocketbook issues. And so if we know that Republicans are going to blame inflation and all, you know, all of the past Trump policies on Joe Biden, Democrats need to make sure that they can walk and chew gum at the same time. They have to, you know, we know that the fears of crime are just kind of latent subtexts that have a racialized history in this country. And so walking voters

through the perception of crime and where there actually is crime, but also the economy is much stronger under Joe Biden. We know that he's not giving tax breaks to his friends. We know that this debt relief for a lot of folks who have student loans is going to do exponential wonders for their futures. And so Democrats have always been poor on messaging. And so we have to make sure, A, we don't write off this election before November 8th. There's still a lot of people who are very interested in the future of this country, not just economically, but the soul of the nation, as Joe Biden always says. So we can't just say just because historically the party in power does lose seats,

we still have to wait until actually people go to the polls on November 8th. And hopefully enough Democrats and moderate Republicans and independents are motivated to really shore up the foundation of this nation and move in a much better direction than Donald Trump has been trying to drag us into. So, Christina, there's been a direct correlation this year between the polls and the price of gas. We have seen when the gas prices were high, Democrats suffered. When they started to drop, Democrats went up. Gas prices have gone up again in recent weeks, although we should note down a little bit in the last day or two. And President Biden yesterday announced they'll be tapping the strategic petroleum reserves

again in an effort to try to mitigate some of the damage caused by the OPEC Plus decision of a few weeks ago. But that is by far the central economic issue, it seems, for voters. So weigh in on that. But one other thing, too, there is this hope among Democrats that the abortion issue has led to new voters to register, voters not being picked up in the polls. There could be still a late surge of particularly women voters going for Team Blue in November. What do you think? Right. So first things first, you know, we know that people go to the polls

based on pocketbook issues. And so if the price of gas is coming up or down, we know that people do actually pay attention to those things. I think, Jonathan, we also have two things at once. There's the reality and there's perception. Even though Joe Biden has been doing what he can to stave off inflation, to make sure gas prices go down, there is a perception that everything is more expensive. There's a perception that, you know, folks are really struggling on a day-to-day basis. And so that's something that he's got to combat in the next few weeks, really articulate a vision as to how we can move economically in our personal lives. As far as the abortion conversation, I don't understand why Democrats can't walk and chew gum at the same time. This is not just a conversation about women. This is about men and their economic futures as well.

And so, you know, yes, it is about female autonomy and our right to choose. But I don't understand how Democrats don't zoom out 30,000 feet and make a much larger conversation about what this looks like for families in general. This is a party, when we think about Republicans, who don't believe in a social safety net, who don't believe in public education and shoring up the future of our young people, who don't believe in climate change and making sure that these young people that they want born into this nation actually have a future to look into. So why don't we have a much larger, more complex conversation? I know it's difficult, but it's not impossible. Why can't we do that for men and women to make sure that these new voters

are actually galvanized and bring in other people for their own futures? Because this election is really about not just the economics of the nation, but about where we're going. Because if we don't get this election correct, we know that November 2024 will set us back possibly generations. You know, at least after the Dobbs decision, Democrats said, OK, this is this is the issue. This is that we're running through the fall on this. And it has helped many candidates in many places. But you went to Pennsylvania and talked to some swing voters who said what about that topic? It was interesting. We actually we interviewed four different groups of the electorate in Pennsylvania. We started out in Philadelphia. We spoke to urban African-American voters in Philly. We spoke to some swing voters from Bucks County,

competitive suburb. And then we went on to Pittsburgh and we spoke to women swing voters and then to Trump supporters and a lot to say on abortion from all of those groups. But I want to go specifically to this one just snippet of what happened when we asked swing voters from Bucks County if they were going to vote based on abortion. And let's watch that. Will any of you vote specifically based on a politician's views on abortion? No. Strictly no. If the choice is pro-life or pro-choice and they're only pro-life with no other circumstance, I would never vote for them.

So, yes, I would make that decision solely on that because that's a that's a line I'm unwilling to cross. I agree. So that's Bucks County. Those are the swing voters who decide statewide presidential elections, obviously. So what was on their mind when you talk to them? Abortion important to them, but other issues perhaps more so. And there's certainly a lot of passion about abortion, but they're upset about crime. And they say that crime is going up in Bucks County. And that's also what we heard in more visceral terms from the African-American voters in Philadelphia who described just the day-to-day crime wave that they're experiencing and how they see an upswing over the last 10 years. So you've got that, you've got inflation, the cost of gas going up,

the cost of groceries really being a concern, too. So there are a host of issues that voters are navigating as they make their decisions. It's so interesting. And Joe, you were talking about the governor's race here in New York. When you look at the polling where Lee Zeldin has closed the gap, Governor Hochul still has a lead. The number one issue among voters in the recent Quinnipiac poll was crime above inflation, which is fascinating. Yeah. You know, I when I campaigned, I knocked on doors, knocked on 10,000 doors in my first campaign. And I never, never needed to take polls because you talk to enough people even in one day and you start to get a sense of what's concerning them and what's not concerning them. And at least it's so fascinating that you talk about crime.

And what's so fascinating is in 2020, Republicans ran on a slogan, defund the police, despite the fact that every Democratic leader I had on here, I said, do you support defunding the police? And people like Jim Clyburn would would go the opposite direction and say, no, we need reform, but we need actually to fund the police more because it's people of color that are the victims of crime more often than not. And it's something that Reverend Sharpton has always said. But I will tell you, the last week talking about knocking on doors and getting anecdotal evidence, which I've always found, you hear it enough, like it's on people's mind when they vote. I have heard from one Democrat after another Democrat who work for Democrats. When I was in Washington, when I'm in New York, when I'm in other parts of the country, they're not saying, hey, let's talk politics. They're all talking about crying. Hey, did you hear there was a shooting and such and such? Yesterday, Mika got a call from somebody in Washington, you know, connected with a powerful Democrat. Her house was broken into all, you know, it I just it's so it's bizarre. I'm hearing a different story every day. And when people are

talking about crime, they're not connecting it to the election. They're just saying, my God, things are getting really bad here. So again, the irony is in 2020, Republicans had this vapid slogan, defund the police, that weirdos and freaks and a couple of city councils actually tried to implement into law, but National Democrats didn't. But this year may be the year that crime actually does have an impact, especially in places the last year just because I, you know, I have a little bit of a knee jerk reaction after the whole American carnage era and know how crime is sometimes used by certain politicians. And the statistics are pretty troubling. And when you hear the stories directly from voters, from all strikes and all political persuasions, you really get the sense that this is the issue of the 2022 midterms.

And, you know, Christina, this morning before I came on the show, because I've been hearing this so much, you also hear from progressives that crime is actually worse per capita in red state America, in states that voted for Donald Trump. So I actually tweeted out a study this morning and I said, this study claims that crime's the highest and eight of the 10 states where it's the highest, they're red states that voted for Donald Trump. Jacksonville had a higher rise of murders than than San Francisco, despite the fact they're about the same. So so I've heard this. But if that is, in fact, the case, and I ask, is the New York Times written a story on this? Is the Washington Post written a story on this? Is the Wall Street Journal written a story on this? Because I would love to hear some context, because all I'm hearing right now from voters is crimes going up and they believe it's

going to impact Democratic candidates disproportionately. You know, Joe, I think it will impact how people think about particular candidates when they go to the polls. And Jonathan Capehart, your colleague, and I talked about this a bit a few Sundays ago. But here's the thing. You know, many voters aren't singleue voters. So they also have to take all this into account when they're going to cast their ballot. Crime is incredibly important. We know that, obviously, when there are financial strains, crime goes up. People get desperate. And this is when petty crime, especially in cities, which sadly can turn into violent crimes in cities and suburbs when the economy is making people feel a little unsure. But I think we also have to look at the totality

of things. There are many voters who will say, well, you know what? Yes, I am feeling a little strained at the grocery store or the gas pump, but I also want to actually have autonomy over my own body. And so here we are. I think also we have to be honest about, you know, the partisanship of so many voters. I mean, they will not necessarily be swayed. And so for the few people who are still independent and confused as to which party they want to support, I think they have to ask themselves, you know, when we're looking at the larger picture, are you really supporting a party that says that they are anti-immigrant or, you know, in so many candidates' cases, anti-Semitic, and they don't believe in a more

inclusive future? Or are you going with a party that is trying to get their footing and really trying to figure out the ways that we can include the diversity of all stripes into not just the party, but the nation. So, yes, crime and economic issues will always be at the top of the ticket. But we have to hopefully get some Democrats to on a micro level to really inspire people to turn out. That is the key. We can talk about these issues in focus groups and in a vacuum. But we really needed to translate into people actually getting up on November 8th and casting a ballot. And, you know, Willie, we're talking right now, the New York Times is writing what we're hearing from Democratic consultants off the record, what we're hearing from Republican consultants,

that things really seem to be breaking the Republicans way. But you never know. It depends how many people watching today, depends on how many people watching news over the next couple of weeks decide to get up and vote. It depends on whether young people are going to continue breaking past trends and whether they're going to get out and vote. But the one thing we do know is there are always surprises. Like I said, in 2020, it was actually people around Kevin McCarthy and Republican leadership that said the final weekend, the polls are all breaking so badly against us. We're going to get wiped out. The opposite happened a couple of days later. You never know. Also, one other thing that I thought was fascinating, and I think it also I think it's I think it's still going to be a sleeper issue, is in 2020 afterwards, I was shocked how big of an issue COVID was in Miami and the Miami-Dade area. I heard one politician after another, one consultant after another, one pollster after another voting against Democrats because they blame Democrats for

shutting down their schools. They blame Democrats for shutting down their businesses, blame Democrats. So that is, of course, Donald Trump was president at the time, but Democrats certainly were more aggressive in many of these areas. There are these sleeper issues that sometimes don't even show up in polls, which is all to say, don't get discouraged by what you're hearing or don't get too excited by what you're hearing. Because, again, as Tom said, you never know until the voters have their say. Always wise to listen to Tom Brokaw. To your point about covid in schools, ask Glenn Youngkin about that. It's why he won. It's why he's the governor in the state of Virginia in large part. Christina Greer, thank you so much. And to you, the Mets fan, I say what we say every year. There's always next year. Good luck. Thanks, Christine. Go Mets. Go Mets.

Still ahead on Morning Joe, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Sean Patrick Maloney, will join us and talk about all of this and whether his party can hold on to the House in November. Plus, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy warned this week Republicans will not write a, quote, blank check for Ukraine if his party wins the majority. That comment appears to be causing a new rift within the GOP. We're digging into the fallout there. Also ahead, embattled British Prime Minister Liz Truss facing growing calls to resign. One conservative lawmaker warns she may only have a few hours to turn the ship around.

We'll have the very latest from the UK. And Morning Joe comes right back. Been a night of astonishing scenes at Westminster with reports of jostling, manhandling, bullying and shouting outside the parliamentary lobbies in a supposed vote of confidence in the government. The deputy chief whip was reported to have left the scene saying, I'm absolutely effing furious. I just don't effing care anymore, before he resigned,

along with the chief whip. But we've just been told they have now officially unresigned. The Home Secretary has, however, definitely gone. In short, it is total, absolute, abject chaos. That was the open to yesterday's ITV newscast. There was manhandling in Parliament. British Prime Minister Liz Truss is standing her ground, though, there as she faces fury from her own Conservative Party over a botched economic plan, calling herself a fighter, not a quitter. It was the first time she attended a session of the prime minister's questions since Treasury Chief Jeremy Hunt recalled the tax cut package Truss proposed less than a month ago. During a heated session yesterday, Truss apologized to Parliament and admitted making mistakes. But many opposition leaders want her to resign. I have been very clear that I am,

Mr. Speaker, that I am sorry and that I have made mistakes. Last week, the Prime Minister ignored every question put to her. Instead, she repeatedly criticized Labour's plan for a six-month freeze on energy bills. This week, the Chancellor made it her policy. How can she be held to account when she's not in charge? So why is she still here? Mr Speaker, I am a fighter and not a quitter. I have acted in the national interest to make sure that we have economic stability. We need prime minister's questions in America.

Yes. Put that to the side. We need that. The turmoil happening the same day trust's interior minister, Suella Braverman, resigned, citing a breach of government rules. Braverman's departure comes just five days after Trust fired her previous treasury chief over the economic package that triggered the financial turbulence in the UK. Joe, chaos indeed, as the ITV anchor said. Chaos. And we showed part of the clip where the head of labor said the chancellor of the exchequer is gone. Tax cuts are gone. They're all gone. So why is she still here? A question that not only Labor is asking, but the Tories are asking as well.

There was it seemed there was one conservative member of parliament after another going in a landslide victory by just going to a very small percentage of members of the conservative party to cast that vote. It's absolute, absolute chaos. And this is this is what they've gotten. And it's got so bad for her yesterday is that she vowed to keep a certain policy in place. And then her chancellor came, Chancellor of the Exchequer came later and reversed the position, cut the position while she sat meekly behind him. It's it's really again, it's it's so bad. I just don't know how she survives. Yeah, that head of lettuce is looking pretty good in the race to survive right now. Let's bring in CNBC's Juliana Tattlebaum live from London. Juliana, good morning. It's good to see you.

So she says she's a fighter, not a quitter. But can the prime minister survive all of this? Well, her premiership is absolutely in peril. There is no doubt about it. You asked the very important question, why is she still standing, given all of the backlash against her and her government for putting forward that mini budget back on September 23rd, where there's clearly been candidate. There is no unified consensus within the conservative party around who could replace her. It has been an extraordinary series of events, not only over the last few weeks, but in the last 24 hours. You mentioned some of the highlights. Liz Truss started the day yesterday on the offensive, facing down that grilling in parliament where she said she is a fighter. Then her home secretary resigned. And

now a number of MPs have officially said that they no longer have confidence in the prime minister and are now calling for her resignation. But again, what is keeping her in power right now? It largely seems to be that there is no clear replacement for her. There are four frontrunners that the U.K. media have latched onto and believe to be in the running. We've got Jeremy Hunt, the now chancellor of the exchequer, who she replaced Kwasi Kwarteng with just last week. Penny Morda, Rishi Sunak, the former chancellor under Boris Johnson. And believe it or not, Boris Johnson himself. There are a number of conservative party members who are calling for Boris Johnson to return to the helm. He had overwhelming support from the public at the beginning of his tenure as prime minister.

One final problem I would throw into the mix is that the Tories have suffered greatly in the eyes of the public over the course of this saga. The Tories are now more than 30 points behind the opposition Labour Party in polls. So they have got to be extremely careful about how to move forward. It's not just a question of what happens to Liz Truss, but also what happens to the Tory party. Amazing. This could just amount to a bit of a vacation for Boris Johnson. Goes away for a while and comes back.

CNBC's Juliana Tattlebaum live from London. Juliana, thanks so much. We appreciate it. Joe, you were talking about conservatives even who want to see Liz Truss go. Here's one conservative MP named Charles Walker talking about the prime minister. I think it's a shambles and a disgrace. I think it is utterly appalling. So you seem quiet.

I'm livid. And, you know, I really shouldn't say say this but I hope all those people that put Liz Truss in number 10 I hope it was worth it I hope it was worth it for the ministerial red box I hope it was worth it to sit around the cabinet table because the damage they have done to our party is extraordinary I'm sorry it's very difficult to convey. You look just furious about it. I am. I am. I've had enough. I've had enough of talentless people putting their tick in the right box, not because it's in the national interest, but because it's in their own personal interest. Well, Joe, again, that is a member of Liz Truss's own party speaking about the prime minister and the people who put her there. Yeah. And the numbers, Willie, are just absolutely horrific. They are 30 points down right now. And you look at some of the other candidates that have been suggested, and many of them seem also to be overmatched. So many people were pushed to the side when Boris Johnson

became prime minister. You had many Tories that had worked for Thatcher and even before Thatcher that resigned. And so right now they just find themselves in a position. It's kind of like this show. Why are we still on after 15 years? Because they can't find anybody else to fill four hours. Why is Liz Struss still prime minister this morning? Because they can't find anybody else that can do a better job filling however many hours a day she works. My suggestion, though, Willie, is in case of emergency, break glass and get John Major. Placeholder. Just have John Major there as a placeholder. Say, children, children, let's just I'll stick around for a year, year and a half. We'll unify and maybe we can get that 30 point deficit down to about a 10 point deficit.

I mean, it couldn't couldn't be worse with some of the candidates they're talking about right now. An adult in the room, perhaps. I just really like Rishi Sunak. I think he could do great, great work for the UK. And I mean, the reason he didn't get the tap the first go round was because he was seen as too ruthless and too anti-Boris. That's the whole reason they got stuck with Liz in the first place. So I'm very pro-Rishi and think it could be good for the UK, even though I have no real electoral vote there. For comedic value alone, Boris Johnson. That cast my ballot for Boris just to see that the headlines, the tabloids were having such a field day with Liz Truss and the lettuce. The lettuce now, by the way, notice it's not just the one tabloid anymore.

They're all latching on to the imagery of Liz Truss and the lettuce. We're seeing it here on the front page of The Star. But Boris, the Trump, Boris the secret, perhaps, really. Wow. We're going to split vote here. This is kind of like, well, Lemire's kind of going with Rod Blago. You got there. Blago.

Has it been so long since I pronounced Rod's name that I can't say his last name? Yeah. Rod Blagojevich. There it is. Blago. Exactly. I mean, you know, maybe send him over there. It's pretty bad, though. I mean, you you you you thought that

with with Boris Johnson leaving that things couldn't get much worse. They got a lot worse. I wonder if some of those people wish they still had have Boris there right now. We'll see how much longer she survives. Coming up here, John Meacham continues his residency. Yeah, it's a residency like Celine Dion in Vegas. Here on Morning Joe for his new book on President Abraham Lincoln. Today, we will focus on the uphill battle for Lincoln's Republican Party in the midterms when he was president and show some comparisons to what Democrats are facing this time around. Plus, President Biden is expected to discuss infrastructure during a visit to Pennsylvania today on the heels of a major announcement aimed at curbing rising gas prices. The president's

chief of staff, Ron Klain, will be our guest live from the White House to Morning Joe. Look at that beautiful shot of Capitol Hill. Let's bring in a guy who is in residence. This is like, I don't know, maybe it's like Elvis. More like Elvis in Vegas, right? Or Sinatra at the Sands, right? Is it possible, Joe, that some of your viewers may think it's more like Guantanamo? It could be.

Just stay in there. Let's stick to it. Let's stick to the exactly. Let's stick to the Vegas analogies might be safer. Let's bring in right now. Presidential historian John Meacham. He's back for more on his new book titled And There Was Light. Abraham Lincoln and the American struggle. The printing press keeps running out of ink. They keep printing more. It's extraordinary how many books this guy is selling. Willie, we may have to go down to his palatial estate in Belmede and just sort of soak in the, you know, go to the library and that Corinthian leather.

Just smell the leather-bound books. It'll be great. You know, Joe, he sits in that leather chair. He's got the glasses at the end of his nose, a cardigan on, maybe a cigar, a fire in the fireplace, reading the great work. It's something to behold, I'll tell you what. Well, there really is a lovely feature in Elle Decor on John Meacham's office that I think that viewers can do if they want to read it. I think we can keep moving. Well, not the oppo. Go ahead, Joe. Sorry. Why don't we keep moving

with the conversation with a host of MSNBC's Politics Nation and president of the National Action Network, Reverend Al Sharpton. And Willie, you know, I've been in this business now for decades. I don't know if you knew it before. I was a public servant. So, you know, I've asked, I've had people ask, you know, would you like me to do your portrait? The last time I was at Six Flags over Georgia, I got off the Great American Screen Machine and they have me in this. You love it. They have me in the go-kart, right? So it's this little go-kart, but it's me, right? So that's a portrait we have hanging up over our fireplace. But Reverend Al, he got a portrait done, too. I don't think it's as impressive as mine, but let's show it to you.

He's immortalized in an oil painting. It's actually in the International Hall of Honors in the Martin Luther King Chapel at Morehouse College in Atlanta. Obviously, such a prestigious college where Martin Luther King Jr. went. And, Rev, a great likeness, but also what a great honor. It was a tremendous honor and a surprise when Dean Lawrence Carter told me they wanted to do this. Dr. King went there to that school and many of the great black clergymen went there that I grew up being mentored by. So I was very moved, very honored. And I wanted to, aside from other things, to have John Meacham have to look at something when he goes to do his book on Dr. King.

Oh, yeah. Inspiration. Exactly. It is inspiration. Well, that is such a great honor, Reverend Al. And we're so grateful you're here this morning to talk about a fascinating topic on Civil War. You know, John, we always look back at these figures in history. We never realize how close they came to either not getting elected or to failing in a

monumental task that changed America. The thing about Lincoln, though, that was so surprising is and again, like I said, in the year or so that I studied him, just exhausting. The guy was getting picked at constantly from all sides, pulled apart. And going into 1864, he didn't really even think he could win his own party's nomination. And even when he did win his own party's nomination, most people thought he's probably going to lose reelection. And then Atlanta happened and then Sherman happened. But just talk about the history of the midterms. You know, Clinton had horrible midterms before that. Reagan, who won 49 states two years later, had horrible midterms. Before that, Reagan, who won 49 states two years later, had horrible

midterms. Barack Obama, who I guess he's only president since FDR to win majority or Ike to win majorities twice. Horrible, horrible midterms. But even great historical figures from the 19th century, like Lincoln, the greatest. He, too, terrible midterms. Yeah. LBJ wins the largest majority in American history in 1964 and then loses 66 seats in the House in 1966. And Reagan becomes governor of California. That's another way of looking at that era is that a thousand days was the Kennedy administration. It was also the only period where Johnson had full dominance of American politics. And you had an immediate backlash then. Lincoln. Yeah. I mean, we look at him now. There's the monument. It's not as nice as the Sharpton portrait.

But, you know, it works in Washington. And you've got this notion that he was a godlike figure. He came to power with 39 percent of the vote. Several southern states didn't even bother to hold elections. The South goes out in the winter of 60, 61. And then in the midterm elections of 1862 and also off your elections in 63, he loses, the party loses the governorship of New York and New Jersey, which were kind of the Virginia of the era as a kind of harbinger, and loses effective majority, loses official majority control of the House of Representatives. So Lincoln had a pretty tough go of this politically. And you're right. He was half the country had seceded, wanted to break up the Constitution to defend slavery and the perpetuation of human enslavement.

And in the north, this idea that everybody was walking around the north, you know, carrying signs for abolition is crazy. There were horrible draft riots in this city where black people, innocent black people, were attacked because the Copperhead interest, as they were called, named after the snake, what Lincoln called a fire in the rear, is that he had a white opposition in the North that was not at all interested in fighting in this war. His steps on habeas corpus, his steps on free speech, all of these things, his economic policies were a source of immense controversy in real time. So the idea that Abraham Lincoln came down from, you know, left Springfield, went to Olympus, freed the slaves, went to the theater, died. No, no, no.

You know, it was it was a tumultuous and difficult time. That's the thing about reading your book and any history book, really, is that the oil painting or the statue or the story we tell ourselves is always much, much more complicated. So how did he do it? All those factions you're talking about, forget even the South that was against him, but in the North, how did Lincoln pull them together? There was just enough of his kind of centrist Republican sensibility to to push forward. But as Joe says, 39 percent of the vote and heading into 1864, I think one of the most important moments in American history, arguably, happened in the middle of August 1864. The chairman of the Republican National Committee, Henry Raymond, who was also the editor of the New York Times, which tells you how long ago this was, goes to Washington to meet with Lincoln and says, if you keep emancipation as a condition for peace, you will lose this election. Lincoln writes the famous blind

memorandum where he says it looks as though this administration will be defeated, but I will obey the Constitution. He believed that if the presidential election was not legitimate, if it was not accepted, then what they were fighting for would fall apart. He was willing to follow the rule of law. He was willing to put the Constitution ahead of his own interest. And then, as Joe says, Atlanta fell and the politics shifted. But what Lincoln said in that moment, he met with Frederick Douglass was, I cannot ask men, black men, to fight in the Union Army if they do not have the prospect of emancipation.

Because men act on incentive, a fundamental political insight that had a moral component as well. You know, John, if you could just round out a little bit, because obviously we hear about those that are telling him to be cautious, to pull back on emancipation. But again, just so people understand what a fiery trial it was with Lincoln walkthrough. He also had on the other side, he had evangelicals. He had New England abolitionists pulling at him, basically saying the guy was a sinner, that he was too cautious. He was weak. He was he was he was too timid and he needed to be more aggressive moving towards abolition. So you had this New England wing, this religious evangelical wing that was pushing him hard towards abolition. On the other side, of course, you have the Democrats

in the North, even the Democrats who were were were, my God, not even far from being enlightened. And again, that pull and push was so constant that at one point Lincoln tells visitors coming in saying, you know, I'm I'm trying to carry everybody on my shoulders across Niagara Falls. All right. On a tightrope. It basically says back off. I'm doing it the only way I know how. Absolutely. And yes, he was buffeted on. I want to be very careful here, as I know you do. He was buffeted on all sides. That is not to say that both sides had a legitimate point of view. Right. There was the white South where you and I come from, Joe, was openly fighting to preserve human enslavement and end the constitutional experiment toward a more perfect union.

However imperfect that experiment is and however much work we have to do now. That said, he had people in our terms to his left saying he was too cautious, too moderate. He had people who had seceded. And then he had this this middle, not middle, but this other element on the spectrum that were basically copperheads, which they were in Indiana. They were you know, this was not just, you know, a northern elite thing. Remember, racism and the conviction that the white race was supreme and had to be supreme in civil and social matters was the ambient reality of America in the 19th century. And we don't do ourselves any favors by not saying that. Lincoln was believed for a long time that the way to end slavery was to prevent it spread, to hope that by building

what was called a cordon of fire around it, it would extinguish itself. It was called the scorpion sting. And then, and let's be very clear, black people would, under his plan, voluntarily leave the United States of America and go to an offshore colony. And some folks want him to that to have been an early thing. No, no, no, no. This went way into the war. And so he and Lincoln's defenders say, well, it was for political effect. Here's the thing, as we all know, you can't credit what people say when you agree with it and then discredit it just because and say, oh, well, that was just for political effect when when you don't want to accept it.

Right. And so. Right. He so this is not a warm story. This is a real story. Yeah, it's a difficult story, and it's a difficult story in part because with Lincoln, he was talking about colonization into his presidency. And there are also times, we've talked about this before, where whenever he seemed the least interested in emancipation, all those around him said, oh, my God, he's playing to the racist countries. Oh, I don't I don't care about this. I don't care about whether slaves are emancipated or not. I'm only doing this for military purposes. And and and and and that was, again, the tightrope that he was walking. And oddly enough, Rev, unlike Jefferson,

Abraham Lincoln did not reduce a lot of his political calculations to writing. He just didn't do it. He was a hard guy to read. People would go into his office being frustrated because they'd ask a question and he'd tell a lot of stories. But of course, again, the South, as John said, South obviously isn't even part of this midterm discussion. The crazy thing is that Lincoln was operating in a racist north. He was from Illinois. They had they had a vote on whether black people should be able to come into Illinois or not. 70 percent voted to exclude blacks from Illinois. So this is the environment politically

that this guy was operating. And so when I'm saying he's being pulled from all sides, he's being pulled from racists, not just in the South, but racists in the North. And then you've got the evangelicals up in up in New England that are pushing in the other direction. I think that is the importance of John's book, that we don't have this kind of zealot that went to Washington to free the slaves, but that it was a process. And I've come to find that, Joe, that great people are people that are torn and go by what they really ended at the end of the day, believe in. But they didn't get there by being a zealot. They got there by being torn. And that, I think, was the greatness of Lincoln. And all the

way through, Lincoln was not only talking about colonizing black people offshore, they were talking about sending them to Liberia. But he did end up being the one that led to emancipation, just like 100 years later, John Kennedy didn't go to Washington to lead the march on Washington. He came kicking and screaming into working with Martin Luther King or Barack Obama on LGBTQ rights. And I think that when we don't tell the whole story, we rob from Americans the right to grow themselves and to not feel guilty about being torn. And I think it's important with Joe's raising, John, that the North was not all abolitionists, just like they're not all progressive now, that the North had as many hardcore slave defenders and racists as the South did. And Lincoln had to deal with that. And he was able to grow past that. I think that's his greatness. You

shouldn't rob his growth from him as your book did. And exactly. And this is a theological point, because fundamentally, Lincoln did what he did because he thought it was right. And he did a lot that was wrong. But as he put it, moral cowardice is something I think I never had. And, you know, Frederick Douglass's view of Lincoln is one of the most, Joe knows this speech well. 1876, I think one of the most important statements in the American canon on biography and history and all the issues we're talking about, how do you learn from the past? How do you judge the past? Was a speech that Frederick Douglass gave in 1876 at the dedication of the Freedman's Monument in Washington. And he said, viewed from the genuine abolition ground, Lincoln was slow, tardy, dull. But when the crisis came, in fact, he did the right thing. And you don't have to embrace wholly someone from the past to acknowledge what they did well,

nor do you have to cancel somebody because they got stuff wrong. Because, and this is Reverend Sharpton's business, not mine, but we're all fallen. We're all sinners. The remarkable thing is when the sinners manage to do something saintly. And if you get one or two, you know, maybe you get a portrait at a mourn house. Yeah. You know, Rev, the thing about Douglas, that Frederick Douglass speech that John was talking about is, of course, he talked about how Lincoln was viewed from the world that he lived in, viewed from the political constraints that he had viewed from the world that he lived in, that reality that he lived in. Not up on, you know, not a philosopher king sitting on top of a mountain.

Douglas said Lincoln was was was a revolutionary. He was a radical. He was he was fiery. He was exactly what needed to be done. Again, when viewed from the reality that Lincoln lived in as a public figure. And you have to deal with the context of the time and the environment Lincoln was president in and what he grew to be president in. And I think Douglass kept agitating and pushing him. But I think he also at the end really respected and regarded this man as a great man. When Lincoln walked over and greeted him in front of everyone, after Douglass had been a critic of him, pushing him on letting blacks in the Union Army, pushing him on emancipation and feeling that he wasn't moving fast enough,

and then he made the definitive move that freed the slaves and put them in the Union Army, I think Douglass was awed by the fact that this man had a lot more depth than he could recognize on the surface. And I think that brought out the best in both Douglass and Lincoln. And I don't want to risk tying this in too neat of a bow. But as y'all were talking, I was just thinking of something that my favorite priest once told me about how the greatest gift is watching personal growth and watching and the ability to grow. And so not to dismiss someone. So many people are unable to change throughout the course of their lifetime. And so is this book in some sense, the story of Abraham Lincoln's growth and progression as a moral force in America? It is the story of his growth as a moral force in America.

It is the story of his growth as a moral force in America. The remarkable thing and the central point I hope folks take away is that he did have an anti-slavery creed. He believed it from the very beginning. He once said, I am naturally anti-slavery. And he was a lawyer who picked his words carefully, naturally meant from birth. He found that circumstances gave him a chance to put those convictions into action. And I would just urge all of us in this hour of unfolding crisis to remember that if you send someone to the pinnacle of power who does not have a conviction about something other than their own power and their own interests, that is potentially fatal to the American experiment in liberty.

Abraham Lincoln was anti-slavery. He believed in the Union. He ran on the 13th Amendment. Ultimately, he put something other than himself at the center of the story. And if we send people, if we give them responsibility and all they're interested in is themselves, then God help us.