Morning Joe - Morning Joe 11/14/24

Episode Date: November 14, 2024

Reaction to Trump's administration picks

I was shocked that he has been nominated. If the nomination proceeds, I'm sure that there will be an extensive background check by the FBI and public hearings and a lot of questions. It's going to be a significant challenge. Why do you think it's going to be a significant challenge. I don't think it's a serious nomination for the Attorney General. That's Lisa Murkowski's view. Do you think? Yeah. I'm a little surprised.

Yeah, I think that's the general vibe around here. So, you know, we'll handle it like any other nomination, and then we'll do our job as providing advice and consent and see how it goes. But I don't have any basis. Republican senators on Capitol Hill reacting to Donald Trump's most controversial cabinet picks so far. Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz of Florida to serve as attorney general.

If confirmed by the Senate, Ga Gates would lead the department he has called to be eliminated and that once investigated him for sex trafficking. We'll take a look at whether he would have enough GOP support to be confirmed and if Gates could still become attorney general even without the votes. Also ahead, the latest reporting on Senate Republicans' choice for their new leader when they take the majority in the next Congress. even without the votes. Also ahead, the latest reporting on Senate Republicans' choice

for their new leader when they take the majority in the next Congress. How Republican Senator John Thune of South Dakota is planning on carrying out President-elect Trump's agenda. Plus, inside the Oval Office meeting yesterday between President Biden and President-elect Trump in an effort to signal a peaceful transfer of power. Donald, congratulations. Thank you very much. And I'm looking forward to having a, like we said, smooth transition to everything we

can to make sure you're accommodating what you need. And we're going to get a chance to talk about some of that today. It's good. Welcome. Thank you very much. We're going to get a chance to talk about some of that today. It's good. Welcome. Thank you very much. And politics is tough, and it's in many cases not a very nice world, but it is a nice world today and I appreciate it very much.

A transition that's so smooth, it'll be as smooth as it can get. And I very much appreciate that, Joe. You're welcome. Good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. We have a lot to get to this morning. A lot to get to. A busy day yesterday. Now many of you have reached out to us since the election and though many were disappointed by the results you've let us know you appreciated our reporting and the reporting of those results in a calm and measured way. Yeah, we have been especially thankful for the kind words we've received from those who voted for President Trump.

And we're going to continue our best efforts to be fair and objective in reporting on the incoming administration. Now, unfortunately, the next story does involve us personally a bit, but we still give you the facts while remaining objective. So here they are. President-elect Donald Trump has selected Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz of Florida to serve as attorney general and lead the Department of Justice. If confirmed by the Senate, he would head the department he has in the past called to

be shut down. I don't care if it takes every second of our time and every ounce of our energy. We either get this government back on our side or we defund and get rid of, abolish the FBI, CDC, ATF, DOJ, every last one of them, if they do not come to heel. And I don't think it's too much to ask. Also, it confirmed Gates would lead the department that once investigated him for sex trafficking. In late 2020, the FBI started investigating allegations that Gates was involved in the trafficking of a 17-year-old girl at the core of the case, with testimony from a former

Gates associate who is now serving an 11-year prison sentence for several federal crimes, including sex trafficking. But the investigation into Gates ended in February of 2023, with no charges filed. Gates abruptly announced he was resigning from Congress yesterday, after Trump posted the AG nomination on social media. Multiple media outlets reported yesterday the House Ethics Committee was set to vote this week on releasing a report about him, quoting from the Washington Post, Gates has been under investigation by the bipartisan committee for allegations that he may have

engaged in sexual misconduct, illegal drug use, and accepted improper gifts. And now more on the character of Matt Gaetz and how it connects to this show. Donald Trump began tweeting about widely discredited conspiracy theories about Joe after receiving documents given to Trump by Congressman Gaetz. That's according to former White House Communications Director Alyssa Farrar Griffin. She revealed that information in 2022 during her deposition before the House Select Committee investigating the January 6th attack.

She told lawmakers she was in the West Wing with Republican Congressman Jim Jordan, former White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany and Gates. When she noticed he had a folder with him. When she asked him what was in it, she says Gates pulled out conspiracy theories about Joe Scarborough. For Rock Griffin said she then told Gates he could not put that in front of the president, right as he was getting ushered into the Oval Office.

Brock Griffin said that the next morning, then President Trump started tweeting about those debunked conspiracy theories. Trump tweeted about those lies to his millions of followers for at least five times over the next three years. Those posts caused so much pain and emotional trauma for the widower of an aide who worked for Joe that the widower himself wrote an open letter to Jack Dorsey, the then CEO of Twitter, pleading with him to remove the posts from social media, from the platform, writing, quote, My wife deserves better. Twitter never deleted the posts, responding in a statement that the tweets did not violate

its terms of service. They, of course, changed the terms of service the next day. So... Some Senate Republicans yesterday were surprised and expressed doubts about Gates' nomination. We're going to get to more of those reactions in just a moment. But it may not matter, because Donald Trump is demanding senators allow for recess appointments so that he can unilaterally select his cabinet members, arguing it takes too long to confirm nominees. Those are the facts.

It goes without saying that we invite members of the incoming Trump administration to be on our show. And also, we look forward to discussing this issue and others face to face with President Trump himself. Along with Joe, Willie and me, we have the host of Way Too Early, White House bureau chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire, U.S. special correspondent for BBC News, Cady Kay, president of the National Action Network and host of MSNBC's Politics Nation, Reverend Al Sharpton, and NBC News national security editor David Rode, and also with us former US attorney and MSNBC contributor Chuck Rosenberg.

Great to have you all with us this morning. So Willie, let's talk about the day yesterday. I mean, one shock after another that will have long-term, most Republicans and Democrats agreed, will have long term negative impact on the United States. You can look at the AG selection. You can look at Tulsi Gabbard. D&I.

D&I, which our allies have said just don't expect the sharing of any intel with the United States anymore because of course she is spread, constantly spread disinformation from Putin. Also of course many people concerned about her relationship with Assad in Syria. And then of course also had the DOD pick, which retired generals and admirals to a person, deeply concerned about not only his lack of experience, but also some of the extraordinarily hostile things that he's written, talking about Democrats as enemies from within and worse.

Yeah, he wrote that in a book not that long ago. That's not an old thought for Pete Hegs Yeah, he wrote that in a book not that long ago. That's not an old thought for Pete Hegseth, the man that Donald Trump has nominated to be Secretary of Defense, but you're right for every Marco Rubio at Secretary of State and John Thune winning yesterday to become the majority leader of the United States Senate, which most people in Washington said, okay, we can live with those choices. John Thune, a highly respected guy across party lines in the Senate. Along comes a Tulsi Gabbard, who, as you said, at best is sympathetic to Russia and Syria.

She was critical in the early days of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, of Ukraine and the United States for provoking that somehow, always tilting toward Russia. And the same, as you said, goes for Syria and Assad. She paid a visit to him not so long ago. So deep concerns about her directing our national intelligence. And then in Matt Gaetz, this is the one that shook not just Democrats, but Republicans. And we're going to play some of that reaction in just a moment from people who just utterly stunned, not, on the other hand, well-liked in just a moment from people who just utterly stunned, not

on the other hand, well liked in the United States Congress and not just by Democrats but by his Republican colleagues as well. He's someone like a lot of Republicans who talked about the weaponization of the Justice Department, about lawfare that is using the legitimate institutions of the legal system to attack people personally. Here you have it actually. A lot of that was invented, of course, but Matt Gaetz is chosen for the very reason that Donald Trump would tell you that he will go after Donald Trump's opponents, his perceived

enemies as well. So David Rhoade, let's swing over to you for reaction. What you're hearing from sources across the Justice Department and people who have worked in our in our legal community for years. What are they saying? So yesterday I was actually in the Justice Department. It was before this announcement was made and afterwards there was sort of shock from people in the department. They were stunned by the choice and it's And it's a pattern of, essentially, Matt Gaetz, based on his past activity,

will repeat a false narrative, a false narrative that fits Donald Trump's sort of personal political goals. And that's dangerous. We need institutions that sort of operate on facts. The power of the Justice Department is tremendous. And that's the concern here. People are not talking about mass resignations. People are talking about staying in the department and doing their jobs. They've worked for Republicans

and Democrats. But it was a shock. You know, there's calls for him not to be confirmed by the Senate. But it's this very dangerous rewriting of history and fact that appears that is what I believe will happen if he becomes attorney general. Yeah. So Jonathan Lemire, one of the things I heard repeatedly yesterday after this shock came down and this was from Republicans was that he won't make it through and that perhaps Donald Trump threw this out there and said,

OK, I'll let you shoot down Matt Gaetz in the Senate, but you got to give me X, Y and Z sort of as a strategic. The problem with that is Mika laid out is if he does recess appointments and he has a compliant Congress now, we know that then it doesn't matter. There's no vote. Yeah, there's a lot of things at play here. First, you're right. It can't be overstated just how stunning this announcement was.

It can't be overstated how disliked Matt Gaetz is. Across Capitol Hill, both parties. There is no sense that he is qualified for this position. We heard Republicans and Democrats alike voice real concerns that he would not be able to do this job. There is, look, Donald Trump, it almost feels like a dare. People are daring Republicans, try to defy me.

And yes, his initial picks were met with mostly a claim from the GOP. The last few, particularly Gabbard and Gates, much less so. That is one of the theories out there, is that Gates maybe does get knocked down, but that's maybe the one that Senate Republicans can object to, allowing the others to get in. The timing here is also very striking just two days before the release of a health ethics report about Gates's conduct because he is now suddenly resigned from Congress which was

not normally how this works. You usually keep your seat just in case you don't get confirmed so you can fall back on your old job but because that that he has resigned, that makes that probe go away. And now there are real questions as to whether or not that report will still see the light of day. So Chuck Rosenberg, let's talk about that, if you think that that report, you will see the light of day, whether you think that's part of the decision-making process here with Trump perhaps doing gates of favor

by giving him cover to bow out of the House of Representatives. But also, what it would mean if he is confirmed. There's real doubts about the recess appointment strategy. Thune said he might support it. That was before he was elected. It would be sacrificing a lot of Senate power if they were to let Trump do this. But if Gates were to get in, what would that look like? Wouldn't look good, Jonathan.

You know, you just mentioned that he is unqualified to the office, and you're exactly right. Of course he is. But in a sense, everybody's unqualified to that office. The work of the Department of Justice is so deep and so broad and so complex. Nobody comes in knowing everything about tax or antitrust or civil rights or civil work or criminal work

or everything from the Federal Bureau of Pr to the federal bureau of investigation. So it's not just that he's unqualified, Jonathan. You look for three things, I think, in any attorney general. Republican, Democrat, male, female, black or white, absolutely meaningless as long as they have one of these, or I should say all three of these things, right, integrity, judgment, and independence. If you have those three things, we're fine. And if you don't have those three things, we're not. And, you know, I first came in when Dick Thornburg was the attorney general of the United States, Republican from the Western District of Pennsylvania, had served as U.S. attorney, had been a governor, a man of tremendous integrity and honor, intellect,

passionate about the work of the department, understood the norms, followed by Janet Reno, who drove Bill Clinton crazy because of her independence. But it's exactly what the Department of Justice needed. Even Jeff Sessions disappointed Donald Trump when he recused himself from stewardship of the investigation into Russian election interference. I am sure Joe Biden was unhappy with Merrick Garland when Hunter Biden was indicted and when Mr. Garland appointed a special counsel to investigate Joe Biden's mishandling of

classified information. Right. What they all have in common, all of these attorneys general, is that independence streak. And with Matt Gaetz, you get not just somebody who is wholly unqualified to the substance of the work, but to somebody who lacks integrity, judgment, and independence. So what does it look like, Jonathan, if he becomes the attorney general of the United States? It's a train wreck.

All right. So, Cady K, just looking at the reaction on both sides of the aisle, seeing words like stunning and shocking, and even hearing them this morning, disturbing, wow, from Republicans and Democrats to many of these nominations, choices. You've been with us reporting throughout the campaign

in the run- up to the reelection of President Trump. So I guess my first question to you is, is it so shocking? Because I don't think it is at all. Not shocking at all. And this is exactly the kind of thing that President Trump laid out very clearly as he was running for reelection. And I just want to sort of set the record straight on that.

It's just not a surprise. Not to me. Wondering what you think. And also, what is your reaction to the nominations that you're hearing from around the world? So I suppose, I mean, it's shocking in the sense that Donald Trump's earliest picks for his cabinet seem to be more conventional. The Pete Waltzes of the world were people I mean, it's shocking in the sense that Donald Trump's earliest picks for his cabinet seem

to be more conventional. The Pete Waltzes of the world were people who have respect, could be understood in the context of America's foreign policy, but America's system of government more broadly. And that's why Matt Gaetz, I think, did come as a shock, maybe perhaps not after Tulsi Gabbard, also an unconventional pick. And that's, I think, many of us thought perhaps he was going to go down a more conventional route just because some of the early picks were more conventional. I've heard, as we all have this morning, even from very conservative constitutional

lawyers that they find the pick of Matt Gaetz unfathomable. But you're right, Mika. I mean, Donald Trump did signal all through the campaign, and people around him signaled that one of his priorities was to go after people who were his political enemies. It's very clear that he feels aggrieved at the way that he's been treated by the Justice Department in the way that Matt Gaetz does.

I mean, in this way, they're similar. They're kind of peas in a pod. They both feel they've been victimized. They both feel they've been wrongly investigated. And so you could kind of see why it would make sense The reporting is that Matt Gaetz was not high up on the list other people around Donald Trump didn't think he was necessarily going to be the Attorney General pick and then he flew up with Donald Trump yesterday morning to Washington DC and The reporting is that as a result of those conversations, his name was then announced. So maybe this is Donald Trump not being as organized about his cabinet as we had thought

he was from the early pick. When he came in and immediately announced Suzy Wiles, we thought this is different from 2016. This is somebody who's been planning this. It's organized. There's a system here. And yet the last couple of appointments suggest that may not be the case, that some of this is being

Pete Hegseth only went down to Mar-a-Lago on Monday was announced very quickly Matt Gaetz appears was announced very quickly after those Conversations on the plane. So perhaps there is a little bit more Chaos around this one. I think the thing I remember thinking in 2016 is how does competence factor into the Trump administration's cabinet and I think some of the last appointments that we've had Pete Hegs have not necessarily the most qualified for the job he's doing Matt Gaetz also raised the question is this cabinet going to be able to do the things that Donald Trump wants because do they have the experience even to do it? You know Rev it's interesting even some of the people that have gone in and seen

perhaps as buffers against Donald Trump's worst impulses, maybe a John Thune or Marco Rubio, Suzy Wilde as well. Maybe, but also he gets just about everybody now in this party to bend to his will. So even somebody who is viewed as a guardrail potentially ends up not being one. And I've, you know, you see in here after the Gates announcement yesterday, outrage and people saying, wait a minute, when I voted for Donald Trump, I voted for lower prices and a tougher border. You get the whole package when you cast your vote. You buy the ticket, you get the ride, and this is a part of it.

This is a part of it, but what is stunning is how they're handling it in such a way that is so bizarre for their own interest. Donald Trump, despite all of my criticisms of him, had the opportunity to now say, I was put in office even after being defeated, maybe the only second president in history to do that, and rise to the occasion. But you come in and put people in the Department of Defense, you put people in nominate people like Matt Gaetz. I mean, when you look at the temperament and background of these people that they're even disliked among Republicans. I mean, when what

Gaetz does to an innocent family, trying to take shots at Joe, I mean, let's not get past that shows a temperament despite the fact that we all know how ludicrous it was Why would you even pirate something like that? Unless there's something about you that should certainly not be sitting at the head of the Department of Justice And I think that what Donald Trump had an opportunity to say, I was not everything y'all said I was. He is now confirming our worst fears and making a mockery of government. To put these people over the Defense Department, to put Tulsi Gabbard there, over intelligence, to nominate Gates is to mock the American people that voted for him and those of us on the other side saying, we defer to the vote of the people, but we told you so.

Even we didn't tell you it would be this bad. And Willie, to your point about you're getting the whole package, Trump couldn't have been clearer. His agenda here is retribution against his perceived enemies. And for him, that's the deep state. What agencies?

Department of Justice, the intelligence community, Department of Defense. Those are the three picks right here. Pete Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard, and Matt Gaetz. That is what the second term is going to be about. And we should note, Republicans yesterday did defy him in their choice of John Thune as majority leader. They did so in a secret ballot.

Now they're going to have to put their names to it. And the FBI, head of the FBI, is still hanging out there. Let's go to NBC News congressional correspondent Julie Serkin. Julie, good morning. Gosh, a lot to sift through with you this morning. First of all, reaction you heard on Capitol Hill and then the chances of Matt Gaetz being confirmed by the United States Senate, who now openly is expressing disdain for him. But with that caveat about the possibility of a recess appointment.

Yeah, well, this is the first big test for Senate Republicans. Jonathan is exactly right when he's saying that because all of the appointments are one thing. You had Hegseth, you had Gabbard even, but it was like whiplash when Gates came down the pike. In some cases, we were running around the hallways informing lawmakers about the news that Gates was chosen as attorney general. And this is somebody who is disliked equally on both sides of the aisle.

I had, for example, Kevin Kramer say to me, well, I don't like what he did when he ousted Kevin McCarthy. I had other women Republican senators tell me on background, meaning not attaching their names to it, that they are disgusted by the investigations and some of the allegations that Gates was facing with his sexual misconduct, something he was disgusted by the investigations and some of the allegations that Gates was facing with his sexual misconduct, something he was being investigated by the House Ethics Committee for, as Jonathan laid out.

But when you talk about the chances of getting confirmed, the reactions were filled with expletives. They were filled with shock. A lot of senators, even conservatives in the MAGA world type, told me, look, I was okay with all of the people that he's put forward so far, but Gates is really a shocking one. And look, you can have defections like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.

They are about to have perhaps a 53-seat majority with Dave McCormick in Pennsylvania, though that race was headed to a recount. But still, regardless of the cushion, you still have a lot of Republicans who are scratching their heads at this pick, thinking maybe it's not going to end up happening at the end of the day. And wait, you talk about those recess appointments. John Thune was asked about that before the Gates pick was announced. Take a listen to what he said. You've said that recess appointments are on the table.

That's a key demand from President-elect Donald Trump. Will you move forward with that? Well, what we're going to do is make sure that we are processing his nominees in a way that gets them into those positions so they can implement his agenda. How that happens remains to be seen. Here's the thing. Nobody wants recess appointments. The last time this happened was under President Obama.

The Supreme Court blocked him because he didn't do it in a certain amount of days. The Senate then returned to this handshake agreement of not doing stuff like that. Essentially, what that would mean is both chambers get dismissed. The Senate's not in session, but then Trump is allowed to install essentially whoever he wants. With somebody like Gates, certainly alarm bells are ringing in senators' ears. But even when they met behind closed doors in the candidate forum before those elections where they voted for Thune for a leader, I was told that they talked about recess appointments.

While that's on the table, everybody prefers going through regular order. So Julie, what are you hearing about what I mentioned a few minutes ago I heard from some Republicans yesterday, which is Donald Trump threw out Matt Gaetz so that the Senate could shoot that down and then Trump could say, OK, but you got to give me everybody else. You got to give me Pete Hegseth. You got to approve of everyone else that I'm putting on the table. You get one. You know, it's an interesting theory.

I think the ethics investigation with Gaetz is really fascinating to me. I heard from some Republican lawmakers that perhaps Trump nominated Gaetz as his attorney general, knowing that he's not going to get confirmed but kind of gives him this out and a chance to go away before this damaging and embarrassing health ethics report is released. Because remember, that goes away entirely now that Gates has handed in his resignation letter all the multi-year-long investigation that they were putting on. That just poof, gone.

And of course, the DOJ never charged Gates. So that's definitely an interesting possibility and theory when it comes to Pete Hegseth. Even nobody said, look, that's a flat out no. Senators were definitely confused. They didn't see that pick coming necessarily, but they do see, for example, the pairing of Pete Hegseth at DOD and Mike Waltz as national security advisor as kind of the grownup in a role and maybe Hegseth can be the face of Pete Hexeth at DOD and Mike Waltz as national security advisor as kind of the grown-up in a role and maybe Hexeth can be the face of it. Yeah, that by the way that report that was due to come out tomorrow about Matt

Gates three years in the making one source inside that committee saying it is quote highly damaging to Matt Gates now goes away though those things do have a way of finding their way out into the open. NBC News congressional correspondent Julie Serkin. Julie, thanks so much. We appreciate it. So Chuck Rosenberg, we'll give you the last word on this. What is your sense of the possibility of this idea of recess appointments actually taking

place when sort of anything is possible in a town that Donald Trump controls and a compliant Congress? We know sort of anything is possible in a town that Donald Trump controls in a compliant Congress. But do you see the possibility as being very real for recess appointments? I guess, Willie, I see the possibility as being possible, but it would require the members of the Senate who took an oath to the Constitution to ignore the advice and consent clause. So if that's not an important part of their jobs in their own eyes, there's not a thing that you or I can do about it.

I can't imagine a world in which Matt Gaetz could pass Senate confirmation regardless of the Constitution of the Senate. So let's see whether or not the senators take all of the clauses of the Constitution seriously. Is it possible they won't? Of course it's possible. To your point, anything is possible. All right. Former U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg, thank you very much for being on this morning.

We'll talk to you soon. Time now to take a quick look at some of the other stories making headlines this morning. New York Governor Kathy Hochul has expected to revive a plan to charge a toll on most vehicles entering Midtown and Lower Manhattan. That comes after she pulled the plug on the idea back in July suggesting the $15 charge was too high. According to the New York Times, the new cost will be $9 per vehicle. The new plan would be fast-tracked for approval. In an effort to head off, President-elect Trump's vowed to kill the program. A new storm could hit Florida by the middle of next week as a Category 3 hurricane. Government forecasters say the system, to be named Sarah, could bring catastrophic flooding.

The Gulf Coast has already seen five hurricane landfalls this season and conservative attorney Theodore Olson has died. The longtime lawyer successfully argued the 2000 Florida recount case that secured the presidency for George W. Bush. He later worked to overturn California's ban on same-sex marriage. The former solicitor general appeared more than 60 times before the US Supreme Court. He was 84 years old. And still ahead on Morning Joe, our next guest says Tulsi Gabbard's nomination is a national security risk. The Atlantic's Tom Nichols joins us for more on that. You're watching Morning Joe. We're back in 90 seconds. Well, it must be the worst nomination for cabinet position in American history.

I think this is something that falls well outside the scope of deference that should be given to a president in nominating members of his senior team. Gates is not only totally incompetent for this job, he doesn't have the character, he is a person of moral turpitude, and notwithstanding how difficult it may be politically, this is a nomination the Republican Party should oppose. We'll tick through some of the other nominees, but do you think he's the only one that you might see some real opposition to, or do you think there are others? Well, I think that Tulsi Gabbard's nomination to be director of national intelligence, when I first heard that today, my immediate reaction was hilarious. Why?

She's totally not competent for that job. Gates is the worst. She may be tracking in at the second worst. One of Donald Trump's former national security advisors, John Bolton, yesterday reacting to the controversial Trump nominations, Trump picked Tulsi Gabbard, a former House Democrat who ran for president in 2020, to be the director of national intelligence. Gabbard is currently a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve and has served in the Hawaii National Guard. But she has never worked in the intelligence world or served on a Congressional Intelligence Committee.

Back in 2017, when she was in Congress, Gabbard received criticism for meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who was accused of human rights violations and war crimes. Gabbard defended her meeting at the time, saying Assad is, quote, not the enemy of the United States. Gabbard has often been at odds with assessments from the U.S. intelligence community and has clashed with government analysts who say Russian leader Vladimir Putin is the primary purveyor of disinformation that's designed to sow divisions in the U.S. Two years ago, lawmakers accused Gabbard of promoting Russian propaganda

after she posted a video online that claimed to show U.S.-funded bioweapon labs in Ukraine. Gabbard denied the allegation. She also has claimed the Biden administration could have prevented the war in Ukraine. Gabbard denied the allegation. She also has claimed the Biden administration could have prevented the war in Ukraine if it addressed Russia's concerns about Ukraine joining NATO. So Willie, you know, as we said off the top of the show, we've done our best since the election and we plan to continue doing it, reporting the news straight down the middle. If somebody were just tuning in and listening to these reactions to Matt Gaetz for AG and Tulsi Gabbard for DNI, they might go, ah, oh my gosh, these are

left-wingers that don't like Donald Trump's selections. Everybody they're talking to, well, of course, there you saw John Bolton. But I think what's so unique about these two selections, unlike the others that President Trump laid out there, that you actually, if you go on the Hill, you will have Republicans and Democrats both being critical of the selections and I suspect Republicans being more critical of the Gates pick just because they know him personally more and have had a lot of problems with him for many different reasons. But with Tulsi Gabbard, you talk to anybody on the Intel committees, any Republicans on

the Intel committees, talk to any Republicans that actually have dealt with the gathering of intelligence, the sharing of intelligence with foreign governments. They seem to be the ones right now most horrified by this. This is, this is, we talked about Matt Gaetz before, but it's fair to say that Tulsi Gabbard is a bipartisan shock as well, only because the conclusion is if she were to ever be in that position, other countries simply wouldn't share Intel with the United States. Yeah, that's what I was going to say, too, Joe. You touched on that earlier, which is I heard from and read yesterday where you have people in the Intel community saying our allies just aren't going to share intelligence with us if she's in there because the sympathetic view, the kindest view is that she is a sympathizer of Vladimir Putin's of Assad's in Syria. I think Tom Nichols and others might take it a step further in who she is and what

she's been doing over the last several years. Let's bring in the staff writer for the Atlantic Tom Nichols, his latest piece titled, Tulsi Gabbard's nomination is a national security risk. Tom, good morning. Can you explain specifically why you believe she would be, if she gets this job, a risk to the country? You know, every federal employee every year has to sit through insider threat training to recognize people they think might be hazards around classified material. And part of that is people who are deeply critical of the

United States and its foreign policy, who seem to have a lot of affinity and meetings with foreign nationals. I mean, there's all kinds of alarm bells that go off here. And this nomination sets them all off. This is, you know, not somebody that you would say, sure, this, you know, I'll hand the crown jewels of American intelligence to someone who, as you pointed out, leave aside that she's completely unqualified for the job, this is somebody who has consistently taken the side of people like Bashar Assad and Vladimir Putin, even when she was a member of Congress. There is absolutely no way that in any normal universe we'd even be having this discussion

about trusting Tulsi Gabbard with the American intelligence community. And it reminded people watching, the DNI sits on top of all of America's intelligence communities, including CIA. And I think, you know, one of the terrible things about the Matt Gaetz nomination is that it was so cartoonishly shocking that it's wiped out talking about how completely unfit Tulsi Gabbard is, and frankly, Pete Hegseth as well.

I mean, you would have two people at Defense and DNI that I think you'd simply be shocked to think are handling classified information information are, at least in Pete Hegseth's case, part of the nuclear chain of command. This is Donald Trump in a way he's trolling the nation, mocking, I think, Reverend Sharpton had already, he's mocking his own voters. But these are all focused inward. These are all about people who are going to punish Donald Trump's opponents merely by virtue

of even being in the jobs. And there's no thought at all here about, well, I don't know, what's best for America or American national security or defense of the republic. Right, right, right, right, right. So, Jonathan Amir, help me out here. You've obviously you've reported on President Trump now for quite some time. Let's look back over

the past week. He received 50% plus in the vote tally that came in. He did, I mean, swept the swing states, did far better than anybody had expected as far as that big of a route. He was praised by, of course, Republicans, got grudging respect from political pros on what he did. Certainly a lot of respect and adulation for Wall Street and business leaders, got grudging respect from political pros on what he did. Certainly a lot of respect and adulation for Wall Street and business leaders,

something that he certainly likes to hear. Laid out his first two, three picks that were met with, I think a good enough reception. And so everything seemed to be breaking his way. And again, if you had a president who wanted to be a 50% plus president, he certainly had started off the first week very well in that direction. I'm curious, though, yesterday, one shockwave after another, obviously with Matt Gaetz, somebody who is not qualified to do the job and someone he knew

would cause the reaction that it caused from Republicans and Democrats, same thing with Tulsi Gabbard. I'm curious, your best reporting on why that sharp turn when everything, it seemed the first week to be going so smoothly. The people I've talked to around Trump in the last few days show this is a case study of these competing impulses he has. On the one hand, yes, he wants to be liked. He wants to receive praise from the mainstream media, from Wall Street, from business leaders. At the same time, he gives into his darker instincts about revenge and retribution and also siding with those who simply flatter him. It's about his agenda too. We should fully anticipate business leaders

pushing back against tariffs, let's say, or the mass deportations because those things will impact the economy. Will that be enough to get him to stop? We shall see. He was praised for a lot of his early picks, including the official announcement yesterday of Marco Rubio to be Secretary of State. But beginning two nights ago with the Pete Hegseth pick,

and then really accelerating with Matt Gaetz and Tulsi Gabbard, this is him prioritizing personal loyalty and also retribution, which is what he has said this entire term would be about. And those around him, look, were taken by surprise, particularly by the Gates and Gabbard picks. They weren't on the short list, Gates included, and then they now wonder what happens next. It seems like a real dare to Republicans.

Tom Nichols, I wanted to circle back to the Tulsi Gabbard selection with you, because one thing I heard yesterday, or a concern I heard from those who are currently and formerly in the intelligence community, is that this would have a chilling effect on our allies. That because Gabbard is viewed with such suspicion, that there would be some of our European and Asian partners who might not want to fully cooperate with us,

who frankly might have had some skepticism about Trump himself. Trump, of course, famously blabbed about intelligence to the Russian ambassador in the Oval Office. And now you add Gabbard to the mix. What's your degree of concern? Is this going to undermine our alliances? My degree of concern about all three of these and especially

about Gabbard in that position is off the charts a level of concern. Of course it's going to affect our allies. They'd be, you know, they would be irresponsible in their duties to their countries if they were not concerned about her because when you're thinking about dealing with, again, the top American intelligence official, you take your pick. You wouldn't want to work with her because she's not qualified for her job or because she's overly sympathetic to the president of Russia and the president of Syria, who, you know, she thinks was a seems to think is not our enemy and as a, you know, she thinks was a, seems to think is not our enemy and is a, you know, needs to be understood after he gassed his own people.

There was also, I think, within the intelligence community within the United States, you're going to see information slow down simply because there are going to be offices and agencies who were going to have intelligence professionals saying, what do I send up the chain? Where should this piece of information go? Do we keep it in-house at CIA or the FBI or the National Security Agency? I mean, it's a mess. Can I ask you, Tom, so let's say perhaps she's not, she doesn't get confirmed by the

Senate. Who would be some other strong candidates for this position that might fit more into Donald Trump's worldview? So if not Gavrards, and we've certainly heard from Republicans and Democrats alike, not her, but who would be two or three good names for this position if for some reason she got voted down? Joe, I am not going to make the life

of a future nominee difficult by naming them and saying that somebody I think would be OK. How about describing the describing the type of person that Republicans and Democrats would support? What would the qualities be? The qualities would be, first of all, some experience with intelligence. I mean, these this can't be amateur hour. This isn't the apprentice. This isn't celebrity director of National Intelligence Week on the staffing apprentice

to see if the Hawaii National Guard Lieutenant Colonel can make it to the top of the intelligence heap. This is ridiculous. This is reality show approach. So you'd want somebody who has background in national intelligence, somebody perhaps, if it's a legislator, somebody who sat on those committees, if it's someone from within the intelligence community, someone who's managed a large organization. This is another thing we keep forgetting about these.

You know, one of the problems with both the Gabber and Hegseth nominations is these are immense bureaucracies. They require people who are executives, who have run big organizations. So you look for that kind of background. Right. Gabbert has none of them. Yeah. Rev, I mean, look, again, no matter how his first few appointments went, that might have led people to think in certain ways, these nominations are in line with exactly what Donald Trump was repeatedly

communicating to the country. There's, you know, if people are shocked, then in some ways they haven't heard what he's saying, or they didn't believe it, or they didn't think he meant it. So now we know that he does. And Rev, I'm wondering if you could speak to the impact of these nominations, and if we could talk more about how it could impact the American people,

how it could ultimately impact their day-to-day lives, why this matters to not the elites in Washington who are concerned about big, big issues, but to people in America who perhaps are tuning in for the first time and looking at the president that they voted for. I think that that is what is critical here. When you look at the fact that American people are dealing with day to day-day challenges in how they afford their life. We talk a lot about how the price of milk is going up, how they deal with their travel in terms of our infrastructure, how they deal with

crime. All of this now has become a sideshow to playing to some cheap seats on the super right wing by nominating people that does not have the capacity to address any of that. To have someone over the Justice Department that is more concerned with vengeance and chasing conspiracies than really dealing with how do we get rid of criminal elements and people that are tracking guns and that are causing real, real problems for people to live under threat is in many ways a real, real tragedy. And I think that's what we're looking at, to have our intelligence compromised because

someone that is highly suspect in terms of their relationships at a time that we have wars, we have wars in Ukraine, we have wars in the Middle East. Why would we be even playing this risky game? Who are we playing to if you're the president? I thought about how Mrs. Coretta Scott King told me once, Martin III got her and I to talking. She said, Al, you can't be big and small at the same time. You're playing the small crowd saying rhetoric that'll fire them up, but what about the bigger

picture? And the president is playing to a small crowd that's here at his rallies and not really evolving into being the president and the leader of the free world and doing what is right for the average non-partis sitting in their house today trying to figure out how they're going to get through the week. David, when you look at the totality of these foreign policy picks, I mean, some are more isolationist than others. Rubio probably more classically

in the vein of American leadership around the world, but the others, Waltz, Hegseth, Gabbard, all more isolationist. How does the balance of power play out amongst these players when it comes to the issue of what is probably America's biggest concern, and that is China? Does this seem to suggest to you that American consumers really should be looking at tough tariffs on China,

which could potentially raise prices for them? Or do you see it as being more complicated than that? I think tariffs is an excellent example. What you need is intelligence officials and other officials who will give you frank advice. Will tariffs cause China to back down? And the scenario for American consumers is that Donald Trump has said he has not given a promise that he would defend Taiwan from an invasion by China. China's leader Xi Jinping

has said he plans to do that during Donald Trump's second term, 2027 as a year. He's talked about regaining control of Taiwan. If a war starts with Taiwan, if a trade war starts over tariffs, you know, prices go up. And just again on intelligence, it's critical. Intelligence is getting information. What is she thinking? But it's also making estimates and predictions. Iraq WMD, the intelligence community got it wrong.

The United States invaded Iraq thinking there were weapons of mass destruction there. Thousands of Americans died. gas prices went up. A system was set up after the Vietnam War where intelligence officials lied and 50,000 Americans died in Vietnam. So we need fact-based intelligence information. And Tulsi Gabbard saying that, you know, the war in Ukraine was caused by a secret American

chemical weapons plants in Ukraine is false. That makes you think, oh, Putin will be reasonable. So these are momentous decisions and why it's so important to have fact-based people. And there are, I will not name people in Congress, but former Republican heads of intelligence committees do this. Mike Walz is seen as a responsible person. So there are people

out there who support Donald Trump that can do these jobs effectively. Well yeah, exactly. And that's what I was gonna say. There are Republicans who've been extremely responsible over the past decade on the Intel committee and in other committees that could. Who also supported Donald Trump through the campaign, very supportive of him, that could do the job for him because really at the end of the day we're talking about how these picks are bad for the country. They also ultimately though, if they're bad for the country, they're bad for Donald Trump. On the issue of Intel, you want to have somebody

where the whole world is sharing intelligence to help get to the president of the United States the latest on what's happening in Iran, what's happening in China, what's happening across the world with people who want to do us harm. We certainly recalled several times during this administration the United States intelligence services actually getting intel on attacks that were going to be happening in Iran.

And of course, during President Trump's administration, he got intel that allowed him to issue a strike against Soleimani, and something that could have never happened without all of the Intel agencies working together. And so while we're talking about these picks being bad for the intelligence community, being bad for the United States, ultimately, it's bad for the President of the United States, the incoming President of the United States, the incoming President of the United States, if he has somebody there that's not up to the job and also somebody that other countries will not trust with critical intel when President Trump will need it the most. Yeah, it turns out personal retribution is not a good guiding principle for a President

of the United States. You need the best, most competent people in the job for, as you say, the benefit of the country and the benefit of the president who's sitting in that office. We'll see. We will see if Matt Gaetz, we will see if Tulsi Gabbard make it through the Senate. As John said before, this is a big test for the new majority leader, John Thune. Will he control his caucus to the point to keep these two people out of those offices? And as I said before, FBI still out there.

And don't forget Bobby Kennedy Jr. still floating around to perhaps run the NIH. NBC's David Rode and the Atlantic's Tom Nichols. Thank you both very much for coming on the show this morning. We appreciate it. And coming up on Morning Joe, Donald Trump meets with President Biden at the White House and promises a peaceful transfer of power. We'll dig into what the two discussed yesterday. Morning Joe, we'll be right back.

Few minutes before the top of the hour, live look at the White House. Time now for a look at the morning papers across the country. We'll begin in New Jersey where the record leads with Democratic Governor Phil Murphy's drought warning advisory. Murphy made the announcement yesterday following an unprecedented streak of dry weather that has fueled wildfires across the state. The governor's warning aims to preserve water supplies and avoid shortages. In Rhode Island, the westerly sun has a front-page feature on the declining rate of opioid deaths across the U.S.

According to the CDC, nearly 97,000 people died from overdoses over a 12-month period that ended on June 30th. That is down 14 percent from last year. In New York, the Buffalo News reports restaurants are seeing more cooking oil thefts. At least seven local restaurants were targeted in one day. Officials believe the thieves may be trying to produce biodiesel, which is a highly valuable commodity that can be made from cooking oil and animal fats.

And in Vermont, the Burlington Free Press is looking at the state's record number of votes cast in last week's election. There were nearly 373,000 votes for national and statewide races, topping Vermont's previous record of 370,000 votes from the 2020 election. Wow. Love Vermont. That's something, because a lot of states, the voting numbers were down. I know.

Still, I had continued reaction to Donald Trump's pick for attorney general. Our legal experts are standing by with what this move likely signals for the DOJ. Plus, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren will join the conversation with her take on Trump's new appointments. Also, two-time Golden Globe nominee Richard Gere will be our guest to discuss his new film, Oh Canada!