Morning Joe - Morning Joe 11/21/24

Episode Date: November 21, 2024

Federal inquiry traced payments from Matt Gaetz to women: NYT

How have your meetings been today sir? They've been going great. The Senator has been giving me a lot of good advice. I'm looking forward to a hearing. Folks have been very supportive. They've been saying we're going to get a fair process. So it's a great day of momentum for the Trump-Vance administration. Are you confident you can get confirmed by the Senate? It was a great day. I don't think there's any way he could get confirmed if this is accurate. confirmed by the Senate. Do you feel like? It was a great day.

I don't think there's any way he could get confirmed if if this is as this is accurate, and I will tell you I don't. I will say Matt when he's been confronted about this is denied it over and over and over again. If it turns out that Matt Gates was Matt Gates was lying,

you're going to see a lot of opinions change on this. It is extremely concerning. It was already a very. It to see a lot of opinions change on this. It is extremely concerning. It was already a very, it's already a hard push to get Matt confirmed to begin with. This is, this is, this will make things very difficult if it comes out that it's actually true. That is Republican Senator Mark Wayne Mullen reacted to a New York Times report that details a trail of payments from Matt Gaetz to various women.

Gaetz, as you saw there in the clip, was on Capitol Hill yesterday attempting to win support for his nomination for attorney general. Good morning. Welcome to Morning Joe. It is Thursday, November 21st with Joe and me this morning. The host of Way Too Early, as always, and White House Bureau Chief of Politico, Jonathan Lemire.

He's very good at his job. Outstanding. He's really outstanding. Outstanding. He's great. Day in, day out. I'm going to use outstanding he's really that's outstanding is great stay in there. I'm going to use you as references that's right. He is you know, I've had some people say is the Cal rip can

of early morning. Just every day shows up. I'm sorry I didn't mean to lose my range eventually though. Well, we have some more important introductions. introduction. White House and State Department president emeritus of the Council on foreign relations, the great Richard Hops is the author of the weekly newsletter home in a way available on sub stack and congressional investigations reporter for the Washington Post Jackie Alameda

with a lot to talk to Jackie about we have a ton to talk about you know, I there's a lot to look at in the papers really quickly. The Wall Street Journal editorial page, you know, it's the Republicans in the House maybe trying to keep this from the Republicans in the Senate and let's just make sure we say here this isn't a Democrat versus Republican thing. This is an intramural battle between House Republicans, some House Republicans. Okay, maybe one or two House Republicans, because the rest want this report out. And the Senate and the Wall Street Journal editorial page says, the Senate has every right to demand to see the report on Mr. Gates before confirming his nomination as president elect Trump's next attorney general. Even without the House report, the Senate could call the same witnesses to testify, and they will. And as Senator John Cornyn suggested this week,

in order to do our job, we need to get the access to all the information, but also to protect the president against any surprises that might damage his administration. Again, this isn't just about the Justice Department. This isn't just about America. Selfishly, it should be for Donald Trump as well, because this will be a disaster. And it's a Wall Street Journal... It is a disaster. The Wall Street Journal editorial page says, the Senate would be justified in sticking

to that line, whatever the political pressures that Mr. Trump might bring to bear for a speedy confirmation on Gates. And Willie, the news just keeps coming out. I mean, again, you got so many layers of problems here. He's not qualified. Nobody thinks he's qualified. Everybody's going, well, let's see this report before we... Everybody knows he's not qualified for this job. Everybody knows he doesn't play well with others.

The House Republican members can't stand him. I think Ari Melber has some clips we're going to play later on about all the nasty things he said about Republican senators. Then on top of that, you have sworn testimony that he had sex with a 17 year-old girl at a drug fueled orgy under oath. These people can would be sent to jail if they were lying and just yet one after another after that I can see by the way you're looking right now that Alex is saying.

Why doesn't Joe let him read the story. why doesn't Joe let him read the story. No, no. But then, We're gonna find, we're gonna find the Ari Melber clip. We're gonna do that later, cause he did put together a compilation. Right, but anyway,

but anyway, you know, the thing is like people are going, well, we're still going to get this, that, and other before we talk. I love the intro of what the Senator said. Well, if these allegations are true, then he can't he knows they're are they're true. He knows they're true.

And that and everybody knows they're true based on sworn testimony where people would have been sent to jail if they were lying. Senator Mullen, who you just heard from there, he is the one who famously said that Matt Gates would describe how he would crush up ED Ed medication and chase it with power drink so you could you know have a longer evening so these guys these are again these are the. I didn't realize there was no turning back. But that's what he said. But again, as you say, these are Republicans, John, who do not miss a chance to find a microphone

to criticize Matt Gaetz. It's personal on many levels, but also in this case, they're saying this report is crushing. This report would eliminate...if one or two details in the report were true, this would end anyone else's nomination or potential nomination. So we will see how much more capital Donald Trump wants to spend again. He's pushing these how far can I push these guys and these women in the Republican Party. At the moment on Matt Gaetz at least they they seem to be

saying Matt Gaetz is the line for us. Yeah, even before this nomination it was well known the House of Senate just how much fellow Republicans despise Matt Gaetz is the line for us. Yeah, even before this nomination, it was well-known, the House and Senate, just how much fellow Republicans despised Matt Gaetz. And in a process like this, you need some friends. He doesn't really have any. JD Vance, they'd take him around the hill yesterday. They had some meetings with senators, but they were notably noncommittal to his nomination. And you're right.

I mean, Trump is trying to push this, and he's got a number of controversial picks. But it seems like the Senate is standing up against this one. Now as we'll get into, the House Ethics Committee, Republicans on the committee voted to block the release of this report yesterday, but there is a widely held belief it will see the light of day. And we heard from the Senate yesterday, including from Republicans in the Senate saying, we need to see that. So that report will emerge emerge but even were it not

there is serious questions about his qualifications serious questions about his character and Trump is trying to push his allies as far as he can on the upper in the upper chamber here but we're seeing some real resistance here I'm told for last night that Gates's nomination deeply in doubt. Well and again the Wall Street Journal editorial page brings up a great point. Even if they don't release it in the House, it gets worse for him because they bring the witnesses live to Capitol Hill. So this meltdown can occur on live television with live witnesses.

Nobody, nobody should want that to happen in the Trump administration. And I doubt the AG nominee would want that to happen. I don't, I'm not exactly sure what this stance is. Like do they, I mean, if they're going to do a try a recess appointment and start a constitutional crisis, they go that way. But why trot this around? This ends badly any way you cut it. I think we also are just missing what this is about. At the end of the day, you had a full field FBI background investigation when I had one

and they're going back to your hometown and talking to the preacher and checking with everyone. It's not because they care about your morality. They care about if your morality leads you to become compromised. And this is about not wanting a sex addict, not wanting a drug addict to have control of the nation's top secrets at the end of the day. And so that's why this is kind of a little bit important. It's not about morality at the end of the day.

Yeah, and to your point, Senator Mike Rounds, Republican again of South Dakota, said, all right, if you don't release the report, we can relive this whole thing in a hearing. We'll do our own investigation. This position as attorney general is too important. So we'll see where this ends. The document obtained by the New York Times shows federal investigators have traced payments between Matt Gaetz and women who say they were paid by the former congressman to have sex with him. According to the Times, the document shows how Gaetz and a friend, quote, send thousands of dollars through Venmo to dozens of people who claim to be involved in sex parties from 2017 to

2020. Those people have reportedly testified to federal and congressional investigators. Sources familiar with the case tell the Times among those who received payments was a woman who was 17 years old when she attended one of those parties. The Times reports the document which uses thumbnail photos of Gates as well as various women and men to show how payments flowed between them was assembled when the Justice Department was investigating that was awfully complicated that's a lot of that is why that is there are a lot of there are a lot of lines right

there a lot a lot of activity on the Vin Mo that's Russell Crowe in a beautiful mine level line. Although the DOJ declined to file charges, the Times reports the House ethics committee was given a copy the chart does not show what the payments were for NBC News has not been able to independently verify that dock in a lawyer for 2 women who testified that Gates hired them for sex says their payments totaled about $10,000 and that they were typically given about $200

to $500 for each encounter. In a statement to the Times, the communications director for President-elect Trump claimed the material was classified and purposefully leaked to smear Gates. According to the Times, there are no classified markings on the document, no reason there would be. Gates has declined all allegations of sexual misconduct. Yeah, that's piling up there. And again, here's the thing. Right now, the House Speaker and others are trying to be clever, going, oh, we're not going to release a report. Actually releasing the report would be better than reliving it on the Hill in a Senate committee with everybody seeing it. And Jackie, I mean, that actually would be the worst case scenario for the incoming president, the worst case scenario for the incoming president, the worst case

scenario for Republican supporters. You talk about a needless distraction, which the Wall Street Journal has talked about. Karl Rove yesterday talked about how the first week of nominations went well, and then he came to Gates, which I think he said was a colossally bad selection. Again, you wonder how much scar tissue they're going to want to take on over this with the New York Post, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, Republican senators, all saying, this guy is not fit to be attorney general. Whether or not Matt Gates or Republicans want this report to come out, details of it, and perhaps the most lurid and salacious details of it,

are going to inevitably come out because of exactly what you just laid out. The women, the witnesses, some of the women who were previously 17 years old when they had an encounter, a sexual encounter with Matt Gaetz, they are going to be called as witnesses to testify before the committee, although their lawyers have told us extensively over the past two weeks that they really want to avoid doing so. And I think that's why we're seeing them

sort of make these public appearances over the past few days to lay out some of the allegations that their clients have made behind closed doors. And now, while we didn't confirm that document that was obtained by the New York Times, which really shows the breadth of the investigation in a way that we haven't seen before, that was ultimately cleared and dropped by the Justice Department two years ago in 2022. They ultimately decided that the witnesses, there were some credibility issues with the

witnesses and didn't pursue charges against Gates. We did obtain exhibits that were shown to the House Ethics Committee and provided to the Justice Department as a part of that investigation that showed some of the Venmos and PayPal requests and payments that were given to some of these women who testified that they were paid for sex by Matt Gates. This is outside of the allegations of sex trafficking of Matt Gaetz having a sexual encounter with a minor. There were 27 different PayPal payments

and Venmo payments that were shown in these exhibits that totaled nearly $10,000. The notes next to those payments were sort of a variety of descriptions ranging from love you to gifts to cartridges. But in the past two days when we've been in conversations with the lawyers for these clients, they have been very clear that that Gates was paying them at sometimes for sex and also to have sex with other people at these drug-fueled sex parties.

So Jackie, as you know, Matt Gates is not popular among his colleagues on Capitol Hill. He's made a habit of insulting lawmakers, his colleagues, including those who will vote on his nomination. Here's that montage we were talking about from our friends at the beat with Ari Melber. They put it together last night showing Gaetz trashing his Capitol Hill colleagues while he was in office. We have Murkowski and Collins rejecting the duties that they have as senators, and if they do that, their voters should reject them. Our leadership, frankly, is in shambles. You've got McConnell wavering.

Speaking of fools, Republican Senator and neoconservative Mark Wayne Mullen, Mitch McConnell's real legacy is that he was missing in action when we needed him most and spent a lot of his time in the Senate putting special interests above American interests. My advice going forward is that the Republican leadership doesn't need to pick one of the Johns. John Thune, John Cornyn, John Barrasso, I think that there are going to be better options than the Johns center till is trying to get another blank check for a corrupt country, it's it's disappointing is a certain hubris to all of it.

I kind of day we're counting on our hand that's a right yeah, we had to go to a second hand that does a recent insult, yeah, 8 senators that he's trash and those are just the ones in that in that one moment, he's done a lot more that so Jackie as you look at this process and understanding Capitol Hill so well it seems like Speaker Johnson is kind of giving the Ethics Committee some space and they need to continue their discussion and and decide whether they're gonna let that report go public.

If they don't there's a chance somewhere greater than a hundred percent that it will find the light of day into the media most likely. So how do you see this playing out with pressure applied from Trump and JD Vance on the top but such almost universal disdain for Gates in the Congress? Yeah, well you cannot understate the amount of vitriol that the majority of House Republicans and some Senate Republicans have for Matt Gates. But there is one extremely important ally that he has and someone he's fostered a really close relationship with since 2016, really became one of his top allies and most outspoken

advocates really early on in the Trump administration. And that is Donald Trump. This is someone who is not going to withdraw his support for him. They're going to go through this process. And they've actually demonstrated in the past few days that they're going to take a more persuasion approach rather than the scorched-earth approach that I think we could imagine this leading into. But what happened with the House Ethics Committee yesterday was a little bit surprising, considered

all of the, again, vitriol that's been directed toward Gates, with none of his House Republicans who are, who sit on this panel of 10 members who could vote to release the report voting in favor of releasing it. You saw Susan Wilde come out yesterday after the the two-hour meeting of deliberations saying there was no agreement not to disclose the report, that it was inaccurate for Michael Guest, the chairman of the committee, to say that there was agreement. This has sort of kicked the can down the road. The

House Ethics Committee is going to meet again December 5th, but it's possible this is going to come to a head prior to December 5th. Now you have members, two Democratic members, you have Representative Steve Cohen and Sean Castan, who have both Steve Cohen and Sean Caston, who have both called to, one, preserve the documents in order that this report somehow makes it potentially to the Senate Judiciary Committee. That's a separate process that seems very likely to happen if it stays behind closed doors.

And then, two, for this to be brought to the House floor through a privilege resolution. So this would force a vote of all of the House to call on their members to release this report. So Democrats are trying to make this come out one way or the other, and you are seeing some Republicans one by one incrementally say they're going to have discussions with Mike Johnson behind closed doors about this because they do want this to be a part

of the process and feel like it's important for it to be a part of the process and feel like it's important for it to be a part of the process. Well, as the old Midas ad says, you can pay me now or you can pay me later, and it actually gets worse later because, again, you talk about some hearings. Whoa. And I would tell you, I mean, he called the Oklahoma senator a fool, speaking of fools. I mean, and you go down all the list of all the insults there, and those are just the ones that Ari picked out. That's gonna be a problem.

So, that's an understatement, that's gonna be a problem. So, Richard, so Richard, Washington is run, I mean Washington is run on relationships. I mean, you know, I had one of the most conservative voting records in Washington, D.C. Like I've said, I had 95% ACU rating. Every time I got on the House floor, I walked over to the Democratic side. They talked to people I disagreed with. I made sure I built really good relations there. And that's how you get things done.

And also, you find out when things go sideways, you know, you've got friends there to stick with you. And he just doesn't have that. Talk about Washington. You've been doing this for a very long time. And how important it is to have those relationships and even if you're not great at having relationships, not insulting everybody that you come across in Washington, D.C.

Yeah, look, the bottom line is he's more likely to be investigated by the next attorney general than to become the next attorney general. So let's just start that and in no small part because of what you just say. He doesn't have, to say he doesn't have a reservoir support is a generous way of putting it. He's got one relationship, which is Donald Trump. And that's what's so interesting to me about this. It's almost the tension between those two, the one relationship he has and the many relationships

he doesn't have. And so the question is, how does that play out? How long does the Trump team stick with him? To what extent, you know, I'd like to know, were they surprised by Nainis? What was the vetting process? Did they, is there anything that's happened or could happen that they said, wow, we didn't count on that or we didn't say that, see that coming? Or did they see all of it coming and said, let's press ahead regardless?

And we were talking about it before. One of the interesting things of this, again, I don't think he's going to make it, is to what extent does this help a lot of the other people? How much appetite do people in Washington have to take on two, three, four of these nominees regardless of their lack of fitness? And that could also be, again, whether it was the original strategy or not, my own view is it may become part of the study. Let this play out, and even though it's costly, as Karl Rove pointed out, if it attracts enough

incoming, then a lot of other people may survive. Well, here's the problem for the three or four nominees that are just, as Karl Rove said, completely radioactive, and that is everybody's going to be concerned about Matt Gates, right? radioactive and that is they're gonna be a lot everybody's gonna be concerned about Matt Gaetz right but then if you're a Republican who spent your entire life adult life working on Intel issues you're gonna be just as concerned about Tulsi Gabbard and there's likely gonna be four Republicans that are gonna vote against Tulsi Gabbard and then you know if you're concerned about the DOD it's so funny we had Admiral Stravita's here and we were talking about Gaetz he said

well no I'm concerned about the DOD, it's so funny we had Admiral Stravita here and we were talking about Gates, he said, well, no, I'm concerned about the DOD pick. And you go down the line for these three or four. I actually think Bobby Kennedy Jr. is going to get through. I think that may be the one that in normal times may have had problems. But for these three, and again, it's not the same people having problems, everybody has problems with the Gates nomination for a thousand different reasons, but you talk to people that are armed services, they're just in meltdown mode, Republicans about the DOD pick and again Tulsi Gabbard for Intel community. So I want to get to

Elise but first just some quick reporting and Richard was saying he was wondering whether the the the Trump transition team were surprised by some of these things especially with Matt Gaetz and the DOD selection. Your reporting and other reporting said yes they were surprised by both of those things with Gates, especially the report that came out today, or was going to come out two days before he resigned. Some of this Gates stuff was known. Other parts came as a surprise, the Trump transition team.

The Hegseth allegation and the sexual assault claim in California completely blindsided them. And that's in part because, Richard, to your question, they're not going through the standard vetting processes. They're not using the FBI. They've hired private companies to do this, and there's real concerns that the vetting they're doing is minimal at best, in part because, and Julian Castro, the former HUD secretary who was on with us a way too early a few moments ago noted that that's perhaps in part to avoid the possibility of lying to the FBI, to shield their nominees from doing that, as well as, of course, we know Donald Trump's long-held distrust of

that agency. So that is a real problem here, is the lack of vetting. And it wasn't a calculated strategy to have Gates be a sacrificial lamb. I mean, we're told the president-elect wants this pick through, but there is a possibility that may be what happens because he's taken so much of the heat that it might allow some of the others to slide through. But Joe, to your point, and Hegseth and Gabbard in particular are ones that other Republicans are having real issues with.

So I wouldn't say their confirmation are sure either, though it'll be a test of how much the Republican Senate feels like they can stand on. I just think right now, the Gates election is just right here in front of everybody. And the testimony against him is so universally damning. They're not looking beyond that. So I think that's first in line. And I actually would guess that probably the Intel community would probably have more trouble with Tulsi Gabbard than even the DOD pick. I'm not saying people aren't having a lot of trouble. I'm just saying that I've talked to so many Republicans that have spent their entire life in the Intel world that just say we can't have somebody that's an apologist for Assad, that's an

apologist for Putin in there. So again, I'm talking about Republicans here. I'd be surprised if there are four Republicans that wouldn't vote against that selection. So have a lot of things here. So on the DOD selection, I only keep calling that because I still can't pronounce it. Hegseth? Hegseth. Hegseth. Pete Hegseth.

I'm calling Pete. Pete Hegseth. So let's get, I've seen the cowboy hat enough. Let's get another picture of him. And that. I've seen that enough. Now, now I don't like that one, DJ. Let's get him without cowboy hats or Fox fan things on his head.

He at least deserves that. all right, our photo editors. So the problem, as the Wall Street Journal editorial page said, I think it was yesterday, is that it's a he said, she said, all right? So he said, she said, the details seem really shocking. He denies everything, though All right? So he said, she said, the details are, are, are, are, seem really shocking. He denies everything though, right? But is they sad? Okay, so let's just put it over here as a he said, she said. The bigger question, Wall Street Journal, I believe it was editorial page or Coral Road, but one of them said is the bigger question is, did he tell the president elect? Did he tell the transition team that he had this?

Was it the Wall Street Journal editorial pitch? Yeah. Okay, the editorial board said, bigger question here is, okay, we'll put the he said, she said over there. It looks bad, but he's denying everything. Question is, did he actually tell the president-elect before the nomination was made? And if he didn't, well, that's almost reason enough

to say, well, what else is out there? Well, the reporting is that he didn't, and yes, it is he said, she said, but I would add in the huge but caveat with a payment and money talks. And why would you shell out if you're innocent? Why don't you fight for your innocence instead of paying out a victim? Also has to be said, the idea that the Trump transition team was, quote, surprised by the

allegations against Matt Gaetz is a little implausible considering it's been a three year investigation in the House of Representatives. That's one phone call to anybody to find out what's really going on there. And to put all this in perspective, the idea that Bobby Kennedy, in relation to all these other ones, now seems like the easy, sane pick to run HHS. Which the New York Post, the New York Post has called what, a nut job? A supreme nut job? And by the way, they keep, I would say the New York Post editorial pages keep going after this day.

You certainly would expect this from the Wall Street Journal editorial page, but you would not expect it. I mean, I don't know. These are crazy. So maybe you would expect it from the New York Post editorial page. I'm just saying it is so offensive to conservatives, to Republicans, to people who supported Donald Trump, that they're going day in and day out saying, move past these crazy nominations. Yeah, it's been a sustained campaign

by the New York Post against a lot of these nominees, but very interesting from a Rupert Murdoch-owned outlet. We're gonna talk much more about this. Jackie Alamani still with us coming up on Morning Joe. We're learning about the new weapons package. The Biden administration is sending to Ukraine before Donald Trump takes office. Plus, Steve Ratner will break down Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s potential plans for the Health and Human Services Department.

Speaking of photo editors, that is an ominous picture right there. Wow. They get some lighting going. Also going through the impact all of this will have on public health if Kennedy is confirmed to lead that agency. Morning Joe's coming back in 90 seconds. You've been a crusader on questioning vaccines. Are there specific vaccines that you would seek to take off the market? Oh, I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna take away anybody's vaccines. I've never been to any vaccine.

I've just said- You will not take any vaccine that is currently on the market. I'm not, if somebody, if vaccines are working for somebody, I'm not gonna take them away. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. You got to talk about this. You know, this is what you call the soft bigotry of low-exp.

I'm about to read a script. They don't usually do it, right? Because Mika's here, and we don't have any scripts. But so Mr. Cornell grad says to me, and I want to know, first of all, when is Cornell ever beaten the Crimson Tide in football? But anyway, here's a question. We just got pads last week.

What's that? We just got pads last week, so we're... Leather helmets. Now, yeah, it's leather helmets. Face guards, everything. By the way, the word in the...you pronounce it exacerbate. Haha. It's wow. My mom when she when she was younger she visited Pennsylvania to visit some relatives and they were

surprised to choose from the South that she was wearing shoes. And here we are all these years later we've got no further what did the former congressman Peter King used to say to you? Like you walked out barefoot from a revival. Exactly. So Peter at the time was quite the defender I would say of the IRA. And we were having a big battle on whether the president of the United States should

meet Jerry Adams. And I said I don't think he should, I think it's an insult, blah, blah, blah. You know, I'm, of course, hot. I said too loud or even arms too much. And they asked Peter King, goes, yeah, Joe Scarborough just walked out of the Tute revival in Northwest Florida without any shoes on. So don't listen to him. And I didn't know Pete before that. I went up to him. And this is like the personality thing. I went up to him and this is like the personality thing I went up to him and I laugh a that may have been the greatest quote of Most and Pete and I became fast friends So you do it and by the way, it's nicer to be

Friends than not. I'm listen there is Right here and I we're gonna go to Steve Ratner at at the southwest wall because the kids literally are rushing these kids are rushing down the stairs because they're like mommy daddy yeah you can hear the little uncle Stevie's on but before I get there there's a front page column in the article in the Wall Street Journal, and it's fascinating, and this is something we all have to grapple with as a country. How science lost America's trust. Voters angry over COVID-19 measures backed Trump's election of RFK Jr. You know, we talk about so many different things

that have had an impact in, you know, the cost of groceries, the cost of gas. We talked about on the social issues, that ad that was played 30,000 times, and the impact it may have had on men. This really does seem to be the sleeper issue that's more like, it just sort of sets. It sort of sets the environment of this election.

There's such blowback against all of the shutdowns. Not just shutdowns, but the more basic thing, science. What's so interesting, Joe, is science has somehow become a cultural issue. I think about it, you see it, and we saw it during the COVID pandemic. We also see it on climate change. It's elitists who are saying the science says X, Y, and Z, and therefore we should resist it. So the politicization, it's another good word, it's right up there with exacerbate for you.

Oh, thank you very much. As words go. You nailed it. Boom, you're good. Thank you. But the science has somehow become politicized, and it's become an issue in the culture wars, which makes it incredibly difficult now to have serious public policy debates about these issues

because those who are promoting the science are seen as somehow with agendas and as elites. And the impact, you said you've been in meetings and people talking about how some of the proposals could just devastate R&D companies. Oh yeah, you know grants coming out of the national institute of health could have a real impact on universities and there were basic research there. On Alzheimer's on... A zillion things and a lot of scientists are saying if we can't get the grants, if we can't get public support, then we're leaving because this

is our this is our livelihood. If we can't do this grants if we can't get public sport, then we're leaving because this is our this is our livelihood if we can't do this life-saving research here we're going to if you will as Lebron would say take our talents elsewhere will go to live a line. Yeah elsewhere, yeah. Yeah, I mean I have to say for all his failings in defense of science during the pandemic the operation warp speed under President Donald Trump was one of the great achievements of the last I don't know many many general

got the vaccine and so many people and save so many lives that was an achievement of the Trump administration that rails against science and the strange thing is he can't actually say that in front of his crowds like any other president with any other presidential library you would walk in and that would be the first thing. Because you remember the beginning of the pandemic, what were we hearing? Oh, if we ever get a vaccine, it'll take seven, nine, 12 years.

You talk to any scientist and they will tell you the fact that there was a vaccine within a year. One of the more remarkable scientific achievements ever. I mean, take it back to the polio vaccine because so many lives were at stake. And the crazy thing is he can't even talk about it. He tried to. Remember that Bill O'Reilly talk that they had?

And he started talking about it. I think Bill O'Reilly started that they had and he started talking about it. I think Bill O'Reilly started talking about, hey, this is a pretty good thing. And the crowd started booing. For again, after the white hot heat of all of this, 30, 40, 50 years from now, people will look back and they'll go, okay, that was an extraordinary scientific achievement. Operation Warp Speed. Speaking of vaccines, let's talk about Robert F. Kennedy Jr. You heard a moment ago what he's been telling,

what he told a while ago, Von Hilliard of NBC, that he's never been quote anti-vax. Experts still concerned. If Kennedy is confirmed by the Senate to be the nation's top health official, he will exacerbate the already concerning rise of vaccine hesitancy in the United States. Joining us now, former Treasury official, Morning Joe, economic analyst Steve Ratner. Steve, Bobby Kennedy sort of hides behind being a skeptic of vaccines.

Therefore, he feels he can say he's not anti-vax. But let's walk through some of the data behind all this. Your first chart is about what vaccines actually do, which we need to remind people of these days. Yeah, and you guys covered a bit of this joke. I actually could have come over to the Southeast wall for his comments because he would have had some charts to help him along. But let's just talk about polio first, being perhaps the most famous case.

Polio really erupted in 1916 in Brooklyn with a lot of cases, but then it took off again when FDR, remember FDR got polio in 1921, and that spurred the first effort to really develop a vaccine. Some of us may remember the March of Dimes where everybody gave a dime to develop a polio vaccine. Coincidentally, you had a huge spike in polio in the 1940s. In 1955, the polio vaccine was licensed. I want to inject a personal note here.

I was one of the first cohorts of people to get injected, and I remember well how excited and relieved my parents were that their kids were not going to have to worry about polio. And polio, lo and behold, dropped to zero cases today. And the red line here are the deaths of which there were a significant number. You guys mentioned COVID and Operation War Speed, an amazing accomplishment, a vaccine developed in less than a year. And we have really good data comparing people who got the vaccines, people who didn't get the vaccine. And you can see the weekly death rate. This is the Omicron surge, which we all remember all too well, unfortunately. This is the death rate for people who did not get the vaccine.

This is the death rate way down here for the people who did get the vaccine and for people who got the booster and even lower death rate. So your next chart, Steve, as we move across the wall is some of the other benefits that come from vaccines to our society. What are you looking at there? Yeah. So again, we went down a similar path with a lot of other childhood diseases.

Again, I grew up in a world where all these diseases, not smallpox, but most of these diseases were ones that we were susceptible to as kids. But look what's happened. On an average of about 530,000 cases a year of measles back in the 20th century, we've dropped down to 47, 99% drop. thousand cases a year of measles back in the 20th century. We've dropped down to 47, 99% drop.

Whooping cough, similarly. Mumps, 99%. Rubella, which is also called German measles, 99%. We've essentially eradicated smallpox everywhere in the world, which is an amazing accomplishment. Polioio zero. And then that has had a significant impact on childhood mortality rates around the world. Essentially this is the death rate of infants under the age of one. It's dropped from 10% back in 1974 to about 2.8%, I believe that is, in 2024. And this is what scientists estimate the death rate would be without vaccines.

101 million, call it 100 million, infants around the world have been saved over this period of time because of vaccine rollouts around the world. All right. So let's move over to your final chart, Steve. Some other concerns if Bobby Kennedy does get this job at HHS. He has talked repeatedly about taking fluoride out of the water, another of the great accomplishments of the last century. What are you looking at there? Yeah, this is also in the anti-science ignorance, whatever category you want to put it in.

But fluoride in drinking water has been an enormous, made enormous improvements in tooth health. So you can see here the percent of people who are drinking fluoridated water, this was a study done between 1967 and 1992 by the Centers for Disease Control. The percentage of people drinking fluoridated water rose from 40% to just about 50%. The average number of decayed teeth drop like that from about 4 to about 1.4, if I remember correctly, yeah, 1.4. And it's not all fluoride, of course, better care of teeth and so on and so forth, but

every health expert would tell you fluoridated water played a significant role in that. Let me, though, turn to an issue in which Bobby Kennedy actually is on the right side of, frankly, in my opinion, which is the whole, or at least partially, because he's got some other ideas around this that are less sensible perhaps. But on the issue of food and what kids eat and obesity and so forth, we have had an upsurge in type 2 diabetes among children. It used to be considered an adult onset disease. It is happening more and more among children. It is closely linked to obesity and that of

course we know what the nutritional issues are for kids. Not surprisingly, kids of color have had a much higher rate of childhood diabetes and a much faster growth in it. We have a huge nutrition and weight problem in our country among kids and this is actually an issue in which I think there's some agreement. I'm not sure I'm not sure taking food dyes out of kids cereals is really part of this but certainly the cereals and McDonald's and all the rest of that is contributing heavily to this. Well I mean see if we'll see what happens there. Remember when Michelle Obama and Michael Bloomberg talked about obesity and the like,

they were hammered by conservatives saying, don't tell us what to eat. The thing about obesity though, especially childhood obesity, but obesity in general, it is such a massive issue, it is such a massive issue. It is such a massive healthcare issue. It is also a massive fiscal issue.

The costs of Medicare and Medicaid would plummet, would plummet if we seriously addressed obesity. So I'm with you. If there is a renewed focus on childhood obesity from whoever is the next HHS director, that's obviously an important thing. And also, I don't know, this is radical. Getting like kids in school out running, exercising, like, you know, everybody's so competitive and how am I going to get into this school or that school? Yeah, that's great, do that, but you've got a better chance to study, exercise. You know, if you're out there exercising, if schools make their students move more,

and I always remember Jay, speaking of Kennedy, I always remember JFK's Presidential Fitness Award or whatever when we were growing up, that encouraged kids to get out there and exercise. And now this is where you respond, Steve, and you go, yeah, Joe. Steve, over to you. It's the first time he's done this, so he's going to be good second or third time. I'm joking, Steve.

Yeah, of course, Joe, you're absolutely right. And I also do remember the Kennedy challenge, I think it was called, to get us all out to exercise. And the obesity problem is much more than a child problem, and it's much more than a type diabetes problem. It is, as you say, it's adding massively to our health care costs, massively to our Medicare costs. And it's something that we need to do something about.

But again, as you also said quite correctly, the Trump administration rejects anything that they can categorize as being the nanny state. They just simply don't believe government should get in the way. And by the way, when you talk about things like fluoride in the water, there's enormous pushback, particularly out west, on fluoride in the water. And they're actually taking fluoride out of the water in certain places. And so this sort of anti-health care, anti-science mentality that exists in certain parts of our country, among certain parts of our citizenry, I think is really scary and

dangerous. This vaccine stuff, how can you possibly say that vaccines are a bad idea? We invented the smallpox vaccine. The first one was 1796. It wiped out smallpox over time with a lot of help from Bill Gates and others. But think about it. Would you like to have smallpox back? No.

Steve Ratner, thank you so much. My bad assist to you on that last question. Thank you. These are fascinating charts. I think they're extraordinarily important. We greatly appreciate it, as always. A couple things. First of all, Oregon, I think, has taken fluoride out of water. So, Oregon, if you're running for office in Oregon, you're for legalized drugs and people being like taking hard drugs in public parks. And you're for people being able to ransack downtown Portland and drive out small businesses. But you're against fluoride in the light. Seriously, who is running Oregon? It's a question I've been asking for about a decade now. It's insane.

I want to talk about vaccines just for one second before we go to break because this is so fascinating and also just shows the stupidity of politics in so many cases. Before COVID and before this actually science became such a white hot issue for a variety of reasons. States like Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Georgia, they were the most vaccinated states in America. And I come to you in Mississippi because Mississippi didn't even have a religious exception. And of course that was the big debate during COVID where we must have a religious exception. You're crushing our First Amendment rights. Yeah, our First Amendment rights. And yet, Mississippi and these other states, especially these other states, no exceptions.

If you want to go to school, if you want to live among all of us, you're going to take vaccines. And of course, in all of those states, you saw the numbers drop. Those happened during COVID to be the most resistant to taking vaccines. And the numbers per capita in a lot of those states, very, very discouraging. You know, it's a real tragedy because it was a public health triumph that in Mississippi, it was one of the best that in Mississippi it was one of the best places in the entire country for childhood vaccines. There's so many

of our health indicators that lag but this we were number one in and you would just go everyone went to the local county health care department and you got jabbed and that was that if you were going to go to school any school private public anything and now you, with the politicization of science, this is where we are. And it's really sad that we're turning our back on science and modernity with fluoride, with all these human advances, with women's health care to a large extent because of just politics. And of course, Willie, two things can be true at one time. You know, there could have been bad mistakes made

in during the pandemic. People make it. I say bad mistakes. It was like the fog of war. This was a once in a century. This is a once in a century pandemic. They didn't know what they were fighting against. They didn't know what was going to work. And so, yeah, you look back in any war, there are going to be bad mistakes made. But you can put

that on one side and let's say, what happened there? Let's figure that out. But don't discourage kids in Mississippi and Louisiana and Alabama and across the country, they'll follow the lead of hippies in Northern California and communists. That's a funny thing. We conservatives used to make fun of the anti-vax hippies. And now it's actually the conservatives who made fun of them going, okay, we're gonna have some of that place. A lot of that too is not about science. It's about schools were closed too long objectively.

Exactly. They were closed too long. Kids should have been back in school, but we learned that as we went. Businesses didn't need to be closed in many cases as long as they were. I think a lot of Americans objected to the idea that they had to stay home. They couldn't go to their grandmother's funeral. But people go out and protest in the streets and massive numbers and do do do that so I think

that's a little science definitely but a lot about a feeling of hypocrisy and other things that were mixed in there and has to be said about Bobby Kennedy juniors he tries to soften his stance say no I'm not anti-vax he's compared the childhood vaccine regiment in this country to his word, a holocaust against our children. And a lot of that is tied to autism and debunked and disproven theories that he and others have. So just pay close attention to his views as we move forward.

Coming up here, Republican Senator and Trump ally Rand Paul is warning against part of the president-elect's mass deportation plan. We'll play for you his new remarks about that and we'll speak with the former member of the Obama cabinet, Julian Castro. That's next on Morning Joe. A verdict came down yesterday in a case that became a focal point in the national debate over crime and immigration during the presidential election. An undocumented migrant accused of killing a nursing student in Georgia earlier this year named Lakin Riley was found guilty and sentenced to life without parole.

NBC News correspondent Priya Sridhar has more. I will now announce the verdict. After a trial that lasted four days, 26-year-old Jose Antonio Embara sentenced to life without parole for the brutal killing of 22-year-old Lakin Riley. There is no end to the pain, suffering and loss that we have experienced or will continue to endure. Her family and loved ones emotional. Seeing the police body camera video showing the moment Lake and Riley's mother first learned her daughter died. Prosecutors say the nursing student was out for a morning jog on the University of Georgia campus in

February when Ibarra, who was lurking in the woods nearby, attempted to rape her and then killed her. Not only does the physical evidence identify him, the video evidence identifies him. Despite numerous studies that indicate undocumented immigrants commit fewer crimes, the case has become a flashpoint in the national debate over immigration during the presidential election cycle. Ibarra, an undocumented immigrant from Venezuela. Right here in Georgia, our nation was robbed of a brilliant 22-year-old nursing student, Laken Riley.

During the trial, the state presenting surveillance video showing Laken Riley's final moments, her last text message to her mother, and her attempt to call 911 before a bar attacked her. He did find. And it is a direct result of that fight that gives you all the physical evidence you need to convict him. Prosecutors say he bars DNA was found underneath Riley's fingernails his thumbprint on her phone and Riley's DNA on his jacket he wore when he committed the crime prosecutors

say this surveillance video shows a bar discarding the jacket. The defense claiming the evidence was circumstantial and pointing the finger at a borough's brother Riley's family remembering her as a kind selfless loving friend and daughter the best daughter sister sister, granddaughter, friend, and overall person that you could ever hope to meet. NBC's Priya Sridhar reporting for us there. Obviously, Lakin Riley's name was the center of the campaign,

the presidential campaign, Donald Trump invoking her name many times, just a horrific tragedy for a bright young star who was kind of just beginning her life. I mean one that any parent, one that any, well any of us, any of us just can't imagine. The absolute heartache. It's unspeakable. And you know Willie, as we move toward move toward next year and a new president, a new Senate, a new House, I suspect that if there is a middle path here, it is going to be to go after violent criminals and other criminals that have committed serious crimes, that may be a middle path to get those illegal immigrants out of the country. I'm not saying that, you know, Donald Trump promised bloody mass deportation. He also, I'm sure Republicans remember what happened when there were those scenes of mothers and

children being separated, the impact that had in the 2018 off-year elections. It is a loser. Even if Americans agree they want deportations, nobody, Republicans or Democrats, want a repeat of that. And I think this is where it starts, a middle ground to find the violent criminals, find others, illegal immigrants who have gotten into this country and who I think 95% of Americans would say should be deported. And Tom Homan, who's the newly appointed border czar for Donald Trump, has said that will

begin on day one and he has said again and again in recent interviews, we're going after the bad guys. We're going to go. Right. Now that's a pretty vague term. What level of criminal are you going to pursue using ICE? We will find out soon. Joining us now, former US Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro. He's an MSNBC political analyst.

Good morning. Great to have you with us. So one of Donald Trump's longtime allies actually is speaking out against the president-elect's plan to use the military as part of that mass deportation of undocumented migrants. Here's what Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky said yesterday in an interview with Newsmax. I'm not in favor of sending the army in uniforms into our cities to collect people. I think it's a terrible image and that's not what we use our military for.

We never have. And it's actually been illegal for over 100 years to bring the army into our city. So while I'm all for remain in Mexico, I will not support an emergency to put the army into our cities. I think that's a huge mistake. So Elise, you are, I hope this is right, you're a libertarian slash conservative. And that's, that is a, that ideological strain runs through, still runs through this Republican party, I would guess that's not just one standalone senator, that's a big chunk of Republicans who voted

for Republican candidates, Donald Trump senators, House members, that have always warned about the military getting into the streets of American cities. Well, and I'll give Senator Rand Paul props for coming out and saying it in opposition to Donald Trump and staking out his territory, as he's going to be the new head of the Senate Homeland Security Committee. And other Republicans, hopefully, can follow his lead

and say, yes, we want violent criminals removed from the country, but we don't want mass deportations that are abusing the military in the way that it was not intended by the founders to be used. So, Mr. Secretary, when you look at the plans as they've been floated out there, which they're talking about getting 11 million illegal immigrants out of this country by force in many cases, what are you expecting?

What are you preparing for here? Well, I think you have to be prepared for Donald Trump attempting to deport that many people. You never know with Donald Trump whether it's bluster. He said that we were going to build the wall and Mexico was going to pay for it. Of course, that didn't happen. There was actually very little of the wall that was built in his administration. Mexico definitely didn't pay for it.

But this has been a fantasy of his, this mass deportation for a while. And it's true that he has a team now around him with more experience and more know-how on how to get this done, also control of all the levers of government now and a Supreme Court that is more supportive of him. So there's already significant pushback from the ACLU, from other legal groups, providing services also to undocumented immigrants who are in the process of trying to become documented. I think there's going to be pushback from local police chiefs who don't want their police departments to become

immigration agents because they feel like that's going to make communities less safe. And I agree with you all that to the extent that the administration sticks with a much more limited plan of people who are violent criminals, you know, it was good to see justice for Lake and Riley's family. I think people agree with that. If there's somebody who commits a crime like that, no matter what their status is, they should be punished for that. But I think when you get into, for instance, saying somebody that has a speeding ticket from 20 years ago, who otherwise is a productive, good member of a community, I don't think

that's in the same category. And I also don't think that DREAMers, for instance, who've known no other country, should be deported, and that if he tries it, there's going to be a tremendous amount of blowback, not just from Democrats, but I think from even moderates and some Republicans. And this is a tough issue to sort through politically if you're looking at Democrats and Republicans, because what is said on campaign trails often it does not match what happens in reality. And Donald Trump, we talked about building the wall.

It was actually Lindsey Graham and it was, I believe, John Cornyn. I want to get these names right. But there was one Republican senator after another Republican senator that said, building a wall is not going to take care of the problem. That was in 17 and 18 when Republicans controlled Congress. But let's dig even deeper. People don't remember, Barack Obama was hammered by the Hispanic community, by Hispanic leaders,

because he deported 2.1 million illegal immigrants, 90% of them by the way, violent criminals. Donald Trump, if my count's right here, deported 1.2 million and that wasn't for a lack of trying. Again, it's not just having the people on the ground to push the deportation. There's a million different things that have to go on. It's interesting. Recently, Congressman Tony Gonzales, who represents a good part of South Texas, including areas right along the border, mentioned that he had inquired into how many folks fit that bill of violent criminals, and that it was several hundred thousand.

So the number that we're talking about is not 11 or 12 million. The vast majority of people who are here who are undocumented, yes they may have come in and they broke the law when they came in, but they have been law-abiding, good, productive members, people that go to the same church, whose kids go to the same school, who you know work and serve the community. And by the way, can we also say, run family restaurants, help work, run family restaurants, make businesses work in a lot of these towns, main streets across America. At least this is again, obviously, if they're violent criminals, if they're criminals that have committed serious crimes, I think 95% of Americans want them out

But if somebody's been here for 20 years been a law-abiding citizen, I think that's when it gets more difficult politically for Republicans for some again if we have the images that we saw in 2017 that is a political loser for any party that tries to do it Well, and if Donald Trump could deport a couple hundred thousand violent criminals that gives him a win It gives him plenty of images. It gives him I've done this. I've delivered on a promise and it doesn't Muddle everything that he's done by taking it too far And so I would use as the example of the counter example, building the wall. Donald Trump didn't build the wall, but he built enough and he made an effort and it showed his voters and Americans that he was trying and they didn't penalize him for it.

And so this could be the same kind of political deal. Get rid of violent criminals, deport them, but let's not deport hardworking citizens. Yeah, two other things. One, if he goes a more retail approach, as you're suggesting, then you avoid a scenario where you have massive public protests. You then, as Rand Paul warned against, having to bring in the military potentially under the Insurrection Act, which would be terrible for American society and terrible for this institution, this successful institution known as the U.S. military. The other thing Rand Paul squeezed in in his comment, which I think

the Trump administration will do, is to reinsert, revive the so-called Remain in Mexico program. We have a totally broken system where people come here, ask for asylum, and then they come in and it might take five, ten years for their asylum cases to be heard. We can't do that. So one of the most interesting negotiations is going to... Yeah, but what happens afterwards? They're told, go on and come back for a court hearing. And yeah, how many come back? We don't have numbers on that, but it's a very small percentage.

I'm guessing it's probably below 10%. I'm guessing you're right. And in the meantime, people are here for five, seven years. That's why, again, the negotiations between the new administration in Mexico to reestablish remain in Mexico, that if you want to apply for asylum here, that's fine. But you sit in Mexico while your case is being adjudicated in the United States, the ability to get that reestablished will be a major, major immigration issue.

Jackie, many of the Republicans you cover on Capitol Hill every day were reelected on the issue of immigration, voters saying that and the economy top of mind for them. So we heard Rand Paul you cover on Capitol Hill every day were reelected on the issue of immigration, voters saying that in the economy, top of mind for them. So we heard Rand Paul draw some kind of a line in the sand for Donald Trump, don't try to use the military. But what will be the posture of most Republicans as he pursues this mass deportation? Yeah, well, before I get to that, I do want to jump on something that Richard noted, which

is the law that gives the president this sort of limitless power to use the military domestically, the Insurrection Act. I would be remiss not to look back on our January 6th coverage, which is a handful of lawmakers and even some Republicans at the time who encouraged reforms to the Insurrection Act. You know, lawmakers do have some autonomy here, especially during this lame duck session, potentially, to get something through, to make some reforms,

to try to curb Trump's limits and his ability to be able to use the military. And we know in the last administration, in his first administration, that he threatened several times over the course of his term to use the military in inappropriate ways such as clearing protesters who were protesting George Floyd's murder, using the National Guard in a pretty violent way in Lafayette Square to clear protesters.

So they do have some power here, but I do think you are going to see the majority of Senate Republicans not throw themselves into the crossfire here, not side with Rand Paul, who is notoriously a dovish on some of these things and has a very libertarian view of the way that the military can be utilized domestically and internationally. But I do think that most Republicans, at the end of the day they are a bit They lean towards I think supporting some of the options outlined in that bipartisan bipartisan border bill that was

tossed to the wayside Earlier this year that though is unlikely to be resurrected now with incoming president-elect Trump Alright, Jackie. Thank you so much as always. We greatly appreciate it