Morning Joe - Morning Joe 1/22/25

Episode Date: January 22, 2025

Several GOP lawmakers defend Trump’s pardon of Jan. 6 defendants

So I want to ask you about the Vice President, J.D. Vance. He said, if this is a week ago, he said, if you committed violence on January 6th, obviously, you should not be pardoned. Why is your Vice President wrong? Well, only for one reason. They've served years in jail. They should not have served. They've served years in jail, and murderers don't even go to jail in this country.

And we had 1,500. We have 16 under review, as you know. We commuted about 16 of them because it looks like they could have done things that were not acceptable for a full pardon. But these people have served years of jail. Their lives have been ruined. That was President Trump yesterday defending his pardons for around 1,500 people charged with crimes connected with the January 6th attack on the Capitol.

We'll have more on his comments from the White House, as well as reaction from Republican senators on Capitol Hill. We'll also hear from a former metropolitan police officer who was beaten by rioters while defending the Capitol. Michael Fanon will join us in just a moment. Plus, we'll go through the new allegations against Pete Hegseth days before the Senate is expected to vote on his nomination for secretary of defense. Also ahead, the president has terminated Secret Service protection for an adviser from his

first term. We'll explain that situation and we'll have latest on the extreme weather sweeping across the South. Incredible. Good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Wednesday, January 22nd. Along with Willie and me, we have the co-host of our fourth hour, Jonathan LaMere. He's a contributing writer at The Atlantic covering the White House and national politics. U.S. special correspondent for BBC News, Cady Kay joins us.

And the host of Way Too Early, Ali Vitale. Joe is off this morning. Let's dive right in. President Trump yesterday defended the pardons he issued to roughly 1,500 January 6 rioters. More than 400 of the pardons were for people who were convicted of assaulting police officers. NBC's Peter Alexander repeatedly pressed the president on the issue. You would agree that it's never acceptable to assault a police officer, right? Sure. on the issue. Well, I don't know. Was it a pardon? Because we're looking at commutes and we're looking at pardons. Okay, well, we'll take a look at everything. But I can say this.

Murderers today are not even charged. You have murderers that aren't charged all over. You take a look at what's gone on in Philadelphia, you take a look at what's gone off in LA, where people murder people and they don't get charged. These people have already served years in prison, and they've served them viciously. It's a disgusting prison. It's been horrible. It's inhumane.

It's been a terrible, terrible thing. Mr. President, you're a president who has long said that you back the blue, but aren't you sending the message that assaulting officers is okay with these parts? No, the opposite. In fact, I'm gonna be letting two officers from Washington police, DC. I believe they're from DC, but I just approved it.

They were arrested, put in jail for five years because they went after an illegal, and I guess something happened where something went wrong. And they arrested the two officers and put them in jail for going after a criminal, a rough criminal, by the way. And I'm actually releasing. No, I'm the friend of, I am the friend of police more than any president that's ever been in this office.

So a fact check on the president's statement about the DC officers. He said he intends to pardon. They were not chasing an immigrant who was in the US illegally. Back in October of 2020, the officers were in an unmarked car when they chased a man named Carone Hilton Brown, who was on a moped. Hilton Brown crashed the moped and died during the pursuit that authorities said violated police policy and was illegally reckless.

Authorities also said both officers later lied about the incident to forestall a potential federal civil rights investigation. Despite their convictions, both officers were allowed to go free pending the outcome of their appeals, which are still ongoing. So there's that and Willie, we're learning more also about who else who were released. Yeah, and a thin defense that should be pointed out by President Trump of what he did under questioning from Peter Alexander. He didn't know if he'd commuted or pardoned.

And then, as you said, had some bad information in his defense there. Two hundred eleven inmates, though, in federal custody for their January six convictions were freed yesterday morning. Video taken by NBC News shows some of the rioters leaving a prison in Orlando. They signed a flag they say they want to send to President Trump. Many of those who were pardoned had committed violent acts on January 6th.

That includes Tyler Bradley Dykes of South Carolina. He was sentenced to 57 months after he stole a police riot shield and used it against officers. Andrew Taki had a six-year sentence for assaulting officers with bear spray and a metal whip. Prosecutors say David Dempsey was one of the most violent rioters and received one of the longest sentences. Twenty years in prison, prosecutors say Dempsey viciously assaulted officers who were defending the tunnel outside of the Capitol.

He attacked them with pepper spray, broken pieces of furniture, and anything else he could get his hands on to use as a weapon, and he is free this morning. And then there are the two people who played central roles in planning the Capitol attack of January 6. Proud Boys leader Enrico Tarrio and the founder of the oath keepers, militia Stuart Rhodes, both convicted of seditious conspiracy. Tarrio was serving a 22 year sentence. Rhodes was supposed to be in prison for 18 years.

Rhodes had this to say when he was released yesterday. I think Trump did the right thing. President Trump did the right thing by letting these guys out and pardoning them because they did not get a fair trial. And that's not on him, that's on the DOJ. You run a fair system and run fair trials, that's what's one thing. If you don't do that, don't be surprised if you don't enforce the presumption of innocence. So, then there's the reaction from lawmakers on Capitol Hill to the blanket pardons of January 6th defendants, the somewhat mixed

some GOP members of the House Freedom Caucus, including Andy Biggs, Chip Roy, and Lauren Boebert, visited the D.C. jail yesterday in a sign of support. Boebert said those who were pardoned were not being released fast enough. She also invited all of the January 6 rioters in custody at the D.C. jail on a guided tour of the Capitol after their release. Meanwhile, some Republican senators defended the pardon while others tried to explain away Trump's decision. How are you feeling about some of Trump's executive actions, particularly on the border?

Love them. Specifically, a pardon. executive actions, particularly on the board? Love them. What about the parties? I think they were absolutely justified. I don't know all the cases. I certainly don't want to pardon any violent actors, but there was a real miscarriage of justice here. You have been forwarded with some of those parties for violent offenders.

Are you comfortable with that? I haven't seen the details, but I think a lot of those parties were definitely well-deserved. Listen, I just assumed he said he was going to do this during the campaign. Senator, are you comfortable with this? Well, if you're asking me if that's what I would have done, what I've said is that the folks who committed violence, I wouldn't want them to be presented with. What signal do you think the president did? That he keeps the campaign going.

Senator, are you comfortable with these pardons for January 6th? Look, as I said, sorry. Sorry. As I said before, we're looking forward to the next four years. What message should this send to police officers? If it was a party of law and order, what about the officers that were attacked? The officers that were attacked that day. You guys have lost all your relations with Biden. Just to recap, that was Senator Ron Johnson mostly supportive of pardons, Senator Josh

Holley saying he wouldn't have pardoned rioters who committed violent acts, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune deflecting questions from reporters. Compare that to other GOP senators yesterday who spoke out against the pardons. People who committed violent crimes on January 6th of 2021 should not be pardoned and I think this is a terrible day for our Justice Department. It's wrong to assault anybody, but certainly to assault an officer. And I'm a big fat blue guy. I'm disappointed to see that, and I do hear the message that

it's sent to these great men and women that stood by us. Am I concerned about it? I mean, again, it's not ideal, but I'm not overly concerned about it either. I think the gift is that it's all behind us now and we can stop talking about it. What I'm trying to do is figure out there are some commutations. To me, I just can't agree. I'm about to file two bills that will increase the penalties up to and including the death penalty for the murder of a police officer and increasing the penalties and creating federal crimes for assaulting a police officer.

That should give you everything you need to know about my position. Look, it is, it was surprising to me that it was a blanket pardon. Now I'm going through the details. And former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told some for yesterday, quote, no one should excuse violence and particularly violence against police officers. So Jonathan, the mayor, I mean, obviously in your book, you covered the big lie and all that transpired. These pardons seem to be in some ways, you could argue the will of the people.

Twenty twenty five. Trump campaigned on this. This is no surprise. Nobody should be shocked. If anyone's shocked, they were not listening. Having said that, there's some differences here. You heard, I think it was Senator John Thune saying, look at Biden's pardons or something.

So Biden did pardon his family, and that is a legitimate conversation to have. I think that's the gray area. Some would argue that sets up a really bad precedent. You can definitely argue there is a lot of criticism you could put on those actions or you could also see the world perhaps how they were looking at what was coming at them. That's one conversation. But the other one is about assaulting police officers. The other one is about committing acts of violence against our capital, the people who work there, our vice president, our speaker of the House, assaulting cops, video of it.

And there, there's a clear difference. Joe Biden, to respond to Senator Thune, he pardoned the people who defended the Capitol. And Donald Trump pardoned the people who assaulted the Capitol and the people in it. And there's a big difference there. And I don't know if this is what people wanted, but this is the will of the people. Yeah, that couldn't be... It's the outcome of this election. That couldn't be a starker contrast there between who President Biden pardoned, those who defended the Capitol,

and those who investigated the attacks, versus President Trump, who is now pardoned, those who committed these attacks. January 6th was, of course, the culmination of the big lie. The big lie fueled this violence. and what we got from president Trump this week with these blanket pardons sort of closes the book if you will on a Republican effort for 4 years to completely whitewash and downplay what happened that day we're going to keep showing

the video but Republicans have been trying to turn the page as quickly as possible since that with very few exceptions we did see you know some muted criticism from Republicans, some sharper language from others, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Senator Cassidy. We just saw her from Senator Tillis. There were some Republicans who made clear this isn't what they would have done.

At the very least, they wouldn't have agreed to pardons for those who committed violent offenses, offenses against police officers. And others, as we heard from the new majority leader, tried to sort of play what about ism with the pardons from President Biden. And as Mika said, those for his family, that's that's deserving of a separate conversation. Those for the January 6, the committee and the police officer involved, that's very different. And what we don't

know now is whether this will fuel any further resistance from Republicans. And Willie, I mean, I think the safe bet is no. Yes, this is how it always goes. You'll have certain senators who, because of often electoral concerns, and yes, sometimes out of principle, will criticize Donald Trump, but the vast majority will either simply full-throated endorse it or turn a blind eye to it. Yeah, and we heard them, many of them, including the majority leader, later yesterday talking about we're going to get through all of Donald Trump's nominees.

They will all be confirmed. We'll stay here all night. We'll stay here all weekend, signaling again that we are with Donald Trump on whatever he asks us to do. And Ali Vitale, you cover these men and women every day. In Congress, Majority Leader John Thune, I thought was very revealing, a guy who's very well-respected, well-liked, a decent man who just answered the very easy question,

should people who beat up cops be released from prison? He said, would you ask Biden the same question about pardons? It feels like Donald Trump gave these Republicans a pretty easy test right out of the gate. Are you able to say, by the way, you were the victims of this attack on January 6 in many ways, you were inside the Capitol. Are you able to say that people who beat up cops viciously in front of cameras, the whole world watched it happen, should they be released

from prison? And by and large, with the exceptions we saw there, most of them kind of are looking the other way because they don't want to cross Trump in these early days. I think that's exactly right. I mean, the way that Senator Thune answered that question, I think, tells us a lot about where the House, the Senate Republican Conference is writ large, and they are just trying to put January 6th in the rearview, let Trump basically tie up the loose ends

by commuting and pardoning all of these rioters. And they're just trying to move on to the agenda of taxes and immigration. I hope, I don't think it will be that easy, because you still have five to seven, if we're being generous, counting Republican senators that rebuked this move. You've still got a handful of them who are willing to say that this flies in the face

of being the party of law and order and backing the blue. But again, there are so many litmus tests that are being put out in the early days of this administration. January 6th is one of them. The confirmation battles for controversial nominees are another. We saw the way that Pete Hegseth was able to be pushed out of committee in favorable fashion because all Republicans there voted him out. Of course, we'll see whether his confirmation hearing on the full floor changes anything.

If there are Republicans that are still reluctant or reticent about the job that he could do leading the Pentagon, that's certainly something that I'm looking for. But I think it really tells us something about the ways that Trump was able to remake Congress in his image. And now he's he's bearing the fruits of that. Katie Kay, the Wall Street Journal editorial board has a piece this morning titled Trump pardons the January 6th cop beaters. This is the Wall Street Journal editorial board writing, quote, Republicans are busy denouncing President Biden's preemptive pardons for his family and January 6th, cop beaters. This is the Wall Street Journal editorial board writing, Republicans are busy denouncing President Biden's preemptive pardons for his family and political allies

and deservedly so. But then it's a shame you don't hear many, if any, ruin President Trump's proclamation to pardon unconditionally nearly all the people who rioted at the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, 2021. This includes those convicted of bludgeoning, chemical spraying, and electro-shocking police to try to keep Mr. Trump in power. Now he's springing them from prison.

This is a rotten message from a president about political violence done on his behalf, and it's a bait and switch. Out of roughly 1,600 cases filed by the feds, more than a third included accusations of assaulting, resisting, or impeding law enforcement. Of the 1,100 sentences handed down this year, more than a third did not involve prison time. The rioters who did get jail often were charged with brutal violence.

What happened that day is a stain on Mr. Trump's legacy. By setting free the cop beaters, the president adds another. So you have this morning, what two days into his administration, caddy, the Wall Street Journal calling this a stain on president Trump's legacy. And so fascinating as Ali said, to watch these Republicans, many of them on Capitol Hill twist themselves in knots to look the other way. Yeah. The Wall Street Journal has been very interesting over the last few days because it's been a real reminder that president Trump campaigned to look the other way. Yeah, the Wall Street Journal has been very interesting over the last few days because it's been a real reminder

that President Trump campaigned to run the country and now he is running the country and the problems are his problems. And I've been struck by how many editorials there have been. There's another one in there today. Trump gives TikTok an illegal amnesty. The journal's really pushing back

and they've pushed back against several of the things that President Trump has done. They've called out the nominee for secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, saying, we didn't learn anything in the nomination hearings. We just have to hope that he's the right guy for the job, but not sounding at all convinced that he was. And so you've got that kind of—I guess you could put the journal as the kind of voice of the sort of Mitt Romney wing of the Republican Party, to some extent, still out there saying, OK, you won this.

Now all of these problems are yours. You have to deal with all of these things. I think one of the most interesting things that was said by those Republican senators actually was Senator Kramer, who said, look, it was done on day one and it's behind us now. And you wondered to some extent whether President Trump, knowing that this would be kind of controversial with members of the Senate, but it was something that the base wanted.

You get it done early and then you can move on from it. And I think that's the hope for the White House is that this can now there'll be a lot of outcry about this in these first 48 hours or so. And then they can get on to other things that the Republicans actually want to talk about. So let's bring in NBC News justice and intelligence correspondent Ken Delaney. Ken, NBC News spoke to a line prosecutor who worked on the January 6 cases. What was his reaction to these pardons? He was appalled, Mika.

Good morning. His name is Jason Manning, and he's one of many career prosecutors who devoted years to prosecuting, investigating, finding, investigating, prosecuting these January 6th attackers. This was the biggest criminal investigation in the history of the Justice Department. Nearly every FBI field office and every US Attorney's Office was involved even though it took place mostly in the DC US Attorney. U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington, D.C. And this prosecutor really reflected on what this pardon, set of pardons meant to the victims that he knows very well in many cases, the police officers who were assaulted. Take a listen.

Everyone just trying to judge these pardons and think how they think about them needs to put themselves in the shoes of the Capitol Police officers, the Metropolitan Police officers who were victims that day. Think about what it was like for those people. Officers like Officer Michael Fanone, who was dragged into a mob and tased in the neck, or Officer Dan Hodges, who was squeezed between a door and had to scream for his life, Officer Brian Sicknick, who was assaulted with pepper spray, lost his life of a heart attack. Have to think about what it means for those officers and their loved ones to receive this message

that those assaults don't matter, that attacking police officers like that is okay. So for me, that's what I'm thinking about when those pardons are issued. I don't think that's okay, and so I find the pardons appalling. That was a fantastic interview by our colleague Ryan Reilly, who as you know wrote a book about January 6th. I spent the day yesterday talking to everyone from Ivy League legal scholars to people inside the Justice Department, even to lawyers who defended January 6th defendants. I couldn't find anyone, anyone who would defend the pardoning of violent offenders who attack

police, except for Mike Davis a conservative lawyer who advises Donald Trump who said basically they suffered enough but it's hard to convey guys what a body blow these pardons are not only to the Justice Department but to the American system of justice because it's sort of made a mockery of the work of FBI agents prosecutors but also federal judges there's a judge from a Texan, Royce Lamberth, a Ronald Reagan appointee, who in an opinion a year ago,

just remarked about the misinformation and lies that were surrounding the whole idea of January 6th and the notion that these people didn't do what the video shows them doing. He said he'd never seen anything like it in his 37 years on the bench. And that's what we're facing now, is that Donald Trump, by issuing these pardons, has essentially turned to dust years of work by the justice system, guys.

So, Ken, you just spoke very well about how this decision invalidates the work of so much of some of these prosecutors. So my two-part question for you would be, one is, do you think we'll see some perhaps resignations in response to this? And secondly, as we pivot looking forward with these violent offenders back on the streets, is there concern among law enforcement? I know you speak to law enforcement all the time that they are back out again and if perhaps summoned by the President of the United States would commit violent acts again. Yeah there's absolutely concern Jonathan in part because when you have a felony conviction erased from your record you get your gun rights back. So a lot of these people are able

now to buy and and carry concealed weapons. So I've definitely heard some concern about that from law enforcement and from victims of their crimes. Yeah, so absolutely that's an issue. All right. NBC's Ken Delaney and thank you very much. And we have one more note on this. New polling shows Donald Trump is starting off his presidency more popular than he was throughout much of his first term in office. A new Reuters Ipsos poll taken Monday and Tuesday after Trump's

inauguration shows the president with a 47% approval rating. But his decision to issue a blanket pardon for virtually all the rioters who participated in the January 6th Capitol attack doesn't appear to be as popular. 58% said Trump should not pardon all people convicted of crimes on January 6th. So we'll be following that. And still ahead on Morning Joe, former DC Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone,

who defended the Capitol on January 6th and was attacked with a stun gun that day, joins us next to react to President Trump's blanket pardon for rioters. Plus, President Trump's pick for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is facing new allegations that could potentially complicate his confirmation. We'll have the latest from Capitol Hill. We're back in 90 seconds. We have more coverage now at 26 past the hour on President Trump's pardons, and you're making note of something that is in Politico's playbook.

Playbook out this morning, noting an interview that Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, who, of course, just received a pardon from President Trump, gave to Alex Jones Infowars yesterday. So, hours after his release, he spoke to Alex Jones Infowars. He said this, we went through hell and I'm going to tell you it was worth it because we stood for what we've been fighting for. We saw yesterday on the inauguration stage, we need people like Pam Bondi, the attorney general nominee, and FBI Director Cash Patel, and the rest of Trump's cabinet to right all these wrongs.

The people who did this, they need to feel the heat. They need to be put behind bars. So, Willie, here we are seeing the leader of this hate group, the leader of the Proud Boys, come out not only thanking President Trump for freeing him, but suggesting that Trump's cabinet does need to carry out this agenda of retribution for those who were part of the January 6th riots with investigations and prosecutions, setting an ominous tone here as this new

administration comes back to power. And as you talk to the quote, the people who did this, presumably talking about prosecutors, judges, and a jury that listened to evidence and convicted all of these people. Meanwhile, Axios is reporting an advisor who was familiar with the discussions in the room about these January 6 pardons quoting Donald Trump. This is a White House advisor quoting Donald Trump, the final decision saying quote, F it, release them all, citing Donald Trump directly in saying that. Open the jails, let everybody out.

Retired DC Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanon, who you'll remember was brutally attacked at the Capitol on January 6th, now has had to file protective orders against the people who assaulted him. This comes after President Trump pardoned his attackers. It also comes after Fanon was told by DOJ officials there would be no protection for him or his family. They've been targets since he testified before the January 6th committee.

And Officer Fanon joins us now. We should note former President Biden provided Fanon and the other officers who testified a preemptive pardon in anticipation of retaliation from the Trump administration. Fennon is the author of the recent book on the insurrection titled, Hold the Line. Officer Fennon, it's great to have you back on the show.

Just your first reaction to these blanket pardons of many of the people who attacked you that day. I mean, it's outrageous, but like Mika said earlier in the program, it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Donald Trump has been promising these pardons ever since he announced his candidacy from Waco, Texas. You know, for those of you who don't know or remember, that was the scene of a violent confrontation between members of American extremist groups and law enforcement in which law enforcement officers were killed. And Donald Trump saw that as a fitting place to announce his candidacy.

So I fully expected this to happen. And the American people voted for it. So you got these protective orders yesterday, I understand. Why did you feel compelled to do that? Can you talk about some of the threats you felt for you and your family? Well, first, I haven't obtained them yet.

I'm going through the process. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like it's gonna be as easy as I had initially anticipated. That being said, listen, once these guys were pardoned, and let's talk about the individuals that were pardoned. Daniel Rodriguez, sentenced to more than 12 years in prison after he pled guilty and admitted to using a Taser device, applying it to the base of my skull numerous times while I was being restrained in a crowd and assaulted. Albuquerque Cosper Head from Tennessee placed me in a headlock, pled guilty.

This is the rioter that if you watch my body worn camera footage yelled out, I've got one as he dragged me out into the crowd. Thomas Sibic, who while I was restrained and being assaulted, ripped my badge and my radio from my police vest. Kyle Young, who again, while I was being restrained and assaulted, tried to remove my firearm from its holster as he violently assaulted me. These individuals pled guilty. They admitted that they assaulted a uniformed law enforcement officer who was simply doing his job.

And Donald Trump chose to pardon these violent criminals. They are all out on the street today. Because of Donald Trump's actions, my family is less safe. We have suffered threats and acts of violence almost immediately after my congressional testimony in the select committee hearing. In fact, I didn't even make it through my testimony before I received the first threatening phone call. My mother has been the victim of swatting incidents. She has had bricks thrown at her home in the middle of the night. And recently while she was raking the leaves in her front yard, she had an individual pull

up in a truck and throw a bag of shit on her. This is the type of conduct and behavior that we've experienced for four years. And quite frankly, law enforcement has been feckless in its attempts to protect us and prevent these types of crimes from occurring. All of what you just laid out is disgusting. And of course, the crime for which you're receiving all of this is for defending the United States Capitol during an assault, during a riot, for doing your job as a police officer. Many of these people who love to talk about and have bumper stickers on their cars about backing the blue attacked you.

And I don't want to walk you through the worst day of your life, I assume it was, but you went into cardiac arrest. You've talked openly about thinking about your kids, assuming that it was over, that this was the end. How close did you think that day you were to dying Michael. I mean I certainly thought that was the inevitable outcome. But I'll be honest with you January 6 2021 was not the worst day of my life. That you know maybe on January 6th, 2021, I thought it was, but these past four years, the threshold for the worst day of my life has changed dramatically. Having your mother call you and tell you that someone pulled up in a pickup truck and threw shit on her and knowing that it was because of the things that I've said and my conduct on January 6th and simply

doing my job was probably one of the most painful calls that I've ever received in my life. Again, because of these pardons, my family is threatened and my family is less safe. So going forward now, as you said, the people who attacked you that day are out, they're free, many of them, everybody's out at this point. What do you anticipate the next days, weeks, months to look like for you and your family? I fully expect to to experience violence at the hands of some of these individuals, whether it's the ones that directly assaulted me or others who see me as a spokesperson for accountability for

January 6th. I certainly feel as though I have a target on my back and I have a target, there's a target on the back of my family members and not just from these government itself, from Donald Trump's government. Well, in this perverse logic that we're seeing now, you've been made a villain by this group of people. And we just want to say publicly what we've said all along, that you and the other officers who defended the Capitol that day perhaps saved the country. You are the heroes and we're so grateful for your service. We hope to talk to you again often.

Retired DC Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanon keep us posted on everything. Great to see you, sir. Thank you. So Mika, these pardons that Donald Trump, according to Axios, said, F it, release them all, not happening in the abstract. These are things that are very real to people like Officer Michael Fanon, to Harry Dunn, to Acalino Ganell, all these officers that we've come to know and bravely

defended the Capitol that day. They're going to have to relive it now. Again, these people who attack them and beat them to within inches of their lives are out and free. And it's it's true we shouldn't be shocked. Trump said that he would do this. He said it repeatedly. It was a key part of his campaign. At the same time it is very hard not to be incredibly sad right now about this and what it means. So the full Senate could vote on Pete Hegseth to head the Department of Defense as early as tomorrow.

But a new affidavit received by senators yesterday could pose an 11th hour challenge to his nomination. NBC News has learned exclusively that more than a dozen senators have received a sworn statement from Hegseth's former sister-in-law, Danielle, in which she says his behavior caused his second wife to fear for her safety. NBC News has received a redacted copy of the document. The affidavit was submitted in response to a letter sent last week from Senator Jack Reid of Rhode Island, the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. NBC News reports Reid asked Danielle Hegseth to detail what she knew of, quote, instances of abuse or threats of abuse

perpetrated against any other person and, quote, mistreatment of a spouse, former spouse or other member of his family, among other requests. Among the allegations are that Samantha hid in a closet once from Hegsath, that she developed escape plans for use if she felt she needed to get away from Hegsath. That would be activated with a code word and that she did once put the escape plans into action. Danielle noted in the document that she previously detailed these allegations to an FBI agent at the end of last year. The Trump transition team did not tell the Armed Services Committee's Republican chair or the Democratic ranking member about the

allegations told to the FBI according to two sources. In an email exchange with NBC News, Samantha Hegseth, Pete Hegseth's second wife, said, I do not believe your information to be accurate and I have copied my lawyer. There was no physical abuse in my marriage. This is the only further statement I will make to you. I have to let you know that I am not speaking and will not speak on my marriage to Pete. A lawyer for Pete Hegseth denied all allegations in a statement that reads in part belated claims by Daniel Dietrich, an anti-Trump far-left Democrat who is divorced from Mr. Hegseth's brother and never got along with the Hegseth family, do nothing to change that.

Both Pete and Samantha Hegseth signed a court document in 2021 that said neither claimed to be a victim of domestic abuse. The pair divorced in 2018. Let's bring in NBC News Capitol Hill correspondent Julie Serkin with more on this. Julie, what are you seeing in this? And it seems to me that Republicans would be looking at patterns. I think it gets complicated getting into family dynamics, but perhaps patterns of behavior? And would that then draw back to maybe alcohol abuse or other things? Well, obviously, Mika, those things have been long a concern for Republican senators, especially

the alcohol abuse. And if you remember that memo that was sent by a friend of the Monterey accuser, the woman who accused Pete Hexeth of sexual assault in 2017, something he had denied, something charges were not pressed on him against. But all of this kind of raises questions about why none of these things made it into that FBI report. And I will tell you just with those statements from Samantha Hexeth, those happened in two different instances.

We were reporting this story for several weeks. We've known about the allegations specifically from Danielle Hexeth and that she had communicated them to the committee for several days. We reached out to Samantha Hexeth for comment initially on those. We haven't heard back until we reached out to an attorney for Hexette And then that's when Samantha Hexette told us she does not believe the allegations that we had to be accurate when we went back to her and Specifically pressed her on which allegations in this affidavit that have now been signed by your former sister-in-law

Do you find inaccurate and she simply said there was no physical abuse in her marriage but many of the things that Danielle is alleging hiding in a closet using a safe word these are things that Danielle knows about because Samantha had confided in her she confided with her friends with her family members and this behavior Danielle hex that says would get worse when hex at was abusing alcohol. Obviously, Samantha and Pete Hexeth both signed that document saying there was no domestic abuse. But I got to tell you, Mika, I mean, in reporting this story, we've heard how difficult it was

for senators on both sides of the aisle, by the way, I'm talking Republicans, too, to actually interview witnesses firsthand because of any confidentiality agreements that Hexeth may have forced them to sign. In the case of Samantha, perhaps it was an NDA, and as we were reporting this as well, there were threats and intimidation along the way to stop our very pursuits. But significant here that for the first time,

this is not an anonymous smear, as we've been hearing. This is a woman who went on the record and signed a sworn affidavit to Congress under oath. Julie, it's Ali. Even the anonymous smears, which is how Hegseth tried to explain them away without directly confronting them back during his confirmation hearing,

even those were deeply reported by you and other members of our team here at the time. But I guess my question here in reading this latest allegation, who does it move? I know that there are senators that are on the fence that are reluctant, but can we put those names out there? Are any of them willing to sign their name to saying no to Hegseth for DOD secretary? It's a really good question, Ali.

And you'll know, obviously, especially in a Trump administration, one of them putting their neck out on the line if the vote's not going to move is probably not something they're willing to do. So they need at least four of them to come out and vote against Pete Hextheth just because of the math here. And I do know at least five who are actually on the fence who don't want to vote for Pete Hextheth, not just because they don't like him or they don't think he's that qualified. I think the list actually grows beyond five if you look at those folks, but are willing to vote for him because they want the

President to have the cabinet that he selected but these five specifically Susan Collins for example saying yesterday that she's taking these allegations seriously I know a handful of Republicans have looked at the affidavit an Unredacted copy of which was in a room yesterday where senators can go in and look at it behind closed doors of which was in a room yesterday where senators can go in and look at it behind closed doors. The problem here is, of course, is that the Hexthief team is mounting an aggressive rebuttal of this. You heard him during his hearing last Tuesday. He wouldn't answer many of the questions that Democrats try to allude to in terms of potential abuse of his spouses, in terms of potential sexual assault, which he had denied. And I'm told that that is something that the Trump transition team actually paid very close attention to.

And that's part of the story, too. What did the transition team know that they did not provide in the FBI briefing? What did they know that they didn't want to do anything about it? And in this case, of course, Danielle importantly wrote in her affidavit, and I think this is crucial that part of the reason that she came forward is because I have been assured that making this public statement will ensure that certain senators who are still on the fence will vote against Hexsett's confirmation. That is a stunning statement. And I know that right before she signed it, she needed those assurances.

And they came from Republicans. Democrats are voting against him already. NBC's Julie Serkin, thank you very much for your reporting this morning. And the host of Way Too Early, Ali Vitale, as always, thank you as well for staying on with us. And coming up, NBC's Janice Mackey-Frayer joins us live from Beijing with a look at China's reaction to the Senate confirming Marco Rubio as secretary of state and how this could impact America's relationship with the country.

Morning Joe, we'll be right back. John Bolton, a former national security adviser during President Trump's first term, said yesterday that Trump has terminated his Secret Service security detail. Bolton was granted the detail in 2021 amid threats to his life. The following year, the Department of Justice filed charges against an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps official for attempting to hire a hitman to target Bolton. Bolton himself has also been an outspoken critic of Trump in recent years. The president was asked yesterday about his decision. Why did you remove John Bolton's security clearance, sir?

Because I think that was enough time. We take a job, you take a job, you wanna do a job, we're not gonna have security on people for the rest of their lives, why should we? I thought he was a very dumb person, but I used him well because every time people saw me come into a meeting with John Bolton standing behind me, they thought that he'd attack them because he was a warmonger.

He's the one that got us involved, along with Cheney and a couple of others, convinced Bush, which was a terrible decision, to blow up the Middle East. We blew up the Middle East and we left. We got nothing out of it except a lot of death. We killed a lot of people. And John Bolton was one of those guys, a stupid guy. But no, you can't have that for life. You shouldn't expect it for life.

All right. We'll be following that. Some say it appears to be retribution, which is something Donald Trump talked about a lot during the campaign. The United States has a new top diplomat, former Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, was sworn in as the nation's 72nd Secretary of State yesterday. The first Latino Secretary of State in U.S. history is also the first confirmed member of Donald Trump's cabinet. For a look at how China is reacting to the news and the complications involved, we're

joined live by NBC News international correspondent Janice McEfrayer in Beijing. Janice, what can you tell us? Well, his first day in office today and Secretary of State Marco Rubio made it clear that pushing back against China will be a focus for this administration. But there is a very big hurdle to get over here in relations. And Beijing appears willing to overlook its sanctions against Marco Rubio now that he has been confirmed. At a regular briefing with reporters here, I asked China's foreign ministry if Beijing was willing to drop the sanctions it brought against Mr. Rubio back in 2020. The reply, quote, China will firmly safeguard its national interests.

At the same time, high-level officials of both China and the U.S. need to maintain contact in an appropriate manner. Now, Secretary Rubio is one of many hardliners on China now in the White House. He was among several U.S. individuals and companies sanctioned by the Chinese government in 2020 twice over criticism of Beijing's actions in Hong Kong and Xinjiang. Those are views that have remained unchanged. This is the first time, though, that a secretary of state has been sanctioned by China, which could be awkward for bilateral ties, especially as both President Trump and Xi Jinping have been signaling a possible reset for relations. I put the China sanctions issue

to the former U.S. ambassador here, Nicholas Burns, in our exit interview earlier this month. This is what he said. China's going to have to deal with the, as they've dealt with the Biden administration, they'll have to deal with the, as they've dealt with the Biden administration, they'll have to deal with the administration of President Trump when he comes into power. And that means that, in my view, they should lift the sanctions on Senator Rubio on soon-to-be, if should he be confirmed Secretary of State Rubio. Why should China lift the sanctions? Because they have to talk to the American Secretary of State.

If the sanctions are that they won't talk to the Secretary of State, the soon-to-be Secretary of State, that's not going to work in a world where China needs to work with the United States, needs to be talking to the United States about the difficult issues as well as on the issues where we may be more aligned to cooperate. Whether China will drop the sanctions or just ignore them isn't clear, but officials have expressed this willingness to talk. But something to add here, for the past few weeks, Chinese social media users have noticed

a change in the way Marco Rubio's name is now being translated to Chinese characters. Back when he was sanctioned, he was Lu Biao. Now he is Lu Biao. Now he is Lu Biao. The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson was actually asked this question today. Is this how you're getting around sanctions by changing his name in Chinese? She was visibly amused by the question.

She said that she would look into it, but she also added, quote, I think his English name is more important. Mika? Wow, NBC's, Janice Mackey-F more important. Mika? Wow. NBC's Janice Mackey-Frayer, thank you very much. Cady Kaye, I'm curious, your thoughts on Marco Rubio moving on to the world stage now as secretary of state at complicated world stage with Donald Trump as president.

Whichever name he goes under and whichever sanctions he may be eligible for. I thought that was funny. Look, I think one of Rubio's biggest challenges may not be Donald Trump. It may be that there's quite a lot of diverse opinions within the foreign policy team. If Tulsi Gabbard is confirmed as DNI, she is pretty much at odds with much of what Marco Rubio has stood for in the past. But he has another problem, which is Elon Musk. So Elon Musk is actually the person who has been out there during the transition making waves on the world stage in Europe, in the United Kingdom, in Ukraine.

Elon Musk has complicated business relationships with China. To what extent does Elon Musk start representing the real voice of American foreign policy because people around the world understand that he is the person who is actually close to Donald Trump Compared to Marco Rubio puts mr. Rubio senator Rubio secretary Rubio in a tricky position. Yeah. All right