Morning Joe - Morning Joe 2/3/25

Episode Date: February 3, 2025

U.S. stock futures plummet after Trump hits U.S. trading partners with tariffs

No, no, I'm not going to say that. We may have short-term, some little pain, and people understand that, but long-term, the United States has been ripped off by virtually every country in the world. So, we're going to change that. We're going to change it fast. We're going to make America great again. We have to focus on our country. President Trump last night telling reporters he was not concerned about how his tariffs

may hurt everyday Americans. The president's trade war with China, Canada and Mexico is already having a major impact on the markets this morning. We're going to go through that and the details of his executive orders. It comes as Elon Musk appears to be on the cusp of shutting down a key humanitarian agency. We'll dig into the unprecedented control of the federal government that is being given to the world's richest man. Also ahead we'll go through the growing concerns about a possible purge within the FBI as the

Bureau's employees are being forced to respond to questions about their service to the country. Meanwhile another judge has halted the federal funding freeze from the Trump administration. We'll look at what could come next in that legal battle. We'll also bring you the latest on the deadly mid-air collision near Reagan National Airport as we're learning more about the helicopter's crew. Plus, the Democratic National Committee has a new leader. We'll have more about the new chairman of the DNC.

And we'll bring you the top moments from music's biggest night. Good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Monday, February 3rd. We do have a lot to get to. A lot has happened since we last saw you. With us we have the co-host of The Fourth Hour, Jonathan Lemire. He is a contributing writer at The Atlantic covering the White House and national politics. The host of Way Too Early, Ali Vitale is with us, and co-founder and CEO of Axios, Jim VandeHei

joins us. Jim, we're going to get to the tariffs lead story. Obviously, the markets overnight look like they may be moving towards a pretty bad day here in the United States for investors and people with retirement accounts. I do just want to, overall, though, we're going to be going through a variety of issues, whether you're talking about the federal freeze, whether you're talking about the USAID, basically Elon Musk's raid on the USAID, same thing with the Treasury Department. There are a lot of things that are going on here that are just, that, well, it's as the

New York Times had an op-ed yesterday, it's Trump versus the law. The law may still win a lot of these questions are just very basic questions about The power of the first branch of government versus the power of the second branch of government I'm just curious just an overview you have United States Congress setting up USA to 1961. Donald Trump deciding just to send in a guy who's not even a member of the federal government to go in and basically raid the place and take it over.

Same thing with the Treasury Department, same thing with these freezes. Again, give us your overview look at some of these actions over the first two weeks where Donald Trump is unambiguously telling Congress, get out of the way. Doesn't matter what you passed. Doesn't matter what you authorized. Doesn't matter what you funded. I'm going to just pretty much gut it if I feel like it.

Yes, I mean, I would say very clearly in our lifetime, we've never seen any president move with this type of speed and this type of scope to solidify the power of the presidency, certainly at the expense of Congress, potentially at the expense of states and the courts. He believes, based on court rulings in the past, that he has essentially unrestrained, unlimited power. And that may be true. It may be true. And you're watching him use this power for some payback, some quick movement on policies he talked about on the campaign trail and many of these will ultimately end up in the court and people cheering that they end up in the court that could be a good thing and that it stops it it also could

further the precedent the precedent of the president having this type of authority almost unilateral authority and almost imperial presidency and we wrote about this this weekend for Republicans and MAGA fans who are cheering this. What I would tell you is, if you look at recent history, Joe Biden had all-democratic rule for two years, Trump before him, Republican rule for two years. Same for Obama, same for Clinton, same for Bush.

Recent history shows that we have a lot of volatility in our political system. If you think Democrats aren't gonna use these exact same tools, techniques, and tricks to solidify their power and to go after your programs and your people, then you've not been paying attention to how this city works. No one ever takes power and says,

I'll give it back, I don't want it. Right, no, no, no, it's what I said during a time you remember very well, the impeachment of Bill Clinton. I said to Republicans on the House floor, just remember, there will be another Republican president and whatever standard we hold Bill Clinton to, that is the standard Republican presidents will be held to in the future. And, Mika, a lot of these things, again, Republicans have always wanted line item vetoes. There's no such thing as a line item veto, not the federal government. So the idea that a president can go in and just decide what programs Congress has authorized and funded and can gut those programs and not follow

through on that? That is a real constitutional question. So we will find out in the coming weeks whether we still have three separate branches of government or we do not up. And that'll be left in the court's hands. It's going to be interesting to see where Republican senators specifically who are dealing with some key issues and could make some key decisions that the For or against what the president wants how they're looking at the decisions They have to make in the coming days given what has transpired whether it's the FBI purge

Spending freezes these things impact many people's lives and could have many potential consequences Massive consequences, it's good we have four hours. We're going to start now though with the tariffs. President Trump is making good on his threat to impose tariffs on three of the United States' biggest trading partners, Mexico, Canada, and China. The president signed three executive orders on Saturday while also threatening to increase tariffs on any country that retaliates. That has sent U.S. stock futures plummeting. We're talking about 25 percent tariffs. The president's measures set to take effect tomorrow include a 25 percent tariff on Mexican and Canadian imports and a 10 percent tariff on Chinese imports. Trump says the tariffs are due to the three countries' roles in the flow of fentanyl and undocumented immigrants to the U.S. In a social media post over the weekend,

President Trump acknowledged Americans might feel, quote, some pain. Reaction has been scathing, with the Financial Times editorial board labeling the move absurd, while the Wall Street Journal editorial board calls it the dumbest trade war in history. Let's bring right out the anchor of CNBC's worldwide exchange, Frank Holland. Frank, comparing the tariffs first term to second term are dramatically different. And as Axios, Jim, and Mike Allen's newsletter reports this morning, this year we're going primarily against our allies and

some of our closest trading allies, Canada and Mexico. Yeah, good morning to both of you. Not only some of our closest, the two biggest trade partners for the US. I want to get to the market reaction first. We're seeing the major indices down more than 1% in the pre-market right now. We had a number of money managers on the show and other people who represent business. I think the one where we continue to hear was uncertainty. A big reason for stocks trading lower right now is the uncertainty. What happens next? Will it be retaliation? We know that Canada and Mexico are planning some retaliation. We also know the president plans to speak to the leaders of those countries later today

a big question is will there be retaliatory tariffs coming from China and what does this all mean long term a lot of analysts believe that these terrorists will be short-lived others just aren't clear about what the path is going forward the other big question bond yields this morning we haven't seen a reaction from bond yields but generally tariffs are seen to be inflationary a lot of people are expecting so-called bond vigilantes to take action and move bond yields higher. We're also hearing from the newly confirmed Treasury Secretary later today about government funding. The question is, how much will the government borrow? So a lot of uncertainty out there right now. We're seeing a sell-off when it

comes to automakers and companies with large international exposure, specifically companies that are tied to trade when it comes to Mexico and Canada. Think Chipotle, they get a lot of avocados from Mexico. Think Constellation Brands, the maker of the very popular Modelo beer. Obviously, that beer comes from Mexico. So broadly, uncertainty is the reason we're seeing a lot of this sell off, a lot of questions to be answered, a lot of people waiting for the president to explain what the long-term gain will be since he said there will, there would the president to explain what the long-term gain will be since he said there will, there would, or there could be some short-term pain.

Right. And Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has announced that there will be retaliation, something Trump warned against. Coming up on Morning Joe, in just a few minutes, we're going to have Canada's former foreign and finance minister, Chry Christia Freeland, will join us on the show to talk about the tariffs. CNBC's Frank Holland. Thank you, Frank.

Thank you very much. So, Elon Musk has access to the Treasury Department's payment system, full access. The New York Times reports that Musk and his team, with the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, gained access on Friday night. It came after a top Treasury official who had resisted Musk's efforts was put on leave and then suddenly retired after more than 35 years of working for the government. The paper also reports that the Musk allies who have been granted access to the payment system were made Treasury employees past government background checks and obtained the necessary security clearances. However, the Musk representatives have

yet to gain operational capabilities and no government payments have been blocked. However, this is unprecedented. Meanwhile, the security leaders for the U.S. Agency for International Development are on administrative leave after trying to prevent Musk's team from accessing U.S. aid systems. Sources tell NBC News that Musk's team tried to access personnel files and security systems, including classified systems beyond the security level of at least some of the Doge employees. Musk targeted the agency in his pursuit of trimming federal spending. Yesterday, he posted on social media that it was time for the agency to die and accuse the independent agency without offering evidence of being a criminal organization.

USAID provides humanitarian and development assistance to other countries, primarily through funds to non-governmental organizations, foreign, and international groups. In the fiscal year for 2023, USAID managed over $40 billion in appropriations, which is less than 1% of the federal budget. The top recipients of the funding included Ukraine, Ethiopia, Jordan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo and Somalia. Last night, President Trump was asked about Musk's work so far and the future of USAID. I think Elon is doing a good job.

He's a big cost cutter. Sometimes we won't agree with it and will not go where he wants to go. But I think he's doing a great job. He's a smart guy, very smart, and he's very much into cutting the budget of our federal government. It's been run by a bunch of radical lunatics, and we're getting them out.

USAID, run by radical lunatics, and we're getting them out, and then we'll make a decision. You know, Jonathan Elmire, it's hard really to know where to start here. First of all, on the USAID, let's talk about USAID for a second. Here's an organization that has fought hunger and starvation across the globe, that's fought diseases across the globe, that's fought diseases across the globe. Jimmy Carter helped use it to actually rid the world of some diseases that, again, across Africa, across the world, have had massive impact.

And I just have a quote here at the end of World War II, just to talk about for anybody that might want to know why the United States engages in USAID, it's not just charity. It is the ultimate soft power that allows America to have an advantage over China and Russia in the third world in the global, because the United States is there, actually not just mining for minerals and precious metals, but also helping people. Harry Truman called in Herbert Hoover at the end of World War II when there was the greatest humanitarian crisis the world had known. And Herbert Hoover, who Truman had run against basically his entire adult life, said, bare substance means hunger.

Hunger means communism. And they started a program to make sure that there was not starvation across Europe and the rest of the world. And so those that are cheering, all these things that we're talking about this morning, let's make no mistake about it. And we're going to be talking about the gutting of the FBI. The fact that you have the Trump administration actually looking inward to purge the FBI instead

of looking outward at threats from Al Qaeda, threats at ISIS, threats from China. You can say the same thing about the Pentagon. They're so busy running around trying to take generals' pictures off the wall. They're going to take their eye off the ball many people fear. And on USAID, make no mistake of it, we actually collect data. We collect intel across Africa on Al Qaedaaeda's growth, Al-Qaeda's movement, what ISIS is trying to do there, what China is trying to do there. Yes, there is the carrot, but there is also the stick for our enemies.

That's why they're there. And to have the world's richest man go in and say he's going to basically tear this organization to the ground, not only will cause immeasurable suffering across the globe, it also will put us in a strategic disadvantage. This is strategic. What he's talking about doing is, I'm sorry, it is stupid. And to try to vilify this organization so he can destroy it, that's not just bad

for people who are suffering, the poorest of the poor, the most disadvantaged of the most disadvantaged. Just strategically, you talk to anybody in any administration, and they will tell you it is just a stupid strategic move. But let's talk about the modeling of this, Jonathan, because we had the freeze last Wednesday of all government spending.

On Thursday, the judge put an injunction on it. And then there was a memo that said, oh, never mind, we're not going to have a freeze. And then on Friday, I believe the White House announces, no, no, no, the freeze isn't full effect. And then a judge came back, said, OK, well, now it's obvious why this injunction has to hold. And then we have last week this freeze on USAID. And then Marco Rubio said, this from the Times yesterday, soon after announcing the cutoff,

the administration abruptly switched gears. Rubio said that quote, life-saving humanitarian assistance would continue for quote, core efforts to provide food, medicine, shelter and emergency need. That is not only not happening right now. Elon Musk is going in. They're basically, you know, doing everything but breaking down the doors and gaining access

to classified information. He's not even a government employee. And again, my question is, when are the courts going to step in? And also, one of the members of Congress, Republicans, who are in charge, who authorized all of these programs, voted for all of these programs, authorized all these programs, appropriated money for all these programs, which the Constitution of the United States gives them the power to do, when are they going to stand up and go, wait a second, this is not your power, we are still three co-equal branches? Talk about that and also talk about the muddled message. One day the freeze is in effect, the next day they say the freeze is not in effect.

One day the USAID freeze is in effect, the next day Marco Rubio says, oh, but no, the humanitarian assistance moves forward. And then the next day, well, no, it doesn't look like it is. Now Musk is going on Twitter and just saying completely unfounded, crazy things about USAID. Yeah, a lot to get through here, Joe. Starting with this, foreign policy analyst

texted me over the weekend saying, you know who USAID's biggest opponent might be? Vladimir Putin. Because Putin understands that it is helpful both in terms of yes, there's a humanitarian element to this. There's America being the shining city on the hill. We're supposed to uplift our neighbors across the globe. But also there's a real strategic purpose as a bulwark against China.

Yes, against Russia. And now Elon Musk says that agency that has done so much good needs to die, declaring that it is evil. We have seen him and his cronies at the Treasury Department going trying to access classified information, sensitive information, not just about federal employees, but everyday citizens.

Has Elon Musk been confirmed by the Senate? No. Has anyone at Doge been confirmed by the Senate? No. It's not even clear what exactly a federal agency this is. It's still a quasi group. We're still being written up as to what it is, and yet they're already moving into some of the most sensitive areas in government. And it's taken in tandem, as you mentioned, with this purge at the FBI, not just of agents who investigated the Trump cases, but potentially any agent, they're investigating any FBI personnel who had anything to do with any January 6th case.

We have, as you mentioned, the freeze and the mixed messaging there. We even have a release of water from a California reservoir, water not needed to combat the Los Angeles fires, which are now thankfully contained. But just because Donald Trump last week had said he was going to do something, so they reverse engineered it and said put water... And Jonathan, let's just talk about the common denominator here. And again, we will tell you, for those of you that don't know the Constitution of the United States, maybe you haven't read it, or maybe you never saw Schoolhouse Rock

to know exactly how this stuff breaks down. Yeah. But Congress funds these organizations. They negotiate with the White House. They come up with a plan. Then the White House signs the bill, it becomes law, and the funding goes out there. This, again, just because you have an administration that wills it to be so, says, oh, we don't need to do that anymore. We can just do all the

cutting. No, there's nothing in the Constitution that remotely says that. We'll see what the Article 3 branch, the courts will do. I'm quite confident that the courts will actually say, well, this is so cut and dry. Constitution doesn't allow for this. I'm wondering, though, when Republicans in the first branch will say, we're equal powers here, and you want to talk about USAID? We'll do that when we negotiate next time. When it goes through our subcommittees and then our committees and then the floor of Congress and then to the Senate and then we come up with a bill we send it to you and you decide to either

sign it or veto it. That's not happening. So there are a lot of these questions about how these two branches of government are going to respond. But Jonathan, let's underline something that is good for every Republican in Washington, D.C., including Donald Trump, to know, to hear, and to understand on what Elon Musk is doing right now. And what other people are doing right now. When you got USAID, and this is a truth every president has known, you are actually taking comfort away from the poorest and the most disadvantaged people on the face of the earth, and you are providing comfort to our enemies,

whether it's Al Qaeda that's trying to make gains across Africa, going south of Sudan, trying to spread their hateful ideology, whether it is ISIS, who also is moving aggressively to try to foothold across Africa, whether we're talking about throughout the Middle East, wherever we're talking about. And the big winners, as you've said, big winners are China, the big winners are Russia, the big winners are Al-Qaeda, the big winners are ISIS. The big winners of the United States doing this are all the people who wish us ill. And nowhere is this more true than in the gutting of the FBI,

where you actually have an administration looking inward to carry out a purge of the FBI, right? Doing that instead of looking outward at all the threats from al-Qaeda in the United States, all the threats from ISIS in the United States, all the all the cybersecurity threats from China across the United States for American citizens, all the cybersecurity threats from Russia, from Iran, who has said they want to strike the United States. They want to kill Americans. They've said that. And so you're gutting the FBI, you're firing all these people across, you know, possibly one third, one fourth of the workforce, and your most experienced people for political reasons,

you're doing that, the winner are our enemies, those people who seek to do harm to America and to kill American citizens. You are so right on two points. One, this is helping our adversaries, not our allies. Also, these tariffs further alienating our allies to the point where the US national anthem being booed at sporting events in Canada over the weekend. And secondly, we know what the Constitution says, and the Trump administration, though,

is trying to defy it. That's sort of the point of how muddled this all is, is they want to confuse and they want to say, try to stop us. We think the courts will back us up. So Ali, the question is, is the other branch of government going to do anything? Elon Musk said over the weekend, well, I'm paraphrasing here, but more or less said, it's easy to get work done when your opponents take the weekend off. And we have seen, first of all, a lack of cohesive response from Democrats, who see a little slow here on most issues, but also Republicans who do have majorities,

who do have the ability to say, look, actually these programs have been in place for decades. They've had bipartisan support. There are even national security reasons to keep them going. But yet so far, they seem completely muted and afraid to stand up to Trump and Musk. Is there any way that changes? Yeah, I mean, we started the program talking about how when power is given,

people don't just willfully give it back. And yet we're watching in Congress the very central power of the purse program talking about how when power is given, people don't just willfully give it back. And yet we're watching in Congress the very central power of the purse that Congress has had forever. They're now seemingly okay, especially the majority party, with giving it over to the White House and the Trump administration on this. Look no further than the fact that Elon Musk went on X overnight, did a spaces, held court online. that Elon Musk went on X overnight, did a spaces, held court online, and with him was Senator Joni

Ernst, who was effectively backing him up when he said that he wanted to get rid of USAID. She made the point that she said we want to help starving children effectively in other countries, but that they're afraid the money is not going where it's supposed to be going. The way that USAID does its work is it funds non-governmental organizations that then funnel the money where it needs to go into any of the number of these countries that USAID helps. What Joe is talking about here is the hearts and minds approach to national security. And so, yes, Democrats have been flat-footed in some cases or aggressive in others in pushing back against

this administration. But when you're in the minority, it's hard to affect change, especially if no one in the majority party is willing to cross party lines and stand with you. So we've seen it on everything from the gutting of these kinds of agencies, the attempts to try to eliminate these agencies, which, by the way, you need Congress to actually do. You can't just stroke of a pen, wipe an agency off a map. And we've also seen it then when it comes to basic things like nominations.

The idea that they're going along with Elon Musk and Doge, when that is not actually a federal agency, and it's not someone who has to go before the Senate and be confirmed, is just further underscoring the fact that senators and House members seem happy to farm out the central functions of their work to the federal government. And that was always going to be one of the key tests in the early days of this administration. I think we're getting our answer at this point.

Well, and again, Jim Vande Hei, let's be very clear here. Not only is helping the poorest and the most destitute, not only is that a good thing to do, the right thing to do, we heard Jimmy Carter devoted his entire life to it, but also it is the most cold-eyed strategic thing to do. Again, going back to that Herbert Hoover quote to Harry Truman after Truman was president. People were starving across Europe and the world. And Herbert Hoover, no warm-hearted soul said that that sort of starvation, that sort of hunger, that sort of desperation led men and women to be desperate and would turn them into communists.

And here again, you can say the same thing about Al-Qaeda, about ISIS, about China trying to, again, trying to make dramatic moves across Africa and across the world. I mean, this is not just about helping the poor if you don't care about helping the poor this is about american soft power this is what we have depended on it along with our guns and and and jets and missiles

uh... to to be the most powerful nation on the planet it to quick points one uh... there's nothing I've seen in the last 18 months that suggests Republicans or the courts are gonna contain Trump's power. And so anyone who thinks that's gonna happen, just look at everything that's happened over the last 18 months. On the second point, here's the problem.

Two things could be true at once. If you looked at any part of the US budget, and you've done this, and you did it when you were in Congress, you will find outrageous uses of our taxpayer dollars. You just will. But that doesn't mean, therefore, that the entire program is idiotic or that people are part of a criminal conspiracy. They're making this extremely personal. If you think about the people at the FBI, you think about the people at USAID, you think about the people at the Treasury Department, they took jobs. You might not like those jobs, you might think they're inefficient, you might think they're wasteful, but that doesn't make

them criminals, it doesn't make them DEI hires, it doesn't make them idiots. And so in rushing on this, are able to seize on a couple of programs, often a lot of programs, that are outrageous. But there's a way to go through the government budget. There's a way to do it that doesn't have to be so chaotic, and chaos is a part of the strategy. But they're choosing that strategy of chaos because they believe at that velocity you'll have a program like this where we can hardly even keep track of all the things that happened just in the last 24 hours.

Yeah. like this where we can hardly even keep track of all the things that happened just in the last 24 hours. Yeah. Yeah, well, you know, the thing is, I know this sounds sort of boring, but this is how it's done. You have the United States Constitution. Every funding bill starts in the House of Representatives. You have subcommittees, and they go through these programs. And then it goes to committees.

And then it goes to the House floor. And then it goes to a conference committee with the Senate. And then they all agree what programs are funded, what programs are not funded. Then it goes to the President of the United States, who signs it or vetoes it. The people like it or not. Yeah. That's the Constitution of the United States, and that's how it's done. I don't know if the first branch, who actually is given the power of the purse by James Madison

and the Constitution of the United States, is going to stand up and defend their constitutional rights. But I am hopeful, I am hopeful that the third branch, not for the sake of, not for the sake of opponents of Donald Trump, or for the sake of opponents of Elon Musk, or for the sake of anybody, but for the sake of the Constitution of the United States. They need to stand up and do the right thing because again, what comes around goes around. What goes around comes around.

And again, if Republicans are allowed to do this in 2025, you can rest assured because there's so much overreach here, Democrats will be doing this in 2029. And that is not a government that we want, where there is one branch more powerful than the other two. Checks and balances, Madisonian democracy, House, Senate, the President of the United States, and the United States court system. I mean, I think it's very clear that Republicans in Congress, definitely some of them, and

most of them in the Senate know that what's going on here is not normal and is probably very destructive. USAID, you make this great point. Now, politically, Donald Trump may make the argument, why should we be helping other countries? And maybe part of this base would get that transaction in its own political sense. But it's what make America great. It's what makes America strong. And it's what makes America tapped in. And the FBI purge is simply dangerous for this country.

It's important to try and explain that. And we will more with our guests coming up. In fact, we'll be talking about the purge in the FBI, including the one member of the FBI. There are a few others as well. But the one man who really stood in the breach against Trump's orders, we'll talk about that. CEO of Axios, Jim Van De Heide, thank you very much for being on this morning.

Also still ahead on Morning Joe, the latest on recovery efforts after last week's collision between a passenger jet and military helicopter near Reagan National Airport. You know the numbers. The numbers aren't lining up. There are some that show it at altitude at 200 feet for the helicopter, 325 feet for the jet. And so this is why the NTSB needs to continue its investigations without people chiming in and making wild assumptions that just may not be true. But first we're going to talk to Christia Freeland,

candidate for Canadian Prime Minister, about President Trump's new tariffs and Canada's response. We're back in 90 seconds. The reaction from the three countries President Trump is imposing tariffs on has been swift. The president of Mexico posting on social media Saturday night that she had instructed her secretary of the economy to implement what she calls their Plan B, which includes tariff and non-tariff measures in defense of Mexico's interests. Meanwhile, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced Canada would impose a 25% tariff right back on Canadian exports to the U.S., affecting more than $106 billion worth of American goods, ranging from beer and wine to household appliances and sporting goods.

Joining us now, Canada's former Deputy Prime Minister, Chrystia Freeland, who has called Trump's new tariffs, quote, an act of economic warfare. She is the former foreign and financial minister to Canada, and she's running to succeed Trudeau as prime minister. It's great to have you back on the show, Chrystia. I think first of all, it'd be great if you could explain the impact of these tariffs on both sides. Well, great to be with you, Mika.

Look, this really is utter madness. And from our perspective, the key thing here is you guys are engaged in this colossal act of self-harm. These tariffs are gonna make life more expensive for Americans. You have put a tariff on the gas we sell you, so gas is gonna be more expensive. You have put a tariff on the gas we sell you. So gas is gonna be more expensive. You have put a tariff on the food that you are buying.

That's a tax on groceries. They're gonna be more expensive. We have now the United Steelworkers, the American Farm Bureau, the Chamber of Commerce, all saying this is gonna hurt America. Stock futures are down. You are hurting yourselves. You are taxing regular Americans and we are going to fight back. And Canada is your biggest market.

Canada is a bigger market for US exporters than China, Japan, the UK and France combined. For Americans like your business people, right? The customer is always right. And your customer is really angry at you. The whole country is behind the retaliation the Prime Minister has announced. So now we are gonna tax American exporters who are trying to sell us stuff.

That means Americans are gonna lose jobs. So this is really, it is self-mutilation. America is hurting itself. We think that it is utterly crazy. And we're also really, really angry at you. So Madam Deputy Prime Minister, I was really struck when Prime Minister Trudeau spoke over the weekend, the sense of betrayal that he expressed, that we have been there with the U.S., he was saying, I'm paraphrasing, every step of the way, even in times of need.

And now this is coming out of nowhere. Elaborate on that, please. And also just more specifically, just remind viewers just how closely linked these two nations are, particularly whether it's people or goods going back and forth across the border, sometimes multiple times a day? The prime minister has been great and I have to tell you the whole country is rallying behind him. We all feel personally hurt and that hurt is now becoming anger. You know, we pride ourselves on being a polite, nice country. But at the Raptors game last night,

the American anthem was booed. At a Senators hockey game over the weekend, the American anthem was booed. Because we do feel like we are your friends, we're your neighbors, we are your allies, and you guys are really lucky to have us on your northern border. The fact that you have this safe, secure, friendly country on your northern border is

foundational to American prosperity. And now you're slapping us in the face. I mean, the tariffs against Canada are higher than the tariffs imposed against China. What's going on here, guys? It's Ali Battali. I have a question for you in regards to the way that these tariffs have been put on. The Trump administration is saying that it's because they want to stem the flow of fentanyl through borders as well as illegal immigration. But in your conversations and in the conversations that these governments are having, do you have a sense of what the Canadians would even have to say to get these tariffs

removed and appease the administration? Well, thank you for the question, Allie. And the fact is, it is—these tariffs are being imposed truly for utterly no reason. The pretext offered is the flimsiest pretext possible. Less than 1%, in fact, around 0.2% of the fentanyl that comes into the US comes through the Canadian border. If border security were the issue, this could be solved in five minutes.

We wanna secure border too. We would like to stop the illegal US guns that are smuggled into Canada and cause deaths on Canadian streets. And we are very happy to work together to not have asylum seekers crossing either direction. The president has also directly threatened our national sovereignty. He has said over the weekend that if we were to become the 51st state, there would be no tariffs.

Canadians really, really, really are angry about that. And I do want to say we want to be your friend. We want to be your partner. We want to be your neighbor. We're good at that. We've done it for decades and decades. But we are proud of our country. We're really proud to be Canadian.

Our sovereignty is not negotiable. And if you hit us, we are going to hit back and the whole country is going to be proud to do that. Well, and Canada has been Mika. Canada has been our friends, our allies, our best trading partner. And again, as Chris just said, and so many Americans need to understand that the fact that the longest peaceful contiguous border in the world is the northern border that starts at Maine and goes all the way, all the way over to Washington state. And the fact that we don't have to have troops on that border because Canada is such a good

friend. Again, this is, again, for so many Canadians, just shocking. So also a friend, Christia, who was on Morning Joe in the Early Days, along with all of us, sharing her political analysis. She is educated steeply not in just Canadian values, but American values and the American Constitution. And so, to your question of what's going on here, guys, Chris, did I ask you, imposing tariffs on a friendly border nation, what do you think is going on here?

What's your assessment of what's happening here? You're the Americans, and I'm going to leave that up to you. But I do have a message for you, which is we are a great ally and partner. There is an exit ramp here. There is a win-win here. For all of our history as countries, we have been great mutually beneficial partners and friends. Ronald Reagan famously said,

"'We're more than friends, we are kin.'" And he said that the Canada-US relationship is the best, the most mutually beneficial relationship between two countries in history. Ronald Reagan said that. He was a smart guy. He was right. But what I will also say is this isn't going to work.

This is a colossal act of self-mutilation where America is hurting itself and please know that we think it is utter madness. We are not going to back down. We are really proud to be Canadian. We love our country so much. Canadians are rallying around this issue. We're going to stand up for ourselves. And you know, I used to say we do it more in sorrow than in anger, but we're moving away from the sorrow feeling towards really being angry about this because it's so unjustified and so pointless. And as the Wall Street Journal editorial page says, it is the dumbest trade war in history. Christia, let me ask you finally, and I understand Canadians have all come together and they're

even coming together behind Prime Minister Trudeau, who has been extraordinarily unpopular in the polls up to this point. I am curious, though, is there anything more he should be doing? Is there anything more that you would do if you were prime minister now in response to these tariffs? The whole country right now is united. Everyone is rallying behind this united national response. Our prime minister is our prime minister and we are supporting him as he stands up for Canada. If I am chosen to be leader of

the Liberal Party and become prime minister, I will continue that fight and I will fight really really hard for my country Canadian Prime Minister candidate and former Deputy Prime Minister of Canada Christia Freeland, thank you very much. It's good to see you come back I have a feeling this story isn't going away anytime soon. Thank you very much for being on this morning This morning there are growing concerns about a purge within the FBI. Bureau employees have been instructed to complete a questionnaire by today about their involvement in any criminal cases related to the January 6th Capitol attack.

It is the latest sign that the Trump administration plans to deliver on its promise to make dramatic changes within the FBI. On Friday, at least eight senior FBI executives were told by the Trump administration to resign or they would be fired. NBC News has learned the FBI's acting director also was told to turn over the names of every FBI employee involved in investigating the January 6 rioters. But he pushed back, promising agents he would follow the law and existing FBI policies. Ryan Reilly, who covers the Justice Department and federal law enforcement for NBC News,

joins us now, along with NBC News national security editor David Rode. He's the author of the book Where Tyranny Begins, The Justice Department, the FBI, and the War on Democracy. Well, David, it seems, just given the title of your book and the work that you've been doing, you're a good place to start. There are, I've talked to agents and I've also talked to people that have served in other administrations, many not fans of the FBI at all for their own personal reasons, saying that what's going on right now is horrifying.

It is their words in the best interest not of the United States, but in the best interest of Al Qaeda, of ISIS, of China, of Russia, of criminal gangs, of drug empires, you name it, anybody that seeks to do America ill, what we've been hearing throughout the weekend is this is their dream that you have an administration that is focused on looking inward in the FBI instead of looking outward at all of the different forces, malevolent forces that want to hurt America, that want to kill Americans, and want to destroy this country. I can't describe to you how unusual all this is, what a chaotic weekend it was. I want thank Ryan, who's right here with us, and other NBC reporters, Tom Winner, Ken Delaney, Jonathan Dietz, Mike Kozner, fielding calls and

emails from panicked FBI agents. We talked to a Penn State historian who tracks the history of the FBI. He said this is uncharted waters and a wholesale effort to eliminate the independence of the FBI by a political leader. And this all goes back to J. Edgar Hoover and massive reforms that were enacted, again, 50 years ago to make the FBI independent from elected officials who could interfere or direct them in terms of criminal prosecutions and criminal investigations. So it's extraordinary.

And just the last point, this is all about January 6th. The questionnaire you mentioned asking FBI agents, and they have to answer until today, did you investigate the January 6th riots is just unprecedented. The FBI agents association is urging some of them to not answer if they can but to remain calm but essentially it's an argument from the sitting president that it was wrong to investigate the January 6th riot at the US Capitol, that it was wrong and improper and anyone who did so should be removed from the FBI.

I mean Ryan that's such an extraordinary statement. This is the biggest investigation in DOJ history. The agents who were assigned, it's not like they're willingly chose necessarily and it could lead to just gutting of the Bureau. So talk just a little bit more about that but also a few of those who are trying to step in the breach and hold this back, the acting director right now, also we're seeing out of the New York field office. Yeah, the JRIZ, I think, is his nickname that people have been going with.

And there's a lot of support within, I think, the Bureau for how he handled that. Although, you know, remember, the FBI is a very, I think, ideologically diverse institution. And there are a lot of Donald Trump supporters within it and people who have these grievances against the FBI who have complained for a very long time about it. So that's just the reality of it. I think it's sort of crazy if you go back 10 years just the way we talk about the FBI now as though it's some sort of liberal haven. But the truth is it's a conservative leaning law enforcement organization and I think that

that sometimes can get sort of lost in this. And there were people within the FBI who were not very enthusiastic about these January 6 cases altogether. I think the ones that were about assaulting police officers individually, I think broadly there was support for those. But they definitely had their issues with the way the Justice Department was approaching this.

There were plenty of FBI prosecutors, rather DOJ prosecutors who thought, who told me directly that they thought the FBI was half-assing a lot of these investigations, weren't putting all of their effort into it. So that's the reality, I think, across the Bureau more broadly. But this really is a remarkable moment, because anyone who touched a January 6 case has to fill out that form, whether you were enthusiastic about it, whether you were one of the key

FBI folks who did this, or whether you just had some sort of involvement in an arrest, right? You need to sort of do a show of force and make sure that someone's taken into custody efficiently and effectively and safely. And that's when a lot of people get involved in those. So, you know, this is a huge number of agents and FBI employees that you're talking about here and just to have it be this personal grievance of the president because he doesn't like that some of his buddies were locked up, he's been hearing about is, you know, from having these direct communications with the January 6th community, I think is pretty

remarkable and really does. I think it's a real historic moment for the FBI here. Ryan, I think that timing is so important. The fact that you start seeing the beginnings of this purge after Kash Patel does his confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill. But the pushback that you and David are talking about here from agents, including the acting director right now, what does that portend for if Kash Patel gets confirmed, if he does what he said he wouldn't do during his hearing, but he said a lot before he got before the Senate that he would enact retaliation against people who worked against the president.

What does that portend for him being able to enact that agenda if people within the agency are pushing back even now? Yeah, I mean, I think Cass Ratel said all of the sort of right things during the hearing. And the question with going back and forth was, was this the podcast bro persona or was this his actual thing? Was he just trying to sell those books that call Donald Trump king? That was, we're trying to figure out exactly where things land. And these are a lot of people that he knows.

That was a question that Senator Booker asked during this, asked him if he knew all these individuals who are now been put into these weird roles within the FBI. And that's really, really unusual because typically you only have that one official who has an appointment and it was supposed to be this 10-year term. And that's not the way this has worked out for the past two FBI directors, one of whom was fired by Trump, one that was preemptively pushed out by Trump. I think he really is sort of remaking the Bureau or trying to remake the Bureau to be something that he can get fully behind and not be worried about going after any of his buddies. I want to go to David Rowe to second, but let me ask our reporters, Jonathan O'Meara

and Ali Vitale, your thoughts on, at the end of last week, you had Cash Vitale saying that if he were put in as FBI director, that he was not going to seek retribution. And then of course that night the retribution began and the purges began. I'm wondering everything I've heard up to this point suggests that Cash Patel is going to get the 50 votes he needs. I wonder the chaos, the gutting of the FBI, the purges, what we've seen this weekend. Does that move any Republican vote in the Senate, who obviously should be, and I suggest are actually concerned by the great purge that they're seeing going on at the FBI? Ali, I'll begin with you.

We'll wait to see when senators come back to town, of course, but I think the common question throughout all of these various hearings, it was true for Hegseth, it's true now for Cash Patel, it's exactly what Ryan and I were talking about, the idea of are you the person who's sitting before me in the Senate explaining who you are now, or are you the person that has all of these incendiary and controversial comments on everything

from in Hegsett's case, women serving in combat, to Patel's case, where he says he's not going to enact any kind of agenda for an enemy's list or retaliation against people who worked against or to investigate the basics of doing their job at the FBI, the documents case or other legal woes that we're facing than former president Donald Trump. That's always been the central question for senators. Which do you want to believe? It's been a Rorschach test that largely these nominees have been able to pass because of the partisan pressure that's being pushed upon these senators.

But it's interesting to see and we'll see. I mean, nothing happens in a vacuum. The purge is certainly something that is roiling the hill right now. But whether or not it's actually going to move people's votes remains to be seen. John and Jonathan, the question answers itself. You look at Pete Hegseth.

I'm only focused on the warrior culture, bringing the warrior culture back. Then Milley. Not retribution, not this, not that. He gets in immediately. I'm sorry. One of the first orders, they take down General Milley, a guy who's one of the most highly decorated generals in US history, they take down his picture and then Pete Hegseth,

right after he gets in, announces an investigation of General Milley for political reasons. They take away his security. Yeah, they take away his security, all these other things. And now with Cash Patel, you have somebody who, as you and I have said and everybody knows, he said he's going to arrest people, he's going to arrest reporters, he said we're going to get you, we're going to come after you, whether it's criminally or civilly, however we can get you, we're going to get you. You can line that up, Republicans, with what Donald Trump is doing and with his lawsuits, with every news organization.

So when they say it, they mean it. And then you can go through his book and look at the so-called enemies list and see what's going there and line that up with what's going on. The purges this weekend, the most dramatic, most extreme purges inside the FBI, it's ever taken place and that's taken place this weekend, right after his testimony. So Republicans know what's going to happen. And we're here to say, I am here to say, and I speak only for myself, that if you have an FBI director that furthers these purges, that is a win for Al-Qaeda.

If you're gutting the FBI, I guarantee you, whether you want to call it a win or not, they are cheering this happening. ISIS is cheering this happening. China is cheering that this has happened. Russia is cheering that this is happening. Iran is cheering that this has happened. Russia is cheering that this is happening. Iran is cheering that this has happened. And do you know who knows that? Republican senators? They know every single Republican senator knows that to be the case. So Jonathan, the question is, are they going to get an FBI director who is more concerned

about going after criminal gangs in America, going after murderers in America, going after Al-Qaeda or ISIS or Islamic terrorists who want to blow things up in America or domestic terrorists that want to blow things up in America or domestic terrorists that want to blow things up in America? Or who's going to be looking inward at the FBI trying to conduct political purges? Every Republican knows what they need in that position as FBI director. After this weekend especially, the question is, are they going to do anything about it? Yeah, to put it simply, gutting the FBI does not make the nation safer. And we should also just reiterate this. Those who stormed the Capitol on January 6th were encouraged to do so by Donald

Trump. Donald Trump then pardoned all of them. And now he's investigating and threatening to fire everyone who looked into those cases which is setting up quite a permission structure perhaps David going forward so let's go back to Kash Patel's potential confirmation I heard over the weekend there are real doubts in the Trump world that Tulsi Gabbard can make it growing doubts about Robert F. Kennedy there's some thoughts here that maybe Senator Cassidy could be that fourth vote Patel though up until this weekend seemed like he was smooth sailing. From what you've heard though what we've seen this extraordinary as you

put a purge over the weekend is there any suggestion now that some Republicans will stand up to Patel? Not yet but I was at the confirmation hearing last week. Senator Tom Tillis said specifically he thought that the pardons and excuse the expression sucked. Tom Tillis said he was going up to Capitol Hill police officers and apologizing to them for this happening. Senator Tom Tillis, Senator Lisa Murkowski, Senator Susan Collins, Senator Mitch McConnell, those are the four votes. And Tillis was the one vote that let Hegseth get confirmed to watch here. Because we're talking about an estimated number of the times reported

is that 6,000 of the 38,000 FBI agents in this country were told and ordered to play some role in the January 6 investigations. So that is 15% of the FBI's workforce. And what this leads to, again, is chaos and distraction. Instead of hunting down fentanyl traffickers and hunting down Chinese or Russian spies, the FBI is in turmoil and distracted from its mission. All right, David Rode, Ryan Reilly, thank you so much for your reporting and analysis.

We'll continue to follow this.