Morning Joe - Morning Joe 4/10/25

Episode Date: April 10, 2025

President Donald Trump pulled back Wednesday on a series of harsh tariffs targeting friends and foes alike in an audacious bid to remake the global economic order.

I can't predict the future. I have to wait for it like everybody else. But I do think that we'll look back a year from now, if we take this deal and say what I'm saying today is that President Trump, he's won this fight. Now let's don't lose it by not taking the opportunity. All right. That was Republican Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana, who had been critical of President Trump's tariffs on our show yesterday. The president later in the day announcing a pause in most of his tariffs will go through

how it played out yesterday in the trade war with China that is still very much in effect. Also ahead, we'll dig into new reporting on the lack of criminal records for dozens of migrants who were sent to a prison in El Salvador. Plus, the president appears to be retaliating against two former government officials who were critical of him. We'll explain that new investigation. Good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Thursday, April 10th, along with Joe, Willie and me.

We have the co-host of our fourth hour, Jonathan Lemire. He's a contributing writer at The Atlantic covering the White House and national politics. Editor-in-chief of The Economist, Zeni Minton-Bettos is with us and co-founder and CEO of Axios, Jim Van de Huy. So a lot went down with the markets yesterday. A lot happened. And the president making a yesterday. A lot happened. And the president making a shift. A lot happened.

And Willie, it's interesting we had Senator John Kennedy on it at 9 o'clock yesterday morning. And he said, hey, you know, declare victory. You've got all of these countries calling, talking about negotiating with you. Stay tough on China, but negotiate with those other countries that want to negotiate with you. A couple of hours later, inside the White House, reportedly great concerns about the bond markets as well, but the president did, again, do for the most part what Senator Kennedy was talking about, a pause on reciprocal tariffs against allies and friends and staying tough with China.

Yeah, and talking to people in Washington yesterday and especially here on Wall Street in New York, it was what you said about the bond market, which is that safe haven for the economy. When everything's in turmoil, the world turns to American bonds, it turns to the dollar, and that was beginning to collapse. They were seeing a sell-off there, and they implored the president to at least pause these tariffs for now. Now, he says this was the art of the deal, this was the plan all along. We'll hear from some of his supporters, hosts on Fox News and other places, that he did it. This was what he meant to do from the very beginning. But there were no negotiations with these countries that he said, well I got

brought them to the table. There are no new deals. There are new new tariff deals except for this pause. So we'll dig into the details of it, but the idea that this was the plan all along flies in the face of common sense and of what we all have been hearing about the bond markets in the last 24 hours. It will be interesting to see what happens. You have South Korea, Japan, a lot of other countries wanting to move forward and figure out a deal. We'll see if that happens and we'll see what happens also with the markets today. Asia, strong overnight, but right now the futures for the Dow down a bit. Let's start right there. Stock futures are falling once again this morning despite an historic rally yesterday

sparked by a pause on most of the president's tariffs. A baseline 10% tariff on all trade partners remains in effect this morning, while China's tariffs are now at 125%. Here's how everything played out yesterday around 9.30 a.m. Eastern. The president posted on social media that everyone should be cool and that it was a great time to buy stocks.

Then at around 1.15 in the afternoon, President Trump officially reversed course, posting on social media there would be a 90-day pause. That decision sent the markets soaring. The S&P 500 added more than 9%, its third largest gain in a single day since World War II. While the tech-heavy NASDAQ had its biggest one-day gain since January of 2001 and its second best day on record.

At the White House, the president was asked what led to this reversal. Well, I thought that people were jumping a little bit out of line. They were getting yippy, you know? They were getting a little bit yippy, a little bit afraid, unlike these champions, because we have a big job to do. No other president would have done what to do. No other president would have done what I did. No other president. I know the presidents, they wouldn't have done it and it had to be done. Is it the bond markets that persuaded you to reverse course? No, I was watching the

bond market. The bond market is very tricky. I was watching it but if you look at it now it's beautiful. The bond market right now is beautiful. But yeah, I saw last night where people were getting a little queasy. This was something certainly we've been talking about for a period of time, and we decided to pull the trigger, and we did it today, and we're happy about it.

I didn't know it would have that kind of an impact, but it's, you know, I think you have the biggest increase in the history of the stock market. That's pretty good. That's pretty, you're almost, you know, if you keep going, you're going to be back to where it was four weeks ago. Jim Van Dy, the president, getting ready for Masters weekend by employing that famous golfing term the yips, is what you say about somebody standing over a putt

that doesn't know how to get it in the hole, but said that things were getting a little yippy. That included also, of course, the bond markets, where a real concern, this one, Scott Besson and others went to the president saying, this could go sideways very quickly yeah i mean make no mistake they keep panicked about the first time we've seen him blink in such a

a public way he was get under a lot of pressure from g o p senators a lot of c e o's a lot of investors elon musk people calling him saying listen look not just a bond market look at the regular market look at the bond market, look at the dollar, that a real economic collapse was in the offing. And he saw that and he hit pause. And then you had his entire team come out and say, no, this was like part of the art

of the deal. And I don't think anyone's buying that. Certainly a lot of people internally aren't buying it. They under they did they underestimated the effect that it would have on the markets. And now, yes, the market surged, but if you talk to CEOs, there's still so much unpredictability. You basically replaced the largest,

maybe the largest trade war of generations with another, maybe the second largest trade war, which is us versus China, which might be a bigger deal, and it's now escalated, which still creates a hell of a lot of uncertainty for CEOs and businesses who are trying to plan on do they invest in people, do they invest in buildings? What is their supply chain going to look like? And that uncertainty is going to continue to hover over the economy. And I think that is the pickle that the president is in right now.

Somehow he has to figure out a way to thread that needle where he can get what he wants in terms of getting more fairness and trade between us and most of those nations, but also send a signal to these businesses and to the markets that there's going to be stability, that there's gonna be a new regulatory environment, a new tax environment, and a trade environment

that you can trust enough to make those investments. Yeah, and the stock markets did come roaring back yesterday, John, but not yet even to the point where they were just eight days ago when all this started. So let's talk about how he got to this place. We're seeing, if you go down the list of White House advisors, if you look at the Commerce Secretary, they're all saying this was a brilliant move. This was the art of the deal. The White House spokesperson, they're all citing his book from the 80s.

But what really happened here? Obviously, he was watching the markets tank, telling people to be cool, hang tough, all of those posts before hitting the pause button yesterday. How did he get to that 90-day pause? He blinked. Let's put it clearly. Yeah, I wrote on this for today as well. Taking us behind

the scenes here, this is obviously day's worth of unhappiness. We've seen the markets collapse since his so-called liberation day of last week. He was hearing from Republicans at the end of last week over the weekend, privately concerned, saying, look, this is a problem market situation. We're talking about it. We're seeing 401Ks disappear. We're seeing the stock market vanish. Treasury Secretary Scott Bissett, who was largely out of the mix last week, reasserted himself over the weekend, spent time with Trump on Sunday, made the case, let's make this targeted. Not going to go public with criticisms, not saying do away with tariffs entirely, but

let's be a little smarter about these. And then the president, I am told by people close to him over the last couple of days, saw a bunch of Republican senators on cable news shows. Senator Kennedy, among them yesterday, did some media appearances, including here on Morning Joe, that he saw, saw the concern. And more than anything, it was indeed the bond market. Some of his closest economic advisors saying, this is the difference between potentially a recession and a depression.

And Trump didn't want to own that so I'm told yesterday you know they his team is trying to spin this as a win. You both inside outside the White House is biggest supporter saying this is the art of the deal or look how clever it is that we've isolated China down the road and then and there is certainly an appetite for taking on China although there are going to be repercussions of that as well Joe, but this is this was not the plan. This This was, he had to cave because of these external pressures. There were some dissent within his team

that pushed him there as well. And then they're trying to spin this as a victory when it was really a retreat. You know, Zanny, we were talking yesterday morning when we talked with Senator Kennedy. I'm not talking economics here. I'm just talking pure politics. And when Senator Kennedy and I were talking, I said, you know, much, much easier to justify a trade war against China, a trade war against your biggest nemesis, a trade war that actually CEOs will say

have had unfair trade practices, unfair practices for its valuation. It's interesting, I lined that up for us, if you will. If it's not a multi-front trade war, if it's the United States versus China, obviously that's going to cause some distress in the US markets. At the same time, China, after five years of, I will just say, mishandling his economy, you don't know what great position she's in to have a sustained trade war with the United States right now.

Take us through what that looks like. So I agree with you that politically, this is much easier. You focus the trade war on China. And as you say, China has has not been the best actor in the global economy in the last few years. So this is easier politically. But let's not underestimate economically still what a mess this is. Yes, the broad reciprocal tariffs have been walked back but the 10% across the board tariff is still there and they've

only been walked back for 90 days so there's still an enormous amount of uncertainty for everybody else in the world because there's still this kind of contradiction really at the heart of the president's strategy which is does he want the jobs to come back to the US because if he does the tariffs have, the tariffs have to stay in place. Or is this a negotiation and he's willing to negotiate for much lower tariffs? But vis-a-vis China, which you're right, is now the absolute kind of center of this, I think we have a really big problem, which is we have two strong guys, neither of which wants to back down. And I was in China a couple of weeks ago, and the Chinese have been preparing for this

for years. They may not have expected quite the scale and speed with which this has become a full-on trade war with 125 percent tariffs. But they are ready for this, and they are in no mood right now to back down. And both—so, practically, it's very, very difficult for Xi Jinping to lose face. You know, that's—it face. He cannot lose face. So, for the moment, I think quite how they unwind this becomes hard. Of course, China exports more to the U.S. than vice versa.

So, China is going to be hit harder by the tariffs. But China also has a lot of tools it can use. It needs to move its economy more towards domestic consumption. It's prepared to use those tools. And quite a lot of people I spoke to in Beijing actually saw this as a, it would be tough for China, but it would be an opportunity for China both to improve its economy and also frankly to benefit from this kind of what's perceived as crazy action from the U.S.

You have state-owned media in China this morning calling Donald Trump's tariffs tyranny and saying that they need to fight back against them. Let's bring in the anchor of CNBC's worldwide exchange, Frank Holland. Frank, good morning. So as we said, the markets yesterday, Dow up almost 8%. The S&P up 9.5%. It's biggest gain since the financial crisis of 2008,

but not yet back to the levels where it was just last week. So walk us through the markets, the futures this morning, and also if you can talk a little bit about the bond market. We've been sort of talking shorthand about that and why it persuaded the president to make this 90-day pause. Why is the bond market so critical? Well, good morning, Willie. Why don't we start with the equity market and what a difference a day just makes.

Take a look at futures right now. They're pretty close to their lows in the morning. I'm seeing the S&P down almost 2%, the NASDAQ down more than 2 percent again in the futures market. After that historic rally on Wall Street after the president announced a tariff pause for most countries, the very notable exception, of course, that's China that saw its tariffs increase to 125 percent and China responding with its own retaliatory tariffs. So as you mentioned, the historic rally, Nasdaq's best day since 2001, the S&P since 2008, but we got to keep it all in context. The S&P is still 10% off, it's 52-week high. The NASDAQ 15% off, it's 52-week high. We also call

that correction territory. So this morning, the markets, they're trying to do the math on what the pause really means when it comes to tariffs. We've seen some estimates, sometimes guesstimates, kind of back of the napkin math on what the new tariff rate is. I've seen numbers from 15 to 20%, still historically high. But the recession concerns, they've certainly eased. Goldman Sachs, their economist a couple days ago, they said they saw a 65 percent chance of a U.S. recession in the next 12 months. Now, they've just completely rescinded that call. Now, I want to get to your question about the bond market. The bond market's often called, said it's deeper and smarter than even the stock market. So, we saw yields really rise.

A lot of people call that bond vigilantism. Bond investors responding, selling off bonds over economic concerns or concerns about debt. The president is certainly paying attention to that, according to some of his cabinet members. Treasury Secretary Besson said that. We also heard some of our reporters here at CNBC say that the president was watching the bond market. He thought investors in both the equity and the bond market were getting what he called yippee, using a golf term, when you can't just hit a putt. Those yields rising really puts a lot of pressure on the equity market. It just also is a sign of a loss of investor confidence.

And this morning, there still is some questions about confidence in the equity markets. For example, a lot of questions about the impact of those sector-specific tariffs, especially on autos. This morning, we saw Goldman Sachs and UBS, they cut their price target on Tesla. UBS also downgraded General Motors. Goldman also downgraded Ford. And then we also continue to see concerns about big tech. Yesterday we had a very notable investor, Altimeter Capital's Brad Gerstner, on our air.

He said he spoke with a lot of big tech CEOs who say they feel reassured that they now have a bit of a framework when it comes to the president's tariff plan. However, we heard from a different voice today. Dan Eyes from Wedbush, a very notable, fashionable tech analyst, also a big time bull. He told a very different story. He believes spending on AI is going to pull back anywhere from 10 to 15% based on the uncertainty from tariffs. He also downgraded his view on the biggest tech stock in the market, Microsoft.

He says tariff uncertainty and China tariffs are the main reason. And then we get to the big event today. That's the CPI report. Read on inflation. Estimates are for 2.6% year over year decline from 2.8% a year, a year over year. That could also have an impact on the bond market just to go full circle. Back over to you. CNBC's Frank Holland. Great summary of where we are at this hour this morning. Frank, thanks so much. So guys, again, if you look at the futures, a lot of red on that board this morning. Yes, a bit of a recovery yesterday, not back to where it was a week ago, but a recovery

for sure. Right. Not so much this morning. Well, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said yesterday that President Trump's negotiating strategy was the plan all along. Take a look. And we saw the successful negotiating strategy that President Trump implemented a week ago today.

It has brought more than 75 countries forward to negotiate. It took great courage, great courage for him to stay the course until this moment. And that, you know, you might even say that he go to China into a bad position. They responded. They have shown themselves to the world to be the bad actors. And we are willing to cooperate with our allies and with our trading partners who did not retaliate. It wasn't a hard message. Don't retaliate, things will turn out well.

Scott Bessett looks a lot more comfortable there than he did this weekend when he was talking about, you know, a full blown trade war against everybody. Continuing for a long time. Again, if it's a single front trade war, mostly focused on China, that's a bit front trade war, mostly focused on China, that's a bit easier message to sell economically

and politically. Still tough economically, as we'll see today. But again, just politically, certainly on the Hill, much easier to sell. So Fox business correspondent, Charles Gasparino, argued the abrupt tariff pause was not some sort of strategic calculation by Trump but instead largely motivated by alarming sell-offs happening in the bond market.

I want to tell you right now that Donald Trump outsmarted the world. Trust me, I'm an American, I support my president, but that's not really what happened here from what I understand. And what I understand, and I'm getting this from people that are talking to the White House, what happened in the bond market overnight, the spike in yields on the 30-year and the 10-year bond, which showed that people were dumping our bonds. And who were those people dumping our bonds? Japan, the biggest holder of bonds, was selling bonds.

That's what I'm getting from some very big money managers. China, maybe to some extent, but it was largely Japan and others. If you have a mass sale of bonds, that means people are losing confidence in the U.S. economy on the ability to do deals with us. And from what I understand, this is what forced the hand of this 90-day reprieve. Make no mistake

about it you cannot divorce this decision right here from what happened last night which was you know I people focus on the stock market all the time it's the bond market and the sort of lending markets that's the plumbing of the economy and those markets were imploding last night. And that's why we have a 90-day freeze. So, Zanny, let me read from the Wall Street Journal editorial page on that point. They write this morning that the bond route was scary, with a 10-year yield hitting 4.47 at one point Wednesday, capping the steepest three-day yield climb since 2001.

This was accompanied by a decline in the dollar against a basket of currencies. But can you explain for us again why is it that when the bond market went sideways, that suddenly became a five alarm fire? Because I think that was a very powerful signal that markets—something very, very bad was happening in markets. Markets could seize up the bond. The tenure is like the bedrock of financial markets. It's the ultimate safe asset.

And when the ultimate safe asset is behaving as it was yesterday morning, like a kind of scary emerging market bond, these enormous moves, things can break in the financial system, whether it's, you know, a the financial system, whether it's a big financial institution, whether it's a hedge fund, things can go very badly wrong. And I think—remember, you had me on your show earlier this week, and I said I was going to be watching the markets, because if they seized up, I thought the president might pause. And I think that that's kind of what happened. And frankly, I'm delighted that that's happened.

And I think it's what Secretary Besson has probably been arguing for several days and, you know, eventually since prevailed upon the president, and it prevailed because of what he saw in the markets. It could have got very, very scary when, you know, the most safe asset in the world behaves in that way. And I think we've forestalled a kind of chaotic market meltdown. But let's be clear, this is a moment of relief, but it is not over and the damage has not gone away.

A trade war with China—remember, the U.S.'s main trade—the second biggest economy in the world is still a very big and damaging deal. And there are still big tariffs on other countries. They haven't all gone away. And the uncertainty about what will the outcome of all of these 70-odd negotiations be, I think, will still mean that businesses stay on hold. So, the damage of all of this is real and is going to be lasting. It's not as catastrophic as a financial market collapse would have been, but it's still real

damage. Editor-in-chief of The Economist, Zannie Minton Beddows, thank you so much for coming on this morning. And still ahead on Morning Joe, House Speaker Mike Johnson had to delay a vote on a key budget resolution amid Republican infighting. What it says about the state of the Republican Party as the president urges GOP lawmakers to get it done. Plus, Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar joins us to discuss the bipartisan effort to limit a president's ability to impose tariffs.

And later, award-winning actor John Hamm is our guest. He'll bring us a preview of his brand new show for Apple TV+. Morning Joe is back in 90 seconds. Music Other stories were following a wrongfully detained U.S.-Russian dual national taken into custody in Russia over a year ago is on a plane headed back to the United States. That's according to a social media post

by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Ksenia Karolina was sentenced to 12 years in a penal colony after being found guilty of treason in a Russian court for donating less than $100,000, $100,000. $100. Oh my gosh, less than $100,000. $100,000. $100. Oh, my gosh, less than $100 to a U.S.-based Ukrainian charity. The Wall Street Journal reports she was exchanged for a dual German-Russian citizen arrested in 2023

for allegedly exporting sensitive microelectronics. Secretary Rubio did not mention that detail in his post and NBC News has not independently verified it. And a look at some of the other stories making headlines this morning. FBI Director Kash Patel is no longer serving as the acting chief of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives. According to the AP and other outlets, he's been replaced by Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll. As the New York Times reports,

the unusual move puts a civilian military leader in charge of a domestic law enforcement entity and raises concerns that the ATF's mission could be recalibration away from firearms and investigations and toward immigration enforcement efforts. Cleanup efforts are underway in rural North Dakota where a rupture in the Keystone pipeline caused nearly 150,000 gallons of oil to spill into agricultural land. It's not clear what caused the problem, but a worker was able to shut down the flow within two minutes after hearing a loud bang.

The company is investigating how long repairs and cleanup will take. And the Connecticut Supreme Court has rejected an attempt by Alex Jones to throw out the $1 billion Sandy Hook verdict against him. Two years ago, the conspiracy theorist was ordered to pay defamation charges to the families of a 2012 school shooting that he spent years falsely claiming was fake. The parents of the slain children have testified how they were routinely harassed by Jones's listeners.

And coming up, a new report finds most of the migrants deported to a prison in El Salvador have no criminal record. We're going to dig into that and what it could mean for the Trump administration as it faces a legal battle over its use of the Alien Enemies Act. Beautiful shot. Morning Joe is back in a moment. Beautiful live picture of the White House,

6 31 in the morning. The Trump administration has described men deported to that prison in El Salvador as quote the worst of the worst, suggested they were gang members involved in various crimes. But new reporting from CBS News 60 Minutes found three quarters of the Venezuelan migrants flown to the prison there three weeks ago have no apparent criminal record. Data shows 22 percent of those prisoners have records in the United States, but the crimes are for non-violent offenses like theft, shoplifting, and trespassing. A dozen are accused of murder, rape, assault, or kidnapping. The migrants were removed after President Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 last month to accelerate

mass deportations of Venezuelan migrants suspected of being gang members. Again, that reporting from 60 Minutes. Joining us now, NBC News Senior Homeland Security correspondent Julia Ainsley and NBC News National Security Editor David Rhoade. MSNBC contributor Mike Barnacle joins the conversation as well. Good morning to you all. Julia, let me start with you on this 60 minutes reporting. Obviously there have been questions about due process as these men were scooped up and brought to El Salvador. What more are you hearing about the 60

minutes story? Well, you know, this is a question that we've been asking the administration and DHS in particular since this flight first left on March 15th. In court, a lawyer argued to a judge that just because they didn't have a criminal record didn't mean they might not commit a crime in the future because they had a connection to this gang. Of course, that's problematic in front of a judge, but they did not have to present evidence, any criminal evidence in a court in order to deport these people.

When we went to DHS to ask about their criminal records, and especially this report just that you're referencing from 60 Minutes, they said, well, they still were human rights abusers. There were other ways they used to describe these people. What they're getting at, Willie, is that they think that just because they don't have a criminal record, their tie to this gang, Trane de Aragua, is enough. But not only have they not had to establish a tie to that gang, they don't show any evidence that their ties have led to any kind of violence. And so that's what the Supreme Court said this week, is that even though they've now

lifted this ban that kept them from putting more people in El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act, they said that people now need to have a reasonable amount of time in order to protest whether or not they're part of this class. And in order to be part of that group, the government would have to show that they're part of Trinidad or Agua. So now it's a matter of seeing what evidence they bring going forward.

But for these people who are already there, and as you mentioned, so many of them don't have evidence of ever having committed crimes, it's really unclear. And the Supreme Court left it an open question, what they can actually do to protest their detention and to ever be released. Yeah, David, as we've been talking about on this show for a long time now, most Americans would agree that if there is a violent offender who is in this country illegally, they ought

to be deported. But there is a process to determine that, something that's not been undertaken by this administration in putting this group of men, now 60 minutes, as three quarters of whom have no apparent criminal record to that notorious prison in El Salvador. Yeah, the administration is taking advantage of the fact that these are foreigners. They don't get to see a judge. It's a very basic American ideal. And so there are definitely a dozen or so who are very serious offenders, but that's a problem. It's almost they could commit crimes, as Julia noted, that's almost future crime, if you can think, remember the movie. And then again, a great piece that Julia ran last week. The administration, you know, they talked about vetting these people the worst of the

worst. The administration also sent eight women down to El Salvador. That prison in El Salvador doesn't take women. And so it was unclear what ties those women had. We spoke, Julia spoke to two of them and they said they weren't tied to TDA. So there's just a question about the vetting and how fast this is all happening. Julia, I want to get to some of your exclusive reporting up this morning on NBCNews.com, titled Inside the DHS Task Force, Scouring

Foreign Students' Social Media. This is reporting very chilling to a lot of people. What exactly is DHS doing and who are they targeting? Who are they screening here? Well, there's a new task force that's been just recently stood up with Inside DHS, and what they're doing is they're going through all of the social media of the foreign students in the United States. And there's over 1.5 million

who are on foreign student visas at this moment. And we understand that they're using tools that were designed by these two groups under CBP, the National Targeting Center and the National Vetting Center, that previously, especially they were ramped up under the Biden administration, to be able to scrub social media for anyone who might be a U.S.-bound

traveler or immigrant to see if they might have a terror tie. It was supposed to be specifically screening for any kind of national security threat. But now they're using those same tools to look through and see if they may have posed anything that they might deem anti-Semitic. Where they draw the line, if it's simply something that's pro-Palestinian, is unclear. But they announced yesterday that USCIS, the agency that's responsible for putting out these visas and for revoking them, is going to be looking at anything that could be deemed as anti-Semitic as grounds to revoke a visa or to deny immigration benefits. So as we understand it, this team gets together,

they review everything with this software, they then would flag it to USCIS, take it to the State Department. I know this is all very bureaucratic, but then they tell ICE that the visa has been revoked and they go and arrest that person. The reason that bureaucratic process matters is that I'm hearing from sources that previously

a lot of this investigative work would have been done in the field and so that more than 30 ICE field offices and HSI Homeland Security investigation field offices would be able to do the work themselves. If they had a problem with someone in their community they could do that. The people on the ground making these arrests would know why someone's visa had been revoked, would know why they were making this arrest. Now they're feeling like these are decisions being made in an ivory tower and the men on the ground who we've seen arresting students may not actually have the answers about why this is being done. And so there's some concern there from the people who are having to execute these arrests

that they're not getting all of the information. And we understand this task force wants to be very dogged and to try to make this net as wide as possible to go out and revoke these students' visas. One more thing I'll say, Willie, is that there's a man now who's the chief of staff of ICE, John Furey. And if you look back at what he wrote for the Center for Immigration Studies before he came into this job, there were dozens of posts, really, that talked about problems with the student exchange visitor

program and how he really wanted to look at issues of fraud in that program. And so this seems to be a continuation of really that bugaboo for him to try to focus specifically on foreign students, Willie. So Julia, according to your very alarming reporting, is this not a definition of the death of due process? Well, yes. I mean, when you're looking at what's happening to people going to El Salvador, that was exactly what they got around.

The Alien Enemies Act, they said, was a way to get around due process. But as a circuit court judge asked the administration just recently, could you deport me to El Salvador? If you're not giving due process, not only does that mean that immigrants aren't able to show in court why they may not be a member of this gang or why they might not be eligible for deportation, but that would mean you could even put an American citizen on a plane

before they have a chance to show that they're legally able to be in the United States. And then when it comes to these students as well, they do have a right to free speech. That's part of the visas that bring them here. They do have those constitutional protections. And so without the right to also argue about why they shouldn't be deported, that is difficult. Although one thing I will say on that, that there was an immigration judge just this week in the case of the Columbia student, Mahmoud Khalil, who said that the government needs to present evidence about why they want to deport this man, and if not, he needs to be released. So these are all the threads

we're watching to see what judges at any level, even an immigration court, are going to stand up to the administration and say, this isn't the way things have been done and you need to show some evidence here. 1.5 million foreign students having their social media accounts scoured now by DHS. NBC News senior Homeland Security correspondent, Julia Ainsley, her new reporting at NBCNews.com. Julia, thanks so much as always.

David, you're following the move by President Trump now to open investigations into the former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, Chris Krebs, as well as Miles Taylor, the once anonymous author of a 2018 article in the New York Times describing the effort inside Trump's first administration to frustrate his agenda. So Chris Krebs, one of the most respected guys, not only in cybersecurity, but in Washington, appointed by the first Trump administration, famously came out, his organization came out

and said that the 2020 election was secure, that there wasn't fraud, nobody's tampering with the voting machines that offended Donald Trump, and now he's going after him. How? Well, we've crossed a new line here. This is in a memorandum from the president ordering the attorney general to criminally investigate two people who defied the president. And that's what sort of struck me and my colleagues in the national security team about how unusual this is. In the past, since Watergate, since Richard Nixon abused the Justice Department, the department tried to be independent and the president wasn't supposed to be saying, investigate this person because I don't like them.

There's supposed to be a process where there's evidence and clear evidence of wrongdoing. That's not true here. Again, Miles Taylor, Chris Krebs defied him. Krebs, his key role was in 2020 repeatedly saying the election was not stolen. All this talk of dominion voting machines, he said, he was the head of the top cybersecurity agency, said that's just not true. And Miles Taylor was anonymous. The story talks about resistance, but what it was about was Trump's advisors pushing

back on policies that they think wouldn't turn out well, foreign policy in particular. And that is, again, now that's another criminal investigation. And when President Trump announced this yesterday, signing the executive orders in the Oval Office, he again focused on the idea that he believes he won the 2020 election, which of course is simply not true. That is a lie. So Jim Van De Hei, I mean, David Root is right. This crosses a line.

This is pure retribution. This is what Donald Trump said he, on the campaign trail, said he would do. But this is sort of scary and dangerous, the idea that the way he's targeting people like this, ordering up investigations, setting off alarm bells, to be sure, on the left. And you'd like to think that some Republicans would also

be very queasy about this. This is an important story. Lost in the stock market, moves in the bond market, the tariffs, all that, but it's worth focusing on. Talk to us a little bit about what you anticipate reaction could be from both parties on something that frankly is a new frontier for this president and his retribution campaign. Yeah, I think you guys described it perfectly. I can't think of another time in history where someone's used an executive order to then

order the Justice Department to go after your political enemies. And it gets lost because people are worried about the stock market, thinking about the tariff debate that we spent the first half of the show talking about. Remember, this isn't isolated either. The day that the president did the tariffs, Laura Loamer went into the White House and convinced the president to fire some of the most accomplished people on the National Security Council. And that didn't get that much coverage.

And yet you're talking about people with vast expertise in cybersecurity, which is arguably the biggest vulnerability as a country that we have that requires extreme expertise. And so those two things just show that he continues to go after people that he considers his political enemies just because they don't share his ideology. Putting that on top of competence and just the type of people you need in government, it's very hard to get the American people to pay attention to it because there's so much that's being hit with them, but it's good that you guys did the segment.

It's good that people are paying attention to it because you're setting a precedent that you hope others won't follow, but others could, and it has real ramifications. David, thinking about Krebs and Taylor, but Krebs in particular, his criticisms, if you can even call them criticisms, they were just presentation of facts, were neither political nor personal about Donald Trump. He just came out and said, my job was to look at the security of the elections in 2020. They were secure. There was not widespread fraud.

The voting machines were not tampered with. So what would be theoretically the charge here from the Justice Department? I don't know. And the point could be simply the criminal investigation and intimidating people who oppose the president. And I just want to back up and what Julie was talking about earlier. This is all about the concentration of power, incredible power in the presidency. Are the courts going to challenge the president and he's deporting these people on his own?

Will Congress counter the president as he takes these sweeping actions? Again, it's a basic principle of American democracy. As a journalist, I want three strong branches of governments that compete with each other. I want transparency. I want them all to leak to me. But that is what we are seeing here is unprecedented concentration of power in the president and Trump is using it. And even if there isn't a being a charge, it's its legal fees, it's bogging down, it's intimidation.

When people warned Joe, when people warned if President Trump, you took office and promised this campaign of retribution, this is exactly what they were warning about, whether it be people who used to work for him, political foes, journalists, activists, whatever it might be. We're seeing it play out right here. Whether it's going to be criminally or civilly or just opening investigations or the possibility of investigations. That's what everybody warned about for quite some time and also some people that are actually in the administration said they were going to actually do. David, I wanted to get your response and Jim Van Dyke, yours as well. Two, you talked about three separate branches.

I, many stories that I think have been covered, sort of not covered up, but have distracted some from things that happened because of the markets, things that happened this week. I think one of them we talked about a couple of days ago was the Supreme Court rulings and lost in the body of a lot of the stories below screaming headlines was the fact that all nine justices on the Supreme Court, you're talking about checks and balances, said when it comes to deporting immigrants, they first need to be given

notice and then they have to come before the court and get due process. Now if that had been five to four that would have been one thing and that you know you could have said well the court might move in one direction here another another but I've talked to quite a few people who think that it's one of the You could have said, well, the court might move in one direction here or another. But I've talked to quite a few people who think that it's one of the more significant rulings this court has had in the body, actually, in the body of it, of the opinion that all nine justices say, no, no, no, you can't scoop people up off the street, fly them to wherever you want to fly them out of our jurisdiction.

You have to first give them notice and then you have to let them come before the court and get due process. What are your thoughts about that? And is that the Supreme Court saying what you just said? There are three separate and equal branches. It is. And you're absolutely right. And that's, again, this basic principle that if you're a foreigner, and obviously if you're

an American citizen, you have a right to go before a judge and plead your case. And that's so core, I think, to our constitutional democracy. And so I think there is a looming conflict coming. I think these were technical rulings. They didn't...not the right to venue and not under habeas, so to speak. So it will be fascinating to see what happens. It seems like Roberts is sort of trying to buy time here and doesn't want a direct confrontation. And the real concern is that, again, the Supreme Court rules against Trump and he defies the

ruling. That's when you're in a massive and unprecedented, I'm sorry, constitutional crisis. And so we will see. But it was a positive step forward that yes, all nine justices are saying in the United States, foreigner or not, you have a right to see a judge. NBC News national security editor David Rode, thank you very much for coming on this morning and still ahead on Morning Joe, Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar will join us after the Senate passed her bipartisan bill to end tariffs on Canadian imports.

She'll also weigh in on how the trade war is impacting farmers in her state. Plus, we'll speak with an economics professor and former Biden Treasury official who's out with a new piece entitled, the Trump White House cited my research to justify tariffs. It got it all wrong. He'll explain that. Also ahead, Emmy winning actor John Hamm will be live in studio with a look at his Apple TV Plus series, Your Friends and Neighbors. Morning Joe will we'll be right

back. Great read, great touch by the four-year-old daughter of Rory McElroy. That is Poppy sinking a long putt yesterday during the annual par three contest at Augusta. That's one where you say you just have to breathe on it. It's a downhill putt. She read it perfectly. Gets a hug from her big sister and her dad. Way to go, Poppy.

Very nice. Wow. He goes a little loud for her. She's like, ah. The world's best golfers about to tee off just a few minutes from now at Augusta National for the opening round of the Masters. Coming up on two years as the number one player

in the world, defending champion Scotty Scheffler, the betting favorite to capture the first major of the year. It'd be his third in four years. He would join the great Jack Nicklaus as the only players to win three in a 4 year span meanwhile Rory McElroy you saw there ranked second in the world enters his 17th Masters now with 2 PGA wins this season including at last month's players championship. He is seeking

his first major title in over a decade and famously the one major that has alluded worry. Is the Masters he tied for second a couple of years ago he finished second a couple years ago would be nice to see him cap it off this week boys entering strong he's won a couple U.S. competitions in recent months. It does as you note the large for him is the albatross he has not yet been able to cross. But he's certainly one of the favorites

guys shuffle the hard to go against him. Mike it is also just it is one of the favorites. Sky Shuffler though, hard to go against him. Mike, it is also just, it is one of the rites of spring. You and I, I know, are particularly partial to opening day, but the Masters here. Oh, it is. It's April. It is. This is something that's, it's a wonderful,

wonderful moment of the sports calendar. It's a spectacle. I mean, the beauty of Augusta, the time of the season, it is an awakening, a real awakening for everybody living north of Baltimore, I would indicate from the weather around here. But on Rory McElroy, I would personally love to see him win the Masters title.

And it doesn't matter that he won two weeks ago on another PGA title, another PGA tournament. The Masters has been the great white whale for Rory McIlroy. And it would be great to see him win that. No? You're shaking your head? No, no. I was not shaking my head again. Yeah, yeah.

You know, Willie, when asked, Rory McIlroy said, approaching this tournament, well, it's just another tournament. It's not just another tournament. No. Come on. And he knows it's just not another tournament especially for him I think a lot of people are gonna be cheering for him this weekend but I will tell you a guy who plays this like it is just another tournament because he can have a good round and he can have a bad round and Scottie Scheffler still Scottie Scheffler you know a, a great pitching coach once told one of his players, he said, I want to be

able to drive up in like in the fourth or the fifth inning and look at you as I get out of my car and not be able to tell whether you're ahead five to nothing or down five to nothing, right? And that's Scottie Schaeffler. That's the magic of that guy he just goes out there man and and and he is never overwhelmed by the circumstances on the golf course. You know the heart rate stays the same at all times. He is enjoy to watch his swing is a little bit unorthodox his

footwork is not how you would teach somebody but my gosh he is so consistent so steady such a great player and this is just such a fun tournament a beautiful setting should be great and by the way that honorary first tee shot will go off about 25 minutes from now with the great Jack Nicklaus Gary player and Tom Watson

starting the tour a short time from now coming up.