Morning Joe - Morning Joe 4/22/25

Episode Date: April 22, 2025

Pete Hegseth shared information ahead of Yemen strikes in a Signal chat with wife and brother

Why do you even ask a question like that? We have recruitments at all time high, the spirit and the armed forces. It's fantastic. Great confidence. All right, President, once again, publicly supporting Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth following yet another signal chat scandal. It comes amid a report the White House is already looking for his replacement. Meanwhile, the president continues to criticize

federal Fed Reserve Chair Jerome Powell demanding interest rates to be lowered. CNBC's Tom Chu will join us with insight on how those comments are impacting the markets this morning. Also ahead, we'll have President Trump's response to the Supreme Court blocking deportations through the Alien Enemies Act. We'll also provide some context on due process for migrants. And we'll bring you the latest out of Vatican City on the funeral services for Pope Francis. Yeah. So much to get to. And we'll bring you the latest out of Vatican City on the funeral services for Pope Francis. Yeah, so much to get to.

And it's going to be interesting. We've been talking about due process, what happened under the Obama administration. Right. And under the Obama administration, obviously, there were a lot of deportees without full due process. Under the courts, ACLU complained about that back in 2014. They weren't trying to use the Aliens Enemies Act. But we will provide some context there.

Also there's a line that Mika just said right there, reports that they're already looking for Hegseth's replacement. We've heard time and again that maybe they're looking at DeSantis, they were looking at DeSantis from time to time. I don't know if that's the case, and I'm sure the White House will deny it, but I'm just curious what your reporting shows, because obviously, you know, the president, the president, as you have reported and others have reported, not happy that he thought he had a two-month winning streak that Hegseth's

sloppiness sort of snapped. This signal gate deal broke through with the White House, and Donald Trump wasn't happy. The first time, sure he wasn't happy yesterday that he's sending this to his wife and brother and lawyer. Yeah, they felt like they were on a two-month run when then the first signal gate snafu occurred. Since then, they've been teetering a bit because of the fallout to the president's tariff policies. And as I reported this morning, in the last week, the White House was sort of giving explicit

instructions to talk about other issues, namely immigration, namely deportations. They think just reporting what they think. They think that's a winner and now derailed again by this latest signal gate issue and yes the president publicly we already played some comments publicly supporting hegg set the white house vociferously publicly pushing back against the idea that hegg seth could be ousted soon but as i've reported others there has been some conversations more on the outer edges of the trump orbit right about starting to cast about for names who could fill in work. I mean, these are just distractions that the White House just doesn't need, that the DOD just doesn't need.

It's just, and again, signal. Again, it's one thing when you're trying to point to Mike Walz for adding somebody. But when he has his own sort of side bro council with wife saying, hey, you know, it's like that scene where Martin Sheen at the end of the dead zone in the movie goes, gentlemen, the missiles are flying. I mean, he starts his with operations are underway. I mean, he starts his with operations are underway. No, no, no. I mean, everybody in the military knows, including if you go back and see what Hegseth said about Hillary Clinton and classified documentations,

this, he would be the first person on TV going crazy against any Democrat if they had done the same thing. Yeah, and this is single chat that he started. His wife's in it, his brother's in it, his personal attorney is in it. Why? You know, sharing details. Some of them employed by the DOD, but not in roles that would require them to know the

intricacies of strikes against the Houthis. His wife, of course, has no DOD role at all. But this comes also at a time where some of his most senior advisors were ousted from the Pentagon. Some of them escorted from the building last week as part of an ongoing and somewhat mysterious classified leak information probe. So there's just a lot of questions in the White House

about just the chaos right now at the Pentagon. Yeah, Willie, obviously, feel free to tug at whatever you want to talk about, but this is going to be a hard turn from the Pentagon to Nashville Cats. You were in Nashville, saw some pictures. That looked amazing. Oh, yeah. Yeah, I was in Nashville last week for a Michael J. Fox Foundation event called A Country

Thing. Chris Stapleton played, Little Big Town played, Kimberly Schlappman of Little Big Town's mother has Parkinson's, so she and I have connected on that. My dad has Parkinson's as well. So it was, it's always good to be in Nashville. But for an event like that to raise that kind of money, Michael was there. He made the trip down to Nashville. And of the cool moments of the night, there were many. The coolest was Stapleton for his last song said, I've never played this on stage, but let's try it. Breaks into Johnny B. Good. Marty McFly jumps up in his box and starts dancing.

It was chills. It was incredible. That is awesome. It turns out Stapleton, even though he'd never played it before, was pretty good at playing Johnny B. Good. Yeah. He had that in his arsenal. So yeah, it was a great trip for a great cause.

But as we talk about this story with the Hegseth signal chat, the second one now, let's bring in NBC News Senior National Security Correspondent Courtney Kuby. Courtney, good morning. What's the latest, the details first of all of what Hegseth actually did here? Who he included in this group, what he shared, and is there pressure, if not from the president, but internally at the Pentagon for something to change here? Yeah. I mean, I have to say, first off, it's really difficult to follow a conversation where you

talk about Marty McFly and then talk about Signalgate 2.0. Yeah. That's on this. That's on this. Yeah. So, yeah. Look, the reality is, as Jonathan was mentioning here, this is a whole nother story from what we all were talking about several weeks ago with the chat that was, that was reported on by

the Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg. He was mistakenly added to why this is so much more important right now and why this is really turning a lot more heads. Even then the first signal chat is the fact that secretary Hedgeseth himself created this chat and as you mentioned, he added some of his family members into it. The reality is there is no reason that any of these individuals who have been identified, his wife, his brother, his attorney, his personal attorney would have any need to know about strikes and attack plans against the Houthi rebels. Candidly,

there are people in the Pentagon who are saying, look, it just looks like he was bragging about what they were doing. And it came with the possibility of endangering the lives of the men and women who are flying those manned aircraft into a dangerous environment, an area that the Houthis have shown they can contest. They can contest the airspace. And there were men and women, hundreds of them on ships afloat, not far in the initial salvo. Remember, the US military launched strikes from those ships, not only

aircraft. So the fact that he, the secretary himself is the one who created this signal chat is why this is causing so much buzz around the Pentagon. And it's for the reason that the secretary of defense is supposed to be the model for the young men and women in the military who are supposed to follow his behavior. I was out on an aircraft carrier a little over a year ago when they were doing strikes against the Houthis. And just to give you a sense of how sensitive they are about the information about these strikes, about three or four days before the strikes began against the Houthis office aircraft carrier, the entire carrier, the entire ship goes into this mode.

I won't say the name of it, but they, they go into this mode where essentially no one is allowed to communicate with the outside. They cut off all their communications. You can't send a text home to mom and dad. You can't send an email to your wife or your husband back home. And that is because just the possibility that someone were to send a piece of information that could in any way endanger the mission is such a high priority to ensure that the information is maintained, that they don't let those sailors communicate back home.

So the fact that now we have this fantastic reporting out of the New York, initially by the New York Times and matched by a number of other agencies, that's why this is getting so much attention. And as Jonathan mentioned, it also comes amidst this just utter chaos at the top, at the Pentagon right now, with a leak investigation that was announced by the chief of staff, Joe Casper, several weeks ago. And the first three people who were identified and actually escorted out of the building,

two of them are extremely close to Secretary Hegseth, people he's known for years, worked with for years, they were in his inner circle. They were escorted out of the building and now they're all talking about how they have no idea why they were even fired. So it's a level of uncertainty in the Pentagon that in my 20 years there, I've never seen

anything like it, Willie. All right. NBC's Courtney Kubi reporting for us from the Pentagon this morning. Courtney, thanks so much. Joe, you mentioned anyone who works in intelligence, works in the Defense Department. Frankly, the layman viewer watching the show knows you don't put classified information into a public space like that. Also, the senators who've jumped out, Republican senators, raced out to defend Pete Hegseth again on this round.

How embarrassing. They all know better. And they were first in line on Hillary Clinton's private server. I mean, how embarrassing for these GOP senators. They know so much better about it. And again, I would say Pete Hegseth knows better. That's what's so surprising is somebody that fought in combat, that somebody who understood the importance of... I mean, again, there are clips out there of him going after Hillary Clinton and the need

to protect classified material. This is not... Listen, this is just not a close call. And make, of course, the Wall Street Journal editorial page rightly concerned about this. And they write an editorial today saying Pete Hegseth is proving all of his critics right. He can blame it on the media if he wants to, but this is all his own fault, and all he's doing is proving people like Mitch McConnell and others who said he wasn't ready for this

job, he wasn't up to this job yet, proving them right. Yeah, the Wall Street Journal editorial board writing what they call the Hegseth Pentagon Chronicles, reading in part, quote, No doubt the Beltway Press would love to knock Pete Hegseth out as defense secretary, but that doesn't come close to explaining the mess at the Pentagon. The staff in fighting, dismiss dismissals and leaks over signal app chats look to be the self-inflicted mistakes of a management neophyte. As GOP Senator Mitch McConnell warned in voting against Mr. Hexseth's confirmation, the

desire to be a change agent isn't a sufficient credential to run the giant Pentagon bureaucracy. Mr. Hex has calling cards enforcing high standards and accountability at every military level. He's relieved several general officers to make his point, sometimes firing indiscriminately without checking his scope. Is the secretary accountable himself? Let's bring in Roger's chair and the American presidency at Vanderbilt University historian John Meacham. And John, again, this is unthinkable for any secretary of defense to do.

It's unthinkable that it happened at once. Unthinkable, just unthinkable that somebody would start their own chat and let civilians in on a pending strike and the Wall Street Journal editorial page, well, they ask a question that answers itself. Let me ask you, can you imagine Bob Gates talking about a military strike on an app with friends and family. You can fill in Bob Gates with any other sec-deaf that has held that position over the past 100 years.

It just doesn't happen. Well, I knew you wanted me to speak this morning about Henry Knox, the first secretary of the war. Yes, of course. There he is. Bing, bing, bing. I thought that was...

Again, if it's around the horn, we would give him as many points as we gave Pablo for saying parabas on Good Friday. Go ahead, John. So from Henry Knox to George Marshall to Bob Gates. No, I think Senator McConnell, I think the Journal's right to go park and back to that. Senator McConnell's vote was the right one. These things feel as if, and I'm not in any way making light of it because these are military operations, these are soldiers' lives that are at stake, but it feels as if it's a fellow who got a really

exciting new job and wants to talk about it. He seems very, you know, sort of hyped up about acronyms and terms, you know, this is Tom Clancy come to power. And, you know, it's not where it seems to me, the defenses of the country wanna be. One of the things about Washington stories like this, as we know, is the ones that genuinely have impact are the specific that shed light on a universal, right? So this is one where the specific that shed light on a universal, right? So this is one where the specific is, here's an unconventional figure doing a job for which, again, as some United States senator said,

he is probably not has the exact right preparation for, and it's a sign that perhaps the President Trump's view that disruption should be the central value in this second term is something that, guess what, might not be the best idea. Well, I mean, there are places for disruption, but as we've said on this show every single day, the Pentagon is not one of them. It's one of the most complicated, complex bureaucracies in the world. And speaking of Bob Gates, as we said time and time again, Bob Gates said he spent 75% of his time just trying to stay ahead of the game at the Pentagon.

It wasn't until the last maybe couple of hours at the Pentagon that he actually could get to his agenda. It is extraordinarily difficult as a job, and you don't put a neophyte in there, especially one that seems so swept up by excitement that he, again, says, the F-16s are launching now. I mean, again, it's just hard to believe. John, before we let you go, obviously, we have here's the New York Times groundbreaking pope reshaped the church, the Wall Street Journal, the pope talks about the pope of

firsts reshaping the church, you have the Daily News, and then the New York Post, simply Pope Francis. Talk about the pope and his role not just in the Catholic Church, but also in global Christianity. Well, I think one of the ways to think about the papacy and sort of broad popular political culture, certainly in the last 60, 70, even 80 years, is that they, significant pontiffs have often reflected either a large spirit of the time or embodied the counterintuitive, countervailing spirit. And I think about John Paul II, whose remarkable anti-communism was in many ways in tune with what President Reagan and Prime Minister Thatcher were doing in other parts of the West. Pope Francis is

a little different in that as the world watches over the next six days, seven days, going into what will be a remarkable funeral on Saturday, Pope Francis didn't so much reflect the spirit of the times as gently and lovingly rebuke it. as gently and lovingly rebuke it. He was the embodiment of not what was unfolding, but what should be unfolding. And I think that there's no, you know, we all judge not lest you be judged. I'm not casting any aspersions as somebody who fails

six times before I turn on the coffee maker in life, you know, this is just an observation. There will be a stark contrast and it will be lost on no one when the legacy of a man who devoted himself to the gospel of Jesus Christ, particularly the essence of the Sermon on the Mount, the words in the Last Supper, the first shall be last, the last shall be first, love thy neighbor as I have loved you, and the powers of the world who will come to commemorate him. They will want to be seen in the Basilica. They will want to be seen as ennobled by this pageantry. But

I just hope they understand that these are not, it's not just about the images of their attending the funeral. It's about whether they heed the words that Francis lived by. So John, as you mentioned, the funeral will be in the early morning hours Eastern time on Saturday morning. There's already a public debate and certainly a private debate that will be carried out among the cardinals from around the world as they lock themselves in the Sistine Chapel and we all wait for the white smoke about what kind of pope should come next, which is that this pope was a departure from the previous two, Les Doctrine Air, famously said,

who am I to judge about LBGT members who wanted to join the church? What do you suspect may happen next here? Will this next choice be a reaction to Pope Francis or a continuation of him? To judge the politics of the Roman Catholic Curia, we can barely judge America. So I'm gonna be very careful. I do think that there's a lot of talk among Roman Catholics whom I know and love about, and love about once again going outside Western Europe. Would there be a way to elect a pope from the more developing world who is also conservative? That's a very important base for Orthodox Catholicism and really orthodox religion, period. And so it would not be surprising to see a pope who might not look like any other pope, but who is very

much rooted in the traditions and the traditional theology of the church. All right, historian John Meacham, thank you so very much. You will be in our thoughts and prayers for those minutes before you go get your coffee and stumble around at least six or seven times. It's pretty good. That's... Thank you.

Thank you. Take care. Thank you, John. Giving me a run for my money. It's very interesting for people that don't follow the church or theology closely. Jonathan O'Meara, I know you study it all the time. But it's true actually of the Catholic Church, it's also true of the Anglican Church, that often the most conservative

members are in the developing world or in the South. So if somebody sees that a pope of color, for instance, is going to be the pope, and they're going, oh, yay, it's going to...they're going to carry on the liberalizing tradition of Pope Francis. Of course, it will differ from cardinal to cardinal. But actually, again, in the Anglican Church and in the Protestant Church and the Catholic Church, actually some of the most conservative theology is practiced in the South, Southern Hemisphere. Where the church is newer and perhaps more growing and adhering more to the sort of traditional doctrine.

And that had been when Pope Francis first grew ill a few weeks ago, but did have some conversations with people speculating who the next pope might be. And what John Meacham just said there was sort of the consensus and we should of course know that we don't know what's going to happen in the Sistine Chapel until the smoke comes out of that chimney. But there is a sense it wouldn't be a surprise if let's say it's a more centrist or moderate pope from Africa, perhaps the first time that would be the case. Or Asia, there's never been an Asian pope or an African pope in the Catholic Church's tradition.

Of course, Pope Francis I from Latin America. So there is a sense that that could be a nod towards still change, but perhaps a step back from Francis' more progressive ideas. All right, still ahead on Morning Joe, President Trump ramps up his attacks against Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. We'll go live to CNBC for an early look at how markets are reacting to the president's

call to cut interest rates. Plus, we'll have the latest on the deportation or forced removal case against Kilmar Abrego Garcia as four Democratic lawmakers visit El Salvador to advocate for his release from prison. You're watching Morning Joe, we're back in 90 seconds. All right, I was gonna to ask about Conclave. I think everybody here has watched it. I think it's going to be time to watch it again. Yeah, we need a rewatch.

It is really amazing. A team rewatch in preparation for this real-life Conclave. Best movie I saw last year. Yeah. Best movie? Yeah. I mean, I only saw like three. But no, it was fantastic.

And we were talking here at the break. The acting terrific. Oh my gosh. Every single one. Let's terrific. Oh my gosh. Every single. Let's go, it's amazing. Very fine. Stanley Tucci.

Isabella Rossellini. Oh my God, they were great. All right, time now to take a look at some of the other stories making headlines this morning at 25 past the hour. The price of gold has hit a new record high of $3,500 an ounce. Is that good?

It comes in response to President Trump's trade wars. As the New York Times points out, gold is often a safe haven for investors during times of market turmoil. And its price has surged more than 30% since the start of the year. You know, Willie, there are a lot of people that can be accused of, you know, doing like what Zuckerberg has

done and getting nervous. And of course, law firms that have capitulated and have folded to the president. I will tell you, there is one institution you cannot say that about. It's a Wall Street Journal editorial. Now, they're right. Every day. And they're not doing it from some left. They're doing it from a very conservative, Mr. President,

please don't threaten the Fed chair. You're going to cause a market rout. Please don't be careful about the bond market. But nobody can say that during these times that the Wall Street Journal editorial page tried to do the old Homer Simpson and hide in the bush. Every day in every way. Here's part of what they're writing, the Wall Street Journal writing, the fire Jerome Powell market route.

It reads, if the White House wanted a test of how firing Jerome Powell would go over in the markets, it succeeded on Monday. U.S. stocks and the dollar plunged while yields on long-term treasuries climbed after President Trump renewed his attacks on the Federal Reserve chairman. Markets now, they know that tariffs are taxes and taxes are anti-growth. The Trump tariffs are the biggest economic policy mistake in decades, and extending the 2017 tax reform and deregulation may not compensate for all the damage. Smart presidents pay attention to market signals and adapt, writes the Journal.

The adaptation now would be to negotiate a quick end to the tariff barrage, claim some trade deal victories and call it a day. But markets are spooked because they don't know if Mr. Trump listens to anyone but his own impulses. It's a good time to bring in CNBC senior markets correspondent, Dom Chiu. Dom, good to see you this morning. Also from the journal on the news side, this headline this morning, Dow headed for worst April since the Great Depression.

What is this all about? So basically what we have is a situation where over the course of the last several weeks, there's been an evolving narrative, if you will, right? We talked about this notion that with new policies, especially on the tariff front, what you have is a new degree of uncertainty brought to global markets, global trade,

that then manifests itself in the way that markets have reacted with some of that downside volatility. Now I remember over the course of the last few weeks having this conversation kind of around the lead up to that so-called liberation day and the tariff announcement about the stabilization factor of the US market and the US economy. Over the course of the last several decades, the American economy and the markets, the capital markets, have been seen as a stabilizing force within the global economy and the global market, one that you can turn to no matter what, in good times and in bad. That narrative

has shifted a little bit more. It started off a little bit more along the lines of, can you still trust the U.S. dollar? Now, the U.S. dollar is the preeminent and the world's really only reserve currency out there. It's the one that you go to because pretty much every asset out there worth having is denominated in US dollars. The US treasury market is the deepest most liquid sovereign bond market in the world. It is the safest place to be. In the course of the last few weeks there has been a little bit of chatter early on about the luster coming off some of those assets, the U.S. dollar and the U.S. Treasury side of things. Over the course of the last couple of weeks, there

is now a full blown debate in certain parts of Wall Street about whether or not there is a market shine coming off the value of the U.S the US treasury market. In no way is anybody out there saying that the US dollar is still not a reserve currency. There is in no way anybody saying that the US treasury market is not the place that you want to be. But when you have a possible paradigm shift, a change in thinking about the way that the dollar is valued and viewed in the global market, the way that our sovereign bonds, the US dollar is valued and viewed in the global market, the way that our sovereign bonds, the U.S. Treasury market, is viewed in the market, that shift

or potential shift is enough to have traders and investors, not just here in America, but around the world, questioning whether or not you have to change the way that you think about it. Now, to be fair, Treasury Secretary Scott Besson, like every other Treasury Secretary before him, has proclaimed the notion of a strong U.S. dollar and of course the idea that the U.S. capital markets are the deepest, most liquid in the world.

The question now becomes, guys, whether or not that incremental effect of not just the tariff and trade policy, but now the attacks on the central bank and its independence and its leader are making those assets, again, relatively less attractive. They are still the most attractive out there, but in a term of relative less luster, could that change the way that people think about the way that U.S. markets operate? That's what you're kind of seeing play out right now.

All right. CNBC's Dom Chiu, thank you so much. Greatly appreciate it. And I love how Dom pointed out that we're still obviously still where the people have gone, will continue to go most likely. And all of this depends on what Donald Trump decides he wants to do. I think that's what's rattling the markets is that it's one person who's deciding how far he takes this. But the United States does remain this massive economic power and this is while this has been the worst April since the Great Depression, one wonders if he starts striking deals with the UK, with Europe, with Japan, with South Korea and stops talking about Jerome Powell.

One wonders if that market doesn't go back up. It certainly may and investors seem like have built in that expectation but it hasn't happened yet and let's be clear we're now three... Well yesterday was because of Powell. Powell down to almost a thousand points. Yeah, very concerned about that. The Powell talk rattled the markets and the trade deals were now three weeks since Liberation Day, three weeks tomorrow since so-called Liberation Day.

Nothing's done. There has been some preliminary talks, I'm told, furthest along with Japan. There have been some others' negotiations that have begun as well, but nothing's done. And in fact, even some very Trump-friendly economists, Charles Gasparino, who we know the White House listens to, was on Fox News last night, was talking about how he believes there's been real snags in the deal with Japan and that nothing is close, that Besant over-promised the speed in which these things would get done. So therefore, if indeed this does drag on for days and weeks longer, which it seems

likely, then it becomes a question of Trump's pain threshold. Is he going to push another pause perhaps to buy more time to maybe boost the markets? Right now, they're rattled. Well you know again it's a lot like what I said about Doge early on, I think transparency would have been the better route to say this is what we're doing today. Today we're going to be looking at USAID. These are the programs we're concerned about and do it that way. Don't sneak up on people. It's the same thing with the tariffs and the negotiations. I mean, I'm pretty confident. Let me just say maybe, kinda, that, you know, they want a deal.

They want to move toward a deal. But if they've hit a snag, it would be good. Say, these are what we're negotiating, just like they do with arms deals. We've had an issue on this problem or that problem. We're talking Japan. We're going to work through it. But that transparency would be very good for the markets. This is where that Silicon Valley, Elon Musk, move fast and break stuff thing catches up

to. Don't work. And by the way, look at the federal government. Look where Elon Musk, he tried to look where he is today.. Don't work. And by the way, look at the federal government. Look where Elon Musk, he tried to, look where he is today. It doesn't work. Right. It doesn't work. And talking to some people too in Washington, they believe now the president is trying to

set up Jerome Powell as the villain. Right. Because he sees what's happening to the economy. He understands perhaps that he's made a mistake with these tariffs. He's watching the markets tank. Worst April since the Great Depression. He doesn't want that on him. So now he's trying in some way to say he won't cut rates.

It's his fault. If he would just go along with me, the economy would be fine, which is not true. And speaking of Musk, we should note today there's a Tesla earnings call today. Some people believe that Musk in that call might reveal how much longer he's going to stay working for the administration. And how well the company is doing. I mean, again, their problem is, part of the problem, Jonathan, is a political problem, obviously. The very areas where he used to get the most, you know, whether you look at California or,

let's just say, bluer states where he'd find most of his EV customers, where he'd find most of his EV customers. Those cells are drying up. You look at France, you look at Germany, you look at his EV cells in Europe, getting absolutely pounded because again, he got involved unnecessarily in far-right politics to little to no effect. In fact, God, have you looked at the numbers in Canada lately? I mean, Carney is going to probably win an outright majority there. You look at what's happened across Europe. It's not working.

All he's doing is damaging his brand and then China. I mean, if this were just politics, that would be one problem with Tesla. The problem is he's getting lapped in China on technology. The very thing again, I'm not giving Elon Musk advice, but the last thing this guy needs to do right now when he's getting pounded, what has he lost? $100, $150 billion? It is time to go back to your day job. I mean, he's getting pounded.

Tesla is getting routed. Yeah, the trade war with China certainly doesn't help there. And let's note again, there's been no conversation, zero, between the United States and Chinese negotiators on any kind of trade deal. And we've seen Tesla's market, you know, vehicles fall off a cliff in Europe, their sales. And here in the United States, it's certainly in blue enclaves

where his most faithful customers used to live. You see it in the streets of New York City, you see it in Washington. Bumper stickers put on Tesla saying like, you know, I had this before the election. Like you basically try to get some different separation between. And again, John, I think you're more damning. He's being lapped. Like technology. The cars are better in China. They're cheaper in China.

They're doing like Tesla can't compete in China. That in California, two of his biggest markets. Yeah and that's why we have seen the company's fortunes really suffer here of late and there's certainly a widespread belief that Musk will start to wind down maybe rapidly his time with the administration in order to try to pilot and right the ship with Tesla but he's got a lot of obstacles, self-created obstacles in front of him. So coming up, we're gonna show you the scary moment. Delta Airlines passengers were forced to evacuate their plane after an engine caught fire on the tarmac.

Is Greyhound still open? Ay, ay, ay. Plus the New Yorkers. Yeah, yeah, people still go great. Plus the New Yorkers. Jonathan Whitzer joins us to explain what he calls Donald Trump's deportation obsession. Morning Joe will be right back. Really, 300 people had to evacuate a Delta plane in Florida after its right engine caught

fire. I mean, come on, friendly skies and all that. What's happening? NBC News senior correspondent Tom Costello might have some answers. Okay, come on, Tom. At Orlando International, fire on the ramp. The right side engine on a fully loaded Delta Airlines flight spewing flames just moments after pushing back from the gate.

As pilots quickly shut off fuel to the engine, passengers evacuated the jumbo jet down emergency slides. The process slowed with passengers only able to evacuate from the left side of the plane. Please take your time going down the stairs. On board the Orlando to Atlanta flight, Channing Wells and her nine-year-old son returning home after a Disney cruise.

So you had everyone in the back of the plane in a panic trying to rush to the front. And then all of a sudden you start smelling the smoke and different things like that. And then everyone was panicking. Firefight the smoke and different things like that and then everyone was panicking. Firefighters quickly doused the flames as passengers gathered on the ramp.

Delta says the highly unusual fire happened in the engines tailpipe. In my many years of flying, tailpipe fires are very rare. I was trained for it, but in all my years I never had a tailpipe fire. The latest in a string of high profile aviation incidents this year that have flyers on edge. I can't. I don't want to talk about it.

It's hard enough, you know, it's hard enough for me getting Mika on airplanes. This has made it, this has made, she does not like flying. This is all Willie. I want to lodge a complaint with somebody. This is making it a lot harder to get me on a blackout on these stories and because yeah, well by the way I use that. I use to tell Alex hey you know tell me because she has to go up said that would do the plane. The plane that deal but there you know there are a lot of people with the people upside down. A regular flyers that yeah, you wonder what's going on.

Hold on, I want to keep talking about this. No, I don't want to talk about this. You wonder what's going on there. Now, it is important for us to remember that even over the past four or five years, remember we had Tom, poor Tom, had a lot of those incursion, those runway incursions. No. Close calls, yeah. I think things are just too crowded out there, up there. Well, that was one of the eye opening parts of the collision in Washington a couple of months ago was just the amount of traffic coming in and out of here on the schedule.

So we'll see if that changes. It is important to remind everyone that flying is safer than it's ever been in human history. Ever been these isolated events. It is so safe. No, it really is. The numbers are incredible. I will say, though, again, with Washington,

maybe you've asked this question of somebody in Washington. You go there. But people on the street. But they had the horrific tragedy with the helicopter and the plane, and then like a couple weeks later, they're flying like jets, like right across,

Reagan National. Like, are they figuring this out? He's blaming it on you. No, I'm asking, are they figuring this out? When are they gonna stop flying military planes and helicopters across the flight path of one of the busiest airports in America? They haven't yet.

They have scaled it back. Why haven't they? This is not a hard call. This is something that the FAA and the DOT Commissioner Duffy has suggested will take on. Members of Congress have looked into it as well, from Senator Cruz. We should also note though, members of Congress are the ones who advocated increased number of flights in and out of DCA because they in part use them to get home on the weekends.

They've expanded the number of cities that airport serves. It's an extremely busy airport and there's a lot of military installations, understandably near the nation's capital, but there is some evaluation being done as to some of the flight paths, but those flights have not stopped entirely. So here's what you do. do you fly him around the airspace

you can testify to that right there. I have I have I have on the real mad. That's what you tell the panel and yet let me show you this tick tock video. Okay. Still ahead on morning. Author and staff writer for the Atlantic David Graham will be

here. He'll be our guest with his new book that dives into project 2025 and how he says it is reshaping America also had two-time Oscar winner Ben Affleck and Emmy winner John Bernthal will be live in studio with a look at their new film the accountant to morning Joe will be right back. Welcome back.

President Trump yesterday complained the justice system is not allowing him to deport migrants. The president wrote on social media that the Supreme Court, with the exception of Justice Alito, does not want him to remove migrants, his administration claims, are gang members. The president also claimed his administration could not give everyone it wants to deport a trial because to do so would take 200 years. The Post was his first comment on the issue since the Supreme Court on Saturday temporarily blocked any new deportations or forced removals under the Alien Enemies Act. A bit of context when it comes to due process. Back in 2014, a report from the nonpartisan think tank, the Migration Policy Institute, looked at how the deportation system

changed over the previous two decades. It found that before 1996, the vast majority of those facing deportation received immigration court hearings. That system, according to the report, dramatically changed to a system today of non-judicial removals, where 75% of people removed do not see a judge before being expelled from the U.S. As the ACLU summarized, the Obama administration has prioritized speed over fairness in the removal system, sacrificing individualized due process in the pursuit of record removal numbers.

And, Rev, I know you were, at times, you brought this issue up in front of Obama administration officials. Of course, the difference here was the Obama administration usually focused on illegal immigrants close to the border and they would get them on buses or do whatever and deport them that way. It certainly never used 200 year old statutes. To get people to a prison in El Salvador. Yeah, to get people to a prison in El Salvador and I think that's obviously the huge difference here with the Supreme Court at least saying you can't grab people off the street, throw them onto a plane, send them to one of the worst prisons in the hemisphere without giving them due process.

No, I think that's right. Some of us that had a good relationship with the Obama administration agree with ACLU about what they were doing, but it was nowhere near what we're seeing now. They were not flying people to places like El Salvador. They were not arrogantly saying, we don't care about due process, and then at the same time saying, and we'll give refugee status to farmers from South Africa. The contradictions here are glaring and much different than what we raised during the time of President Obama. Well, you know, Willie, there's obviously a very big difference between deportation, where every legal immigrant, illegal immigrant that's being deported doesn't see a judge.

There's a big difference, again, between that, which actually is a good pathway, if that's what the Obama, if that's what the Trump administration wants to do and they want to stand on precedent, they don't have to go back 200 years. They don't have to sweep people up off the streets, throw them onto a plane, ignore federal judges orders, send them down to El Salvador. I mean they have a pathway if they want to do it the legal way that has legal precedent. And that was at least, if you look at the numbers, Barack Obama, again, derided by his own base for being the deporter in chief, but you look at the numbers, Donald Trump's never gotten close to deporting that many illegal immigrants.

Yes, sometimes that chapter is forgotten, that progressives called Barack Obama the deporter in chief because of what Mika just laid out in those numbers there. But there was a different way that they went about deporting people, different from what we're seeing right now. Let's talk more about this with staff writer for The New Yorker, Jonathan Blitzer. His new opinion piece for the magazine is titled, Donald Trump's Deportation Obsession. Jonathan, good morning. So where does this obsession come from?

Let's just start with that. What's the guiding philosophy here? I think Trump, more than really any other contemporary politician, has defined himself, his own brand, as basically being someone who is going to enforce the immigration laws to a degree we've never seen before. He's gone so far, in fact, that he's exceeded the existing laws. And so he's promised a campaign of mass deportation. In the process of that campaign, where he's trying to prove to his supporters that he's

willing to do anything and everything to treat immigrants harshly, he has started to do things that really raise major questions about the administration's suspension of the rule of law, ignoring judges' orders, ignoring immigration judges' orders, ignoring federal judges' injunctions, the Supreme Court's injunctions, and so on, invoking a law from 1798 to basically summarily deport people without any due process, branding them gang members without any evidence. People aren't even sure what the charges are against them, and they've basically been shipped to what in effect is a legal black site in a third country. And there are obviously there has been a wing of the

Republican Party that has wanted this for a long time. You write about that. There's also of course when I was there another wing that was sort of like the more Reagan wing which was let as many immigrants in as want to come in. It's better for our economy. But Donald Trump though, if you look at his approval numbers, you know, they're upside down, especially on inflation, on the economy, on things they've never been upside down on. But you look at his numbers on immigration, and they're up there. Like they would far rather us be talking about immigration

and Abreu Garcia than talking about Jay Powell or the stock markets. And they will tell you, please, they're thinking, please talk about immigration instead of Hegseth, immigration instead of tariffs, immigration instead of the market. Because his numbers are strong on immigration.

Well, you're zeroing in on something that I think has really befuddled Democrats, which is the fact that his numbers seem strong on immigration. I do really think, and I insist, that although people in general, when you look at polling, say, OK, they're OK with the idea of mass deportation or OK with the idea of increased immigration enforcement and so on. What we're actually seeing is something far harsher than anything he's promised, something far uglier than anything he said he would do. I do think that by and large, if Americans followed closely what was happening to people who were caught up in this immigration enforcement dragnet, I do think they would be appalled.

But it's up to Democrats to really hold his feet to the fire. And right now, I think they're anxious about it. You know, I think immigration is one issue, but I think Abrego Garcia, as flawed as he is in many ways, if you look back at his history, I'm talking about him as a person. If you look at him as a person, that might not be somebody that people say, oh oh this is who we want to, you know, go down and visit in El Salvador, etc., etc. If you look at, you know, domestic violence, etc., etc. And yet at the same time, that is breaking through. I had a debate with a friend of mine who was like, oh Democrats are so stupid. I said, I'm not so sure they're so stupid. I think this is so heinous that even with a guy that has a very complicated past,

it is breaking through. And what did we see on Joe Rogan's show? Well, we'll talk about that in just a moment, but you heard from his union, where they were saying, bring our brother home. Four House Democrats were in El Salvador yesterday in an effort to get Kilmar Abrego Garcia released and to demand updates on him and other migrants who are imprisoned there. There are extremely harsh conditions at this prison where people are denied food and tortured and worse. The trip comes just a week after Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen met with the wrongfully removed Maryland man and the members of Congress met with local human rights organizations and officials at the U.S. Embassy.

Salvadoran officials denied their requests to meet with Abrego Garcia themselves. And I do think, I just, I think this case, against all odds, I think this case is breaking through with the American people. Yeah. And you mentioned podcaster Joe Rogan. Well, he's criticizing the Trump administration for its lack of support for due process in immigration deportations, like in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia's forced removal. Here's some of what Joe Rogan said on his show last week.

I think due process exists for a reason, and the reason is it is horrific for someone to be accused of something they didn't do, be imprisoned for crimes they didn't commit, and then live in a cell, live in a cage with a bunch of people who did commit. Here it is Benjamin Franklin, it's better 100 guilty persons should escape than one innocent person should suffer. That is wisdom that has survived hundreds of years. It's incredibly accurate and it is the foundation

of freedom. Like we have to make sure that these people are actually guilty otherwise we become monsters. You can't like what is that when you're fight monsters be careful that you don't become one. Yeah. Yeah. That's very important. This is very important. You know you can't do that. To support one side of this you have to deny some like basic human values either way like to support just rounding people up and just assuming they're all gang members I'm not saying they're doing that but this is the worst case scenario right they get a bunch of people in a room they rope them all in and one guy's just someone's cousin picking someone up to give him a ride home That's possible now you're back on the one person with now you're right back And what if that dude is not doing anything wrong and he's got some stupid tattoos and they decide that this guy's a gang member And now now you're in a prison in El Salvador And you're not even from El Salvador and now you know you were just a hairdresser or you're a tattoo artist

I'm a man you came over here, and maybe you got a green card And maybe you don't maybe you were just given asylum because a lot of people from Venezuela were given asylum in America. And then you get shipped to El Salvador where you're not even from El Salvador. So the fact that that exists scares the s*** out of me. The problem with things that are going in a radical direction and then there's an overcorrection. So the overcorrection is lack of due process. The overcorrection is like round them all up, ship them to jail. That's like some things that you say when you're not thinking things through. Like, what do you do about all the criminals? Take them all, send them to El Salvador. What about due process? No, but here's the problem

with that. What if you are an enemy enemy of let's not say any current president? let's pretend we got a new president totally new guy in 2028 and This is a common practice now of just rounding up gang members with no due process and shipping them to El Salvador You're a gang member. No, I'm not prove it. What I go to court. No, no due process That's dangerous Joe dangerous dangerous. That's dangerous. That's dangerous That's we got to be careful that we don't become monsters while we're fighting monsters Let's be clear Joe Rogan endorsed Donald Trump for president. He's largely supportive of his agenda. He's a hugely influential platform there And John that he I was struck it and Joe, I know you said so as well.

He kept going, this is frightening, this is dangerous, because there's sense. First of all, even Mr. Abrego Garcia, others who are currently in that prison in El Salvador did not receive due process. The Trump administration thinks they've picked the right villain. That's what they've said. They think that this is the person they want to scapegoat. Not only are these people who have rights and due process, but there is this undergrowing fear that I think Rogan hinted at there. Well, it might start with them, but it can move to other groups too, including any

of us.