Morning Joe - Morning Joe 5/17/24

Episode Date: May 17, 2024

Justice Alito house displayed 'Stop the Steal' flag after January 6: NYT

You referred to President Trump as a boorish cartoon misogynist, didn't you? Defense Attorney Todd Blanch asked. It sounds like something I would say, Cohen responded. A Cheeto-dusted cartoon villain? That also sounds like something I said. You referred to President Trump as Dictator D-Bad, didn't you? Cohen says, sounds like something I said. Damn!

Trump is just sitting there while his own lawyer roasts him look i get the defense's argument that you can't trust michael cohen because he hates donald trump but to be fair everyone who's ever worked with donald trump hates donald trump at some point you you got to be like, I think it's Trump. We also learned what the defense ordered for lunch today. 14 pizzas, four cheese, five pepperoni, four sausage and pepperoni, and one chicken, bacon and ranch. No word yet on what Trump's lawyers ordered. OK, good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. Willie, it is today. Officially, I have triple sourced this Friday.

It's Friday. OK, we did it Friday, May 17th. Everybody, welcome to Morning Joe. Along with Joe, Willie and me, we have the host of Way Too Early, White House Bureau Chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire, and Pulitzer Prize winning columnist and associate editor of The Washington Post, the great Eugene Robinson. Jonathan Lemire officially deciding he's going to hang his American flag upside down. No, he's not.

Because the Red Sox lost last night. I did text that to you. It was actually a neighbor. No. That you have raised. You're not. That you're doing it. What?

Yeah, there are pictures, pictures taken. Yes, we will get to it later this morning. But the justice, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, American flag at his home, hung upside down, source signal of distress done in the days after January 6th. It was a symbol of the Stop the Steal movement. It was hung at the justice's house. He blames his wife. You know, Willie, yeah, blaming the wife thing for people in public eye in trouble, that's going around. Don't ever do that. I'm scared of you. I would never do that. But Willie, this circles back to these people.

And I will say these people, these Trumpers who have spent their entire life attacking people for being insufficiently patriotic. And then they lose. And they just hate America. They hate America. They're constantly going around saying how weak we are. They hate our military. They say how weak our military is when it's the strongest in the world. They hate our economy. They claim the president of the United States is a socialist. The Dow yesterday made all of these people a lot richer, breaking 40,000 for the first time, despite Donald Trump's lies that it would collapse if Joe Biden was president of the United States. They hate this country. They attack this country.

The only time they love it is when their person is in office. And I've just got to say, and we've got a lot of legal brilliant minds around this table, so they can speak to this later if they want to. I will tell you, growing up, one of my friend's fathers was a federal judge. I had no idea until I got older whether he was Republican or Democrat. And that was the case in northwest Florida, a very conservative place. The federal judges kept themselves beyond reproach. They never talked politics, ever,

in the privacy of their homes. If you asked them opinion, they would just say, not my job, right? I'm a judge. They actually took their oath seriously. And for a Supreme Court justice, and I will say my opinion only, but the guy most likely to have had something to do with the leaking of the Dobbs decision, leaking it to The Wall Street Journal or somebody connected to him leaking it to The Wall Street Journal because he wanted to keep Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett frozen in place. I think history will show that. But that aside, for a guy who is a Supreme Court justice that let that happen at his own home in one of the most

fraught times in American history since since the Civil War is just it's just sad. And it shows how little respect he has for the institution. It shows how little respect he has for the law. It really it's disgusting. It's just disgusting. Willie. And by the by the way, we can't overstate the timing of this, which is January 17th, 2021. Think about where we were as a country still completely shaken by what had happened on January 6th. And a sitting Supreme Court justice has a flag flying upside down at his home. That is a symbol of solidarity, as John said, with the Stop the Steal movement. We should explain a little bit here. The New York Times is reporting that a photo of an American flag outside the home of Supreme

Court Justice Samuel Alito has now been made public. The flag flown upside down. As the Times notes, the inverted flag has become a symbol of Trump supporters who claim, again, without evidence that the 2020 election was stolen. Reading from the piece now, quote, the upside down flag was aloft on January 17th, 2021. The images showed President Donald J. Trump supporters, including some brandishing the same symbol, had rioted at the Capitol a little over a week before. Mr. Biden's inauguration was three days away. Alarmed neighbors snapped photographs, some of which were recently obtained by The New York Times.

While the flag was up, the court was still contending with whether to hear a 2020 election case with Justice Alito on the losing end of that decision. In coming weeks, the justices will rule on two climactic cases involving the storming of the Capitol on January 6th, including whether Mr. Trump has immunity for his actions. Their decisions will shape how accountable he can be held for trying to overturn the last presidential election and his chances for reelection in the upcoming one. I had no involvement whatsoever in the flying of the flag, Justice Alito said in an emailed statement to The Times. It was briefly placed by Mrs. Alito in response to a neighbor's use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs.

Wait, wait, wait, wait. So you're going to hate on America because of something a neighbor did. You're going to blame your wife and blame your wife. That excuse. What is this? What is this? Blaming wife was mad at blaming wives. Anybody care to jump in? But I want to know what what person, let alone woman, wife, would do that in response to a problem with a neighbor? Eugene, a neighbor upsets me, comes out, makes fun of me because the Rays beat the Red Sox last night. The Red Sox really suck. And so I'm mad.

I'm not going to hang my flag upside down. None of this, this is as dumb as what I heard about the Dobbs League. Nobody believes him. No, nobody believes him. And there's no reason to believe him. And he says he says briefly, you know, that the time story had neighbors suggesting that briefly meant for a period of days. This this flag was flying upside down at Justice Alito's house. And the idea that, you know, a yard sign that says something rude, apparently it said something rude about President Trump,

is enough for a Supreme Court justice who was supposed to be nonpolitical, who was supposed to be, you know, less political than Caesar's wife, would do this. And I'll just say do this, not allow his wife to go out and run up the flagpole, but would do this. And now, of course, as Alito always does, try to sort of brazen his way through it. I mean, I'll just say it. I have thought for a long time that Alito is the worst justice. He is one of the worst justices that we have seen on the Supreme Court since the days of, you know, Roger Taney and the other justices that enabled

decades of Jim Crow. I mean, he's just, his opinions have always struck me as intellectually dishonest, clearly tailored to come out to a, you know, a predetermined result. He's, you know, a predetermined result. He's you know, and now this it's just stunning to me. Stunning. And it's not just that it was a few days after January 6th, while that flag was flying upside down, the court was still contending as to whether or not to hear a 20 or 20 election case. And let's also remember, of course, Ginny Thomas, the wife of Clarence Thomas, part of the same Stop the Steal movement. So now you have two justices potentially compromised on this issue as we head into another election that could very well end up before the court again. Right. And Chuck, I really, ideology is irrelevant. Again, I've known progressive federal judges. I've known very conservative federal judges.

They hold themselves beyond reproach. This is really, again, for the time, it's just unbelievable. So something you said earlier, Joe, really resonated with me. You grew up in the Florida panhandle and a friend's father was a federal judge. Right. And you had no idea, none, what his politics were. So I spent my professional life in federal court around federal judges. I have never seen or heard anything that would suggest to me that ideology played a role in their decisions.

Some of the judges were great. Some were good. Some were mediocre. So they got some stuff right. They got some stuff wrong. But I've never seen politics infect their work. And by the way, I can extend that a little bit further. It was true of the federal prosecutors with whom I worked. We never had a political discussion in two decades. Ever, ever, ever. Same with the federal people. Chuck, I just I want you to underline that fact, because people have to understand that despite what they see from, I will just say this from, from justice Thomas and justice Alito, people take their oaths seriously. Conservatives,

moderates, progressives, they see themselves as officers of the court and dammit, they held this country together after January the 6th. And I have no doubt that among my colleagues were liberals, moderates, progressives, conservatives, all stripes. But we never discussed it. In fact, I remember once, Joe, walking through our office parking lot and seeing a bumper sticker on someone's car, which startled me because it was a political bumper sticker.

I had never seen that ever before. It turned out that that particular federal prosecutor had borrowed his spouse's car because his was in the shop. And that was the only time I even saw a bumper sticker in our parking lot expressing a political view. It was so unusual that I noticed it. Yeah. Also with us, we have former litigator and MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin. How are you holding up covering this trial all day, every day? And MSNBC legal analyst Danny Savalas, because we also have to talk about the criminal hush money trial with former President Donald Trump, which we'll get to now. It potentially could wrap up

next week. We'll find out from the experts here. The prosecution's star witness, Michael Cohen, is set to return to the stand on Monday after Trump's legal team tried to hammer away at his credibility yesterday. Court is in recess today, so the former president can attend his son Barron's high school graduation this morning. Lead defense attorney Todd Blanche says Cohen's questioning will likely wrap up on Monday. Monday, the prosecution has said it does not plan to call any additional witnesses, and the defense says it may not call any either. That means closing arguments could begin as early as Tuesday, clearing the way for jury deliberations by the end of next week. But hold on a second, Willie. Lisa, am I wrong about that? You shook your head. No, I was talking to someone in the

control room. I'm lifting the curtain. I'm sorry. You can lift it. It's fine. And go ahead and communicate. I just wouldn't make sure the information was right. Willie, so we're looking now just at what happened yesterday. And another day of cross-examination of Michael Cohen yesterday. He testified he spoke directly to former President Trump on the phone about the payments to Stormy Daniels. Cohen asserted he contacted Trump through Trump's bodyguard, Keith Schiller, on October 24th, 2016, about the hush money payments. It's about two weeks before Election Day. Defense attorney Todd Blanch pressed Cohen about phone records showing he texted Schiller that day in which Cohen asked how to handle a teenager who was prank calling him.

Cohen responded, saying he did not remember that message. Blanch said, quote, Do you recall texting Keith Schiller at 7.48 p.m.? Who can I speak to regarding harassing calls to myself in office? The dope forgot to block his call on one of them. You don't recall that? Cohen responded, It sounds right. Yes. Blanche then noted a return text to Cohen where Schiller simply says, Call me. Blanche then pointed out Cohen called Schiller immediately after for a conversation that lasted only about a minute and a half. Blanche accused Cohen of lying, suggesting he did not speak to Trump during that call about

Stormy Daniels as he had testified. Cohen, however, insisted both topics were covered despite the short length of the call. The defense also attempted to paint Cohen as having a vendetta against Trump. Here's a portion of his podcast that was played in court. I truly hope that this man ends up in prison. It won't bring back the year that I lost or the damage done to my family. But revenge is a dish best served cold. And you better believe I want this man to go down and rot inside for what he did to me and my family. OK, Lisa, so you were down at the courthouse again yesterday. We talk about that podcast moment in just a second. But let's go back to because it was a little confusing, maybe as you listen through it. What was Todd Blanche? What was the Trump defense team getting

at with that text and phone call between Michael Cohen and the bodyguard Keith Schiller? Well, let's talk about there was a narrow implication and then a much broader one, Willie, that they were trying to draw. The first thing they were trying to say is that Cohen's testimony about the phone call on October 24th between him and Keith Schiller, which he testified was really a call to Trump about the Stormy Daniels settlement, wasn't true. They presented him with text messages and phone call records that hadn't been part of his direct examination. And the insinuation was you manufactured this when you said you talked to Keith Schiller in order to talk to Donald Trump about finalizing the Stormy Daniels settlement.

That didn't really happen, did it? You had a minute and 30 long minute, 30 second long phone call with him and juxtaposed with these texts about the 14 year old who was prank calling you at the time. It's pretty clear that you called Keith Schiller to complain about that, to get Secret Service involved, to get security involved in these harassing phone calls. It had nothing to do with Stormy Daniels. That may or may not be true. It is also true that two days later on the 26th, there is indisputably calls between Michael Cohen and Donald Trump. And I expect on redirect that we'll hear a lot from the prosecution you can't trust Michael Cohen about this phone call, can you really trust any of his testimony about the conversations that he had with Donald Trump at the time? After all, this was nearly eight years ago. And isn't it really the case that

Michael Cohen's recollection is not organic, but is rather the construction of multiple prep sessions upon prep sessions with prosecutors from the Manhattan DA's office who have constructed a memory in Michael Cohen that didn't organically exist about a conversation that never happened and others as well. You know, Danny, I have expressed at times skepticism about this case even being brought. I will say, though, yesterday when commentators were talking about how this was like some Perry Mason, I said, no, it's not a juror. It's not going to go, oh, my God, eight years ago, a minute and a half conversation. Well, that I mean, it seems to me the much bigger problem is the podcast where he says, I want this guy to sit down. Not not. I mean. The prosecution is going to be able to clean this up on redirect, aren't they?

I agree. But I think you and I are in the minority. The vibe I've been getting is that a lot of folks feel like this was that kind of Perry Mason moment. And to that, I say when it comes to cooperating witness types like Cohen and Cohen, if we take a step back, isn't even close to the worst kind of cooperating witness you normally have on the stand. These are hardened criminals normally. Right. This is not Cohen. So the prosecution knows that he's going to get dinged on things, especially because a lot of these allegations happened eight years ago. And juries will forgive memory lapses from that long ago. So I wasn't in the courtroom. But from what I could see, I think this is something that one of two things will happen. Either the prosecution will choose to clean it up on redirect or, Joe, they may not even think it's that big a deal.

They may go for the better moment, which is to stand up and say, we're good. We have no further questions for this witness. I just didn't think it was that damaging because the prosecution is going to concede essentially. And they have throughout the case. Cohen's flaky. Cohen's a guy that isn't the most reliable person, but he's believable on these issues. And, you know, I've been guilty of this before myself in cases where you find a factual inconsistency and you really hammer it. You think it's going to be that Perry Mason moment. But if you hammer it too much, it looks a little petty to the jury. So it's it's really it's hard to say what the jurors are thinking. It just didn't strike me as something that was fatal to the jury. So it's it's really it's hard to say what the jurors are thinking.

It just didn't strike me as something that was fatal to the prosecution. Everybody knew that Cohen was going to get hit with his inconsistencies on cross-examination. I don't think it came to as a surprise to the prosecution. And I don't even think even the defense thinks that they completely dunked on the state's case. So, Chuck, how would if you were this, how would you handle this moment with Cohen? What would be the plan? And once Cohen's done, we may be out of witnesses unless Donald Trump is called to the stand. So first, preliminarily, I agree with Joe and Danny. Perry Mason moments happen on Perry Mason. They don't tend to happen in courtrooms. It would be extraordinarily rare. Second, I also agree with Danny that either the government cleans it up or ignores it.

I mean, cross-examination of Mr. Cohn lasted, what, 17 and a half years? And at the end of that, this is what we're left with? That there was a discrepancy about a phone call eight years ago? Great. He's probably wrong, but was he intentionally wrong? If he was intentionally wrong, that's the problem. And talk about jurors for a second. When the jury goes back,

they're not going to go, oh, my God, there's a minute and a half phone call. He had texting the night before about one topic. They're going to go, it was eight, eight and a half years ago. They could have talked about two things in passing. I can talk about a lot of things in a minute and a half. So if it was unintended, yes, if it was unintentionally wrong, Joe, which is I would imagine the view that the jurors would take of this. And even if the government doesn't clean it up, I think it's just, you know, it's a it's a water under the bridge. Choose your analogy. Or a shooting star, exactly. Exactly. Spilt milk. A flaming supernova.

Keep going. Spilt milk's a good one, too. Let's wait these down. We have four hours. Okay, we do have four hours, but a pencil must be lead. I want to know what's next. Go ahead, Chuck. I have no idea what I'm talking about now, but that's typically true. But at the end of the day, I think that in a long cross-examination, Jonathan, it's not going to matter that much. The jury looks at it holistically. In the main, can we trust this guy? In the main, is he corroborated by other documents

and witnesses and evidence? In the main, even if he got a few things wrong, is he credible? That's the jury's determination. But I don't think this incident undermines that. All right. So, Lisa, looking ahead, a day off today for Barron's graduation, but court next Wednesday. What are we expecting here? What can we know to expect? So court on Monday, court on Monday. And I think Todd Blanche will wrap up with Michael Cohen fairly quickly. And then we will see how much redirect the prosecutions have of Michael Cohen and whether they go into this phone call or spend more time on larger issues. Should they go to the phone call? I think they should because it affects them as well. I think one of the problems with the phone

call, you know, I'm sort of in between Danny, Chuck and you, Joe, and the people whose hair is on fire here. I think one of the problems with the phone calls, it also suggests the sloppiness of the DA's case because Cohen said on the stand, I've never seen this phone call and all the prep sessions that I had for the last eight years, I've never thought about these phone calls or these texts. That means someone in the prosecutor's office likely missed them in their prep sessions. And remember, they're getting call records and texts from a variety of different sources. They already brought in people from

AT&T and Verizon and the like. They missed this. And then the question becomes, if they missed this, what else might they have missed? And so there is a potential larger issue there. If I were them, I would clean it up. But, you know, different people make different strategic choices. And I also agree that the larger question is, do you believe this guy, given the propensity of other actual lies that he's told when this just could have been a misunderstanding? And I said court on Wednesday because I thought there was a proposal to actually. There was. OK, did that happen? It didn't because some of the jurors came back and said they weren't available on Wednesday. So on Monday after they're finished, presumably

when they finish, the prosecution rests their case. Then the defense has their choice to make whether they will present a case of their own. I will predict. I'm curious what Chuck and Danny think that the defense will not present any case at all, but they will leave that issue dangling over the weekend, leave prosecutors in suspense, so that they divert some of their own efforts. Then we'll see a charging conference about what the jury instructions will look like. Tuesday morning, we'll start to see, I would expect, summations. The jury will be instructed. And then as early as Thursday, they can start their deliberations. Danny, same right. Sounds about right. And I think it's a pretty good, pretty good chance that the defense calls no witnesses at all and puts on no case. I mean, I tend to

lean towards not calling witnesses if I don't have to. It's I'm very risk averse. And if you are risk averse, that's usually the approach, unless there's just something you absolutely need from a witness. And then then you think, well, are they going to call one or two? Well, that's that's a strange choice, because if you call one witness, you've sort of put on a case and it shows the jury, well, you put something on, but you only had one witness. I think if it's that minimal, then maybe it's better to just say, look, they haven't proven their case. Stand on beyond a reasonable doubt. The presumption of innocence, the burden of proof, pound the podium. You didn't true. You didn't call any witnesses for your alternate theory. But it seems more and

more that their theory is just going to be they didn't prove the elements they needed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. And Chuck, that sounds about right to me, too. I mean, statistically, it would be unusual, very unusual to put the defendant on the stand, extremely rare. And more typically, the defendants will not the defense will not mount a case, nor do they have to write the burdens on the prosecution. It's always on the prosecution. It never shifts from the prosecution. And to the extent that they had certain theories about the weaknesses of the prosecution's case, Joe, they've tried to adduce that through cross-examination. That's the more typical route. OK. Former U.S. attorney Chuck Rosenberg, MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin, and MSNBC legal analyst Danny Savalas. Thank you all very much. A team.

Just summing this up this spilt milk, water under the bridge, shooting star. OK, we have lead a horse to water, a horse to water, lead, pencil, whatever. All right. Still ahead on Morning Joe. The leaders of Russia and China agreed to strengthen military and diplomatic ties. What that could mean for Ukraine and also NATO amid Moscow's ongoing invasion. We'll go to Beijing for the very latest. We're back in 90 seconds. This morning, Russian President Vladimir Putin continues his visit to China with several more meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Yesterday, the pair signed a joint statement deepening the comprehensive strategic partnership, as they're calling it, between their countries

as both leaders face rising tensions with the West. The move comes as Putin wages a new offensive in Ukraine. Earlier today, Putin met with the Chinese vice president, where he expressed that he's grateful for China's initiatives to resolve the war in Ukraine. Joining us now live from Beijing, NBC News international correspondent Janice Mackey-Frayer. Janice, what more can you tell us about this visit by Putin to Beijing? Well, this is a key visit for Vladimir Putin, his first foreign trip since securing another six years in power. And fitting that he would make it to see his old friend Xi Jinping. China's no-limits partnership with Russia and the close personal

relationship between Putin and Xi Jinping are arguably among Putin's most important ties. And the timing of this is significant in that it's coming as Russia is intensifying the war in Ukraine, while at the same time the U.S. is intensifying pressure on China to do more to stop Russia's war in Ukraine. Russia is pulling closer to China economically at the same time that the U.S. seems to be pulling away. Just earlier this week, imposing stiff tariffs on a number of Chinese goods, including 100 percent tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles. So Putin, in making this trip, is trying to score another win in that he's looking to ensure the economic lifeline that his number one trading partner has provided.

The two men have talked about deepening their cooperation on military, on energy, on financial institutions, Russia's use of China's currency, the renminbi. And then, of course, the subtext to all of this is the shared vision they have of a new global order, a new take on international relations, as they say, which is something on which they are strategically aligned, Willie. Janice McEfrayer live for us this morning in Beijing. Janice, thanks so much. So, Joe, rolling out the red carpet, China for Vladimir Putin, full all the trappings of a state visit, the military, everything you could expect, making a big show of standing side by

side with a man who now is in year three of his invasion of Ukraine. Yeah. You know, I mean, this is not 1970. This would be if if actually President Xi met with Gavin Newsom, he would be meeting with somebody that had a larger economy than Vladimir Putin. And so what is so striking to me is Vladimir Putin is willing to be a junior partner in this relationship. It is. And I'm not just saying it's just the case. He is. He's humiliating himself and basically making himself a vassal of China, which Richard Haass just sort of shook his head like he usually does after every New York Giants game. Let's bring him down. He's the author.

Home and away. Yeah, exactly. Also detailing the ups and downs and downs of the Giants football season, which is available in Substack. Also a former aide to the George W. Bush White House and State Department, Elise Jordan. Also, former reporter for The Wall Street Journal, Matthew Brzezinski. Thank you all for being with us. So, Richard, we saw in the early 70s, of course, the Soviets, China and the United States constantly playing off of each other. In this case, you have Vladimir Putin with a battered military and a weakened economy, basically throwing himself into the arms of President Xi and saying, save me.

That's not surprising because he doesn't have a whole lot of options, Joe. What's surprising and disappointing is that Xi Jinping has doubled down on his relationship with Vladimir Putin. There were a lot of people a couple of years ago when they first signed their no limits agreement on the eve of the invasion of Ukraine, who basically are saying, gee, maybe Xi Jinping regrets this, particularly after things didn't go so well. What we saw the last couple of days is we now see China doubling down. Is this a is this a reaction, though, to the United States? We're doing what I think the United States should do. New York Times highlighted it. We've been talking about it a couple of years ago.

Joe Biden's strengthening the presence, whether it's in Guam, Philippines, with Japan spending a lot more on their military nuclear subs to Australia, the hemming in, the hemming in of China in the east. Do you think this may be a reaction to that? In part. I mean, a logical reaction. Look, China doesn't have allies. Russia is now a strategic partner. The United States, the great comparative advantage is we have Japan and other allies. I also think it reflects China's assessment that whether it's Joe Biden or Donald Trump, there's very little upside in a relationship with us. Right now, there's almost a competition between the two parties as to who can be tougher on China. Biden never removed Trump's tariffs. He just added new tariffs this week. So I think the Chinese have basically discounted any possibility

of a better relationship with us. And they may also see real advantage in the United States being bogged down, increasingly depleted by supplying Ukraine in a war in Europe. You know, though, Elise, and I'm not saying this because I'm an American. I'm saying this because if you just step take a couple of steps back, China needs us a lot more than we need China. Is he really going to trade a good relationship with a Russia that has an economy the size of Texas or maybe now a little weaker than Texas instead of the West. Again, I always have to remind people of this because the earth is not flat. We have about a $26 trillion economy.

Europe has a $25, $26 trillion economy yearly. China's at $17 trillion. Russia's at $1.4 trillion, roughly. So you're talking about China going, we're going to we're going to side with a 1.4 trillion economy and and live in this isolated side of the world and have bad relations with, you know, 50, 60 trillion dollars worth of trade. I think I agree with Richard. I think that she and China, they've made the calculation that it's not going to get better with the United States, no matter who is in office. Politically, stateside in the U.S., it is such a strong issue to be seen as aggressive towards China. And that's not going to change whether the contender is a Democrat or a Republican.

And so you look at what's happening now and China, it's an advantage if the U.S. dollar gets weaker. It's an advantage if the U.S. is using all of its arms supplying Israel and Ukraine and is running shortages. It's an advantage to China. Anything that happens to the U.S. that weakens our economy and our arms. I say one other thing. I don't think Xi Jinping thinks he has to choose the way you set it up. I think he thinks he can have his cake and eat it. He can strategically associate with Russia. And he thinks, for example, that American business will be so enthusiastic about maintaining access to the Chinese market that I think he figures he's probably OK.

And that's why, for example, you always see Xi Jinping courting American business leaders. So I don't think they see quite the trade off or the opportunity cost that you're right. It's not a zero sum game for him. Right. Hey, Matthew, we've talked often here about the reasons why Russia felt the need to invade Ukraine in a discussion you and I had offline earlier this week. You had a fascinating insight that if you really step back, it begins to make sense, at least in Putin's mind, why he was so desperate to make Ukraine, to swallow Ukraine up. Talk about that. Well, I think that Putin may be looking to have a military solution to what is essentially a demographic problem.

Russia has terminal demographics. It is effectively dying and not even necessarily a slow death. Here, bear with me with some numbers here. In 1991, when the Russian Federation emerged from the husk of the Soviet Union, it had a population of 150 million, to our 250 million. Since then, our population has grown to 335 million, while Russia's has fallen to just over 140 million. Worse yet, in the next 20 years, by the Kremlin's own estimates, while the U.S. will be over 400 million, Russia's population will continue falling to around 130 million. And the United Nations thinks it'll go to 115 million. Well, why? Well, first of all, why is that? Why is there this demographic time bomb that has blown up?

And that does make sense why they desperately need Ukraine. That's number one. And number two, how is this impacting Putin's ability to fight this war? Well, I mean, the statisticians will tell you that Russia has very low birth rates. It has high immigration rates and it has high immigration rates, and it has high mortality rates. What that doesn't say is, you know, why. And the short answer is Russia is a very unattractive place to live under Putin, who's been in power for 25 years. And when this next term is done, he'll be in power longer than Stalin and only Catherine the Great will have ruled Russia longer than Putin. Russia has turned into a thuggish,

repressive kleptocracy where the average citizen subsists on $800 a month, while Kremlin cronies have $700 million yachts with full-time crews of 250 people and literally running costs of around $70, $80 million a year. The obscene wealth at the top and the incredible poverty at the bottom, coupled with the KGB running rampant, has just made Russia a very unattractive place to live and people have voted with their feet. Yeah, I mean, and they have voted with their feet. And obviously some of the brightest minds, the tech minds, the very people Putin needs

have left the country. But these numbers, I mean, you look at 335 million Americans to 140 million Russians, and that's going to expand to 400 million Americans to 130 million. I mean, that is a demographic time bomb that is going off now. Yeah. And one that Putin is trying to address, perhaps with this land grab in Ukraine. Yeah. But the long word trends aren't going to end up in his favor. Richard, speaking of Ukraine, Putin is in is in Beijing looking for reinforcements. He's not getting lethal aid, but China continues to send supplies that his military can use.

NATO, front page story of the New York Times today. NATO allies are inching closer to sending troops into Ukraine to train Ukrainian forces. We know how much President Biden has prized revitalizing the NATO alliance. Its 75th summit will be this summer held in Washington. But take us to this decision. There's real risk here, too. Well, it wouldn't be combat, Drew. We're probably talking about trainers. Right now, the training of Ukraine has taken place in places like Poland. And the idea is just to step it up and to have more people on scene and probably give them a little bit more tactical advice. And I think it's a reflection that the trajectory of the war is moving against Ukraine. What we've

seen in the last few months, in part because of the delay in U.S. military aid for several months, and then also because Russia's really geared up, in part because of Chinese help, North Korean, Iranian help, and their own wartime economy, the tide of the battle's turning against Ukraine, not decisively, but the trend is clear. And I think what you're beginning to see are people in NATO saying, what can we do to stem this momentum? And that's why we're going to probably see this step of having trainers inside Ukraine itself. So one of the points that we're talking about demographics in Russia, I think the demographics in China are even more stark. You're talking about a country of 1.3, 1.4 billion. By the end of the century, we're probably looking at a country with 800 million.

Think about the difference. And by the way, Matthew brought it up about Russia. Dead right. I'm so glad you brought up China, too. I've talked to one CEO after another who has told me China's a wreck in every way. Their security forces, the oppression, she what he's done over the past five years to some of the brightest minds. But they always bring up the demographic time bomb there too. And they say 20, 30 years from now, they're going to be haunted by this one child policy. That also people are voting with their feet in China too. If you're a young person who's entrepreneurial, there's no place to go. The only danger of this, and there's a big debate going on amongst foreign policy types, does this lead China to become more assertive or even aggressive if you have a

leadership that can't scratch the ish itch of nationalism that it by high levels of economic growth does China ultimately look at Taiwan as their salvation and it's interesting that Xi Jinping constantly uses the word rejuvenation the rejuvenation of China is not demographic. It's not economic. The question is whether it comes through foreign policy adventure. And that is the thing that we have to worry about, because as the economy fails, as the demography falls, does China then look for some other out? And that's so even if you're right, and I think you are, Joe, that China faces enormous headwinds. That doesn't necessarily mean

good things for us. It could. Yeah, it certainly doesn't mean stability. Look at look at the guy hunched over in the seat right there, Vladimir Putin. There's a reason he went into Ukraine, because he knows, as Matthew said, his country's dying. And so what happens when China starts sensing the same thing? And what's also well, it's not just because country's dying that he needed something positive. So this is his legacy. And what's also, well, it's not just because the country's dying, that he needed something positive to show. This is his legacy. And I think for both, the parallels between Ukraine and Taiwan are quite interesting. In both cases, Putin and Xi see them as organically part of the country.

Right. And that's another reason that China is so supportive of Putin. They don't mind this precedent. Yeah. And Willie, of course, in the middle of all of this, India, which, of course, is absolutely fascinating, a battle for for, again, where Modi decides to go. Yeah, I mean, they're playing a role in all this that isn't doesn't get as much publicity as it probably should. Let's bring in a member of the Ukrainian parliament, Alexandra Ustinova. She's chairwoman of the country's Commission on Arms Control.

Ms. Ustinova, thanks for being with us this morning. I want to talk to you about why you're in Washington this week. But first, just get your reaction to the images we've been seeing, the discussion we're having about Vladimir Putin being welcomed with open arms, the red carpet rolled out by Xi Jinping and China. What does that signal to you from where you sit? Well, unfortunately, Ukraine has been saying for quite a while that China is just pretending to stand aside this war.

So far, we've seen that the North Korean, the Iranians have been supporting Russia with weapons directly. China has been supporting them economically and using the dual use. They're sending tons of the stuff to Russia that actually can be teared apart, and the chips can be used later for the bombs, for the missiles and for the drones that are hitting Ukrainian cities and civilians every day. So unfortunately, this is very sad, what we're watching right now, because this is the fight

between the democratic countries, the free world and the autocracies. And China is watching closely what's going to happen in Ukraine, whether the Western world is going to support Ukraine enough to win and then decide whether they're going to go after Taiwan or not. So we can see that, unfortunately, they are uniting and they're supporting each other much faster than the allies sometimes are united to support Ukraine. So you are in Washington, a town, a city, a capital and a body that took far too

long to get Ukraine its much needed aid. But it did come last month, 60 billion dollars worth of it on its way, making its way soon to the battlefield where it's desperately needed. What do you expect that to do? What difference will that make? And what more do you need? So, first of all, I would like to thank every American citizen for the support that is coming, because unfortunately, we ran out of the interceptors, which are the missiles for the air defense. And Russia managed to bomb all of our power plants. We don't have electricity in Kiev right right now, and this is very sad. Because it was postponed, we were not able to shoot back and to put down the ballistic

missiles coming to our cities and our capital. Right now, we have those coming, so we can at least protect our civilian population, and we, as Ukrainians, are very grateful for the Americans for supporting our population. But unfortunately, even with the weapons coming right now, there is a huge problem. And we've been talking in D.C. for this week to all of the Congress people, people in the NSC, people on the Hill, that Ukrainians need actually exactly what you're showing right now on the screen. Ukrainians need an ability to actually strike Russia at the border. What Russians are doing at this moment, because they understand there is a ban for Ukrainians

to actually use the weapons we have right now from the United States and other countries against the Russian troops on their territories and against the military targets. They're putting everything they have, all the artillery, right next to the border, shelling our cities and destroying our villages. All we're asking to do right now is to do the buffer zone so the Ukrainians can hit exactly the military targets. We're talking about the artillery. We're talking about the MLRS systems that are shelling the cities right now, like Kharkiv.

Kharkiv is the second biggest city in Ukraine. It's 30 kilometers from the border that can be easily reached. This is like 15 miles that can easily be reached by the Russian artillery. Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do because we're not allowed to use the munition we have, to use the weapons we have to hit them back. So we're asking to give us this defensive opportunity right now to protect our cities and to hit the military targets. They are machines. They are weapons that are hitting us every day, destroying and demolishing the cities. All right. Member of the Ukrainian parliament.

Oleska Nora Ustinova, thank you so much for being on this morning. We really appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you so much. I'm wondering, Matthew, your thoughts about NATO sending troops to help Ukraine as military advisors. It sort of sounds like 1963 in Vietnam. But again, if it if it well, it's it just complicates things a great deal, doesn't it? Well, I mean, thus far, we've said categorically no to that. However, we've said categorically no

to all the previous red lines and have done them in the beginning. Remember before? Oh, no, we'll never send tanks. We'll never send F-16s to Ukraine. We won't give them, you know, longer range missiles. And we've ended up doing all of that. So it's, you know, it's likely that that is something that's down the pike. At the moment, the Russian offensive has managed to seize an area that's roughly twice the size of Manhattan. So we shouldn't press the panic button. These gains have not been that substantial. And we are seeing that Vladimir Putin is running out of money. When you have fewer and fewer subjects, you have to squeeze them harder and harder. Last month, he raised taxes for the first time in 20 years, income taxes by as much as 25 percent. So, you know, the longer this goes, we'll see how, you know, whether Russia's economy can sustain this for another year or two.

And it may not be necessary to escalate by putting NATO troops in Ukraine. All right. Former reporter for The Wall Street Journal, Matthew Brzezinski, thank you so much. We greatly appreciate it. And when we return, we will have Willie. What? I was going to just ask Richard about the next, but that's OK. When we you just stepped on my line. OK, well, we'll do it later. Hold on. Hey, TJ. Yeah. Can you edit this? Yeah. Start over. All right. will. Yeah, start over. All right.

Former Wall Street... Hold on. Get in between. Ready? Three, two, one, go. This is so hard. I know. Actually, we have to think about it. Thank you so much,

Wall Street Journal. Former Wall Street Journal reporter Matthew Brzezinski. Greatly appreciate it. When we return, we will have Richard Haas, former... What are you?

He's president. President of the Council on Foreign Relations. TV's own Willie Geist and Pulitzer Prize winning columnist Gene Robinson talk about the New York Knicks. Going to be exciting. And the PGA. That was terrible. Oh, my God. I'm asleep already.

We'll be right back. Oh, boy. Wow. Willie got, Willie. Welcome back to Morning Joe. It's 6.53 on a Friday morning. Back with a little sports news, guys. We're going to get into the NBA playoffs.

A good game last night. Huge game for the Knicks tonight in Indianapolis. There's a lot to talk about. We're just getting some wild, breaking news from the world of sports. This comes from an ESPN reporter named Jeff Darlington, who's covering the PGA Championship at Valhalla Golf Course. And he says, this is his report. He says he witnessed it with his own eyes. World number one golfer Scotty Scheffler, who's, as always, in the hunt after the first

day of the PGA championship at Valhalla yesterday, was arrested while trying to pull his car into Valhalla Golf Club. Darlington says there was a misunderstanding about the traffic patterns. So Scotty Scheffler went around the police car, according to Jeff Darlington. Police car pulls him over, screams at him. The officer screams at Scotty Scheffler, get out of the car. And then, according to Jeff Darlington, Scheffler exited the vehicle. The officer shoved Scheffler against the car, placed him in handcuffs and detained him in the back of a police car. This is at the Valhalla Country Club, a famed club down there.

This is him playing yesterday. Scotty Scheffler, he's one of the two or three most famous golfers on the planet right now. Hopefully they've sorted this out. But he says, according to Jeff Darlington of ESPN, it was a misunderstanding about how to get in. He went around a police car when he wasn't supposed to and found himself in handcuffs before the second round of the PGA Championship. Come on. Well, some added context here. The reason why the traffic pattern was changed, this is per the Louisville Courier-Journal, their story just now. Apparently, a pedestrian had been hit by a bus outside the golf club and was killed early this morning around 5 a.m.

So there's a lot happening here. So the rounds were already delayed. And it appears that Scheffler was not aware, perhaps, of the change in traffic patterns. Tried to go around the police officer. All that happened this morning? It's a busy day. This all happened this morning? Yeah, this happened this morning. Around 5 a.m., a bus hit a pedestrian and killed that person.

What is happening? It's dark. That is unbelievable. Because then they changed the traffic patterns. Changed the traffic patterns. And I guess the, I don't know, Richard Haas. We'll put that all to the side right now. That's kind of.

That's insane. That is crazy. And obviously tragic. Let's talk about the round yesterday. The same Scotty Scheffler, who won the Masters, started yesterday with a bang. With an eagle. Hold out on the first hole, his third shot for an eagle. Ended up, I think, four under par for the round.

Xander Shoffley from California, nine under. Shot a 62 yesterday in the lead. And Rory McIlroy, who a lot of people, it was the second favorite in the betting, five under. So it's going to be an interesting few days. But this is stunning. I hate when sports gets overshadowed by this kind of tragedy. This is really sad.

It's unbelievable. Unbelievable also the best golfer in the world. A cop doesn't recognize the best golfer in the world and throws him up against a car and cuffs him. And also Scotty Scheffler, if you know him, is the most religious. He is. Upright, family guy. Nice guy.

Nice guy. I don't think he's ever cursed in his life. The idea that it would happen to him is just unimaginable. That is unimaginable. Willie, going from golf and just truly bizarre this morning to NBA basketball, which these series, I mean, you think you know what's going to happen, but it's Indiana just crushing the Knicks, the Knicks coming back, crushing them.

But I'll tell you what, Denver, I was sure that Denver was just going to coast after they came back and had a huge blowout win. I was sure Denver was going to coast over the Timberwolves. Timberwolves said not so fast. Yeah, this has been a wild series. Timberwolves win the first two games on the road in Denver, beat the defeating champions. Some people say it was going to be a sweep. Denver comes back to win the next three. So they look like they're moving on. And then last night, just the T-Wolves and that man, Anthony Edwards, Ant-Man, just blowing out

the Denver Nuggets. There will be a game seven between the Timberwolves and that man, Anthony Edwards, Ant-Man, just blowing out the Denver Nuggets. There will be a game seven between the Timberwolves and the Nuggets. Anthony Edwards led the team out of the mid-series slump, scoring 27 points in a, ready for this, 115-70 blowout. Unbelievable. That is unbelievable, Willie. And Anthony Edwards, could you talk to the uninitiated like me about this kid and how some people, they're not saying he's Michael Jordan, but there have been some real Jordan-esque moves this series. Yeah, they won by 45 points last night on the back of Anthony Edwards.

He came out of the University of Georgia as just an unbelievable athlete with huge upside. So he's kind of a dunker at first. But man, he has rounded into an incredible all-around player. He's got a jump shot. He does, dare we say, move at times like Michael Jordan. He finishes at the rim for basically a guard, unlike anybody else.

And now he's got a three-point shot in his arsenal too. Truly maybe the best young player in the league. He's incredible. And now they've got a chance. They've got a game seven to knock off the defending champs. They do. And Jonathan Meir, I mean, he's a human highlight reel just this series. You know, he starts to shoot from up top.

He gets a guy to move, throws it off the backboard, runs in, gets it. I mean, come on. A self-alliated. He's a phenomenal athlete. And there's a scenario where if they do pick off the defending champs and then, you know, they'd probably be favored in the conference finals

against either Dallas or probably Oklahoma City. This is about to be Anthony Edwards' league. Like, he's sort of the new star. Having said that, it's in Denver. It's game seven. Nikola Jokic is the best player in the league right now. He's a three-time MVP. So we will see where that goes.

But, Richard, there are other – Joe, there are other series being played right now. There's a basketball game. Is there really? There is a basketball game. Rumor has it there's a game tonight as well. Yeah. You know, Willie, I haven't – I mean, there's not been a lot to cheer for. If you're a New York sports fan of light, just ask Richard.

But Yankees are doing just fine. Thank you. Yeah. You know what? It's May. OK, it's May. Seriously. Oh, my God. The same thing you say about the polls. Exactly. But Willie, I don't know that I've seen New York sports fans as excited about anything as they are about the Knicks right now. Yeah, there is something about this team. They just bring you along on this ride. They play so hard. Jalen Brunson has been a revelation.

And now tonight they go back on the road where in this series it's been really hard to win. This is the Eastern Conference semifinals. Knicks try to put away the Pacers tonight on the road in game six. It won't be easy in Indianapolis. An Indiana victory would then send the series back to Madison Square Garden for a game seven on Sunday. So, Richard, we're both Knicks fans. We know game seven is out there, a possibility. It would be nice not to need it, but it has been so tough to win on the road in the series. Yeah, the road team has lost every game. The Knicks need to win in part because they need to rest

before they go up against the Celtics, who had the best record in the East. The only good news for the Knicks, who are really battered and depleted, they've got several of their starters out for the season, is at least they're playing now an eight-man rotation with Alex Burks coming back. So, you know, hope springs eternal. But this is, you're right, Joe, what Joe said, for over 50 years, the Knicks have been rebuilding.

And this has been the first moment where people are really, really excited about the team. And they play hard. So we'll see. But I'm feeling good. You've got to love them this year. You know, Gene Robinson, we were so lucky to grow up and great NBA players, great NBA teams. them this year. You know, Gene Robinson, we were so lucky to grow up and

great NBA players, great NBA teams. You know, we always talk about the 80s, the 70s, not so bad either, but you look at the 80s, which may have been just the peak of the NBA, where you had Michael, you had Magic, you had Larry, you had

the bad boys out of Detroit. Bad boys that really, they were thugs. Lamb beer and the thugs. Oh, they were. They were. Like the easiest team to hate. But it was great. But I will tell you, I've kind of stuck to college basketball recently

because my son is a massive NBA fan, but it's put me to sleep. I think this is the first NBA playoffs that I've really, they're pulling me in, man. There's something so dynamic about this. And it's not just the Knicks. No, they've got me. I mean, these playoffs are, in a sense, ruining my life because it's so hard to get up in the morning.

You know, I watched all of that game last night, that 45-point blowout, because I couldn't— Anthony Edwards is just so compelling. If he's not the next Michael Jordan, he will do until the next Michael Jordan comes along, because it is uncanny the way he took over, not just on offense, but on defense, the way he led the team. He's still a kid. And it reminded me of those of Jordan's Bulls trying to get past those bad boy Pistons. Remember, they ran up against them year after year and they couldn't quite get past them in the playoffs.

They'd get beaten up by the Pistons. And so here Minnesota's trying to get past Denver. And who knows, you know, because Jokic is the best player in the game right now. And so that's going to be an incredible Game 7. I confess I'm kind of rooting for a Game 7 in the Knicks Pacers series, just because why not? A game seven at the Garden? Are you kidding? That's going to be wild. And Jalen Brunson is amazing.

Before Tuesday's game at the Garden, I thought the Knicks were done. Jalen Brunson put them on his back, and he's just amazing. Wow. And we are Knicks fans, but we have to say the Pacers are really, And Jalen Bresson put him on his back, and he's just amazing. Wow. And we are Knicks fans, but we have to say the Pacers are really, really good to a great young team. Tyrese Halliburton is incredible. I'm just preparing us that there might be a Game 7, Richard,

because that's a good team we're playing. Meek, I swear we'll get off sports after this, but we have to mention there actually will not be a Game 7 at Madison Square Garden for the Stanley Cup playoffs because the New York Rangers last night secured a trip to the Eastern Conference final with a road win over the Carolina Hurricanes last night. How'd they do it? Look, they're down 3-1 there. Chris Kreider's third period hat trick. A hat trick in the third period.

Come on. Bringing New York back from that two-goal deficit. The Rangers beat the Canes 5-3 and now await the winner of the series between the Boston Bruins and the Florida Panthers. Panthers up 3-2 in that series, but Game 6 is in Boston tonight. If the Bruins win that game, then you get another Game 7 there. You could potentially be seeing a Rangers-Bruins Eastern Conference Finals in the NHL as well.

And a Knicks-Celtics Finals. You could have Boston, New York, Eastern Conference Finals, the NHL as well. And a Knicks-Celtics final. And if we wrap this up right now. You could have Boston, New York, and both. I mean, I talked about the early 70s a second ago. But, man, Richard, I mean, you know, Namath and the Jets, and then, you know, the Knicks. You have all of these things going. We've got a chance. I mean, of the Knicks, the Rangers, dare I say it, the Yankees.

I mean, this is just about as good of a sports spring as New York's had in a very long time. And alas, even I can't make the case that the Giants ought to be on your list this year. I'm sorry. I've got to say, Willie, if we're talking about New York football teams, actually the best New York football team right now is the Jets.

They have an extraordinary team. They have a great defense. They need help at the quarterback position, of course. It's kind of hard. What was Aaron Rodgers' latest? He's got worms in his brain, I think. No, that's RFK. He was on with Tom Hanks. That's RFK. And what did he say? What was Aaron Rodgers' latest? He's got worms in his brain, I think. He does?

No, that's RFK. He was on with RFK. That's RFK. He's on with RFK. And what did he say? What was his thing? He wished that President Biden knew as much about American history as Vladimir Putin knows about Russian history.

Oh, my God. That was from Aaron Rodgers. All right. Exactly. But the Jets are a great team. Go to Willie. The Jets are a great team. They just need to find a quarterback.

Yeah, they've got a great, great defense and then a broken-down old podcaster under center for them right now. By the way, Meek, I lied. One more note. We just learned that Scotty Scheffler has been released from police custody after that incident, and he will be on the tee shortly for the second round of the PGA Championship. What a morning!