Morning Joe - Morning Joe 5/2/25

Episode Date: May 2, 2025

Waltz's issues within Trump WH predate Signalgate scandal: Report

I think they're holding the wrong guy accountable. So you're talking about the Hexite? Yeah, I mean I think that's where the accountability should be, not with the National Security Advisor. That's my view. Have you guys got... So I was surprised to see this. I think they fired the wrong guy. The question is whether the right person is being held accountable. I think there has to be accountability for the mistakes and the errors that have been made,

but I think the Secretary of Defense ought to bear that responsibility. What's wrong with you? I mean, he's the guy who started the unclassified text chain when there were classified channels available in his responsibility, but I also think Pig Hexeth needs to be fired as well. After all, Mr. Hexeth is the person who put the classified information on that text chain, who then also shared that same classified information on a separate text chain involving his wife. I think the president is getting rid of Mike Walz and is protecting Hexette. Hey, that's Democrats in the Senate who are reacting to President Trump's removing Mike Walz from his role as national security advisor. Some are suggesting a different cabinet member should have been removed instead.

We're going to have a lot more about Walz's next role in the administration also, Ed. We're going to be digging into the most expansive ruling yet on the use of the Alien Enemies Act. It's a fascinating decision coming out of Texas with a Trump judge. She was appointed by Donald Trump in Trump's first term. He permanently barred the administration from using the 18th century wartime law. Good morning, welcome morning, Joe. It's Friday, May the 2nd, Mika's birthday tomorrow, Willie's birthday. And of course, as we said, we're going to have an all-star special Saturday morning special starting at 3 a.m. with Willie Guise celebrating that birthday.

We look forward to that, Willie. But I'm going to be up from the night before Joe, as you said, with the tuxedo tie undone, a little drink in my hand, kind of rambling through some of the callers at that telethon. I am telling you, we have to do a Jerry Lewis telethon redo right here on morning Joe around Labor Day, all with the big tuxes and the ties and everything. Willie, we could we have a lot to get to, but I know for a lot of

New Yorkers, they want to talk about one thing, and that is the New York Knicks. Tell us about it. Unbelievable finish last night for the New York Knicks. One of the best shots in the history of our franchise coming from our franchise player, Jalen Brunson. It was just like almost every game in this series. They were up double digits then they went down. It looked like they were gonna lose. They had a big run to end the game and then this play with time winding down Jalen Brunson on a defender in Thompson who's been

awesome on him and look at this loses him hits the three game winner. The Pistons did have another possession with about four seconds left and they had a turnover to end the game. The Knicks win the game in Detroit, avoiding and anything goes game seven and now advanced to play the Boston Celtics in the semifinals. So boy, this was a hard fought series, huge credit to the Pistons who were, you know,

a terrible team last year. They're tough. They're good. They got a bright future. But last night, Jalen Brunson with an all time shot for the Knicks. Yeah. And luckily we have at the snorky Boston fan desk, Jonathan Lemire to tell us what happens when they play Boston. No, I'm going to start. I'm going to go counter-intuitive and compliment the Knicks to start.

Oh, come on. You don't compliment New York. No, it's rare. start. I'm going to go counterintuitive and compliment the Knicks to start. Oh, come on. You don't compliment New York teams. No, it's rare. Look, they won three road games in that series. That's legitimate. And Detroit was up for it. Congrats to Jalen Brunson on that shot. Yeah, Celtics Monday.

This will be fun. The downside for me as a Boston fan in New York is very high. If the Knicks were to lose, if the Knicks were to win, it would be pretty insufferable. Celtics, though, rightly favored. They won all four times they played this year, three of them handily. They're the defending champs. They will have home court advantage and they will have had just about a week off while the Knicks will. So they'll be better rested and healthier than the Knicks. But I think it'll be a good series. I'd rather

talk about the Celtics than the Red Sox. We are also speaking of Boston sports teams. We're going to be talking more about Bill Belichick. Like, what? What's that about? I mean, you got Charles Barkley coming out saying he's worried about anyway. We have a lot to talk about. We're going to be talking sports for four hours because this is Mika's, of course, birthday. And she's sitting at home saying get to the news, which means we're going to bring in U.S. special

correspondent for BBC News and the host of The Rest is Politics, Cady Kay. She's going to explain to us the intricacies of cricket and the rules. Also, staff writer at The Atlantic, Ann Applebaum, who has let us know she doesn't do sports. And also columnist and the associate editor for The Washington Post, David Ignatius, and also NBC News national security editor, David Droad. And before we go to Willie and actually get to the news of the day, you know, I was absolutely fascinated by what happened in Canada last week. We've seen this happening. The right-wing parties underperformed in Germany

from what they were supposed to be doing. Still, a one in five is deeply concerning. I am curious, though, what's happening in Poland. Are we seeing something similar with the presidential election coming up? Are we seeing something similar there that we saw with Mark Cornyn in Canada? You're certainly seeing parties that were planning to run on Trump or run on their similarity to Trump, running into a huge wall of public opposition. I think that's true almost everywhere in Europe. That the political parties who thought, we're going to be sort of maga light, we're going to do nationalism, we're going to echo, you know, we're gonna be sort of maga light, we're gonna be,

we're gonna do nationalism, we're gonna echo Trump's rhetoric, we're gonna win on that, that just doesn't work anymore. Yeah, you know, there's been this belief for some time that you have this rising populist movement in the west that was going to overtake all of these countries. Time and time again, as John Meacham would say, it's a good starter. It's a weak finisher. I mean, you look at France, I can't tell you. Last two elections in France, you know, at least in the U.S., the media's been going, this is a 50-50 race. This is Le Pen and Macron. And last time, I'm like, Macron only got 58%, which he did. I mean, I'm not saying populists can't win in Europe, but usually it seems that the parties

are starting to adjust, and there is a backlash to what's happening in America. So the United States, as the leader of the democratic world, does set a kind of example or a kind of model. And people are looking at the Trump model, and they're afraid of it. They're afraid both because it affects their own security, because Trump attacks allies, because they're the allies who are being attacked, but also because they see the chaos. They see the economic chaos, they see the political chaos, and they don't want that and they're afraid of it.

And so once people start to associate that with the far right, you know, you're right, there will be, there will be, there will be a political impact of that. Some of the underlying issues are still there. The far right is still very good at using social media to make people afraid, and make people angry, and make people divided. So none of that's going away. But you're right that there is a strange reverse Trump effect, at least in some countries.

And again, in Poland, obviously, the historic fear grounded in reason of Russia and Russian aggression, of course, not eased over the past three months. Hey, Willie, a lot of moves in Washington and the Trump administration yesterday. Take us through them. All right. Well, let's start with Mike Waltz. He no longer is the national security adviser. President Trump made that announcement yesterday on Truth Social, saying he instead is nominating Waltz to be UN ambassador. Secretary of State Marco Rubio will now serve as the interim national security adviser while

holding on to his current positions. He's got a few of them. The Deputy National Security Advisor, Alex Wong, also leaving the Trump administration. Waltz has been facing increased scrutiny since March when the editor in chief of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, revealed he was added to a signal group chat with administration officials in which they discussed Yemen attack plans. Waltz took responsibility for creating that chat and for accidentally adding Goldberg.

At that time, Trump publicly stood by Waltz telling reporters Waltz had learned his lesson and that he's a good man. Last week in an interview with the Atlantic, the president said Waltz is, quote, fine, despite being beat up by the signal chat controversy. Now the Atlantic reports Waltz's issues within the Trump administration predated that scandal. People familiar with the matter say Waltz did not work well

with senior members of the Trump team and could not prove to the president he was able to manage his own staff. Yesterday, Waltz acknowledged the change in his role writing on social media, I am deeply honored to continue my service to President Trump and our great nation. Vice President J.D. Vance told Fox News this should be seen as a step up for Walts.

It wasn't let go. He's being made ambassador to the United Nations, which of course is a Senate confirmed position. I think he can make a good argument that it's a promotion. But we brought Mike on to do some serious reforms of the National Security Council. He has done that. I think the media wants to frame this as a firing. Donald Trump has fired a lot of people. He doesn't give them Senate confirmed appointments

afterwards. What he thinks is that Mike Walz is gonna better serve the administration, most importantly the American people in that role. And I have an agree with him. So David Ignatius, you've been reporting on this story quite a bit. Mike Waltz may be never a favorite of the diehard Trump loyalists.

On the other hand, Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, who as we heard many senators saying yesterday, thought he should have been the one to lose his job. He hangs on to his job a little bit more popular with the MAGA movement. So what's your sense of what exactly happened here? So Willie, I'd say, first of all, Waltz is the fall guy for what we call Signalgate. He originated the chat. It seems he had Jeffrey Goldberg, our Atlantic friend, on his contact list, and somehow he got in that chat. So that's a part of this.

There had been rumors for many weeks that the White House was interviewing for a successor to Waltz as national security advisor. A lot of people, it's said, didn't want the job, were nervous about it. I reported this morning that beneath the obvious explanation of Signalgate, you see that all the cross currents, ideological, personality, other factors, beneath Trump. Trump is really the only solid pole in his administration. Beneath him, I said there are really three discernible groups. One is around JD Vance. We call him the kind of MAGA believers, strongly supported by Trump's own son, Donald Trump

Jr., playing a role in this administration, very much like Jared Kushner and his wife Ivanka, Trump's daughter, played in the first Trump term. There's another group that I'd say Waltz was part of, the traditional National Security Republicans. And then there's a third fascinating group, the big business billionaires, the oligarchs, Elon Musk obviously, Scott Bessent, the Treasury Secretary, Howard Ludnick, the Commerce Secretary. So there is this ferment underneath Trump, and we saw a bit of it, I think, in yesterday's action. Waltz will be away from the White House where there wasn't good chemistry between him and Trump.

And interestingly, Marco Rubio, who used to be seen as on the outs, has managed to charm his way into Trump's inner circle, has been very supportive. You never see Marco Rubio say anything, but great job, Mr. President. He's now going to be at Trump's side as the temporary national security adviser.

So the Trump world spins underneath, but you must recognize that there is one person making policy. You don't know what it is from day to day sometimes, but that's Donald Trump. Yeah. The guy you used to call Little Marco is now doing the full Kissinger. I mean, Secretary of State, National Security Advisor. Let's talk about the reason signal gate, and I get that, but let's talk about ideologically what lies beneath, and that is this is a guy who's still seen suspiciously as a neo-con.

He's been pushing hard for tough sanctions, real sanctions against Putin and Russia if they don't come through on the ceasefire. And even this past week, reports are that he was pushing really hard inside the administration for really tough measures taken against Russia if they don't step into the role. That's just not what the president or the administration wants to do. Yeah, he just was never a good fit. There were voices like Mike Walz's in Trump's first term.

In the second term, he has little patience for dissenting points of view. He was right from the beginning. He was not seen as sufficiently loyal. He was not seen as MAGA enough. He was indeed too much for a traditional Republican or a neocon. Trump liked him because he thought he'd be a strong defender

of his policies on television. They then felt like that wasn't working either. Waltz was not doing a good job on TV, which matters too much to this president. Let's not overlook the Laura Loomer moment here, where she came into the Oval Office a few weeks ago, got some of the Waltz's staff fired, also planted more seeds of doubt with Trump

about Waltz himself. Signalgate was sort of the final straw, but it wasn't the only thing that was going on here. In fact, the administration was so dead set on not giving any, in their words, any scalps to the media that they didn't want to have any immediate firings. Trump himself said, I don't want anything to disrupt as we report in that Atlantic story for the first 100 days. Well, you know, that's one of the things that was surprising when I heard the news.

I said, wait a second. This goes against his hope that there's not that turnover. And then we saw later in the afternoon, actually, he's moving him to what JD Vance said was actually a promotion. I was just joking during the clip. I wonder if Jimmy Carter had tried to sell that to Dr. Brzezinski, how that would have gone. As the vice president said, you can make the argument that it's a promotion.

It might not win that argument. We also should note the calendar here. He didn't want any change the first 100 days. Walt's out on day 101. That was part of this as well. So, Ann, let's talk about the bigger implications here for Walt's move because as some of our colleagues at the Atlantic noted, even in the initial hours, this was seen as some alarm with some of the allies because Waltz

was more of a conventional Republican, believer in NATO. Yet Trump himself last week or so is toyed with the idea of Russian sanctions, but certainly not to the degree that Waltz was pushing because there's lack of a ceasefire. So talk to us about how this will be perceived around the world as, again, what Trump 2.0 really means in terms of foreign policy. So it's even deeper and weirder than just NATO. What we're seeing is a kind of patrimonialist, a paternalist administration where only one person makes decisions. Trump know, Trump decides,

Trump takes away, Trump wakes up one morning and he says mean things about Putin and he wakes up the next morning and changes his mind. And that's very, very hard for American allies, for American partners, for American trading partners to understand and to be able to plan. You know, they don't have anybody to talk to in this administration. plan. You know, they don't have anybody to talk to in this administration. They're not sure when they speak to somebody at the National Security Council,

are they speaking to someone who represents the president? When they talk to someone at the State Department, is it someone who represents the president? Even the fact that Marco Rubio is now Secretary of State, acting National Security Advisor, he's also acting head of USAID, and I believe he's still acting head of the National Archives. Yes, four jobs, that's right. That's right. That's not a good sign. It means that none of these institutions is being properly run or

properly taken seriously or his real leadership. And that's confusing for anyone who's trying to plan a strategy, who's trying to understand how to talk to the United States, how to understand what our trade policy is, our NATO policy, our military policy. And by the way, Anne, that's not just among the chocolate makers of Europe, as Rumsfeld would say. These are some hardcore supporters of Donald Trump across the world. You go through the Middle East and you, you know, and they will say, well, you know, there's some good things.

We can get things done more quickly. We don't have to worry about the red tape and that's great. But just like you said, every morning they wake up, they're wondering which direction is he gonna go today? What are we gonna need to change today? Yeah, I talked to a Middle Eastern ambassador not that long ago who was from a Trump country that's very pro-Trump and is very excited about him

having won the election. And it was exactly that kind of caution. So, okay, it's great that he's there, but, you know, he had one policy on Gaza a couple weeks ago and he might have a different one next week, and he's not very interested in the details of actually how you would, what's going to happen to the Palestinian people who live there. He doesn't care about them. And we're not sure who else around him is going to be making that decision, if anybody. Yeah. Well, I guess, David, one of the people that won't be is Mike Walz.

JD Vance's line about this being a promotion was just mildly less implausible than Senator Mullins, who said yesterday that what actually this was about was Waltz wanting to spend time with his young family. And the idea that you would then take on the UN ambassadorship because you want a family time. But anyway, he seemed to insist that was the case. One thing that I have heard is that this was from the groups, the sort of three groups that David Ignatius was laying out,

that the first group with the JD Vance, who were the real Hawks and Don Jr., is that they also are looking at Iran and Russia. And they felt that Mike Walz was being too tough on Iran, and they also felt they didn't want him to push Russia as hard as he's been pushing from within the White House. Can you lay out that theory anymore and why that might have got waltzed out of sorts

with the president and the White House? Because I think it's pointing out this basic problem of the president achieving what he promised. There's no peace in Ukraine after a single day. He's talking about an Iran deal that looks a lot like the Obama deal with Iran that he canceled. And it's not a promotion. If there's a backwater for the Trump administration, it's the UN.

And the broader problem is just the utter lack of experience on the entire national security team. Other than Marco Rubio, who has tremendous experience in Congress, you've got Pete Hegseth, who's struggling to run the Pentagon. Waltz is now out. And he's a decorated special forces soldier. He serves this country incredibly well and was put in a very difficult position. He had no experience to serve as national security advisor. So you see this over and over again.

The loyalty to the president, people who will message and give these sort of simple answers to the MAGA base and change and chaos and instability. It's similar in some ways to the first term. We should note some of the political implications here. This does seem to buy Hegseth some time, but Mike Walz now has to go to a confirmation hearing. Signalgate is going to dominate that hearing.

Not great for him, but also going to revive some questions about Hegseth, no doubt, and that whole scandal, Joe. And we should also note that the Trump administration picked three Republicans from the House to fill positions within the administration. Matt Gaetz never made it. Elise Stefanik had to be withdrawn from U.N. ambassador. And now Mike Walz, losing the national security adviser, yes, gets a consolation prize in Turtle Bay, but gave up a very safe congressional seat for a pretty tough 100 days.

Yeah, and most likely a tough election coming up next year. So, David Ignatius, if you could follow up on Ann Applebaum's observation about how allies and those who see themselves as adversaries wake up every morning trying to figure out exactly what's going to go on inside the White House, what's happening with negotiations. Fascinating to hear somebody close to the president not liking Waltz because he's too

tough on Iran. Come on. What is this? So anyway, I'm curious, at least in New York, it was not passed over lightly that the New York Post, Murdoch's New York Post, absolutely eviscerated, politically deboned Witkoff, who is sort of Donald Trump's point man out there. I mean, that was a strong message from Rupert Murdoch to the Trump White House that in their opinion at least that this guy is a clown and yet he's running point from Russia to Iran to the Middle East. So what are you

hearing in your reporting about concerns about US foreign policy and who's running it? So Joe, as the Waltz News was breaking, I happened to be talking to several senior foreign officials and their reaction was astonishment. Mike Waltz is the traditional American national security figure. The time he served in special forces is widely respected. He's an orderly person. He runs the National Security Council the way it typically is run and people were just

flummoxed. I think part of the uncertainty that people have is that the two key negotiating roles with Iran and with Russia have been given to somebody who has essentially no foreign policy negotiating experience, namely Steve Waltz, president's best friend, fellow billionaire, fellow real estate dealer. People say he's a tough bargainer, can be in business, but that he has no background in these areas. So our allies are wondering, where is this guy going? These are big consequential negotiations. What Europe has done consequential negotiations. What Europe has done is say, okay, America, you handle Russia.

You get concessions from Russia. Trump finally seems to be willing to push a little bit with sanctions, other pressure against Russia. And Europe says, we'll handle Ukraine. We'll bring Ukraine into this negotiation. And as unwieldy as that process sounds, it's actually begun to make some small progress. We're a little closer today to having an agreement that might actually protect Ukraine's security going forward after a ceasefire than we were two, three weeks ago.

So as unwieldy as this process is, just recently there's been progress. I think the agreement that they signed yesterday providing for what they now call a reconstruction investment fund for Ukraine shows that there's some positive evolution, but it is coming out of a really unwieldy policy process. The devil will be in the details, as always. The Washington Post, David Ignatius. David, thanks so much, as always. We appreciate it. Still ahead on Morning Joe, China is signaling a willingness to at least begin trade talks with the United States. We'll go over what Beijing is saying this morning, what it could mean for the US

economy. Plus, one of the nation's busiest airports is warning about more possible delays and cancellations as we head into the summer travel season after a day of major ground stops. We'll have much more on that when Morning Joe comes back in just 90 seconds. The Transportation Secretary is warning this morning of cracks in the system after travelers at Newark Airport once again faced hours-long delays and disruptions yesterday. NBC News senior correspondent Tom Costello has the latest. At one of America's busiest airports, Gridlock, 24 hours of ground stops and delays at Newark International, a critical hub for United.

Arriving flights delayed 5 to 12 hours. This red-eye flight from San Francisco to Newark turned around mid flight on the West Coast passengers waiting in long lines. This is the FAA blames the chaos on equipment issues runway construction at Newark and staffing issues of Philadelphia Traycon which guides aircraft in and out of the airport. What I think you're seeing is you're starting to see cracks

in the system. Still short some 3,000 controllers nationwide, the DOT unveiled plans to staff up within three to four years, including recruiting more military controllers, bonuses for academy grads and veteran controllers who don't leave before mandatory retirement at 56. One newer controller tells NBC News they lost radars on Monday, radials on Wednesday, and things need to change. It's not a safe situation for the flying public. The FAA and the ATC Union insist air travel is safe. I think this is a pivotal moment of seeing what the stresses and pressures of this career path are.

Stress and strain with summer travel weeks away. Tom Costello reporting there. Joe, yesterday the FAA at Newark, which is obviously a major hub in the New York area creating domino effects across the country and around the world actually into Europe as well, said that the average delay on departures was five hours. The average delay on arrivals was about an hour and a half. Just a complete mess and perhaps a preview of coming attractions this summer with those staffing shortages. Yeah, I will say post post covid post pandemic, we have had some pretty grisly summer summers of travel, just absolutely dismal.

Let's hope this is not the start of yet another one. And let's get back to the Russian-Ukraine negotiation right now. David seems a bit bullish that we're moving in the right direction. We certainly haven't heard that from the Hill and haven't heard that from a lot of diplomats. I guess the question is, the central question is, does Vladimir Putin want peace? So he has given no indication in public, nor have any of his propagandists or people who speak for him given any indication that he wants to end the war or that he wants the Ukraine to emerge as a sovereign country with its own ability to make policy and to create a relationship with Europe and to join the European unions.

He's never acknowledged it. He's still talking about essentially regime change in Ukraine. He's still talking about Ukrainians as Nazis. I mean, none of that is gone. And so you have to ask, have the Russians moved at all? Have they made any concessions? And actually, why would Putin move? Again, I mean, my operating theory is that since he was burning papers in the East German

embassy in 1989, his dream has been to reconstitute the old Russian empire, not the Soviet Union, but the old Russian empire, get Kiev, get Odessa, and return to glory. Why would he change that if he doesn't have a president pushing him every day? No, that's absolutely true. And of course, now he has an even bigger goal. So now his goal is also undermine the Western alliance, undermine international law, demonstrate that he can break all the rules, he can break the Geneva Conventions,

he can kidnap Ukrainian children, about 20,000 Ukrainian children, and he can get away with it. And he's trying to show that the post-war world that we led and that we helped to build doesn't exist anymore. And that's actually his real purpose now. So how does a leader from a country that has a GDP that is smaller than the state of Texas

cause so much unrest in the United States and the West over the past nine years? Talk about punching above your weight. It's extraordinary. It's partly because he has allies here and has had for some time. So he has he has American you know so-called journalists and propagandists who are willing to repeat what he says. He's effectively used social media. He has allies in the business community. You know he has you know had allies in the New York real estate community.

A lot of money that came into real estate would came through shell companies, into buildings like the ones that Donald Trump built. He's been building this kind of influence mechanism for a long time. And it's not something that's secret. It's not spies who are doing it. Most of it's in the open.

The Russian state media was paying a Tennessee based media company to produce videos. And we learned that last summer. By the way, they're still interviewing people in the administration. They're still both those same people that were getting paid by Russia through this shell corporation are still one of them is now in the White House press corps. Yeah, exactly. David, your thoughts? One of them is, I don't know if he was paid, but is a nominee to be the U.S. attorney in Washington, Ed Martin, who participated or had a role, was there on January 6th. And then he's had over, I believe, 100 appearances on RT. So that is the key thing of the alliances.

And then again, with Putin, it's the sheer ruthlessness which he uses in Russia. He can have so many soldiers, young soldiers die and be wounded in Ukraine and survive politically. He can bluntly kill off his enemies. And that works when you have a United States that's divided going back and forth. So why do we always hear there were 40,000 people killed and Russians killed in Afghanistan and the mothers rose up and basically brought the Soviet leadership down to force them to bring Russians home.

Why is the mass or the casualties approaching a million and we still don't see that happening? So actually the late 80s, the 80s in Russia were a time when there was more openness and people were more willing to listen to the openness and people were more willing to listen to the powers that be were more willing to listen to public opinion than now. I mean, I don't think people have really understood the degree to which Putin has turned back the clock in Russia, not to the Gorbachev era, or not into the late 80s, but into something earlier. It's a very, very harsh, very strict police state now.

All right. NBC News National Security Editor David Rode and staff writer for The Atlantic and Apple Bomb, thank you both so much. Come back soon and report on the Polish election as we move forward. When's the first round? I think it's May 18th. May 18th. Okay.

We will be carrying that live. Anyway, coming up, the New York Knicks. Big win last night. We're going to be talking about that to what's going on with Bill Belichick. A lot to cover this morning with Pablo Torre. He joins us next on Morning Joe. We're good. To Brunson. Defended by Thompson, 15 seconds left. Brunson takes a peek at the clock.

Thompson digging in defensively, eight seconds Brunson stops at a dime, launches. Oh yeah, Jalen Brunson buries it. What a shot Jalen Brunson seals the series for the Knicks with that tie breaking three pointer with four seconds left in regulation, losing his defender, Asur Thompson, and then calmly draining the three a 40 point night from Brunson as the Knicks eliminate the Detroit Pistons, one 16, one 13 on the road in game six of that first round series. As we mentioned earlier, the Knicks eliminate the Detroit Pistons 116-113 on the road in game six of that first round series as we mentioned earlier the Knicks now advance to play the defending champion Celtics against the Nuggets last night, a 111-105 win at

home. Join us now. The host of Pablo Torre finds out on Metal Dark Media and SMBC contributor, our good friend Pablo Torre. Pablo, good to see you. I see you holding up the back page. That's right. Look at this, Willie.

We got Subway Crime and also that. Subway Berve and Mercy Mercy Me. New York is back, Joe. New York could never be more back. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, I mean, Pablo back page of the post calling Jalen Brunson a legend if he wasn't already. He certainly is.

This series was, last night was a perfect encapsulation of the series, which is the Knicks go up, then they fall apart they go down they were up by 11 points in the fourth quarter then they're down by seven points in the fourth quarter

then they fight their way back and Brunson hits the big shot Pistons turn the ball over had a chance actually to tie it at an open look but the ball went out of bounds your assessment of Jalen Brunson for starters and then looking

ahead to the Knicks and Boston. Obviously, as John said earlier, the Celtics have really had the Knicks number this year. They're probably a better team. They're favored by eight and a half points in game one but whenever these two cities get together, it's gonna be fun. Yeah, I don't wanna hear it from Lemire right now and I say that as somebody who has tried to emotionally disassociate from the Knicks

as someone who grew up a Knicks fan Willie as I know you are. The legend of Jalen Brunson is a real one. And I always say when I come on this show that the thing about New York sports is that it tests you by shining the brightest possible spotlight, putting the most pressure on you and daring you not to melt. And so Jalen Brunson has established himself as not merely one of the most pressure on you and daring you not to melt. And so Jalen Brunson has established himself as not merely one of the most clutch players in the league, but clearly one of the most clutch players in NBA recent history. And each of these games, each of these games has been

close. You know, I am somebody who came into this series saying the Pistons being tough, being physical, clearly almost coming back to win this, they are not something to be trifled with. And so Jalen Brunson hitting that shot in that way is specifically a mythology ceiling kind of an act. And into the second round goes a team that people were preemptively disappointed by only to get the electricity. Is it just me?

I mean, you know, Nick's had a big win, but I'm just I'm just reading Pablo's body. Like he's he's nervous. It's kind of like, you know, from the fire into the frying pan. You seem a little shaken. You don't need to get to the mirror and his hand. We don't do that. Give the city 12 hours. Willie, does does he really have that much of a reason

to be that scared of the Celtics? Because right now seems to be very scared of the Celtics. Well, frankly, the Celtics completely handled the Knicks this year. The games weren't even that close, but the playoffs are different. We'll see. They're different. They're the more talented team, I'll say that, and they're a better rested team. But when you watch what Brunson is able to do, who knows in the playoffs? I mean, I will say

Pablo, I totally agree with you on the Pistons. They were so much better and tougher than I knew. I didn't follow them that closely this year. They obviously had an incredible turnaround, but big credit to them. A lot of young guys, they're going to be good for a long time. But yes, to answer your question, Joe, we do have reasons to be nervous looking at but right now we celebrate the legend of Jalen Brown you know you know that look on the mirrors face is not a look I see when we're talking about Red Sox baseball. He looks more like Pablo when he's talking about the upcoming next Celtic series but there is a self satisfied smugness to the

mirrors face right now. It's as if he knows it's gonna be a 4-0 sweep. Lamir, tell us why the Celtics are destined for the NBA Championship. Well, we'll see if Jalen Brunson gets away with those push-offs next round. Like he did there. I actually think it's gonna be a tighter series than people expect. The Celtics rightly favor, they've got a lot of defenders they can throw at Brunson. The Knicks have really moved away from any other part of their offense. Like, where'd Kat go last night? Celtics are deep, they're home, they're well rested,

they've been through these wars before. Yeah, it is, and they've had time. They've had a couple of nagging injuries, they've had time for those to heal. Yeah, I think Celtics are, let's say, rightly favored in this round. Cat, you saying that makes me feel like you're a cat that ate the bird right now.

You're just like, you know, I don't know. I don't know if that's going to happen. Meanwhile, feathers are just like sputtering out. Look, Joe, the Knicks are, I've made this comparison before about the Mets, and I will extend it to the Knicks as a compliment. There is a bit of a wooden roller coaster vibe. Feels like it's gonna fall apart,

but yet they persist. Yet they persist. I just want people to know that when it comes to how this season for the Knicks ended last year, right? They got eliminated before the conference finals. There was Jalen Bronson and Josh Hart on the street, 8th Avenue, shaking people's hands as if they had won

something, won a title. And so when it comes to the Celtics, the electricity and the nervousness is the knowledge that you're not going to get anyone's hands to shake if this series does not go well. There's still actual real pressure here because now this team has to prove that they're better than they were last year, that it wasn't just a fluke Willie let's go from then be a

championship the hunt for the NBA championship To the the pages of people magazine and talk about the bill Bella-jacked Wow, you know we usually we don't dabble in the salacious side of sports, but now some friends and even members of the family of Bill Belichick say they're a little worried about the 73 year old football coach, the legend over his relationship with his 24 year old girlfriend, Jordan Hudson, follows increased attention on the couple after her interjection. And we're told multiple interjections. The CBS only included one of them in the edited interview during Belichick's recent sit down with CBS News. How did you guys meet? I'm not talking about this. No?

Oh my God. Belichick defended Hudson against critics who say she was attempting to control the conversation, arguing Hudson was simply doing her job to ensure the interview stayed on track. Her job, I guess. Belichick's own daughter-in-law disagreed with that assessment on social media, writing, quote, publicists act in a professional manner and don't storm offset delaying an interview. Wow, his daughter-in-law. Meanwhile, NBA Hall of Famer broadcaster Charles Barkley weighed in on the situation saying he is starting to be concerned about his longtime friend Bill Belichick. Pablo, your thoughts? There is nobody in sports and possibly human civilization that is acting more unlike his previous self than Bill Belichick. And so when it comes to what's

happening, I'll just tell you that I've been tracking this story and this fisherman and that mermaid and also this smiling happy couple for months now. By the way, that was Lemire's Christmas card last year. He was the mermaid. Go ahead. I love Bill Belichick. It's a remarkable thing. And look, on some level, I just want to cut to the chase here. Bill Belichick is not the first older man to fall for a younger woman, right? I am not here to yuck anyone's yum as I often say to you, Joe. That's not what I'm doing. I don't think that's a concern though.

I think the concern if you look at Charles Barkley and other people that are expressing concern, they're concerned that Belichick may not be with it. Well, this is where it comes to be a valid question. Because he's acting so unlike himself. And because she's acting not merely as his partner, but his business partner, and in fact, his agent, representative, manager, CEO of his company, person who wrote an email.

I read somewhere every email goes through her. Yes, there were FOIA. She's at every UNC football practice. Yes, and so what I'm hearing is that UNC Carolina is very concerned about the way in which she has been the voice and face, and also when it comes to how she's been running his life. She's the one in control.

I've talked to people now, Joe. I've been reporting on this story for my show for months now. At every stop he's made, because he's also now Mr. Media Guy, at every stop she has been omnipresent and making the calls. And so when it comes to what is happening here, why is he so unlike himself? Why is his daughter-in-law and old friends and certainly people who used to play for him that I've talked to, they're saying what's even more

astounding than the mere fact that, wow, he's in a relationship with a younger woman, is the fact that all this is happening publicly. Yeah. Publicly. So you've seen Belichick for decades. Ben, obviously, somebody that you've cheered for every Sunday. Do you see something different here? Are you concerned? To Pablo's original point, Bill Belichick is such a disciplinary and so in control everything about him is I'm in control of every piece of my life and every minutiae of a football team that's what made

him special that's eventually why some guys couldn't play for him that that's a bill to was in the scene, he's such control over wide swaths of his of his life. You know as he does promote a book which also seems so unlike him doing all the media stuff, as you mentioned, so unlike him. Yeah, there's a lot of talk back in New England that people were just like, who is this guy? And some, you know, if he says he's happy, he's happy,

but there's some worry being expressed. All right, still ahead. Former, this is a sharp turn, former national security advisor under President Biden, Jake Sullivan is going to be here. We're gonna ask him about Bill Belich to be here. We're going to ask him about Bill Belichick. No, actually, we'll ask him to weigh in on new staff shakeups in the Trump administration and also get his take on what's going on across the world. Also, MSNBC's Stephanie Ruhl is going to join us with her key takeaways from the town hall event she hosted last night

with recently forced out federal workers. Morning Joe, we'll be right back. America's most prominent religious figures were there. You know, I've sat with President Trump with no cameras around, nobody listening, nobody watching and I'm telling you, this is a man of deep faith, a man of deep conviction. Not just one deep conviction, 34 deep felony convictions. Ah, they walked right into that one.

Walked right into that. Welcome back to Morning Joe. Jonathan Lemire, Cady K, Pablo Torre still with us and joining the conversation this hour. NBC News senior business analyst, host of The 11th Hour, our good friend Stephanie Ruhl also writer at large the New York Times Elizabeth Buehmiller and member of the New York Times editorial board Mara Gay good morning to you all so Mickey is off this morning because May 2nd Joe is

a very special day around here. It is because birthday and I'm sure she relaxed by waking up at 3 AM going for a brisk 14 mile run while booking guests for Monday's show. She did. She spends her birthdays a little differently than you and I do, Willie. So, yeah, but by the way, Mika's birthday the day before Willie's birthday. So we do go back to back on this show. We go back to back. We do. We do. So we're going to we've got a lot to cover. We get all of

our sports news out of the way last hour. So so Meek will be if Meek is just waking up now and watching. Sweetie, we've been doing news. Happy birthday. Happy birthday. Happy birthday. Stop talking. Katty, we're going to start off by talking about the trade war. But first, let's talk about what Washington has been talking about for the past 24 hours, and that is the president getting rid of his national security adviser, Mike Walz, moving him over to the UN, which his vice president, JD Vance, suggests just might be seen as a promotion. Yeah, tricky to see how moving to New York and out of the realm of the Oval Office is really a promotion. Almost as hard as to see that this is a reason because he wants to spend more time

with his family. This is a demotion. And I guess he wasn't thrown out totally because we know that the president regretted getting rid of Michael Flynn as early as he did in his first term in office under media pressure. And so he kind of can move him aside. Senate confirmation hearings notwithstanding. Let's see whether he actually has to get through those first of all. And it distracts from the fact that he's been moved because he can announce that Marco Rubio, who has done a most stunning job in re-engraciating himself into Donald Trump's inner circle with

weekend trips down to Mar-a-Lago, the kind of flattery that even Ann Coulter is a little embarrassed about in those Kim Jong-il style cabinet meetings. So it was a kind of neat way of getting rid of somebody without really getting rid of them, I guess. And Elizabeth Buhmiller, my gosh, what a transformation from little Marco to Henry Kissinger, now the secretary of state and the national security adviser. Now you put it like that. Pretty good move.

What does it mean for the Trump administration? Well, he also—Marco Rubio has two other jobs, as you see right there. He's also the—he's the acting archivist of the National Archives. He's also the acting administrator of USAID, which hardly exists anymore. Soon to be the general manager of the Miami Marlins, but go ahead. Right. It just, I think, Marco Rubio's done an excellent job, and as you said, ingratiating himself to the president.

This is a man who was very tough on Russia, very tough on Iran, and has just melded himself to the president. This is a man who was very tough on Russia, very tough on Iran, and has just melded himself to the president. He has actually, you know, he has gone along with these massive cuts to the State Department budget that just has taken that. And he's also very close to Suzy Wilde, the White House chief of staff. They know each other from Florida. And I think that he has found a comfortable spot for himself, probably for as long as he wants in this administration. And obviously, and the National Security Advisor, I'd

like to point out that the longest-serving National Security Advisor for Donald Trump was John Bolton, and that was all of 17 months. So he's had a long, lot of National Security Advisors. Memories that'll last a lunchtime. Willie, we have this story, a story we didn't get to the first hour because we were so packed with sports news, but a really, really surprising, not surprising, but I guess if you look at the judge, if you look at the location, ruling yesterday where you had a Trump-appointed federal judge in South Texas actually saying that the president is illegally implementing the Alien and Enemies Act.

So that's going to be fascinating. Another story we'll be talking about this hour. Yeah, and those rulings, by the way, are starting to stack up against the president. As you said, a Trump-appointed judge down there in Texas. We're going to get into the details of that story in just one minute, but we do want to talk about the economy because the owners of businesses, large and small, are voicing their concerns over the potential impact President Trump's tariffs could have and likely will have on consumers. NBC News senior business correspondent Christine Romans has more.

With dire warnings over President Trump's tariffs, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce practically begging the White House for tariff relief for small businesses, telling the administration, even if it only takes weeks or months to reach agreements, many small businesses will suffer irreparable harm. These tariffs are just adding uncertainty and complexity at a time when these small businesses just don't have the cash flow to cover it. The Chamber's CEO says she's speaking up for Main Street companies that don't have the lobbyists and lawyers like big public names. Businesses like Bonnie Bray Flowers in Denver. Got our roses from Ecuador.

Facing Mother's Day and graduation with new costs they never anticipated. Everything that is imported from another country, you know, adding anywhere from 10 to 20 percent on every one of our invoices. Big companies too with big tariff price tags. GM warning investors of current tariff exposure of four to five billion dollars. Hershey says tariffs will cost it up to $20 million this quarter. Stanley Blackendecker says it's already raised prices because of tariffs and will raise them again next month. Consumers meanwhile growing more cautious. Sales at McDonald's in the U.S. fell 3.6 percent, the biggest drop since the pandemic. Airlines also seeing passengers pull back. Southwest CEO Bob Jordan.

The demand is way down. Now, a lot of that is, I think, the consumer reaction to the tariffs. The administration's message, stay calm. We didn't get here overnight. We're not gonna fix this overnight, but I do think uncertainty will go away. Markets closed higher for the day,

and after the bell on an earnings call, Apple CEO Tim Cook publicly addressed the trade war. Assuming the current global tariff rates, policies and applications do not change for the balance of the quarter and no new tariffs are added, we estimate the impact to add $900 million to our costs. Christine Romans reporting there. So Stephanie, we get a jobs report out just over just under 90 minutes from now. We had that growth report that came out that showed a

slowing economy a couple of days ago. The numbers are stacking up, the prices are rising, and we're not even into the worst of it. Forecasters expect the real inflation to kick in the next couple of quarters and perhaps into the holiday season. So my question for you is, someone who probably, who I know has covered Secretary Besson probably knows him a little bit, does he believe what he just said there and what he continues to say, which is that these tariffs are a good idea and that if we can accept this short-term pain that golden age the president has promised is just on the other side of it. From the sources that I speak to, who are Scott Besson's former colleagues, competitors, peers, no, not one word of it.

And I think that's the hardest thing. We all know it's difficult to be on TV. But the reason he might appear awkward on television is because he knows he's not telling the truth. And even when he talks about, you know, we're making this shift because he just said earlier this week, we're not going back to the jobs of the truth. And even when he talks about, you know, we're making this shift, because he just said earlier this week, we're not going back to the jobs of the past. We're bringing back industrial jobs of the future. Willie, if that were the case, then wouldn't we see exemptions for apparel companies?

Because the jobs of the future are not bringing back sweatshops, clothing manufacturers. We are a manufacturing hub. We're the second largest manufacturer in the world. What we have figured out over time is how to optimize our manufacturing. Now, we certainly have some unfair trade agreements. If we wanted to get together with our allies, we could do so. But what we're doing with China, mano e mano, is devastating for businesses. And when you talk about the unemployment number, we don't know what it's going to be yet.

But the worst is yet to come. When you've got Apple, one of the most profitable countries in the world, that got one of the first exemptions from the president, and of course, Tim Cook, who made his own million dollar donation to the president, when they're telling you they're going to take a 900 million dollar hit, what do you think it's going to do for the toy store in your downtown? You know, Scott Besson, of course, told somebody connected to this show during the transition that the tariff talk was just opening negotiations. And he believed it.

I think you could say that of a lot of people on Wall Street. But, Mara, let's talk about how these tariffs are going to be impacting everybody from Tim Cook to Elon Musk, who has expressed real concerns, frantic private concerns to people close to him, to toy store owners. And it's so interesting that Seth talked about privately run toy store owners. I talked to a friend yesterday in New York who has young children who said he got a call and the toy store owner said we need to know what toys would you be willing to pay 20 to 25 percent more for because those are the only toys we're going to be able to afford to order.

Which is again just extraordinary that that's where we are in 2025. So much for free enterprise. Well, free enterprise, it's also just such a blunt instrument. I mean, there are ways to use tariffs along with other tool sets to reshape the economy, if that's what we were talking about doing. But this is a case where Donald Trump is using a blunt instrument and saying, well, I'll damage everything first and see what happens later. I mean, the other part that's very frustrating to me, and I don't know that we're talking enough about this, but it's not going to hit everybody equally. I mean,

there are companies like McDonald's, they can kind of handle and weather a 3.6% decrease in sales right now. Well, we just saw McDonald's, we saw Southwest Airlines, we saw Apple, we see Tesla. They're going to be able to weather it. Small business owners, family business owners, family run restaurants. There are a lot of people, you know. But also consumers. The hardware store on Main Street USA, they're all going to be absolutely hammered. Right.

I mean, small businesses, I know because my father was a small business owner, you're not dealing with enormous cash flow. And that's what's so difficult about this. This is going to hit small businesses first, which by the way, provide many wonderful jobs in American society. Some of the best jobs, I would argue. And on top of that, the consumer is going to, is being hit. So we have Americans who, you know, by the way,

if you are just an average American, you're not wealthy, you're actually spending more and more percentage, a much higher percentage of your income on these tariffs than the wealthy are. So this is actually, you know, it's a tax that's hitting the poor people harder, working people harder, the middle class harder, and it's easier for the wealthier to pay more. It's easier for big corporations to pay more. And all the while, I'm not hearing a whole lot about new manufacturing jobs becoming available

in the heartland. So, you know, what is this about? It really doesn't feel like it was well thought through at all. And I think that the reaction from Wall Street is only adding to the uncertainty, What is this about? It really doesn't feel like it was well thought through at all. And I think that the reaction from Wall Street is only adding to the uncertainty, because it appears that, just like the Republicans in 2016, they thought they could control the man in the White House.

And that was a fool's errand. And so what now? What is their next move? And who's talking to the president right now? And the problem is, Cady, and we've talked about it for some time, this is something that President Trump believes strongly in, that you have to put up these tariffs that will help get manufacturing jobs back to the United States. We heard Elon Musk before the election saying Americans were going to have to go through a tough period

possibly to get to where they needed to go. Donald Trump said the same thing. He did a couple of days ago as well. But again, the rub here is that we've had globalizations in 1979 since we normalized trade with China. And it's going to take a very long time to unwind 45 years of globalization. And the wreckage, I don't know many economists that don't believe that the wreckage will just be, again, irreversible, especially as

the Chamber's saying, there are a lot of these small business owners who operate month to month. Maybe they have a two or three month rainy day fund, but that's it. And you're going to have a lot of family businesses that have been passed down, you know, generation to generation, that are going to go out of business in the next three to six months if we don't see some real negotiations fast.