Morning Joe - Morning Joe 5/28/24

Episode Date: May 28, 2024

Trump rants about court cases in Memorial Day message

Because freedom has never been guaranteed, every generation has to earn it, fight for it, defend it in battle between autocracy and democracy, between the greed of a few and the rights of many. It matters. Our democracy is more than just a system of government. It's the very soul of America. It's how we've been able to constantly adapt through the centuries. It's why we've always emerged from every challenge stronger than we went in. And it's how we come together as one nation, united. And just as our fallen heroes have kept the ultimate faith with our country and our democracy,

we must keep faith with them. Because of them, all of them, that we stand here today. We will never forget that. We will never, ever, ever stop working for tomorrow, a more perfect union, which they lived and which they died for. That was their promise. That's our promise, our promise today to them. That's our promise always. Good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Tuesday, May 28th. That was President Biden marking Memorial Day at Arlington National Cemetery with a somber message about freedom, democracy and honoring those who've made the ultimate sacrifice for our country.

It's certainly a day for reflection across the country. Really is. And it's a special day and has long been a special day for public servants who focused on those who have given their all, given their lives to this country. That's something that Donald Trump has said and told a general who was his chief of staff. He didn't understand that concept. Why would anybody give their all for America? And, of course, maybe that's why he marked Memorial Day by blasting, well, anybody who was opposed to him and various legal proceedings against him in a post yesterday morning.

Trump wrote in part, quote, Happy Memorial Day to all. Oh, my God. Including the human scum that are working so hard to destroy. You know, I want to I want to stop there, Willie, because he attacks judges. He attacks the woman that he was he was found liable for sexually assaulting, did all of that. And it just reminds me that on a somber day like that, just reminds me what was said by Ken Burns at Brandeis University, where he was talking to the students and he told them, you know, how America came to be, how it's striving to be a more perfect union, just like President Biden said. But he said, choose values over vulgarity. And sadly, a lot of Americans are not following that basic advice and the basic values of being patriotic and being a good citizen of this country. And you've got to look to people who use holidays, whether it's Christmas or whether, you know, it's Thanksgiving or whether it's Memorial Day, a sacred day like Memorial Day

for America to attack, quote, human scum defined by Donald Trump as anybody who doesn't support him. Yeah, that was an extraordinary commencement address by Ken Burns at Brandeis. We're going to play some of that coming up in just a little bit. So much in there, so much to say about our country, where we are, where we're headed, where we've been. Of course, he's such a good student of history. But yeah, I mean, Joe, what's disconcerting, I think, most about it is a phenomenon we've seen now develop over the last decade or so, which is the people who laugh and cheer along the show.

Even yesterday, those posts, they viewed as some kind of a troll and it'll upset us. And we'll talk about it today, even on the day where they call themselves patriots. A lot of those people. But a day he takes to make about himself, his own sacrifice on Memorial Day, his own sacrifice, his own martyrdom. It's always about him. And to the point you made earlier, he asked in that same conversation, according to General Kelly, looking at those headstones, what was in it for them? Why would you give your life for America? Why would you give your life in the defense of freedom around the world? What was in it for them? He genuinely, sincerely, deeply at his core does not understand the sacrifice of the military, the sacrifice of people who put their lives on the line for the country. That's

just it's part of who he is. And we saw it on display again yesterday. And we always talk about this contrast. Look at the president, United States at Arlington, a place that gives anybody who has a patriotic bone in their body or a human bone in their body chills just to walk through and look at those headstones and then look at what his opponent in this election was doing yesterday. There's your contrast right there. And it wasn't just former President Trump. It was his son, Eric, getting some well-deserved backlash over his social media posts after one user posted a photo of the Trump family with the caption, quote, The family that gave up everything to save America. Thank you. Oh, my God. This is over Memorial Day weekend. Eric Trump reposted writing and we will do it again.

Former Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, a military pilot, as you know, responded, quote, Your family has sacrificed nothing. Your name will become synonymous with Benedict Arnold. And how dare you tweet this this weekend? You don't know the first thing about service, you child. to Eric Trump there. This comes after Eric Trump posted a Memorial Day promotion for the Trump store on Instagram that read, we are honoring our brave men and women this weekend. Please buy our stuff. Eric since deleted that post, the Trump website still promoting that Memorial Day sale. So there it all is in one place, guys. OK, there it is. The contrast, if anyone needed one, along with Joe, Willie and me, we have the host of Way Too Early, White House bureau chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire. NBC News national affairs analyst John Howman is with us. He is a partner and chief political columnist at Puck and Rogers chair in the American presidency at Vanderbilt University, Pulitzer Prize winning presidential historian John Meacham. John is out with a new book entitled The Call to Serve the Life of an American President, George Herbert Walker Bush. We will get into that a little later and

maybe a little now, too. Yeah. Hey, John, I just briefly I just wanted you to briefly talk to us about this Memorial Day. The contrast, what we've heard from President Trump's own staff members about him being completely baffled by service to one's country, the military, by the loss of life, basically calling those who were killed losers. I want to ask you, again, the contrast, not just between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, but between Donald Trump and every president that's ever served this country before when we get to this point. And I must say, too, the people who we have discussed before in their little fleece vests, who we talk about it for money, them supporting Trump because I think they'll make more money, of course, is ridiculous because Dow's at 40,000. But this is another thing I've never really been able to figure out.

The very people who spent their entire life, you know, beating their chest self-righteously about their patriotism, telling the left that they don't love America and, you know, America, love it or leave it. These are the very people who are supporting a man who denigrates the memory of those who have served and sacrificed all for America. And I must say, yeah, we're not shocked by anything Donald Trump says. We're not shocked by anything Donald Trump says. We're not shocked by anything he says anymore. We are shocked by those we know who watch this man denigrate the memory of the fallen and happily support him, happily vote for him, happily turn the country back over to him. Yeah, I think about this as you do all the time, and I think part of it is this odd decision that a lot of people have made that politics and Trump is really about the contest and not about the substance. It's about winning at any cost. And there's a suspension of reason, of history, of custom,ennial struggle now that has become politics as this form of really a sick kind of entertainment. thinking obviously about President Bush, a senior who on his 18th birthday, 100 years ago, well, 82 years ago, joins the, you know, graduates from Andover and then gets in a car and drives to

Boston where he takes an oath as a naval cadet. He had considered joining the Royal Air Force in Canada because you could be a pilot before you were 18. And then cut to the first Gulf War, he's watching CNN upstairs in the study, and he starts to cry because he remembers the only time he ever saw his father cry was when he put George Bush on the train at Penn Station to go off to World War Two. And maybe that sounds sentimental and it sounds like the winds of war meets Tom Brokaw. But it happened and it happened not that long ago. And for so many people to suspend those values is something they're going to have to answer for forever. And the good news is there's time. There's time. There's time to reestablish those values.

All right. Well, closing arguments are scheduled to begin this morning in Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial. The defense will go first with Trump attorney Todd Blanche expected to spend several hours on his summation argument. He will try to convince the jury the government did not meet its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump not only falsified business records, but also had an intent to defraud that included, quote, an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof. The prosecution will follow Blanche, likely reminding jurors they can trust the financial paperwork they've seen and the witnesses they've heard from. The arguments could take up most of the day. Once finished, there will be no rebuttals. Judge Juan Marchand will then give the jury its instructions, which is expected to last about an hour.

So that could happen tomorrow. Let's bring in former litigator and MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin and former U.S. attorney and MSNBC legal analyst Joyce Vance. So, Lisa, I'll start with you from covering it from inside the courthouse. What are you going to be watching for and what can we expect today specifically from each side's closing arguments? So, Mika, today, one of the things I'm going to be looking for is how Todd Blanche constructs a narrative out of what usually is a hole poking. When you're the defense, what you really want to do is try and create doubt in the jurors' minds about the narrative that they've just heard. So, for example, Todd Blanch will spend a lot of time saying that these legal invoices and the other documentation of the repayment scheme, they're not actually false because, in fact, Michael Cohen was

appointed as the personal attorney to Donald Trump. He did, in fact, perform legal services. And it wasn't incorrect for these documents to then refer to the payments as for legal expenses or retainers. But you can only do that sort of hole poking for so long. So how Todd Blanch turns that exercise into a coherent, cohesive narrative that the jurors follow and eagerly is something I'm interested in seeing. On the other side, Josh Steinglass's job is less about feelings and more about facts. And it is to convince the jury that everything that they've seen

fits together neatly like a jigsaw puzzle. So he has elicited evidence over these last six weeks, sometimes from disparate time periods or people who don't go together. Now's the time for them to connect the dots in the ultimate way, chronologically, methodically, and most importantly, without very much reliance on Michael Cohen. They want to show the jury that they don't really need Michael Cohen to prove their case. There are a couple of episodes where Michael Cohen's testimony stands alone and unrebutted because anybody else who was in the room has not taken the stand or was not called to the stand.

But for the most part, all of the evidence in this case comes from other sources, too, from people like David Pecker and Hope Hicks, from a series of documents that range from the allegedly falsified documents themselves to phone records and emails and texts. There is a mountain of evidence in this case. It's Josh Steinglass's job today to convince the jury of just how much there is and how little of it came from the mouth of one Michael Cohen. Lisa, can we talk briefly about the mechanics of what we're going to see today, which is that because this is a New York state criminal trial, the defense goes first.

Prosecution gets the last word, which is sort of not what we've seen in other places or people are used to seeing in the movies. Donald Trump says in a post yesterday that this is unfair to him. It's a witch hunt, etc., etc. We should point out this is not unique to Donald Trump. This is New York State criminal court. Why do they do it that way and how does it impact what the jury hears effectively? I'll give you the best case for New York State doing it this way. It's because the prosecution bears the burden of proof. They get to go last. If your burden is to show beyond a reasonable doubt that these crimes were committed, then it makes sense

that you get the ultimate say about what happened here. It is a shame that Donald Trump's very good lawyers in this case, and I want to be clear, I think Emil Bovi and Susan Necklace and Todd Blanche are all good lawyers, didn't have the opportunity in consulting with their client to explain to him how today is supposed to work and to enable him to lie to the American people about this process and to make it seem as if he's being singled out when this is what every single criminal defendant in New York state faces. So, Joyce, let's get your preview of today. What do you think the top key arguments that each side needs to make as they try to sway jurors? Right. So, you know, at the end of every

closing argument by a defendant, if you don't have a little bit of real reasonable doubt in your mind after listening to the argument, the defense hasn't done its job. And I think that's what we'll hear today from the defense when they go first. Their job is to raise questions, to poke holes in this edifice of evidence that the government constructs throughout a trial. Some of the most important arguments will center on Michael Cohen and his credibility. You know, in many ways, there's strong circumstantial evidence. We'll hear the people of the state of New York talk about that in their closing argument. But the defense will have a legitimate argument that if Michael Cohen isn't credible, that entire mountain of evidence is built on a platform that can't hold

it up. Michael Cohen's credibility will be front and center in their argument. And they'll also, along the edges of that argument, point out that he was providing legal services, that these paper records don't meet the technical elements of fraudulent records. When it's the people's turn, they'll come back with this argument. They will argue that proof beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't depend on any one piece of evidence. It's all of the evidence taken together. And so they constructed an immaculate case, whereas we discussed while the trial was ongoing, they corroborated as much of Michael Cohen's testimony as they could before he took the stand. We'll hear them remind jurors of witnesses whose testimony they've forgotten. They testified weeks ago, starting with David Pecker. And this

is an important process that prosecutors go through at the end of a trial. It's memory reconstruction, telling the jurors, don't rely on our memory, rely on yours. But here's what happened at the beginning of this trial. And they will layer evidence upon evidence to say, you know, those holes that the defense tried to poke in our case, there are only one or two pieces of evidence deep, but there are four or five other pieces of evidence that corroborate, for instance, Donald Trump's willingness to engage in a crime that was designed to cover up or commit other crimes. At the end of the people's argument, they will tell the jury that proof beyond reasonable doubt doesn't depend on any one piece of evidence or any one witness. It depends on all of the evidence built together and that there's too much here to ignore.

Strong, direct and circumstantial evidence of Donald Trump's guilt. You know, John Heilman on Way Too Early, which, of course, seen by more people, larger share of the audience last week than any show going all the way back to the Beatles debut on Ed Sullivan. that if Donald Trump is convicted in New York, that the Biden team is going to start using that, possibly even in social media, talking about convicted felon Donald Trump. And Joe Biden, who hasn't spoken yet about this trial, will start speaking about it, Jonathan Lemire reports reports after the verdict. Now, we've been talking about you and I think we both believe that up to now, all of these all of these charges, even the convictions in the other cases have actually helped Donald Trump with his base, not really persuaded many people. They aren't paying attention. What do you think about what Jonathan Lemire is reporting? If Biden starts leaning into it, if Trump is convicted, does

that have an impact from what you've seen? Well, I mean, Joe, I think, you know, this is something that we've talked about also. I mean, I think this is the no man's land to the Terry Incognito version of all this. We have no idea. No one has the faintest clue of what the psychic political effects on the very small pool of persuadable voters in the very small number of states on which this election will turn, what impact it will have. Jonathan's reporting is consistent with what I have heard. There's no doubt that the Biden campaign, if he's convicted, the campaign is going to start labeling Donald Trump a convicted felon. Trump will appeal this verdict for sure.

And he will almost certainly not be put behind bars between now and November. That matters to some people. There's been some polling that suggests that those voters we're talking about seeing Trump not just convicted, but imprisoned is different than just seeing him convicted. So he's going to appeal. He's almost certainly not going to go to jail. The campaign, the Biden campaign is going to call him a convicted felon. Whether Joe Biden does that once more than once, we don't know the answer to that yet. But we're talking about such a small number of voters. And, you know, in a world where almost everyone has an opinion about this case, this is a

case that the actions in question took place in 2006 and 2016. Everyone in the world, we think, has a firmly set view about Donald Trump, Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen, the payments, this, that, the other thing. There is some small number of people out there in the country who haven't decided about what they think about the election, what they think about this case. And convicted felon could move a very small but really crucial number of them. And that is one of the things the Biden campaign is not going to leave to chance. They're going to rightly call Donald Trump a convicted felon if he's a convicted felon. Yeah. To this point, of course, the president hasn't spoken about these trials because he

doesn't want to be seen as interfering. And that will continue for the three outstanding trials, the classified documents, the federal January 6th and the case in Georgia. The president and his team aren't going to speak about those. But my reporting is that once we get a verdict here, the president and the timing of this is fluid, of course, but the president will make some remarks first, sort of more from a government White House perspective, talking about how we need to respect the outcome here, that the American legal system has worked. And he's going to do that no matter what the verdict is, guilty, an acquittal or a hung jury. But if there is a conviction, Willie, he's going to lean into it a little bit. I think that the social media campaign, as noted here, is going to do the convicted felon Donald Trump, at least from time to time. The president himself will make the

argument now and then that this is just further evidence that Donald Trump is unfit for office and look at the lengths he will go to to look out for himself and not you, the American people. But they understand it isn't going to be a major issue. They're not going to spend nearly as much time on this as they do things like abortion or the economy or the two foreign wars right now, things that impact American voters more than this criminal proceeding. There are some in Biden world who actually think that once the trial is over and Trump has to be out there more, that's a bad thing for Trump, that they think he's benefited in some ways from being off the road.

We'll see about that. And certainly the Biden campaign believes the debate about a month from now will be a much more significant event than whatever the verdict is here. Even if it moves just a few voters, it will be a very tight race. Because of the pace of those other trials, this likely is the only verdict we'll get before Election Day. So let's talk about that coming verdict, Lisa. Viewer's guide for our MSNBC audience. What should we expect today? It sounds like you get defense in the morning, closing argument, perhaps prosecution this afternoon, jury instructions tomorrow,

if they're in court. And we will be in court tomorrow. And I would expect we'll hear jury instructions tomorrow. Sometimes you have judges who will set time limits on each side's ability to sum up. That's not what we have here. Each side has advised Judge Mershon that they expect to take several hours in summing up. So I would expect we'll see jury instructions tomorrow. And then the jury goes immediately to their deliberations. We will stay in the courthouse, MSNBC and NBC News, ready for any verdict as soon as it comes. But of course, Willie, you know and John knows we have no idea how long that will take. And trying to assess whether the length of time that the jury is out means one result or another is also sometimes a fool's errand, as Joyce can tell you well. Wow. MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin and former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance, thank you both.

We'll be seeing you both a lot this week. Thank you so much. And still ahead on Morning Joe, Donald Trump was repeatedly booed and heckled during an appearance at the Libertarian National Convention. We're going to show you some of that, how he responded, and be joined by the former chairman of the Libertarian National Committee as well. Plus, Republican Senator Tim Scott gives another vague answer when asked whether he will certify the 2024 election results, no matter who wins. We're back in 90 seconds. Without further ado, I would like to welcome to the stage the 45th president of the United States, Donald J. Trump. Donald Trump faced a hostile crowd over the Memorial Day weekend

at the Libertarian National Convention in Washington, D.C. on Saturday. Trump delivered mostly the same speech he gives to Republican crowds, but to much different results here. In addition to promising to pardon the so-called January 6th hostages, he vowed to end government overreach and root out corruption in politics. But when the crowd continued to boo, Trump quickly turned on them. As everyone knows, it will be my great honor to pardon the peaceful January 6th protesters, or as I often call them, the hostages. They're hostages. There has never been a group of people treated so harshly or unfairly in our country's history. This abuse will be rectified and it will be rectified very quickly. The Libertarian Party should nominate Trump for president of the United States.

Whoa. That's nice. That's nice. Only if you want to win. Only if you want to win. Maybe you don't want to win. Maybe you don't want to win. Thank you, D-Roy. Thank you. No, only do that if you want to win. If you want to lose, don't do that. Keep getting your 3% every four years. We're asking that of the libertarians. We must work together.

Combine with us. You have to combine with us. We cannot give crooked Joe Biden four more years. We cannot give crooked Joe Biden four more years. We cannot give crooked Joe Biden four more years. If we unite, we are unstoppable. I will be a true friend to libertarians in the White House. D. Roy Murdoch, who I've become friends with through his writings in the American Spectator and numerous other places, wrote an article yesterday in which he mentions just some of the things that make me a libertarian without even trying to be one. That's nice. Or you can keep going the way you have for the last long decades and get your 3% and meet again, get another 3%. Now, you want to make yourself winners.

It's time to be winners. You have a lot of common sense. It's time to be a winner. So I'm asking for the liberate. Well, think of it. All right. By the way, he brought in some of his supporters actually were there. Their tears obviously drowned out by all the booze.

The party ultimately nominated activist Chase Oliver for president, who did not mince words, speaking about Donald Trump. I got started opposing neocon war criminals and we just had a neocon war criminal on our stage a few minutes ago. You are not a libertarian, Donald Trump. You're a war criminal and you deserve to be shamed by everyone in this hall. So, John Howman, your latest piece for Puck is entitled The RFK Jr. Big Short, a close look at Donald Trump and RFK Jr.'s cringe-inducing, partly hilarious, but and ultimately failed forays into libertarian land. Tell us about it and especially about the RFK factor. Well, Mika, you got both those guys, both interlopers at the Republican, at the Libertarian Convention this weekend in Washington. People are paying attention, obviously, because the election is going to be so close. You have Trump down there trying to get what they call non-traditional,

basically non-MAGA voters. He's appealing to them. Kennedy was seen as angling for something different, which was to actually get really needing the Libertarian nomination because he would immediately get ballot access in 38 states. The Libertarian Party is the third biggest political party in the country. And Kennedy's trying to get on those ballots. Both of them made complete asses of themselves over the weekend. Let's let's be clear about this. You saw the stuff you just played with Trump. So you saw

Trump say, make me your nominee. right? That was on Saturday night. On Sunday morning, when they went into session to actually decide who was going to be the Libertarian nominee, the chair started the day by saying, Trump can't be put in a nomination. They put in file the appropriate paperwork. So immediately Trump was tossed off. The campaign had not done, having begged for the endorsement the night before for the nomination the night before. It turned out Trump couldn't even be nominated if anybody wanted to nominate him. I'll tell you exactly how much they wanted to nominate him, though. He got six write in votes, six write in votes that put him under one percent in the first round of voting.

Kennedy, who was trying harder to get this nomination, got put in nomination, got his name put in nomination. He ended up getting a few more votes in that first round of voting, about 2% of the total, and also was eliminated from consideration. I will tell you what this says more than anything. And Joe, I know you'll know that you as a student of these things, you'll know what I mean when I say this. Neither one of these guys is a libertarian. And whatever you think about libertarians, apparently the libertarians saw that they didn't want to nominate either of two dudes who have nothing to do with libertarianism. Absolutely nothing. John Meacham, I'm wondering, we can look at that and obviously see that Donald Trump and RFK Jr. didn't have much luck.

You don't need a whole lot of luck, though, with third party candidates. If we're talking about RFK, changing history, we can talk about 1968 with Wallace, Nixon prevailing there, of course. We could talk about 1992. The Bush family still says Bill Clinton won in 92 because of Ross Perot, as you know very well. And they'll still tell you that 2000. It was Ralph Nader's two or three percent that beat Al Gore. He would have been president had Ralph Nader not taken those couple percentage points from him. 2016, of course, it was Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate that took enough votes from Hillary Clinton. And just think about this. But for Ralph Nader and Jill Stein,

there would not have been a Republican in the White House over the past 32 years. But for Ralph Nader and Jill Stein, the last Republican victory for president of the United States would have been in 1988. Right. Wow. And you can't be you can't be for democracy only when your will prevails. So we'll stipulate that they can run. These are the rules of the road, of course. But the voters, however, have an obligation to weigh reality. Right. It's not just this connects with what we were talking about. This isn't a reality show. It's not laser tag. It's not a political call of duty. You know, this is reality. And the way the American system has developed is we have two big choices in the country. It's a duopoly.

There are issues with that. We can talk about that forever. But the reality is these are the choices we have and you have to compare and contrast. And, you know, we're talking about such de minimis numbers of folks who decide these elections now. It's a handful of people in seven or eight states. And anything that distracts from that stark choice can, as you say, produce a result that, interestingly, is radically different from what that third party voter wants. So it's against the third party voters interest to vote for that third party. Now, they don't

see it that way, but that is in fact the case. If you voted for Ralph Nader, were you really delighted by what happened from 2001 to 2009? If you voted for Jill Stein, were you really delighted by what happened from 2001 to 2009? If you voted for Jill Stein, were you really thrilled by Donald Trump? I don't think so. So these are the these are the it's the obligation of citizenship, which sounds grand, but it's true. All right. Our thanks this morning to John Hellman for being on. Thank you. And coming up on Morning Joe, we're going to talk to John Meacham more about his brand new visual tribute to the life of President George H.W. Bush. Morning Joe.

We'll be right back. What a beautiful shot of the sun coming up over New York City. It is 41 past the hour. Award winning filmmaker Ken Burns delivered the commencement address at Brandeis University outside Boston earlier this month, clips of which drew attention on social media over the weekend. And here's why Burns spoke about the nation's ideological divide and what's at stake this November. The Old Testament, Ecclesiastes to be specific, got it right, I think. What has been will be again. What has been done will be done again. There is nothing new under the sun. What those lines suggest is that human nature never changes, or almost never changes. We continually superimpose that complex and contradictory human nature over the seemingly

random chaos of events. All of our inherent strengths and weaknesses, our greed and generosity, our Puritanism and our purience, our virtue and our venality parade before our eyes, generation after generation after generation. This often gives us the impression that history repeats itself. It does not. No event has ever happened twice. It just rhymes, Mark Twain is supposed to have said. I have spent all of my professional life on the lookout for those rhymes, drawn inexorably to that power of history.

The novelist Richard Powers recently wrote that the best arguments in the world, and ladies and gentlemen, that's all we do is argue, the best arguments in the world, he said, won't change a single person's point of view. The only thing that can do that is a good story. I've been struggling for most of my life to do that, to try to tell good, complex, sometimes contradictory stories, appreciating nuance and subtlety and undertow, sharing the confusion and consternation of unreconciled opposites. But it's clear, as individuals and as a nation, we are dialectically preoccupied. Everything is either right or wrong, red state or blue state,

young or old, gay or straight, rich or poor, Palestinian or Israeli, my way or the highway. Everywhere we are trapped by these old, tired, binary reactions, assumptions, and certainties. For filmmakers and faculty, students and citizens, that preoccupation is imprisoning. I have had the privilege for nearly half a century of making films about the U.S., but I have also made films about us. That is to say, the two-letter, lowercase, plural pronoun. All of the intimacy of us, and also we, and our, and all of the majesty, complexity, contradiction, and even controversy of the U.S. And if I have learned anything over those years, it's that there's only us.

There is no them. And whenever someone suggests to you, whomever it may be in your life, that there's a them, run away. Othering is the simplistic binary way to make and identify enemies, but it is also the surest way to your own self-imprisonment. Which brings me to a moment I've dreaded and forces me to suspend my long-standing attempt at neutrality. There is no real choice this November. There is only the perpetuation, however flawed and feeble

you might perceive it, of our fragile 249-year-old experiment or the entropy that will engulf and destroy us if we take the other route. When, as Mercy Otis Warren would say, the checks of conscience are thrown aside and a deformed picture of the soul is revealed. The presumptive Republican nominee is the opioid of all opioids, an easy cure for what some believe is the solution to our myriad pains and problems, when in fact with him you end up re-enslaved with an even bigger problem, a worse affliction and addiction, a bigger delusion, James Baldwin would say,

the author and finisher of our national existence, our national suicide, as Mr. Lincoln prophesied. Do not be seduced by easy equalization. There is nothing equal about this equation. We are at an existential crossroads in our political and civic lives. This is a choice that could not be clearer. Ken Burns delivering the commencement address at Brandeis University. Mike Barnicle joins us now. Mike, your old friend Ken Burns delivering the commencement address at Brandeis University. Mike Barnacle joins us now. Mike, your old friend Ken Burns, like John Meacham, spending his professional life taking the large view, the long view of history and delivering a powerful address that culminated with a commentary about what's happening in our country today, where we're may about to be going and making a plea to the young people in that room, but also to the audience that's going to see it larger than that, that this is from a man who has some perspective on these things, given his life's work, this is a pivotal moment. Yeah, it is. You know, the root of Memorial Day in the word memorial is memory. And you wonder, in listening to Ken's speech over the weekend at Brandeis,

you wonder, is our memory so fleeting that we have forgotten about something else that Ken mentioned? One of the greatest stories in history, the story of America, the formation of America. We remember Ronald Reagan in 1984 talking about its morning in America. And now the reality is many people walking around probably wondering, is it twilight in America because of all the divisions in this country? I think we exaggerate the divisions because we are all Americans. But the idea that this country is so filled with, as he pointed out, right, left, red state, blue state, we are all Americans. Whether we came here from Pakistan or Vietnam, whether our parents came from Ireland or Germany or Italy, we are all Americans. Americans and the idea that we seem to be loosening or maybe even losing that grip that ties us together as Americans and one common purpose to continue to pursue freedom, not only

for our children, but for our grandchildren. The idea that we're losing that is horrifying. It's beyond horrifying. It's a tragedy. And we've got to come to grips with this with ourselves, really, to stop hating each other, to have a conversation with each other. I have no idea the percentage of Americans who don't even know their neighbors, who have never been in their neighbor's home. I have no idea of the number of children who miss so much because of COVID, no matter what their age, missed first grade, missed second grade, missed high school graduations, and would become isolated from one another in our fear of the future. And the future we measure now by a week's paycheck, by a month's paycheck.

Where are we going? We've got to be told again and again the story of America, the real story of America. You know, John Meacham, I love the part. And it spoke to me so much because it was a great concern that Mick and I have been talking about over time, not about who wins or loses this fall, which obviously concerns us, but just the challenges that are before us and before Americans. And as Ken said, we are imprisoned by our own binary reactions, presumptions and prejudices. And people just, again, simplifying things, stripping it down, not understanding the complexities.

And like you and I have talked about, just running to whatever tribe they've picked. You look at AI, the grave challenges that poses on the existential scale to humanity, but also the threats to working Americans and jobs going away. You look at global warming. The evidence grows by the day. And yet we're really not doing anything significant about that.

You look at people's sense of safety when they're walking through large cities. And the fact that they can't get enough police officers, people don't want to be police officers anymore. Not enough, if you ask the LAPD, if you ask the Philadelphia Police Department. There are these huge challenges. Well, and you've got Vladimir Putin on the march in Ukraine, again, because people didn't look at the issue as Americans have since World War II, freedom versus tyranny. They looked at it tribally. And so Mike Johnson held up aid because Donald Trump told him to hold up aid. And other Republicans who were always cold warriors, just completely collapsed because they have this binary vision of America has nothing to do with

ideology. I mean, it's you have voted for Republican presidents in your life. I sure voted for a lot of Republican presidents in my life. Dr. Brzezinski endorsed Republican presidents during his lifetime. It's not a binary choice. You look at who's best for America, but now everything is divided, not by ideas, not by ideology, but the tribalism where on one side you have a president praising those and the memory of those who gave their lives for America. And on the other side, a vile president, a former president who vile when he talks about the fallen, saying doesn't get it, what was in it for them to defend their country, and decides to write on Memorial Day, instead of lifting up those who gave their all for America, attacking those who opposed him by calling them human scum. Um, let's talk about Ken Burns, what Ken Burns said and how we move back actually to that sort of promised land.

Well, I think we could do a lot worse than listening to what Ken said, what Mike said, what you just said, reality is not binary, but the choice we face is. And that's an irony in all of this. I go back to this tension between what is patriotism and what is nationalism. And patriotism, classically understood, is allegiance to an idea. And the idea of America, however imperfectly realized, is that all men are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. And that's our mission statement. And the Constitution, as it's been said, is our user's guide. And we've lived out of compliance a hell of a lot more years with that mission statement than we have in compliance. But at least we keep trying to get there. Nationalism,

roughly understood, is just an allegiance to people who look like you, to people who worship the same God, to people who share the same ethnic characteristics. And that is a fundamental, vital, defining difference in how cultures organize themselves. Are we loyal to an idea that sometimes means I'd rather I have to give as opposed to take, which is not part of human nature. Right. Since the third chapter of Genesis, it's been more fun for us to take than to give. Right. And so but democracy, American democracy, as it's unfolded, is about giving as well as taking and seeing each other as neighbors. And, you know, without that, then politics is a total war. It's the law of the jungle, and it's going to keep unfolding in this disastrous way.

I love what you said. America is an idea. Yeah. And as General Hayden has said on the show before, America is a creed. You raise your right hand. You swear an oath to America and you become an American citizen. I've said this before and I think it's beautiful. My family has been in this country, I don't know, we kind of get lost going back in the 1700s. We've been here like 300 years. Today, someone will raise their right hand. Today, maybe, I don't know, maybe from Indonesia, maybe from Pakistan, maybe from Denmark, it doesn't matter where they come from. They raise their right hand. They take that oath of allegiance to this country and they become every bit as much of an American as anybody in my family that's been here for centuries.

Now, if you don't see the beauty in that, and if you don't understand how different that is, even from Britain or France or Spain. In most countries, when you open your mouth and you talk, even in Britain, people know everything about you and they judge you in large part because of your accent, where you're from, your schooling. In America, lift your hand, make an allegiance to the oath of the United States of America. And you, my friend, are an American. And that is a simple beauty that Donald Trump will never understand.