Morning Joe - Morning Joe 5/31/23

Episode Date: May 31, 2023

House to vote on debt ceiling deal Wednesday

At the end of the day, leadership is not about entertainment. It's not about building a brand. It's not about virtue signaling. It is about results. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis in Iowa yesterday, not mentioning Donald Trump by name, but still taking a few swipes at him. I think he was, maybe even himself a little bit. We'll show you what else he had to say about the frontrunner in the race for the Republican nomination. Good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Wednesday, May 31st. Good to have you

all with us, along with Joe, Willie and me. We have the host of Way Too Early, White House Peer Chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire, member of the New York Times editorial board. I'm not Jonathan. Let's show Jonathan really quick. Make a tie. Or not a tie. Okay, let's take it. Go, go, Lemire.

There you go. Okay. We've done this before. Hold on one second. Mara Gay is with us. Wait, wait, can we stop for a second? Hey, TJ, I'm scratching my face. Do you want to go to me now?

And now also with the smart day. All right. Leave TJ alone. OK, let's see. Now let's do Jen. Let's see. What can I do for you? Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Do we have any flaws? Hey, come with me for a second, TJ. And introduce Jen Palmieri. She's co-host of Showtime's The Circus. Right here. Okay. Oh, we got Jen. Oh, see, he can't even mess up. When you tell him to mess.

Oh, here I am. Now, now. Jen Palmieri. Good morning. Still using the typewriter. The show's really started out well, TJ. Is my collar straight? Thank you.

Everything's good. Let's actually get to work. Hold on. We can't go straight to work. But I got to say, when we do go to work, it's going to be a lot of fun. Because, Willie, I'm going to get to the Yankees in a second. Oh, thanks. But these Republicans.

Oh, this is the worst thing ever. When Donald Trump in 2017 said, oh, we must raise the debt ceiling. This is what did he say? He said, this is a very, very sacred thing in our country. Debt ceiling. We can never play with it. And they not only raise the debt ceiling, Republicans under Trump in 2017, 2018, and 2019. And they not only did it without an actual debt limit,

they kept it open-ended so they could say, hey, Don, spend as much money as you would like, which is unusual. They didn't even put a limit on it because they wanted to spend so much money. It's incredible. Three times, three times three times even as a national that soared to record levels willie not only that get this and then when i say get this tj now that's when you come to me okay get this ready okay take it three two one go go to Joe. Look at it, Joe. Get this, Willie.

Come on, wake up, TJ. They actually attached spending bills. Is everybody following me here? I know with the smooth directing, it's much easier. They actually attached spending bills to raising the debt limit. So they said, not only are we going to raise the debt ceiling to just like where there's actually no ceiling, and not only are we not going to attach cuts to it, but we Republicans who are running this place,

we're going to attach billion-dollar spending bills to the debt ceiling increase. I mean, the hypocrisy here, I mean, it's just there has to be, I don't know, super duper califragilistic hypocrisy. It's it's it's hypocrisy squared here for these Republicans who suddenly are so shocked and stunned that we're actually having to pay for all the spending and tax cuts that they larded onto the budget back from 2017 through 2021. Never paying for any of the tax cuts, never paying for any of the spending. Yeah. Over four years of Donald Trump, nearly eight trillion dollars, eight trillion dollars was added to the deficit, largely because of those tax cuts you're talking about. And here, Republicans are truly, in a theatrical way, setting their hair on fire because there might be some addition to money

added to SNAP, for example, or to benefits for people in this country. And Kevin McCarthy has made the point, guys, I cut more than a trillion dollars, a trillion and a half dollars over a decade out of the budget. This is a good deal that we negotiated. So I guess the question is, is this all signaling to the base or the people that you're talking about who are pounding the lectern and saying this is the worst bill I've ever seen? One congressman said this is a career defining vote. If you vote for this, the republic will never be the same. And on and on and on, suddenly finding religion on the debt now that Joe Biden is in office. Is that all just a signal to the base? I know it's going to pass. Yes. So I can so I can afford to scream and yell about it as it makes its way. And we don't default as a nation.

It is all virtue signaling because, Maura, they did this in 2017. They did it in 2018. They did it in 2019. And by the way, those first two years, they ran the House. They ran the Senate. They ran the White House. It's just like when they ran the House, they ran the Senate. They ran the White House.

Guess what they said? We can't build a wall. A wall won't do any good. You can climb under a wall. You can climb over the wall. The wall, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn, I can go down the list. They had the votes and none of them wanted to build Donald Trump's wall because they said when they actually had the power, it's a stupid idea. Also, when they had the power, they said it's a stupid idea to hold America hostage. And I know you're getting nervous

right now because you're afraid that T.J. is going to go to a chopper shot. But don't worry, he's still on you. But again, the hypocrisy is crazy. And if you're Kevin McCarthy, you're like, wait a second, guys, I voted with you guys to raise the debt ceiling three times when we actually added spending. And now you're saying this is the end ceiling three times when we actually added spending. And now you're saying this is the end of the republic. Don't get it. Well, one of the strange things about this is totally insane, Joe, is that it's clear that there are some people would hold the country hostage over something like the debt ceiling, which is essential to the functioning of our government. I know it's wonky. I know it's complicated. But this just should not be a political football. We need the government to continue to run. Kevin McCarthy understands this.

And there are Republicans who do understand this. Obviously, the White House does as well. So we shouldn't have even had to see a negotiation like this. This should have just happened as a course of doing business. The other thing that you see here is the true agenda of the Republican Party at the moment. This refusal to roll back the Trump tax cuts from 2017 that added $1.8 trillion to the budget through 2029, the refusal to eliminate the carried interest loophole, which, of course, is just a loophole for hedge fund managers, for the wealthy.

And so the question becomes, you know, what is this actually doing for everyday Americans, that Republican agenda? I mean, fortunately here, many of the benefits that are relied upon by working class Americans, including SNAP, as you mentioned, were largely preserved. And this deal is expected to add about 50,000 people, I think, to nutrition, to the nutrition rolls that people can get get food that they need. So that's a win. You know, again, the very people who are screaming, the very people who are screaming right now about this debt ceiling being raised are with cuts, with significant cuts are the very people, again, who went along with Donald Trump three times, three times.

And even those who voted against it, the few that went along with Donald Trump three times, three times. And even those who voted against it, the few that voted against it, weren't screaming, holding press conferences, saying it's the end of the republic like they are now. It's total nonsense. They sat there quietly, quietly, including the Freedom Caucus. I remember talking to Mark Meadows, going to him, I think in 2017, going, dude, you guys are spending too much money instead of doing all of your stupid virtue signaling. You need to start focusing on spending. I told Meadows this twice when we were having lunch at the Capitol. I said, you have got to use your position to actually curb spending in Washington, D.C. It's out of control.

And here's the thing you got to worry about. I told it. You got to worry about what happens when Republicans are in power, because then, as it happened under George W. Bush, the spending's out of control because the Democrats love spending, too. So if the Republicans want to spend, Democrats aren't going to stop them, right? I said, so it's important for you guys to do what we did when we were there.

We stopped our own Republican brothers and sisters from spending too much. Balance of budget four years in a row. But do you think he listened? No, he didn't listen. Not only did he not listen, they were led by a guy who said, I don't know if you guys heard this quote before, this Donald Trump. And he said, said that the debt ceiling is a sacred element of our country.

Dog, cat, horse, person, mule. That's a very, very sacred thing in our country. Debt ceiling. By the way, let's just first of all, I just want to if we could just let's break up that sentence. That's a very sacred thing in our country. Debt ceiling. We can never play with it. So I would have to assume we're in great shape. That's Donald Trump, the man who, along with his Republicans in the House and the Senate, they're being so self-righteous right now, actually caused the greatest increase in the federal debt in U.S. history. In fact, Willie just said eight trillion dollars in four years. That is more debt piled up in Donald Trump's terms with all of these self-righteous Republicans than were piled up in the first, let's say, 220 years of this republic. They're counting on people not remembering, being too busy, and not holding them accountable. I mean, they just take a position that serves them at the

moment. That's all. Here's where things stand right now, by the way. The House Rules Committee voted in favor of advancing the debt ceiling bill to a full House vote set for later tonight. Republicans Chip Roy of Texas and Ralph Norman of South Carolina joined all four Democrats on the panel in voting against the bill. The bill appears likely to pass today in the full House, but President Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy are still receiving criticism from the outer flanks of their parties. Some Democrats in the House Progressive Caucus are still undecided the outer flanks of their parties. Some Democrats in the House Progressive Caucus are still undecided on their votes for the bill over concerns over work

requirements for aid recipients. We'll speak with one of those progressive members of Congress, Ro Khanna, later in the show. Meanwhile, despite Speaker McCarthy reportedly receiving a standing ovation in a Republican conference meeting yesterday. GOP hardliners are very angry at the deal. Speaker McCarthy had a mandate from the American people. This deal that we've heard about totally fails to deliver on all of it. Not one Republican should vote for this deal. It is a bad deal. There's going to be a reckoning about what just occurred unless we stop this bill by tomorrow. What I see

here in this deal is absolutely one of the biggest abominations since I've been in Washington, D.C. I had no idea. I had no idea that we would see a plan as ephemeral and as malodorous as this plan. Oh, I love ephemeral plans. I also love when people use words they don't know what they mean. You know, I don't know if you guys know it or not, but the new ephemeral design for the Diet Coke can. What are you drinking at Diet Coke? It's quite ephemeral design for the diet coke can we drink in a diet coke it's quite ephemeral the word for today is ephemeral look it up uh so so i just chip roy says a reckoning's coming

a reckoning's coming yeah there is one despite the fact fact, Jen, that Kevin McCarthy and Joe Biden have actually put together a far more conservative debt ceiling deal than Donald Trump. And these same Republicans did three times. They raised it in 17. They raised it in 18. They raised it 19. And Andy Biggs said, this is one of the biggest abominations I've ever seen. Really, you know what I would call the biggest abomination if you lie to your voters and say you're a small government Republican,

like they lie to their voters repeatedly over and over and over and over again. They lie year in and year out. They're not small government conservatives. They're only small government conservatives when Democrats are in the White House, when Republicans are in the White House, other than like if George W. Bush or Donald Trump, suddenly they spend money more than any body else in U.S. history. It's happened twice. It's a matter of numbers. They can't fake news their way out of it. They can't lie their way out of it. It's in the numbers. It's in Donald Trump's own Treasury Department numbers. And yet, Jen, they say a reckoning's coming despite the fact Donald Trump, they said nothing

when Donald Trump did this three times and actually attached spending bills onto them, raising a debt limit with no limits. What hypocrisy? I don't really get it. I mean, even allowing for the hypocrisy that we've seen with House Republicans, you know, in past years, when Democratic presidents are in charge, this is what they do. They'll hold the country hostage. House Republican majorities are going to House Republican majorities. This is what they do. They'll hold the country hostage. House Republican majorities are going to House Republican majorities. This is what they do. But what I don't get is that there doesn't seem to be a constituency for the outrage that Chip Roy says he feels, or people don't seem to feel this is malodorous, as Amy Bix

said. Ephemeral and malodorous, I think. But I can't really say malodorous, obviously. There's not, you know, I think like the base, if the base was as worked up as those members of the Freedom Caucus was, I think McCarthy, we would be we would not be in a position today of thinking that this is going to pass the House tonight, that this deal is going to pass the House tonight. But I think that there's sort of a crisis fatigue, you know, in the country and in the Congress, as much as there's a few Republican members of Congress jumping up and down. There are some progressive members of Congress that have concerns, you know, legitimate concerns with work requirements that are in the bill. Maybe the benefits overall get expanded,

but these are not just numbers. These are people. Some people are going to lose out on benefits. They're concerned about that. But, you know, you just don't feel that within the country and even within Republican, the base, the outrage that these Freedom Caucus members feel. And I think that's partly because even at the base level, they understand the hypocrisy. Even at the base level, they understand spending goes up under Republican presidents. They pass the debt limit. This is kind of a fake manufactured crisis. Yeah. Yeah. Manufactured crisis. And again, it's all virtue all virtue signaling again let me repeat this because it's not said enough just like the wall donald trump i'm going to build the wall i'm going to build the wall i'm going to build the wall he's president he has a republican house he has a

republican senate what do they say we're not going to build the wall why because it's not going to work it's also like the alternative to health care i mean we're gonna this to build the wall. Why? Because it's not going to work. It's also like the alternative to health care. I mean, we're going to this is all virtue signaling. It's all government by gesture. Anyway, Jonathan O'Meara, give us, if you will, give us your update on your reporting. Only one catch here. You have to use the word ephemeral in your report. Oh, well, we'll start with, I thought, the only honest moment in Donald Trump's town hall a couple of weeks ago where he was pressed about that comment that he said the debt limit was a sacred thing. And he said, well, you're not saying that now.

And he said, well, yeah, because I'm not president now, which gives away the game. It's just it's right there. He said it. He said it out loud. That's what they're doing. This was when he was president. The Republicans are in control of the debt, the debt limit was a sacred thing. Hold on. Hold on. You're saying his passion then was just there. It is an ephemeral passion. I set you up for it. See, it's teamwork. Thank you. It was a given. It is. It was. It was a really it was nice. One man, two man game there. And now, of course, they think it's the sacred thing that they have to deal with. And what has happened here is there is a confidence.

It's not a sure thing, but there is confidence on both sides that the votes are there. They'll get this across the finish line. It'll be close, but they'll get it done. And that allows space for the outrage. That allows the Republicans on the fringe to throw the fit, to hold the press conference, to try to raise some money off of it, where they can satisfy their constituents that they went to the mattresses to fight on this thing, even though they know it'll pass and the nation will not default, which would be catastrophic for everyone. And I do think this is, as soon as

this is done in the next couple of days, Washington is going to turn the page on it as fast as humanly possible and move on to the next thing because there really are no winners here. They just need to get it done. Except, I'd argue this, that President Biden can again say to the American people, hey, it's a big bipartisan thing. We got it done. We're governing with some competence. So, yes, John's right, Mara, that most of the wisdom in Washington this morning says that that vote, if it happens at 830 tonight as scheduled, the debt ceiling will be raised and we'll be safe for another year and a half or so. One interesting footnote, though, is Kevin McCarthy's future. He did put in place a rule in order to win the votes of all these hardliners that one person can raise his or her hand and say, I want to vote of no confidence and move him out of the place. There are threats of that. It seems very unlikely. But that's what these people are talking about.

Ephemeral malodorous legislation. They're threatening that this morning. Well, that's kind of the question is how far do they want to take the outrage, the outrage show, as it were, the outrage circus? Do they want to stop at Thesaurus dot com or do they want to take it all the way to kind of come for Speaker McCarthy's seat? We don't know, but hopefully for the sake of the country, we can actually focus on on governing and move forward without too much hoopla. We shall see. And still ahead on. Hold on a second. I made a promise. It wasn't an ephemeral guarantee. I'm sticking with this one. Willie, the Yankees last night, man, they're on fire.

The Boston Red Sox collapsing. You know, I said the Yankees were going to beat us by about 20, maybe 25 games this year. I'm putting it up to 35 now. That's over under. But the Yankees on the West Coast, man, you guys on fire. Yeah, they're beating up on the Mariners out in Seattle the last couple of nights. Aaron Judge hit another home run last night. He hit two home runs two nights ago.

Hit another one last night. He's up to 18, leading the American League. He's missed 11 of their games with a hip injury. So he's only played in 40-some games, and he's got 18 home runs. Doing it again and just playing incredible defense underrated in right field robbing people of home runs left and right so they're playing well but they're still you know three four games behind the orioles and the uh and the rays so that division is brutal the yankees now i think have the fourth or fifth best record in baseball and they're in third place

in their own division so it's still fine but they're really playing well oh they're in third place in their own division. So it's still a climb, but they're really playing well. Oh, they're playing great. And, Jonathan Mayer, let me just say the Red Sox may be in last place, but we earned it last night. We earned it hard. I mean, that guy, he threw it. It's sort of a bad sign when you throw 92 pitches into your first inning. It was really, really tough.

And Kike, I love Kike, right? I'm not exactly sure, though, when he's going to turn a double play to end the inning, why he throws to the ball girl out in right field. But he just did. I mean, you know, I'm a jazz sort of guy, so you feel free for him. Finn, you've got to be free for him if you want to throw to the ball, girl, instead of turning the twin killing and getting out of the inning. You go, boy. Why be conventional? Why be conventional when we could actually win a game? All right. I'm going to end this.

The Red Sox have returned to their natural habitat of last place, sadly. Yeah, a brutal game yesterday. Why do you even watch? Kike Hernandez, who we loved what he did two years ago, he has not run much to the table today. He's not hitting. He's not fielding. He's not doing much of anything.

And they look, as they've done this year, they showed some fight. They tried to come back last night. They fell short. And sadly, I think we're in a pretty familiar spot there in fifth place in the AL East. But, you know, as I always say, it's a long, long season. Tomorrow's June 1st. Tomorrow's June 1st. It's still a long season, which means, Willie, we've got a long way to go to endure last place,

but I think we're going to do it. I think we're going to hold on. This season is not ephemeral. It's the opposite of that, Joe. It's not ephemeral. Oh, my God. Okay. And malodorous.

It is a red sox. It is malodorous for red sox fans. Speaking up. All right, we're going to have more from Florida. Did he say that, too? Did he say that, too? Did he say turd sandwich? Yeah, I thought he did. I thought he did. Who says that? I don't know. A guy who says ephemeral and uses it in that sentence. We'll have more from Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' ephemeral 2024 campaign kickoff event in Iowa last night. Plus new reporting about infighting among Donald Trump's legal team. Really, big surprise there.

They're all going to jail. What that could mean for the many investigations he's facing. Also this morning, tense moments over the South China Sea as a Chinese fighter jet flies directly in front of an American surveillance plane. Doesn't seem like a smart thing to do if you want to stay alive. And how Beijing is responding this morning. And could artificial intelligence lead to extinction? All right. You think about that as we listen to Billy Preston going to break. We'll take a look at new warnings from top tech leaders. You're watching Morning Joe. We'll be right back, we think.

Hey, we'll. Hey, Will. Yeah, okay, great. I'm gonna fly high like a bird up in the sky. I'm gonna dance, ain't got no steps, no. I'm gonna let the music move me around. Mysterious shot of New York City at just half past the hour. Time to wake up, everybody. On this Wednesday morning, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis officially launched his first campaign tour in Iowa yesterday, the first stop on a four day push through three early voting

states. DeSantis criticized elites several times during his speech, and he called on his supporters to move to Washington, D.C. I wish the elites in Washington, D.C. would take a page out of the Iowa playbook. But instead, they have ignored what works and they continued to plunge this nation into the abyss. Our country is going in the wrong direction. We need to inspire Americans from around the country to maybe pick up your family and move to the nation's capital for two, four, six or eight years because we need people who live in the country to come out to D.C. to reassert the right of we the people to run our own government. D.C. has imposed its will on us for far too long. It's time we impose our will on Washington, D.C.

After the rally, DeSantis delivered his most direct attacks of the former president so far. I'm going to respond to attacks. I mean, if you say Cuomo did a better job with COVID than Florida did, first of all, that's not what he used to say. This is like new, like six months ago, he would have never said that. Right. He used to say how great Florida was. Hell, his whole family moved to Florida under my governorship. Are you kidding me? OK, well, they actually did. I mean, they actually did. I'm wondering. you look at the speech, Jen, you look at the press conference, he actually does look like he may be willing to go after Donald Trump a little

bit here and there. It is fascinating, though, telling people from Iowa, you need to move to the District of Columbia. I don't know. Maybe not my lead. To do what? Move to the District of Columbia to do what? They're not, right? I mean, they're not, it's not, for better or worse, D.C. is not governed by the people who live here. Definitely not governed by the people who live here. But the thing with, so I think DeSantis. That's strange. It's strange, right? Yeah, that's very strange. But the thing with DeSantis, he's, I thought yesterday, you know, from what he's trying to accomplish, went well. What I don't really get, I'm interested in everyone's view on this, is why Trump is attacking DeSantis as much as he is. Trump is way up in the polls, right?

He has, most polls have him with a 20-dig point lead over DeSantis in the states and the early primary states not quite as high but still a lead and you he should be he should be ignoring DeSantis he should just be acting like the front runner and ignore DeSantis and instead he's been attacking him and he's been attacking him as a hypocrite, right, saying, well, DeSantis was for me in 2018 when he ran. He had that ad talking about MAGA. And now he's against me. And it reminds me, it's interesting because it reminds me of the attacks that other Republicans made against Trump in 2016. That did not work, right?

So it's Trump acting as a conventional candidate. And I think it may just be serving to elevate DeSantis. Republican voters like DeSantis, even Trump. weird, but whatever. He's not attacking Trump. He responds in the press conferences when Trump attacks him. And that may go over better, particularly in Iowa, than than what Trump's doing. We haven't really seen polling yet from after that can tell us how DeSantis is actually doing since he's announced. But I'm really interested to see if these Trump attacks on him are hurting DeSantis or end up hurting Trump. I think maybe DeSantis meant run for office. He said move there for two, four or six years. I assume so. I think that's what he meant. But Donald Trump will be in Iowa today and tomorrow. He's coming in after Ron DeSantis to get the sort of the last word among those two. But this is how he ran in 2016. Who's at the top of the

polls? Who's the favorite of the moment? Jeb Bush. Vaporize him, call him low energy Jeb, and then move down the line. So I guess that's why he's going after Ron DeSantis. But DeSantis' performance yesterday, well received in the room, maybe not the smoothest of political operators, but it's early here. Yeah, it is early. He has time to improve, but he certainly faces questions that he's not particularly charismatic on the stump. He doesn't possess a lot of retail political skills, not a lot of face-to-face time with voters. We've seen some clips go viral in recent days when he has tried to approximate a human laugh when shaking someone's hand. I think it's to Jen's point, Trump does risk elevating DeSantis by singling him out. But at the same time, people around Trump say, well, he's been attacking him and it's worked. DeSantis'

poll numbers have collapsed. And now some of that, it might, is surely DeSantis' own endorsement of extreme policies, particularly, Mara, the abortion ban there in Florida. But the Trump people think that this is, they're just crushing him. And they've seen that Monmouth poll we just briefly flashed there shows that a 20 point swing in the race. So that seems to be where Trump is now. I mean, DeSantis, what does he need to do here, do you think, just as your analysis to sort of try to reverse that slide? And part of it's going to have to be taking on Trump probably more directly than we just saw. Yeah. I mean, just watching him campaign on the stump there, he's an extremely awkward campaigner so far. To your point, he could

get better. So he needs to either get a lot better really quickly or, you know, alternatively, he can kind of stay away from those big rallies that Donald Trump is, you know, that's his signature. So maybe DeSantis cannot go head to head with Donald Trump kind of holding court. That's Donald Trump's specialty. So far, I don't see how he's going to compete against Trump on that level. DeSantis seems to be best at kind of a quick jab, retreating, coming out with some extreme policy that the base may like, like the six week abortion ban, then kind of retreating. But the more he's in front of cameras, the more we see him campaigning, doing retail events on the stump,

the more obvious it is that he may not be ready for prime time. And Joe, he's leaning in, if you listen to his speeches and watch him answer questions yesterday, into the six week abortion ban, running the right of Donald Trump on that issue. But also the Disney fight. He is touting the Disney fight. He's proud of the Disney fight. I guess maybe he has some internal numbers that show it works in the primary, although the public polling does not suggest it's working. Yeah, I mean, I think I think for whatever reason, with people who vote in Republican primaries, Disney is they feel like Disney is a winning issue for them. You know, Jen, though, it's fascinating until 2016. The way you won Iowa, the way you won New Hampshire, the way you won South Carolina, the way you won the presidency is you went,

you knocked on doors, you shook hands, you held hundreds of town hall meetings. You know, you met people in Iowa, New Hampshire, six, seven, eight, nine times. And, you know, I've been talking about sort of a return to the laws of gravity in not only the law, but also in American politics. You know, we're all focused on how Trump flies in. He gives a speech. He says these horrible things on social media. It chins up the base. There is an exhaustion factor there, even among Republicans, especially among Republicans who want to win.

And I'm just wondering, Ron DeSantis goes the traditional route. He goes the alternative route. He knocks on doors. He shakes hands. You know, he didn't go down any golden elevator escalator to announce. He didn't do what Ted Cruz did and went to the biggest, you know, evangelical group of people he could find. He announced in an Iowa church, talked to him there, shook hands and did it sort of the old fashioned way. He did things Donald Trump will just never do. And so I'm wondering maybe maybe that's a path forward.

We are just getting into June now. He's got six, seven months before to do it. And let me tell you something from somebody that had no money the first time, first time I ran. You use that time, you knock on doors, you shake people's hands, you go into their homes, you hold small town hall meetings in neighborhoods and you just do it. You just check off one precinct, one neighborhood, one community after another. Suddenly, people don't know who you are until one day everybody knows who you are. And in DeSantis' case, I'm just wondering if one yard sign at a time, one handshake at a time, one community center at a time doesn't add up over six months to actually help him, you know him possibly beat Donald Trump.

I'm wondering the same thing, particularly in Iowa, which is a state that doesn't like predetermined outcomes, doesn't like incumbents. Incumbents often don't do well there. People who've been in power before, they like to sort out and find a new leader. And they don't like people that attack other Republicans. I saw an event that Donald Trump did in Iowa. He said something about Ron DeSantis. He attacked Ron DeSantis in some way and people just didn't react.

I've seen that at other Trump rallies. Trump attacks DeSantis, people don't react. They don't like it because they actually like Ron DeSantis. They like both of them. They want Trump to be, some Trump supporters want Trump to be president. They want Ron DeSantis to be president after him.

And this is why, you know, I wonder, yeah, DeSantis is down a lot. But I do I do wonder about Trump continuing to attack him. I know that that's what they do. And it's it's it's hurt other people. It's hurt other Republican candidates, particularly in 2016. But no one has attacked Trump from the right on social issues the way that Ron DeSantis is doing it. And no one has the record, for better or worse, that Ron DeSantis has on being ultra right, ultra MAGA on social issues. And it may be in Iowa that that can work.

And, you know, he presents a nice face when he's giving his speech. Nice face. Doesn't really attack Trump. Makes veiled attacks on him, but doesn't go after him directly. And that could wear well. I mean, we've got a long time. Ten months, I think,

at least to the... Or eight months to when people actually vote in Iowa. So he could wear well. How how that how that goes once, you know, you move on in the primary. I don't know how like how Santa's would do in New Hampshire, for example, where they're not so excited about a six week abortion ban. But in Iowa, I could see it.

I could see him winning. Yeah. And I'll tell you Mika there's there's no substitute for being there shaking people's hand and yeah I mean he's awkward. People say he's awkward talking to him. He actually there's also a possibility that when he gets out of the Tallahassee bubble and he keeps doing this he'll figure out a way to get through it and again I'm not you know I'm not cheering on Ron DeSantis here. All I'm saying is it's awfully early to say this race is over when he's got the luxury of six, seven months to knock on doors, to shake hands, to do the retail politicking that he's doing that wins elections in Iowa and New Hampshire. So it's it is unlike the Red Sox season.

This this race is far from over. All right. Coming up, a new argument in favor of humanity amid warnings about an artificial intelligence takeover after a lawyer relied on chat GPT to prepare a court filing. We'll dig into what went wrong in that case next on Morning Joe. Forty five past the hour, hundreds of tech executives and artificial intelligence scientists are warning AI poses an existential threat to humanity. The group signed a one sentence open letter that reads, quote, mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war. Sam Altman, the CEO of the company behind ChatGPT, was among those who signed the letter. He testified before Congress earlier this month and asked lawmakers to regulate the technology. The CEOs of Google and Microsoft did not sign the letter, but several members of

Google's DeepMind Artificial Intelligence Unit did sign it. Willie? Meanwhile, in March, a lawyer representing a client in Manhattan federal court submitted a briefing to a judge arguing why his client's case should not be thrown out. The case was filed against the airline Avianca by a man who says he was seriously injured when he was hit with a metal serving cart during a flight. According to the New York Times, the lawyer cited more than half a dozen relevant court decisions to make his case for why the lawsuit had precedent. The only problem, none of those decisions were real. In an affidavit filed last week, the Times reports the lawyer admitted to using open

AI tool ChatGPT to conduct his research. The program even reportedly told him yes when he asked it to verify that the cases were legitimate. Let's bring in MSNBC legal analyst Danny Savalos. Danny, good morning. Good to see you. So why do we introduce this story into the dialogue? Because it shows what chat GPT, what AI is capable of. But it also shows the flaws that it effectively made up all the case research here. Yes. And there is plenty of human error here as well, because the lawyer initially filed a document that cited these cases. Opposing counsel for Avianca filed something and said, hey, we were looking at those cases and they don't exist. So the judge says he issues an order saying, hey, file copies of these cases so we can look at them. And what do they do? They apparently go right back to chat GPT and file the cases that chat GPT gave them.

And then we see even later in an affidavit confirming this, that the lawyer typed in a request to Chad GPT. Hey, are these cases that you gave me real? And Chad GPT says, yes, they are. So there's plenty of human lawyer error here. And Chad GPT might still be a valid tool for lawyers, but you have to verify at least at this stage because it's really in its infancy. And the problem is when you sign something or file something to the court, you're verifying that everything in there is accurate and it's not verified if you only ask ChatGPT if it's verified. ChatGPT can't take responsibility. The lawyer has to take responsibility. And I don't appreciate Jonathan Lemire texting me to ask if I was the lawyer who filed this document.

I do not appreciate that assumption. I'm a thorough reporter. Thank you. And ask the questions that the audience needs to have answers to. Yeah, we thought you were coming here with a mea culpa for filing that. So this combination of human error and the use of AI sort of going awry, what is the outcome of this case now? What happens?

Do they toss it? No, they don't necessarily toss it, although that was the issue in the motion where this was filed. But more likely, you're going to see professional discipline. And that's something that strikes fear in the hearts of attorneys. And actually, there is actually a tale of two lawyers here. Sadly, one is a simple tale of sympathy, the one not so much. You know, it happens often that you get a lawyer who has practiced, say, in New York for this lawyer practice for apparently 30 years, never bothered to walk down the street and get admitted to the federal court. So he asked the other lawyer in his office, hey, can I do all the research?

And you just sign the document and file it. And look, I've done that. You know, you trust the other lawyer to do the research. So now you have two lawyers on the hook and no good deed goes unpunished because one lawyer, all he did was trust that his fellow colleague in the firm had done all the research and verified it. But once the judge issued the hey, you need to file these cases order, both lawyers should have been on high alert. I mean, this is federal court. They do not play around with things like this. This you might be able to get away with this in state court with a crowded docket. But if a federal judge is raising the alarm that, hey, some of these cases, we can't find them, it's time to pay for a Westlaw subscription. It's time to pay for Lexis and actually get it verified the right way, not through the open AI chat GPT system. So, Danny, my concern, truthfully, is more the New York Times headline that says AI poses risk of extinction.

Good morning. That's a good way to start your day. But setting that aside for the moment, just, and not this particular case, but what are your thoughts on just how AI or whether it's chat GPT or another program, what is its eventual role in the legal profession? What is its eventual role when it comes to the judicial system? How can it be used and what are the dangers? Now, you kids may not remember a movie from the 80s called Terminator, but this is the exact same Skynet theory that it becomes

self-aware and launches missiles against us. That's the concern. Right. And so, you know, what's interesting is we were all concerned about this. You know, lawyers, I could talk about it academically when it was like, hey, well, will AI replace truck driving? Because I don't drive truck. But as soon now you look at all of us lawyers, we're getting very nervous because it seems like AI could at least begin to replace what we do. So I think this case is a teachable moment, at least at this stage. AI isn't we're not in danger of Skynet turning the missiles on us, but we are in danger of getting false results. And by the way, this wasn't just false results. Apparently, it looks like the AI generated entire cases,

not citations, but actual decisions. That's the part that's scary. It's sort of the deep fake problem. You know, to what degree are we getting false information in the form of our research? And that's something scary. Were there some red flags? Yeah. I mean, I think one of the cases cited was Durden. I mean, again, another movie, Tyler Durden, Fight Club. I mean, that could be some subversive AI playing a prank on us. But look, it's the deep fake. Yeah, it could be. It's the deep fake concern at this stage. Maybe not the human extinction alarmist position. And that's what that's the point that a lot of these leaders and by the way,

these are many of the people who created this stuff now saying we've got to pump the brakes a little bit. They worry about exactly what you're talking about. Propaganda spreading quickly and extremist rhetoric. Before I let you go, as the sometimes Howard Stern wrap up show host, will Howard reverse his RSVP and attend Ronnie's wedding? I have zero inside information. I just have my instinct, Willie. And I have to say, I believe he will. But I fear that in saying so, if word gets back to him, this may color his opinion if he thinks that the surprise has been exposed. So for now, everyone, I think there's a good chance he will show up. But let's hope so. I agree. Poor Ronnie. He earned it.

How great is Danny Savalos? Cover the waterfront. Truly, truly does it all. MSNBC legal analyst and so much more. Danny Savalos, thanks so much. Good to see you. Still ahead this morning, we will be joined by one of the top Democrats in the House, Congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, ahead of today's vote on the debt ceiling bill. We'll ask him if there are enough yes votes from his party to get that bill to the Senate. Morning Joe's coming right back. A figure, a drummer, and then makes no difference what group I'm in. McCarthy had a mandate from the American people. This deal that we've heard about totally fails to deliver on all of it. Not one Republican should vote for this deal.

It is a bad deal. There's going to be a reckoning about what just occurred unless we stop this bill by tomorrow. What I see here in this deal is absolutely one of the biggest abominations since I've been in Washington, D.C. I had no idea. I had no idea that we would see a plan as ephemeral and as malodorous as this plan. I think when you read the Wall Street Journal, you read the New York Post, you sit back and listen to a lot of economists, they'll say this is the strongest debt ceiling we ever had. And if I compare it to when Republicans were in the majority, when they

had the House, the Senate and the presidency, they didn't cut anything. They just added more money. Top of the hour, Speaker McCarthy defending the deal and hardliners, as you heard, Joe, trashing it. They say it's going to be a reckoning. What's the reckoning? Well, yeah, what's the reckoning when the speaker's right? Where were all of these people? Why weren't they screaming and yelling at Donald Trump? When Donald Trump and Republicans, when they controlled everything, as Kevin McCarthy said, Republicans raised the debt ceiling three times under Donald Trump. In fact, back in 2019, Trump signed budget legislation which suspended the debt ceiling.

Right. No debt ceiling at all. Just blew the blew a hole in the roof and then raised spending by three hundred and twenty four billion dollars. He also suspended the debt ceiling until July 20, 21, eliminating any chance of an ugly battle before the 2020 election. And Willie, again, you have Chip Roy talking about a reckoning. There's going to be a reckoning. And and the other guy, I think, was Biggs, Malodorous Biggs, Ephemeral Biggs, talking about one of the biggest abominations. Again, do they do they not understand that you can literally Google stuff? I'll just say stuff. You can literally Google stuff. I'll just say stuff. You can literally Google stuff in three seconds and find out that Donald Trump said that the debt ceiling was sacred.

You can find out that they blew a hole in the debt ceiling three times when they ran Washington, D.C. And in fact, they actually attached massive spending bills to the debt ceiling to try to force people to vote for the debt ceiling three times. And these guys, I mean, why didn't they say it was malodorous and ephemeral then? First of all, because ephemeral is not used correctly there. Why didn't they talk about a reckoning when Donald Trump did it three times? And here, as Kevin McCarthy says, you actually have cuts. Yeah, $1.5 trillion in cuts over 10 years is where it sits right now.

That's what Kevin McCarthy is saying. I made a deal with the White House. I got some things that we can agree to. I got some things that we even like. We had to give up a few things because, as they all should know, that's how things work in Washington. If you want a deal, if you want to raise the debt ceiling, it's almost like, Joe, that the members we heard there are not standing on principle, but that they're trying to speak to their voters and to their base and show that they're putting up a fight, even though they know that they didn't do this when Donald Trump was in

office. And as we said, Donald Trump's administration added $7.8 trillion to the national debt, thanks in large part to those tax cuts for the wealthy. So Jonathan Lemire, all this raises the question now of can those members that we just heard from stand in the way of this deal? Or are we kind of sailing, it might be close, but sailing to passage around 8.30 tonight? Republican leadership is confident.

In fact, Representative McHenry, who's one of McCarthy's top negotiators on this, just said a few moments ago that they have the votes. They feel like they've done the whip. They have the votes. Now, of course, between now and 830, could things change? They could. Certainly some on the right are going to. We're going to hear from them today.

They're going to make their stand and they might just be playing to their constituents back home, the conservative cable networks, whatever it might be. That's the theatrics of this as well. But right now, there is a sense that it will be close, but it will get done. Part two of this will be if this does pass it pass. Do some of these right wing members then try to take on McCarthy's speakership? We know it doesn't take much to go after him to call for that vote. His grasp on power, pretty tenuous, at least to this point. Again, the seemingly more bluster than action. No one has signaled they'll actually go through

with it, at least not yet.