Morning Joe - Morning Joe 5/4/23

Episode Date: May 4, 2023

Suspect in shooting at Atlanta medical facility arrested after manhunt

We're not saving the planet with windmills. If anything, you're hurting the planet and you're certainly killing the birds. Have you ever looked under a windmill? Have you ever gone to you want to see a cemetery for birds? Just walk under a windmill someday. Donald Trump continues his strange crusade against windmills. Literally tilting. It comes as his legal team decides its best defense and his civil rape trial. It's

no defense at all. We'll explain that. Plus, more calls for action following yet another deadly mass shooting in America. The latest, a medical center in Atlanta prompting an impassioned plea from Georgia Senator Raphael Warnock. Also ahead, new reporting on the deep financial ties between Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and a Texas billionaire. They keep getting deeper, don't they? It keeps getting worse. And on Capitol Hill, there is no off-ramp when it comes to a deal on the debt ceiling. We'll have the latest on the contentious negotiations. Meanwhile, the market's mostly flat this morning in response

to the latest interest rate hike from the Federal Reserve. We'll have a full breakdown of what could be the final move from the central bank in the fight to bring down inflation. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Thursday, May 4th. We got two out of three birthdays under our belt here with Willie and me, along with Joe, Willie and me. We have Pulitzer Prize winning columnist and associate editor of The Washington Post, Eugene Robinson. Columnist and associate editor for The Washington Post, David Ignatius. White House editor for Politico, Sam Stein. Congressional investigations reporter for The Washington Post, Jackie Alimany.

And the host of way too early, White House bureau chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire is with us. Sam Stein, Boston Red Sox team of destiny. First of all, happy birthday. No, it's over. But thank you. Well, happy belated birthday. Belatedly. But yes, Red Sox.

Unbelievable. Did not expect this in my wildest dreams. I know, they're over 500. It's crazy. I mean, listen, damning with faint praise, but Lemire willest dreams. I know. They're over 500. It's crazy. I mean, listen. Damning with faint praise, but Lemire will take it. I'll take it. Yeah, Sox have now won five in a row, if you can believe it.

Five in a row against some pretty good teams. Three straight against the Blue Jays. Nice win last night. They are now four games over 500, which, Joe, frankly, I mean, you and I have been just saying all season long, 81-81. One step forward, one step back. Just pure mediocrity. They are exceeding expectations to this point, exceeding expectations. Let me tell you something.

I am the living embodiment of the belief that mediocrity can be fun. And this Red Sox team is fun. 500 but fun. And now even Willie is a little team at the bottom. We're a little bit above 500. But Willie Eist, that propagandist for the Yankees Network, said that they had a gift for you, and they gave you a walk-off gift last night. You're talking about the great Jack Curry of the Yes Network who was with us yesterday. We did.

We got a walk-off win last night. We now, not to brag, are two games over 500. Really chugging in the right direction here. How sad is this, by the way, that Yankee and Red Sox fans are celebrating that they just eked over the.500 mark to sit in fourth and fifth place in the ALEs? Come on now. Well, you know what's even sadder? For people that don't live in the Eastern time zone. Can we show those standings again? We spend almost all of our time talking about two teams in the cellar and the ALA.

Yeah. Central time zone. What central time? What about the Orioles? What about the Orioles? It's fantastic. You're in D.C. Mediocrity would be great.

If we could get up to mediocrity. I know. You take it. This is a good point. We would take mediocrity in a heartbeat. The dead ceiling. I love it. All right. We'll get to our top story now with the development that broke during our show yesterday morning.

There is still no independent verification of Russia's claims that Ukraine launched an attack on the Kremlin. Around 24 hours ago, Russian media began broadcasting claims from its government that two drones struck the Kremlin earlier in the morning with the goal of taking out President Vladimir Putin. The Kremlin released a video that purportedly shows one of those drones striking the top of the building. It added that Putin was not at the Kremlin at the time, nor was anyone injured. The State Department said it has been unable to verify the video's authenticity. Neither NBC News or any other source has verified what Russia says happened. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said to take anything out of Russia with a, quote,

very large shaker of salt. Ukrainian officials denied the attack. An advisor to President Volodymyr Zelensky said Russia's claims are in preparation for a terrorist provocation. Zelensky himself denied the attack later in the day. So David Ignatius, New York Times writes on the front page, Kiev denied any involvement in an incident that could raise the already high stakes in Europe's biggest conflict since World War II. Just a couple of days ago, we were talking about how Putin had nowhere to go. Is this a false flag that actually gives him the second win? The honest answer is that we don't know.

But anybody who looks at the footage and thinks that that was a serious attempt to assassinate Vladimir Putin is an idiot. It was it was some sort of provocation by one side or another, a symbolic attack. We are heading toward crunch time in Ukraine. This war is coming to a head. What happens over the next few months, I think, will be decisive in how this war turns out. One thing Secretary Blinken said in an interview yesterday at The Washington Post to celebrate World Press Freedom Day was that he thought that the Ukrainians would take significant territory, that they will advance along this front line. If they can punch through that long front and gain territory from the Russians, will then be in a different position where the Ukrainians finally feel that they've got some strategic leverage. And then I think, and I'm quoting Secretary Blinken, negotiations might be possible.

So the next few months really are going to be critical in this war we've followed so carefully. It's just so painful to watch. And General Milley and most of the people in the Pentagon agree with the assessment that that at least this year, the Ukrainians aren't going to get every Russian troop out of their country and the Russians aren't going to achieve any of their political gains that they sought through warfare. So this is going to have to end up at the negotiating table, whether both sides like it or not. Yeah, at the moment, neither side is ready to do that. But, you know, after the end of this year, let's take another look and see where they are. Because if the Ukrainians do make substantial progress, then, yes, it becomes more palatable to them to talk about a negotiated settlement that sort of freezes things in place.

Russians aren't completely gone from Ukrainian territory, but at least maybe it may be an armistice, a ceasefire, something that keeps this, you know, that tamps this tragedy down until a more permanent solution can be negotiated at some point in the future. One of my questions is whether if we get to that point, is there a role for China in these negotiations? That was something that Secretary Blinken addressed very directly yesterday. I was interviewing him on stage and asked him about the Chinese 12-point peace plan. And he says many of the points in that plan are actually ones that we would be interested in.

The Chinese role in trying to settle this we think would be valuable. Why? It's because the Chinese really, at this point, are the only people who could discipline Putin and force Putin to stop. And I think that makes them a relevant player. President Zelensky in Ukraine certainly wants the Chinese involved. He had a phone call last week with Xi Jinping that he described as very positive. So we'll have to see. I mean, anybody that thinks we're going to get Vladimir Putin over to the White House

or that we're going to have some sort of Camp David moment are dreaming or else on another network screaming about how horrible Joe Biden is. It's just absolute lunacy. Everybody's welcome. If you've got a peace plan, you're welcome. Come on in. And that's that's what I mean, we're going to need China to be part of this process because Putin's only going to listen to China. So tell me, Jonathan Lemire, what are you hearing from the White House right now about the attack? Well, we're going to hear from John Kirby, Admiral Kirby, the National Security Council, a little later in the show. But as of yesterday, a couple of things happened in my new reporting.

The White House did not receive any advance notice of this attack. They are, as David just said, investigating. And their intelligence community is going to make its own assessment as to what they think happened. A false flag operation, that's possible. But others have cautioned me that say that, well, they just simply don't know yet. And they do wonder if, you know, does Moscow really need an excuse to escalate their conflict any further, if they're even able to? And does it show a real sign of weakness, an attack on the Kremlin itself, even one that did seem so modest and there's no chance of success. Another possibility would be some sort of pro-Ukraine force and perhaps not sanctioned from Kiev. And President

Zelensky made clear yesterday that they had nothing to do with it. They didn't order this. But there have been, let's just say, multiple explosions that have happened in Russia. Things tend to be blowing up every so often. And even if not directed from Kiev, there are some pro-Ukrainian forces that have been able to operate within Ukraine, sometimes to the U.S. government's chagrin. So that's a possibility as well, is that one of them were behind it, as much as there is a chance that Moscow itself ordered it up. The investigation ongoing. Right. Either a pro-Ukrainian group or an anti-Putin group. And there are some of those, Willie, still in Russia. The thing is, as Richard Engel told you

yesterday, first of all, there's no way this drone could have come from Ukraine. Secondly, if it was an assassination attempt of Vladimir Putin, it was a pathetic assassination attempt that would not have worked unless Vlad was standing on top of the Kremlin when the actual little drone hit. You never know. Yeah, Richard pointed out all the, poked a lot of holes in the theory that it was an assassination attempt, including that the drone appeared to be one you could get at Best Buy, not a military drone that Ukraine would send over. And we should point out, if this were some kind of an attack that Russia was inventing to go after Ukraine, well, they maybe used that justification already. They sent some drones, shot missiles toward Odessa. They shot missiles

toward Kiev last night. Buildings were rocking. So this may already be in motion as we try to get to the bottom of what really happened there. Meanwhile, back here at home, investigators in Atlanta still are searching for a motive in yesterday's deadly mass shooting. At least five women inside a medical center were shot, one of them fatally, when a gunman opened fire inside a waiting room. After an eight-hour manhunt, the suspect, identified as Dion Patterson, was arrested in a neighboring county just north of where the shooting took place. Joining us now live from Atlanta, NBC News correspondent Morgan Chesky. Morgan, good morning. What more do we know about what happened there yesterday? Yeah, Willie, good morning. And this is the jail that 24-year-old Dion Patterson was booked into late last night by authorities following the shooting and ensuing manhunt that took the better

part of all day and ended at a condo complex in neighboring Cobb County. But Willie, you can imagine the chaos that started when authorities say Patterson walked into Atlanta's Northside Hospital, went up to the 11th floor waiting area, pulled out a handgun and opened fire, wounding those four women, killing another before fleeing that scene. Authorities were very clear last night in providing an update that the public was critical in providing locations following his escape from the hospital.

About 30 minutes after the shooting, Willie, they were able to use license plate recognition cameras to identify the vehicle that he stole from a neighboring parking garage and find it on a road about 30 miles away. Hours followed, this manhunt increased. And late yesterday, officers were able to move in on a building that they had seen him walk inside using another surveillance camera. And that is when Patterson was taken into custody without incident and brought here to Fulton County Jail.

As for any potential motive at this point in time, Willie, authorities have not shared any. We do know that as this shooting took place, we believe that Patterson was accompanied by his mother, although she was not injured in any way during the shooting, nor do we believe she's shared anything with authorities as to this attack. As for right now, though, we're waiting to hear the official charges against that 24-year-old whose only weapon as of right now was a handgun inside that hospital. Willie? Yeah, it sounds like an extraordinary scene in an apartment complex in Cobb County, just north of Atlanta, where an undercover officer

spotted this man and finally was able to take him into custody without incident as police officers descended on that complex. But Morgan, I know we don't know exactly what motive is here, but we did hear from his mother, as you mentioned, who suggested he was seeking new care, that maybe he had been under the care of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Do we know anything else about that? We know that he was discharged from the Coast Guard in January. And as you said, he was believed to be seeking some sort of mental help. But outside of that, very few details are being shared by authorities right now who are still calling this an incredibly active investigation. Willie. All right. NBC's Morgan Chesky live for us from

Atlanta. Morgan, thanks so much. Mika, just a terribly sad scene. You had a 38 year old woman who worked for the CDC killed while sitting in that office doing her work for others injured, sent to the hospital in critical condition. And unfortunately, here we go again. And Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock of Georgia spoke on the Senate floor yesterday following the shooting in his home state. I think that the unspoken assumption is that this can't happen to me. This won't happen to me. It won't happen to people that I love. But with a mass shooting every day, the truth is the chances are great.

I shudder to say it, but the truth is, a real sense is only a matter of time that this kind of tragedy comes knocking on your door. As a pastor, I'm praying for those who are affected by this tragedy, but I hasten to say that thoughts and prayers are not enough. And in fact, in fact, it is a contradiction to say that you are thinking and praying and then do nothing. It is to make a mockery of prayer. Senator Warnock will be our guest later this morning. And Joe, to his point, I mean, this is this is the game Republicans are playing with guns and not addressing the issue.

Perhaps at a time like this, they would say you shouldn't talk politics at a time that there was a shooting. You hear it again and again and again. But similar abortion health care for women where you have women sitting in hospitals or actually sitting at home waiting for fetuses, babies that they are trying to have that might end up killing them because they have abnormalities and they won't make it. And this is happening to real people across America. And it will happen to a Republican. Come to a home near you at some point, whether it's a shooting or a massive health care crisis where a woman cannot save her own life.

Well, it has what they have done. Well, I mean, it has as far as the shootings go. Most of the shootings are in red states. I mean, most of the shootings are where there are the most guns. They're the most guns in red states. You look at the numbers, Sam. Again, I just for people that have just started following news in the past few years and they think it's normal yeah for there to be a shooting in texas

yesterday a mass shooting in texas a mass shooting uh in georgia yesterday mass shooting in texas a couple of days ago you know uh cheerleaders getting shot to death death when they go into the wrong cars, college students getting shot in the back when they go into the wrong driveways, young men being shot at doors when they're going to pick up their twin brothers. It hasn't always been this way. In fact, since Sandy Hook, the number of people who have died from guns is doubled. This is a choice. This is a choice that Republicans, along with gun manufacturers, along with gun lobbyists, have made. And every time there is a slaughter, they cynically say they're coming to get your guns, buy more guns. And so guns just completely flooded our culture and people are getting shot.

And by the way, I said it a couple of days ago, if we just reported on road rage incidences where somebody got cut off on an interstate on 95 and somebody else started shooting, we'd be talking for hours a day about that. It's a gun culture and it's a problem unique to the United States in these numbers. It's incredibly true. What's striking is the reasons for the shooting. I mean, we've always had guns. Obviously, we have more guns, but now it's just minor provocations that are leading to mass shootings. Yes. The wrong doorbell. Yeah. The wrong driveway. I mean, we are resolving our fights. Right.

That was the chilling one. To ask a neighbor to just chill out a little bit with the firing of the AR-15. Don't shoot your AR-15 in your front yard. So clearly it's both an issue of the number of guns and our collective decision that we can resolve our disputes with guns. I would just say, you know, the senator obviously is dealing with a huge tragedy today. But I quibble with one thing he said. He said the conventional wisdom is this can't happen to me. I actually think that's no longer the case. I know plenty of associates and friends and family members who no longer can go to a mass event, a mass attended event, a concert, even a supermarket without having panic attack about what would happen if a shooter walked

through the door looking to find where the exit would be if need be that you have to run. And so I don't think we are at the point where we're saying this can't happen to me. I think collectively we're getting to the point where we're saying, how do we flee if this does happen? I completely agree. I mean, who walks into a mass event without thinking about that? An open air, let's say art show or a sporting event where they're not screened or a grocery store or anything because you're seeing it, Jackie. It's a lot of stress that you take. All the time, right. And Jackie, again, parents, parents who now are afraid to send their kids to school for good reason because they're hearing about active duty. I mean, active, active shooter drills that their six-year-old children are having to take in first grade.

It's insanity. There's a reason why upwards of 80 percent of Americans are in favor of universal background checks, despite the Republican blockade against passing anything further than the package that was recently passed, which I guess was enhanced background checks for people under the age of 21. But these two issues, I hate to be the person to jump immediately to the political ramifications of these policies or lack thereof, but Republicans are already warning that these two issues, abortion and gun control, are going to be the death knell for Republicans going into 2024 if they can't become a bit more centrist and moderate. I'm currently working on a profile of Nancy Mace, who's been one of the lone Republican

voices on this issue, on finding some common ground with Democrats in some way. You know, she trashed Ron DeSantis' six-week ban on abortions that he signed in the dead of the night that has no exceptions for rape, incest, or health of mothers. She has also said that Republicans can't continue to just call for thoughts and prayers. They need to find some ways to work with Democrats to do something to stop the spat of shootings and that this just can't be the norm. And the thing is, they'll do something at some point, but at this point, we're way behind. In terms of the mass, again, mass shootings can happen at this point every day in America. It is a weekly event every three days, every day.

You hear two, three, four people being shot or killed. And they're going to, you know, ultimately maybe bend to the politics of this and do something. No, we need everything at this. Aren't we at the point where we need everything for our children to survive school? I mean, what we're going to see, and it will happen slowly, but it is inevitable. You can't continue to have these mass shootings every day without Congress finally moving, a representative government finally moving. And I quoted John Kerry before when he went before the Senate Arms Service Committee and he asked who's going to be the last soldier to die for a bad cause for Vietnam. I forget the exact words. But we know these mass shootings are going to continue in schools, tragically, David, until some point

Republicans or else voters are going to continue this backlash on abortion and guns. It's going to start with voters. Republicans have too much at stake in this sick gun culture that has developed. It's going to take a popular rebellion. People are just going to have to say, I can't stand it anymore. I can't live like this. I can't get up worrying that my child will go to school and face this kind of violence. If my wife goes for a medical appointment to take the facts of this most recent case, some guy, some person who's got a mental issue is going to walk in with a with a gun and start shooting. I can't live like that. No, no.

People say I can't do it. You have a political movement and then maybe finally you have the power that frightens Republicans. It's going to take fear to get them off of this. I think it needs two things. I think it needs that sort of political action. This has to become a voting issue. Abortion was a voting issue in the midterms, I think we saw. And I think guns has to become a voting issue on the side of sanity as well. And then I think we need people.

We need like a million person march in Washington about gun violence. We really do. We need big public demonstrations of what people believe and what people fear and what people know we need now in terms of gun legislation. Willie. To inject a little bit of optimism into the conversation, I think the good news is there is an entire generation of young people, and maybe it's not us. And shame on us for not dealing with this. And Joe, you and I have talked about this in 50 years.

People will look back and say, were you guys insane? You let this become your culture where people just died going to grocery stores and going to school and everything else. There is an entire generation, conservative, progressive, Democrat, Republican, who has lived through this, who has experienced it, some of them going through shootings, multiple shootings. And they're just not going to stand for it. They're going to do something about it. So I hate to say we may have to wait a little while, but I do believe help is on the way in a generation that has lived through this crazy violence that somehow we accept in our culture. I agree in the two issues that Jackie brought up.

You have guns and abortion. Interestingly enough, those are two issues that Republicans used to use against Democrats to show they were out of touch with mainstream America. Now it is Republicans who are out of touch with mainstream America. And you look at any poll. Yep. A Fox News poll last Thursday. Fox News poll. 80 plus percent for background checks and everything else.

61 percent for an assault weapons ban. Times have 77 percent. If you're if you're driving a 77 percent of this Fox News poll, want a 30 day waiting period. Eighty percent want red flag laws. I was so struck by how screwed up the gun culture is that you had the Tennessee governor trying to move after the slaughter, after the slaughter of little children in a Christian school there, apologizing for for trying to pass something that was like a red flag law. And he said, I'm not going to use red flag law because that's just that's a provocation. That's just a term people invented to provoke. I said, really? 80 percent. Keep those numbers up.

80 percent of Americans support red flag laws and people in these little bubbles that listen to gun lobbyists and listen to the most extreme legislators who listen to gun lobbyists and gun manufacturers and hedge fund managers who make money off of guns that kill people. They try to make red flag laws a bad, bad, bad phrase. No, 80% of Americans want red flag laws. 80% of Americans want health care checks, mental health care checks as requirements for getting guns. Eighty one percent. Twenty one minimum age requirement for purchasing guns. Eighty one percent. This is radical. What actually enforce existing gun laws? Republicans don't like that. So they usually defund the agencies that can do that. Eighty seven percent support background checks. And yes, Gene, a majority of Americans support the banning of military style weapons, water, military style weapons, weapons designed for war to be more efficient

killers of the Vietnamese than the guns that our troops were taking over to Southeast Asia. I just want to refer everyone to this extraordinary journalism that our news side at The Washington Post did earlier this year about what the difference is between what a round from an AR-15 military weapon does as opposed to a round from a handgun. And it's the difference between a wound that might be survivable with a handgun and that is not survivable because of the high velocity of these rounds from these assault rifles. It's a different thing. These are killing machines. That's the only reason. The thing is, Gene, they're killed. The thing is, let's be really clear. If somebody that has guns and knows guns, they're killing machines to kill

multiple human beings at a time. Yeah. If you want to kill some, not to be too graphic, if you want to kill somebody that's coming to your house, you talk to any sheriff, you talk to any law enforcement officer, they'll say get a shotgun. And when they walk through the door, aim at the frame of the door. Can't miss. It is the most efficient defender of a household there is not an AR-15. AR-15s aren't for defending homes. They're going out for mass slaughters, supposed to be in the jungles of Vietnam, supposed to be in other countries where our troops go to war. Now they're in supermarkets. Now they're in first grade schools. Now they're in America. And this is a choice, Americans, that you're making if you don't say no to this. We will continue this conversation coming up on Morning Joe.

ProPublica is out with new reporting on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Bottom line, there's more. It's a lot more. Also, another legal defeat for former President Trump as a judge tosses out his lawsuit against The New York Times and orders him to pay all legal bills for The Times and its reporters. And the latest out of Texas, another mass shooting there last Friday night. We're following new reporting about the gunman attempting to flee to Mexico after being accused of killing five neighbors. Also this morning, the Fed raises interest rates for the 10th straight time. Steve Ratner joins us ahead to explain what it means for the economy.

Is Steve going to be at the big board? I don't know. It's actually not a big board. It's more like Times Square. Oh, I hear he does have charts. That's very exciting. You get your wish, Joe. The kids love that.

Yay! Oh, boy. Also ahead, Emmy and Golden Globe winner, actor Kiefer Sutherland, is our guest this morning. He'll take a look at his brand-new series. You're watching Morning Joe. We'll be right back. You can only take so much more More

More That's a beautiful shot as the sun comes up over the White House at 634 on a Thursday morning. The Federal Reserve again raised interest rates, this time by a quarter point. It was the 10th interest rate hike in just over a year. This time, though, it did signal it could pause further increases. The central bank has been battling high inflation while dealing with a string of high profile bank failures. Former Treasury official, Morning Joe economic analyst Steve Ratner is over at the big wall. It's the southwest wall, we're told in our studio with his chart. Steve, good morning. So a quarter of a point again yesterday, but perhaps this is a sign that the end of the road may be here in terms of

interest rate hikes. That's right, Willie. So it was, as you say, the 10th increase. And that is, in fact, when you look here, actually the fastest rate of increase we've had in any Fed tightening cycle, I think in history, certainly in modern history. This red line is, of course, the late 70s, early 80s. You see where it got to, but it started off much more slowly. And these are the other ones since then. And why did it go up? Why have they gone up so far so fast? Because inflation kind of got away from us during the pandemic, as everybody knows, and the Fed had to move aggressively to try to tamp it down. Then, as you said, the Fed did signal that there might be a pause. They took some language out of a previous statement saying they were going to likely continue to raise rates and suggested

instead a pause. And that's what the market thinks. The market thinks there's an 89 percent chance that at the June meeting, roughly a month from now, there won't be a hike 11 percent. Now, this can shift around any time. And as you suggested, part of what's driving the Fed here is the fact that we've had these three big bank failures. There's an old saying on Wall Street that when the Fed hits the brakes, somebody slams through the windshield. And that's what's been happening. And so the Fed's going to step back and see if all of this has the kind of impact they want it to have before they decide whether to go further or not. Yeah. You know, though, Steve, the thing is, kids that were awakened a couple of minutes ago to get up and see Uncle Uncle Steve's wall of charts. They're sitting there eating the tricks and lucky charms.

And they're all asking the same question. Yes. Uncle Steve. Yes, Uncle Steve. But where is core inflation right now? Has the Fed tapped down core inflation? Ma, bring me some more milk. Where are my Cheerios? I know everybody wants to know what's happening with core inflation. So here's what's happening with core inflation, which is to say almost nothing. Now, what is core inflation, Joe? Since you decided you were going to go down that rabbit hole, I was going to avoid those words. Core inflation is what happens when you take out the volatile categories of inflation, like food and energy and things like that. And you get right down to what we call core services, everything from lawyers to television hosts to hotel clerks and so forth. And what you can see here is that core

inflation has really been stuck at this 4.5% number that came out just a few days ago. And that is obviously way above the Fed's 2% target and, of course, way above where it was before the pandemic hit. So why is it stuck there? In large part because of wages. That is the single biggest cost component for most businesses. And wages, you can see the trajectory following almost the same path. And wage increases in terms of total employment costs now at about 4.8 percent. So you've got 4.8 here, 4.5 there. Not surprisingly, that's the kind of relationship you expect to see. So this needs to get lower before that is likely to get lower. And that's what the Fed's going to be watching. And if it doesn't get lower, you'll have some more interest rate increases at some point. So, Steve, let me ask you about pressure on inflation that continues. You know, Ronald

Reagan famously said a recession is when you your neighbor doesn't have a job. A depression is when you don't have a job. Well, you look at the job market. It's just big wheels keep on rolling. I mean, the job market stayed hot. We had some positive numbers yesterday. Why isn't the job market cooling off? And I guess another way to ask that is why do Americans feel so bad about where the economy is?

If you look at right track, wrong track and the unemployment numbers are as good as they've ever been. In fact, unemployment among black Americans, the lowest ever black men, unemployment among black men, lower than unemployment among white men right now. And yet you hear story after story of how people of color don't think Joe Biden has done enough in this economy. So, yeah, that's great. It's like a tale of of two economies. Talk about it. Yeah, that's a great question, Joe. So, look, in terms of the overall job market, as you say, it's quite strong. We have a three and a half percent unemployment rate. We've been adding jobs at a still substantial pace, although that has come down. We were adding jobs at 700,000 a month on average at the peak coming out of the pandemic. And now we're down to just around 300,000 jobs. And that is still way above the historic average going back before the pandemic of about 175,000 jobs or so.

So the great American job machine, so to speak, continues to grind on. And the same thing with job openings. We had almost 12 million job openings at the peak. It's now down just under 10 million. But that is still about 1.6 jobs for everybody looking for a job. So there's no reason almost that people who want a job aren't going to be able to find one with it being this far apart. Look, as to why Americans still feel the economy is so bad, you and I have talked about it. I don't have a great answer. It's been that way actually for a long time. If you even go back,

really, I think since the great financial crisis, most of the time you'll find Americans fairly down about the economy. I think we are still facing the possibility of a recession. It is very hard. It's going to be very hard for the Fed to get to 2 percent without getting all these numbers down. And that kind of can look like a recession at some point. So I think it's people feeling OK about today, but worried about the future. Steve, this is David Ignatius in Washington. Steve Kornacki is pretty nervous seeing you at that big chart. So I just want to ask whether you and people you talk to in financial markets are still convinced that 4 percent is too high for core inflation. The Fed has this target of 2%. That's the way we lived in this long period of essentially no inflation.

Going down those two percentage points is going to take some pain. Is everybody convinced it's necessary? That's a great question, David. So first of all, the 2% number, it was kind of an arbitrary number that the Fed picked some years ago to try to anchor at what we call anchor expectations. Part of what can cause inflation is, in fact, people expecting inflation. So the Fed really has been trying to anchor inflation at this 2% number. And so the question is, what's the magic of 2%? And the answer is, isn't any magic. Could it could it be three? Could it be four? Sure. But the problem is that the Fed has clung to this two percent for so long and Powell continues to cling to it that for them to back off, people feel would negatively affect people's expectations.

But you're also right in saying, as most economists believe, that getting that last two percent out of inflation is going to be very painful. And getting back to Joe's question, I think while people may not understand the ins and outs of two percent and three percent and four percent, they get it that we still have a ways to go on the inflation problem and that that's going to be painful for a lot of Americans, unfortunately. Steve Ratner, thank you very much. We appreciate you coming on with the charts this morning. Kids loved it.

They adored it. All right, now to this. ProPublica out with new reporting this morning on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. The organization has been leading the investigative reporting into Justice Thomas, having received luxury trips, real estate deals and gifts from billionaire Harlan Crowe over a 20 year period. Their newest report is regarding tuition payments for the grand nephew of Justice Thomas, who he was raising as his son. Joining us now, one of the pro publica reporters on the story, Justin Elliott.

Justin, thank you very much for joining us. This reporting is staggering. How much money are we talking about as it pertains to this tuition that the Republican donor was providing for the Supreme Court justice? Yeah, so we don't have the full amount, but we're talking potentially in excess of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars. This was at two private boarding schools, one in Virginia and one in Georgia, that Justice Thomas sent his grandnephew, who he was raising as a son, to. Here's just yet another example of Clarence Thomas getting financial benefits from a massive GOP donor. You read the Wall Street Journal editorial page on your reporting. You read the National Review, and they are shocked. Shocked and stunned and deeply saddened and said that this is just the left-wing media once again going after a public servant, a good conservative public servant. I'm sure you've read their critiques. Could you could you fill in some gaps that they may or maybe have left intentionally open?

Sure. So I'd say a couple of things. One is that, you know, we're reporting on the entire Supreme Court and I'm contractually obliged to say by ProPublica that, you know, if anyone has information about other justices, they should get in touch. But, you know, but seriously, I mean, we haven't we just haven't found anything like this relationship between Crow and Thomas with any of the other justices at this point. I mean, we're talking about a billionaire political donor who's funding, you know, multiple aspects of the life of a justice. This private school tuition, which we, the story we broke today, lavish vacations on his yacht and his private jet over 20 years. Harlan Crowe owns the house where Justice Thomas's mother is living, apparently rent-free. So this is, you know, we actually spoke to the former chief ethics lawyer for the George W. Bush White House, Richard Painter,

who said that, you know, basically never seen anything like this. And when he was in the government, if you had a staffer taking this level of undisclosed gifts, you'd want to get them out of the government. So, Justin, obviously, Justice Thomas has not reported these tuition payments or anything else in his annual disclosure forms. You just mentioned the Bush White House lawyers, which seemingly rebut some of the claims. This is a partisan effort here. So has Justice Thomas offered any explanation at all as to why he thought this was proper behavior? So Justice Thomas did not respond to our questions for this latest story. He has released one statement in response to our first story about the travel that Harlan Crowe has been providing him with, in which he said, you know, look, I'm close friends with Harlan Crowe, and I was advised by my colleagues that I didn't have to disclose this.

They have not said, you know, who gave him that advice or exactly what that advice was. And, you know, all of the ethics lawyers we talked to say this disclosure law is quite clear that you just have to disclose gifts like this. So, ProPublica reporter Justin Elliott, thank you very much for your reporting, and thank you for coming on this morning. And Joe, once again, it's really hard not to see how this Supreme Court justice was not exposed to being to having his objectivity impacted. Let's just say it kindly by all the gifts over the course of decades by a Republican donor. And then you add the fact. And again, we try and be objective, objective ourselves. But it's hard not to notice his wife texting Mark Meadows, you know, and completely involved

in certain things that seem to be part of the big lie. But then you wonder what is going on. Regardless of those who reflexively defend him, this has been a horrible two years, two and a half years for Justice Thomas's legacy. And for Republicans who are trying to dismiss this, I can't even begin to imagine what would happen if it were Justice Sotomayor, if it was Justice Kagan? This is this is again, let's be really clear about this. Everybody at this table would be shocked and outraged and be critical if this were a liberal justice, a left wing justice.

It was take it was taking this. But, Sam, it's just again, there are no rules. It appears there there is nothing that people on the Trump right can do that is going to get condemnation from most Republicans. I mean, this is a sort of stuff I can't even again, I can't even imagine if any federal judge that I practiced under had taken one hundredth of these sort of gifts. I can't imagine they wouldn't be up for impeachment. You're talking about the need to be objective. I would argue it would be non-objective if we didn't treat this as the clear cut. So wrong behavior it is.

It doesn't matter whether he was appointed by a Republican president or was a conservative jurist. This is very evidently clear-cut, problematic ethics. And to your point, I thought about this a little bit. If it was an associate or one of his clerks who, in the course of discovery, found out a big donor had secretly prayed for that clerk's wife's tuition, that clerk would be tossed out of the court tomorrow. If it was someone in our profession, imagine a reporter who quietly took $150 in benefits from

a donor. That person would lose all credibility instantaneously and never be able to be in this profession. So, yes, we need to objectively assess the situation by noting clearly just how absurd and outlandish it actually is. And it was not disclosed. And not disclosed. Not disclosed. You know, the national disclosure form, Justice Thomas expects us to take seriously his reading of the of the of the subtlest nuances of our Constitution and what every clause means and everything, you know, very, very carefully

parsing that. And he also wants us to believe he can't understand the very simple instructions on a disclosure form. It's ridiculous ridiculous and the court's doing nothing with john roberts uh who i've always said was an institutionalist certainly not acting like an institutionalist now because somebody that wanted to protect the institution with the supreme court's approval rating set an all-time low would step forward and be far more active than this this is something you just can't sit back and leave for leave for vacation this summer and just hope it goes away so So this is you're an institutionalist, David. And let me say again, I want to underline this fact

for the chief justice. The Supreme Court's credibility with the American people is at an all time low. So, Joe, I think you're right that this comes down to the chief justice. We really don't want a situation, Jackie, you cover Congress, where Congress is trying to legislate rules for another branch of government. It may come to that. But isn't this centrally Chief Justice Roberts' responsibility that he's the person who can say this reporting isn't partisan. This reporting is about the basics of accountability that every other judge in America has to deal with. And we and we do, too. And here and here are the rules that I as chief justice am going to announce. Yeah, well, interestingly, Judge Michael Luttig and Lawrence Tribe, who appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this week,

advised Congress that they could not pass a bill forcing the Supreme Court to impose their own set of rules. But under the Constitution, they were allowed to actually create a bill that outlined a code of conduct and then have that enforced by some independent arbiter. And that is the bill. Moving forward. Exactly. And that is the bill that Susan, sorry, Lisa Murkowski and Angus King proposed last week.

There is not any sort of unanimous consent about this bill in any way. But you did have Republicans and Democrats agree that this is problematic. But I will say, you know, judges are still untouchable politically, even when I'm thinking back to our reporting during the January 6th committee that investigated the attack on the Capitol. Liz Cheney privately did not want to touch Clarence Thomas. You know, she was the she's the most outspoken Republican against a lot of sort of the Democratic backsliding and issues that we've seen with the Republican Party. And she had said to her privately to staffers and investigators that she didn't want to touch Clarence Thomas's wife. She didn't want to continue to make that a spotlight. And she thought it was irrelevant to the investigation writ large.

And a lot of her colleagues, Democrats at the time, felt like that was because she didn't want to be the Republican responsible for taking down Clarence Thomas. Well, Clarence Thomas, though, in fact, didn't he rule in a case that he was the lone dissenter? Exactly. That touched exactly on what his wife was involved in. Failed to recuse himself once again. The Washington Post, Jackie Alimany, thank you very much. And coming up on Morning Joe, Republican Senator Ted Cruz questions the president's cognitive ability amid a stalemate in negotiations on the debt ceiling.

We'll show you those comments as the default deadline looms without a compromise in sight. Plus, we'll speak with two members of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Also ahead, White House National Security Council official John Kirby joins us on the heels of reports from Moscow about an alleged attack on the Kremlin. And up next, Luke Russert joins us with his new memoir, which reflects on the impact of his late father, the great Tim Russert. Morning Joe will be right back. In the battleground state of Florida, Florida, Florida. I had my little board out just to play around here. Guess what, guys? 269 minus 11 to 269, a deadlock.

The great Tim Russert. Hard to believe next month it will be 15 years since we lost our dear colleague and friend Tim Russert after he suffered a heart attack preparing for Meet the Press in our Washington bureau. He was just 58 years old. His son Luke was only 22 years old at the time and just out of college. Without time to fully grieve, Luke began his own career at NBC News, starting as a young reporter and eventually a Capitol Hill correspondent. But in 2016, at the height of the presidential campaign, Luke left it all behind as he set off to finally face his loss. He spent months visiting more than 60 countries trying to find his own path. And now he's sharing his experiences in the new memoir, Look For Me There. And our good friend Luke Russert joins us now also with us for this conversation. Mike Barnicle, who's

known Luke, I think, since the day he was born. Great to have you both here. Luke, congratulations on the book. So tell us about this journey. I mean, you were sort of thrust into this world along with us right after your father died. I remember during the 2008 presidential campaign at those conventions being with you and you were kind of pushed out there and said, go do it at a very young age and really didn't have time to grapple with what had just happened in the hole that had been left in your life. So tell us about this journey you took to find it. Well, that's right, Willie. I think you're talking about where it started, which was 22 year old Luke, that's right, Willie. I think you're talking about where it started, which was 22-year-old Luke, that young kid who had such a desire to try and preserve his

dad's legacy because he thought that's what he had to do. He thought that was his duty. And in the process of doing that, was never really able to grieve himself and understand really what that loss of his father was going to mean for him personally. It was a very interesting time because I was so outward facing and I was trying to shoulder this load and shoulder this responsibility of, OK, this is something that my father would want to happen. He would want me to be out there to try and preserve his name, but also the values that he found to be so important in journalism, which was asking the tough questions, accountability. The thing he used to like to say is, if you can't answer tough questions, how are you going to make tough decisions?

So I wanted to be around. I wanted to be part of that. I wanted to keep his legacy alive, keep that flame going. But that became a real burden that I didn't really process until years later, until about 2016. And I decided I'd need some time away. And that ended up actually being a huge blessing because in that process, away from Washington, away from politics of the day to day of Capitol Hill, even though I really enjoyed parts of it, I was anxious and I needed to get out of it to really know who I was independent of my family and my hometown. So, Luke, Friday, Friday the 13th, June 13th, 2008, you're in Rome with your mother. Florence, yeah. You just graduated from Boston College. Yeah. Your father dies

in Washington, D.C. So we're 15 years later now in this journey you've been on. What have you learned about yourself in those 15 years? Well, I think one of the things about travel is that you become more comfortable in uncertainty. And after my father passed away, I was so uncomfortable in uncertainty. I would wake up in the middle of the night sometimes thinking, oh gosh, am I going to die of a heart attack later today? I would constantly think about him and go, I just wish I had a few more minutes to talk to him. And over time, what I found was, you know what? He was my biggest booster. He was my best friend. And more than anything, he would want me to do what makes me happy, but also comfortable. The last thing Tim Ruster would

ever ask me to do, the last thing dad would ever ask me to do is to white knuckle through things that would bring me some sort of pain, some sort of anguish, right? And it took me so long to figure that out. Because he would say, go be you. That's, I, you know, Grandpa was a garbage man. He worked those two jobs for 40 years. I worked my butt off. Pass it on to the next generation and pursue the dreams that make you happy. But don't think that you have to do something for me.

And it took me a long time to figure that out. It took me a long time to figure it out. But when that moment happened, and for me, it actually ended up happening in the Holy Land of all places. It was eye-opening. And it brought me such a place. It got me to such a place of peace. And I wish it had happened earlier, but you know what?

I think the good Lord works in mysterious ways, and shouldering that burden for a while was actually probably something I had to do, and I came out better for it. And a part of the journey that's got you right here, Luke. Tell me about the title, Look For Me There, a very intriguing title. Where did you get it? So, Joe, you're a great dad. When I would go to baseball games or I'd go to a rock concert or I would go somewhere,

my father used to always say, hey, I'm going to be there if we get separated. Look for me there. And this actually comes from I was nine years old and we were at Oriole Park at Camden Yards and it was a hot, humid day. And he was holding my hand and a big crowd of people came through in the concourse. So we got separated and I was a little bit nervous as a young kid, but I never lost sight of him. And he came running back to me and he grabbed my hand and he said, buddy, if we're ever separated, look for me there. And he pointed at a hot dog stand with that big old Oriole bird logo. And he then pulls me in and he goes, but we'll never be separated.

And I've always just thought about that. And there's a coffee shop at the DCA airport where he used to pick me up when I would come home from Boston College, and he would always say, look for me there. And to this day, when I get off a flight, that coffee shop is still there. I swear I see the man, I see the hunched shoulders, I see the jowl about to smile. And that's where it is. And part of the book was looking for something. And that's why it just fits, fits. You know, I remember after my dad

passed away, Tom Brokaw told me a couple of weeks later when he noticed I was a little more quiet around set than I guess he was used to. He said he took me aside and he said, you know, Joe, I'm with my dad and my dad's with me every day. I talk to him every day and he's there. And I, you know, it was hard for me to listen to it first. And it was a tough journey. But, you know, it's gotten to a point now where it's funny, the further I get away from it, the more I feel my parents' presence. And I do every day. They're with me every day.

I'm curious. Are you there? Is your dad with you as you're walking through the Holy Land, as you're walking across the world? Absolutely. Joe, you remember when my father passed away at the Kennedy Center service afterwards, we played somewhere over the rainbow when everybody was leaving the building. And then miraculously, there is a rainbow over Washington, D.C. So whenever I was in I would be in these sometimes tough places of discomfort when I was traveling, not knowing if this was the right thing to do. I just trying to run away from something. I just tried to escape something? And in New Zealand, I was having a tough day.

I saw a rainbow. On the 10th anniversary of my father's death, there was a lot of stuff going on in the media about remembering him. And I didn't want to be a part of it. I kind of ran away from that. I was in Iceland. Waterfall, beautiful rainbow. And it's just one of those things where I look up and I see that rainbow. I go, that's that's dad saying hi. So I talk to him every day. I get into a meditative state to try and think about how he would sound at a given moment, what advice he would give me. And I'd like to say I'm a work in progress. But as it pertains to him, oh, my gosh, there's such a place of joy now. And I just, I carry him and he's right by my side.

All right, Luke, thank you so much for being with us. The new book is titled, Look For Me There. Nice work, Luke. Thank you so much, guys. We love you so much for coming here. And Luke, go Bills. Go Bills. A Dolphins fan said it. Oh, wow. I love you. Go Bills. Go Bills. A Dolphins fan said it. Oh, wow. I love you. Go Bills. Go Bills. Thank you so much, Luke. Go Bills. All right.

As we get to the top of the hour, Mike, I just want to circle back to you for a second. I'm not going to even ask what Tim would think about where the media is right now, where politics is right now. It's just to put people in that time frame when you lost your best friend, when Luke lost his father. It was in the middle of the 2008 campaign. It was even before Barack Obama was elected president of the United States. You know, I'm an optimist. I am an optimist. And I think America's greatest days are ahead. But let me just say what a horrible 15 years politically this has been since since Tim's passing. What would Tim think about where we are today?

Boy, I think he would think the same thing that we think, Joe. It's so incredibly depressing. Our politics, the tone of our politics, the media coverage of our politics. That's in the morning of the New Hampshire primary in 2008, I believe. Morning Joe was in its infancy and Timmy was right there. That was a great morning. A lot of fun. He had fun covering politics. He was excited, very much excited about Barack Obama's candidacy when he died in June of 2008. I think, again, like us, the way we view it as a business that has changed drastically, as has the media changed drastically. I mean, the impact of the Internet on the media, the impact of filing online during the course of a day, a long day, filing stories at 1 o'clock in the afternoon that you would originally, years ago,

take time to think about and file at 7 or 8 o'clock at night. It's all different. That world, the landscape of our world, our joint worlds, politics and the media, has drastically changed in the last 15 years since Tim died.