Morning Joe - Morning Joe 6/4/24

Episode Date: June 4, 2024

Biden criticizes 'convicted felon' Trump 

That's right, Trump was found guilty. They were gonna put him in an orange jumpsuit, but it felt redundant. Trump will be sentenced on July 11th, and his lawyers told him, you should get your affairs in order. Trump was like, that's what got me in trouble in the first place, and...

Jimmy Fallon upstairs last night. Good morning. Welcome to Morning Joe. It is Tuesday, June 4th. With us this morning, the host of way too early, White House bureau chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire. Pulitzer Prize winning columnist and associate editor of The Washington Post and MSNBC, political analyst Eugene Robinson and special correspondent Vanity Fair and host of the Fast Politics podcast, Molly John Fast. She's an MSNBC political analyst. Good morning to you all. We'll dive right in at a fundraiser in Connecticut last night. President Biden made some of his most candid comments yet about former President Trump's

criminal conviction. In off-camera remarks, Biden told the audience that a convicted felon is now seeking the office of the presidency. The president added, quote, as disturbing as that is, more damaging is the all-out assault Donald Trump is making on the American system of justice. President Biden is reported to have said, quote, something snapped in this guy after the 2020 election and quote, it's literally driving him crazy. Biden went on to call Trump unhinged, Joe, of where we may see President Biden going publicly as this campaign rolls out now that Donald Trump has been convicted on 34 felony counts. Right. It is, Jonathan LeMire. It may be a private preview, but this is how Biden feels. This is how his campaign team feels. This is how people around him feel. They are glad the trial's over. They're glad that

he's going out on the trail. And as I said yesterday, while that long stem winder of a press conference was going on Friday, the Biden campaign was celebrating. They said, OK, he's he sounds older, more unhinged, less connected with reality. This is why we want him out of the courthouse and on the campaign trail. Yeah, it seems counterintuitive, but they're exactly right. Some senior Biden people were eager for the trial to end because they felt in some ways it shielded Donald Trump from the scrutiny of the rest of the voters when then they actually hear him talking again and he's in their living room again, which he was in that news conference on Friday, which he will be in the debate in just a few weeks' time.

Americans will be repulsed when they don't want to go back to that Trump term. In terms of how the president and his team are going to handle this, it was previewed to me a couple of weeks ago. As we saw last week, President Biden's first words about the verdict were simply, we need to respect the process.

The judicial system worked and attacks against it are disgraceful. But now we're seeing other Democrats and the president himself begin to ramp up his attacks on Donald Trump. The Biden Twitter account more than a dozen times yesterday used the phrase convicted felon. We heard it again from President Biden last night. Now, they don't believe this conviction itself is a race-changing event. They do think, though, it will help along the margins and in a close race. That could matter. But more than that, they think it's just the latest piece, the latest piece, Willie,

of this overall example they're building about how Donald Trump isn't fit for office. Look at the lengths he would go to to keep power. Look how he's only out for himself and not you, the American voter. Yeah. And given that this came in late May, this verdict, we'll see how long it can burn through a long campaign, whether it stays alive as a conversation piece. And Molly, you're writing about this in Vanity Fair. Molly's latest piece is titled Trump World's Post-Conviction Spin Cycle. In it, Molly writes this. While many Trump surrogates appeared to go about their messaging in lockstep, there were also some rather stark inconsistencies, suggesting Trump's verdict was not something that Republicans

had a clear handle on. Perhaps the weirdest display of dissonance came from Mike Lee, who quite simply could not seem to make up his mind on whether the trial was a boon or a bust. At 5.15 p.m. on Thursday, the Utah senator tweeted that by pushing for and securing Trump's conviction, progressives have, quote, guaranteed Trump's election. But a mere 20 minutes later, the senator appeared to turn a dime, saying of the trial,

I can't imagine a bigger, more impactful contribution to the Biden campaign. A jury has found Trump to be guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records. In his world, this reality does not really matter. It's something that can be endlessly spun and mangled and perverted into a word salad of projection and lies. But when it comes to wiping off a stain that is this indelible, Trump world is going to have a much harder time, writes Molly Jong Fast. Molly, let you expand on this a little bit on your piece. But obviously, we heard reflexive reaction from most Republicans, not surprising at all, given a lot of them were at the courthouse during the trial to support him,

saying that this was a miscarriage of justice and the criminal justice system is broken and the country is terrible and all those things, because one time it cut against them. How do you expect this to play, though, for the rest of the campaign? So it reminded me a little bit of the Access Hollywood tape. Like there was a moment of panic. It wasn't quiet when the Access Hollywood tape broke. There was sort of silence and everyone was like, are we going to stick around with this guy? Obviously, Republicans are in it too deep to do anything but keep going. I mean, Donald Trump is basically the central platform of their 2024 campaigns that, you know, down the ticket.

So I don't think that they're going to cut and run from him. And in fact, we saw lots of defending, but we saw a kind of very weird defending, right? So they would defend some things, but not other things. They, you know, they attacked the rule of law, which is what we were expecting. I mean, a lot of it was this playbook, but there certainly was some tacking and weaving. And I also think ultimately Donald Trump is,

you know, when they're not completely in lockstep, that's something to look at. And so I do think there were some problems there. Ultimately, you know, Trump was always going to say that this is what he expected and that this was how he thought it would go. But I think they really did think that he was going to skate or at least skate on some of the charges. Yeah, I mean, and they wouldn't have been alone. Again, I was sure that there would be a possibility of a hung jury. Sure that maybe there would be one person out of the 77 million who voted for Donald Trump in 2020 that was on that jury that that would not take their duty seriously.

What I was wrong and I and the Trump campaign was wrong. There were 12 jurors who were willing to set aside all preexisting beliefs, all preexisting prejudices, and just look at the facts of the case, follow the jury instructions, and convict him on 34 counts. Now, Gene Robinson, you're saying that there's something Donald Trump could do

if he really wanted to make America great again, And there's about as much chance of him doing that as the Tories winning in a landslide next month. Why don't you tell us what he could do? Well, no, he could withdraw from the race because he's just been convicted of 34 felonies. You know, imagine, Joe, if this were any other point in American history from the founding of the republic to the jury foreman finished reading the 34 guilty verdicts, right? I mean, it would have just been automatically unthinkable that someone would stay in any race given the status as a 34 times felon. But again, you know, we're in this very different world. I thought, as I was sitting down to write a column yesterday, I thought, well, look, somebody needs to call for Donald Trump to step out of the race because, you know, all these sort of, you know, hand-wringing

Democrats and chin-stroking pundits, they've been calling for Joe Biden to step aside. And the only thing he's guilty of is living to 81. You know, it's just, I mean, it's just this weird, topsy-turvy, upside-down world that we live in, and we need to stop every once in a while and realize this is not normal. This is not healthy. This is insane. Maybe that will sink in. Just that fact of how insane and unacceptable this is. We'll sink in with some voters over time. We'll see. I suspect it may with with with swing voters. We saw some polls over the weekend suggesting that it just may do that with independent voters, with swing voters, especially in the upper Midwest states.

But but Gene brings up such a great point, Willie, you know, in the good old days, back back when I was in Washington. I mean, heck, if somebody got indicted of 34 counts, they immediately resigned from Congress and, you know, went to prepare their defense. Here, Donald Trump gets convicted 34 times, 34 different felonies. And of course, you have United States senators who are trying to use it as a badge of honor that their guy is being persecuted by the state. Yeah, I mean, he's martyred him, right? I mean, he's been compared to religious figures without irony by members of the United States Congress, by people on TV as a rallying cry behind him. And that's the that's the Trump way, though, isn't it? Never surrender, never apologize for anything. Put your head down and keep moving and pretend, despite all the facts

around you, that you are the victim And always, always play the victim. I mean, that's always it. Always play the victim. Always play the murder. You know, he was asked in this weekend Fox & Friends interview about evangelical supporting him. We even saw people that used to be, I just saw shocking things by evangelical so-called leaders, one of them having Trump next to Jesus on a cross saying, why wouldn't you vote for somebody

who's been convicted? You worship somebody who was convicted. And that shows you just the depravity that that that many of these people are willing to sink to. It's just straight out blasphemy. I was just going to say there used to be a word for that blasphemy. But, Molly, the point of all this is that Donald Trump could not pull this off alone. Right. He would be a convicted felon and he would sound as insane as he does sound in that interview with Fox and Friends over the weekend for 90 minutes or however long it lasted. But the entire party, the entire media on his side rallies behind him and legitimizes his claims of victimhood.

And what was interesting this whole weekend was that the message out of Trump world was on his side rallies behind him and legitimizes his claims of victimhood. And what was interesting this whole weekend was that the message out of Trump world was this helps him. Right. We raised Gonzo money. Again, we're going to have to wait to see the filings, but it's still a lot of money either way. And he said, you know, this helps him. This makes him more powerful. You libs have done it now. Right. Even though, remember, it's a state case. And the other thing is that this doesn't exist in a vacuum. He has three other cases, plus all of these civil cases. I mean, this guy isn't just this isn't just like one rogue prosecutor. I mean, the guy has done all of these things which have led to all these investigations. So, look, I think that to watch Trump world pump him up,

both to try to play him as the victim and to also say that he must stay in because he is the only way that they're going to survive is a bizarre thing. You know, there is such a bubble to Jonathan O'Meara that these people live in. I mean, and even people in sort of the media orbit that I've talked to, they they think 34 felony convictions. It's great for Donald Trump. Great for fundraising, firing up the base. man, people are going to do whatever it takes to vote. It fires up his his 44 percent, his 43 percent, you know, and ceiling maybe 46, 47 percent. But you know, they actually believe it. I Trump Trump knows better than to believe that this is something that he wants. But there are people

around him that have convinced himself, living in bubble, that these 34 felony convictions were the greatest political advance for Trump in some time. And they're just completely delusional. I mean, they're right that it'll fire up the base. They're right that it'll be good for fundraising, at least for the time being. But there's a couple of things here. First, we do know, as we've long said on this show, the way to know what Donald Trump's actually thinking is what he posts on Truth Social in the middle of the night. And it has been screed after screed after screed expressing anger and frustration at what has happened in these legal cases. And also, I've talked to people around him. He doesn't want to go to prison. He didn't want to be convicted.

They had convinced themselves they would at least get a hung jury. They were surprised by the verdict and particularly that it was unanimous. But even if this does help politically with his base, there's simply no way it helps beyond that. Now, Democrats feel there's worries already about complacency, that the members of the base will say, well, Trump's been convicted. He can't win. No. And that's why the overarching message from the Biden campaign immediately was he can still win conviction or not. We've got to get out there and beat him at the ballot box. But it's about those swing voters. And in particular, as someone in the Biden camp put it to me yesterday, the people who are going to decide this election, the suburban voters,

some of them older voters, they care about a couple of things and they care about democracy and they care about decorum. And they're just sort of turned off by the idea. The Biden people believe that Donald Trump not only has been, as is now indeed a convicted felon, but the other part of that Fox interview over the weekend, Willie, was that he threatened retribution. He said, we're going to use the Department of Justice to get back at the people who did this to me. And that, I think, is going to be upsetting to a lot of voters who are going to cast their ballots and actually decide this thing in November. It kind of confirmed everything people believe about what's going to happen. I'm going to fire off the generals. I'm going to put in MAGA.

We're going to have our own people in there. We're going to get rid of effectively the federal government and replace it with our own. A lot in that interview, if you're interested. Let's turn to some news this morning, though. President Biden is expected to sign an executive order today that would shut down the southern border when daily migrant crossings between legal points of entry exceed 2,500 people. According to three sources familiar with the discussions under the order, the border would not reopen until that number falls below 1,500 migrants a day. Any shutdown would not stop trade, travel or entry by immigrants lawfully presenting themselves at points of entry. However, it would prevent migrants from applying for asylum if they cross the border during the

closure. Two of the sources stress the details are still being finalized, but the White House has begun to discuss the order with lawmakers. One of the sources telling NBC News the White House is acting now because it believes the numbers will rise through the summer, as they tend to do. Department of Homeland Security officials say the southern border currently is seeing more than 4,000 border encounters every day. Joining us now from the border town of Mission, Texas, NBC News Homeland Security correspondent Julia Ainsley. Julia, good morning. So tell us a little bit more about this order and what the impact may be.

Well, as far as impacts goes, one of the quickest things we can expect to see is groups who were advocating for migrants suing the federal government and getting this entire thing enjoined in court. And that is because what we expect the president to unveil today is actually very similar to something that President Trump tried to do under his presidency to try to make it illegal for any immigrant crossing the border between ports of entry. That would be in a place just like this, where he built the wall between legal ports of entry to make that illegal, to make it so that they couldn't claim asylum. That was stopped in courts. That was something Stephen Miller actually came up with. And this is pretty close to that action. Now, what I'm told is this is really the way the

Biden administration is lobbing the ball back into the court of Congress. As you know, they wanted that bipartisan deal that Linkford and Sinema and others worked on in the Senate that didn't even get a vote. And of course, President Trump told Republicans not to vote for because he said it didn't go far enough. This is their way of saying, look, we've tried to take really bold action through an executive order. The court stopped us. Now it's up to you, Congress. And they want that message going into the November election, especially if those numbers rise along the border. We do have to point out, though, numbers have remained slower and steady since December. We saw historic highs in December over 12,000 a day.

Since then, they've remained around 4,000 to 5,000 per day along the southern border. Here in Rio Grande Valley, this used to be one of the busiest spots on the border, Willie. Anytime we wanted to come down, see what was happening on the border. See, I've seen hundreds of migrants packed under a bridge just beyond this wall today. Pretty quiet. We've seen a few Border Patrol vans roll through. They might be hearing some small groups of migrants coming through. But by and large, the border has been quieter this year than we saw, especially toward the end of last year. I just have to point that out because sometimes I think we forget about that when we're talking about border politics.

No, it's important to point out. And Julie, you've covered this so well and so closely for so long. So the process now is you can show up at the border and say you're seeking asylum, that you're being persecuted in your home country, and then you go into the, you're released into the United States while you wait your hearing on asylum. And that can take, as you know, many years. Is anything being done to address that side of it, get more judges, more courts, or more ways to process those cases more quickly? Well, that's what they wanted in that border bill. But without more money from Congress, it's really hard to see how they could do that. We understand that they want to get more beds and ICE detention so that more people can be held while they're waiting that immigration decision.

But in lieu of that money, this is to push more people back into Mexico. In fact, Willie, it's a big reason why we're hearing about this this week and not earlier, because they wanted to wait for Mexico to get through those elections over the weekend before they announced this, because they really can't do a deal like this where they don't allow migrants to come in, claim asylum and get get on to that process that can take years unless they get Mexico to agree to take back the migrants that won't be allowed in. And they plan to do that at just 2,500 a day, Willie. We're already seeing over 4,000 a day. It's hard to imagine a scenario where they would get down to that 1,500 people a day trigger to then reopen it. This would effectively shut down the border immediately and keep it closed for the remaining future.

And of course, as you pointed out, that does not mean legitimate trade and travel. It means migrants passing between legal ports of entry. NBC News Homeland Security correspondent Julia Ainsley down along the border in Mission, Texas. Julia, thanks so much as always. We appreciate it. So, Jonathan, we should underline something that Julia said, which is we'll hear Republicans in Congress complaining about this today. Too little, too late. They had the legislation they asked for sitting right in front of them, bipartisan, led by one of the most conservative senators in the United States Senate, James Lankford, Kyrsten Sinema, Chris Murphy, worked on it for months.

And then Donald Trump told Republicans not to support it anymore. And they walked away from it. So the timing on this, Why now for President Biden? Well, there are two pieces. Julia just hit one. He said they wanted to wait for Mexico's elections to conclude. And that happened. The other timing. Well, let's look at the calendar. We're five months to Election Day. And that's why the president and his team felt like they had to do something on this. We were right to underscore. We've been doing it consistently on this show. Republicans crafted this deal in the Senate and then walked away from it because

Donald Trump wanted to keep it an election issue. Polls do show, Molly, that immigration remains a pretty good issue for Republicans, despite the facts of the matter. And the president, Biden and his team, they acknowledge privately they were a little slow to act earlier in his term. They are acting now. They feel like they need to have a show of force, push it back to Congress, try to get something done. But even if nothing can get done, they at least want to show voters they're making an effort here ahead of November. Right. And look, this that what Julia said was so important. They don't have the money. Right. So they don't have the money for the judges and the system. And so what happens is you have people come in for for for asylum and then they are, you know, they're released. And so you don't have the mechanism to to process these claims. And that is not going to

be solved with an executive order. But remember, Republicans have been saying, you know, Biden can do an executive order. He can solve this problem. So this is his way of saying, you know, we've done an executive order. Obviously, you can't solve it without the bond. I expected to sign that executive order today as President Biden before he heads off to France for the rest of the week. Nearly two years after the Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Wade, a new book is shedding light on conservatives years long strategy that finally led to the Dobbs decision. The book is titled The Fall of Roe, The Rise of a New America. It explores how the right's most fervent anti-abortion activists end up persuading the court to end nearly 50 years of precedent. Joining us now at the book's co-authors, national religion

correspondent for The New York Times, Elizabeth Dias, and national political correspondent for The New York Times, Lisa Laird. Good morning to you both. Congratulations. Today is pub day. Today is pub day. Thank you. Today is pub day. Congratulations. Thank you. Your baby is out into the world. Here we go.

It is. It's here. Deeply, deeply reported, like 350 interviews. You really get into the history of this issue. So it's a lot to get through. But I guess I'll start at the end, which is how the dam ultimately broke after this half century effort to overturn Roe versus Wade. Donald Trump getting in the White House obviously put those three justices on the Supreme Court. But at the end, what happened that pushed it over the finish line?

So our book is really the first narrative of how Roe fell. And what we did was look at the final decade of what we call the Roe era. And what we saw in this period is this tightly connected web of conservative anti-abortion activists were able to move the levers of power in their favor in ways big and really small, you know, working at state houses to start pushing through legislation. And then, as you point out, Donald Trump gets elected. They get really you know, they jump on that train. It becomes a bullet train for them. And they get really lucky. They get those three seats on the Supreme Court. And they're dealing with an abortion rights movement that's really ill-equipped and unprepared to take on this threat. And a country that really has this pervasive sense of denial that this right that's been part of American life for two generations, could suddenly disappear. So, Elizabeth, Donald Trump, obviously evangelicals were skeptical of him in 2015.

Even in 2016, he had talked about being pro-choice many times in public previous to that. And then maybe ultimately they realized they can perhaps shape him a little bit because he so desperately wants to be elected that they can dictate what they want from him. They did. And one of the really interesting things we found, too, is it wasn't just evangelicals, right? Actually, Catholics played a really important role in the anti-abortion movement's growth origins. Evangelicals were actually late coming to that in history. And the leaders of the anti-abortion movement actually really were rooted in their conservative Christian values, values about family, womanhood, and, of course, abortion. And what our story shows is that it was those values that really were behind the movement. Certainly, as Lisa was saying, there's all these levers of power that they pulled.

But at its core, this is all happening over a period when America is becoming increasingly secular. There's so much cultural change, especially when it comes to marriage, family and sex. And these are the things that the anti-abortion movement ultimately is hoping to change. It's not just about overturning Roe. It's about a much bigger half century plan to really roll back the sexual revolution. Joe, you've watched this so closely from the point of view of faith but also through politics over the course of your life and your career culminating once Donald Trump is in the White House with 50 years of precedent

overturned. Right. Right. 50 years of precedent overturned. And Elizabeth, you are right. Catholics, Catholics have have been pro-life for quite some time, as I always joke on this show. Evangelicals, my church, Southern Baptists were pro-choice from the time of Jesus's birth until the Eagles broke up. And I'm the just so when you say a new America, I think it's interesting. It was a new Republican Party and the redefinition by political activists in 1979, 1980, what it meant to be an evangelical, what it meant to be a Christian. And you had people like Paul Weirich and, you know, Richard Vigory and Jerry Falwell just deciding whole cloth. This is how we beat a Southern Baptist Democrat. So I'm curious, how did how did their political machinations in 1979 and 1980 not only change American politics, but based on your reporting, how did it change how evangelicals looked at their own faith

and bringing in this political controversy that many now put at the center of their faith. Well, look, you can think about politics influencing religion or religion influencing politics. And the story that we've been really seeing, you guys have been talking about on this show for so long, is in the Trump era, especially in this last decade, we're really seeing the merging of those two things and politics influencing religion. And, you know, you can think back to this very long game, the anti-abortion movement, conservative Christians think in generations about change. It's not just a political cycle. But also the people that you mentioned, right, that's several, that's a couple of generations ago. And what our book talks about is there was actually this most recent generation that actually got overturning Roe over the finish line was really led by conservative Christian

women and they have a vision of what it means to be a woman in America how motherhood fits into that that really changed the game in the end and it's it's not just the story of kind of the 80s religious right there's a modern religious right that is enormously influential and it's not just the story of kind of the 80s religious right. There's a modern religious right that is enormously influential. And it's not just on issues about abortion. It's the issues, issues, all kinds of cultural issues in this in this whole realm about rolling back the sexual revolution. In some ways, they've radicalized along with the Republican Party, that this is a new generation of socially conservative activists. And they've gone. think donald trump's republican

party expanded their horizons of what could be possible and that's part of what we say see playing out in the politics now particularly on this issue well and and let's also just state what what every survey shows a lot of people just call themselves evangelicals as a cultural marker not as a religious marker uh i mean, no one less than Tim Keller said he stopped using the term evangelical to describe himself because the word had been so politicized. I'm curious, Lisa, in your reporting, I think the cliffhanger here,

as Dobbs was being decided after the leak, was whether John Roberts was going to be able to get Kavanaugh or Coney Barrett to come with him and just go with a Mississippi 15 week ban. I'm curious, what did your reporting find? How close did the Chief Justice get to getting one of those two to take a more incremental approach? Well, he didn't get all that close. He tried and he certainly tried hard, but it didn't.

You know, in the end, this isn't what happened. And, you know, one of the most interesting things I think we found is we uncovered some new some sort of internal documents that showed where this movement wants to go in the future and how, you know, Elizabeth was talking about how this is a movement that's really intent on changing the structure or reverting in some ways the structure of American families. And what we saw was they're looking at other things going forward. And that was hinted at in this decision by Thomas. But certainly are the internal documents we got a handle on. We're talking about trans rights. They were talking about parental rights. They were talking about religion in public squares,

things like schools or town meetings, same-sex marriage. So this is a beginning, you know, the start of a series of cases on these issues that will wind their way to this court. So this is exactly what I wanted to ask about. There's this fetal personhood. I say embryonic personhood because I, you know, I'm on the

opinion side. But can you make this make sense in the broader context of the fall of Roe? Sure. Look, I think for this anti-abortion movement, the fall of Roe was not the end. It was the beginning of the end. Right. The goal here is to eliminate all abortion. If they believe it's morally wrong, it's contradictory to many of their conservative faiths, they wanna eliminate it. And so of course, something like fetal personhood, which is basically the granting of constitutional rights

to a fetus, which makes it, you know, would functionally make all abortion illegal, of course that would be part of the strategy that this and we see that playing out in states across the country. So, Elizabeth, on the other side of this issue, those that wanted to defend abortion rights, were there things they could have done differently? Were there opportunities missed? Were there inflection points where they simply didn't see the threat coming?

You know, it's a hard question to answer in many ways. Yes, we talk about some of those pivot points. But also the thing that they were really up against was this generational thinking, right? The right was planning in really actually 50-year periods, right? They were never going to let up. The deluge of laws in state courts, how they were in state houses, the way they were transforming the courts slowly over time, right? These are things that are just like bit by bit by bit, right? And it makes it hard to see. It makes why so many people and why we wrote this book really were so surprised by

how did this actually happen, right? It's hard to see when it's just inching forward. But the left just, you know, and Hillary Clinton talked about this to us in our interview with her, the left just doesn't have that same kind of infrastructure at all. And so this is a big reckoning on the left for how are we going to, or are we going to respond to this? And what's that actually going to take? Because it's not easy, quick gratification change, right? You have to build building blocks over time. I also think the left was looking at changing sort of cultural, the cultural conversation, getting rid of safe, legal, rare, destigmatizing abortion as a procedure. And so they were really fighting for public opinion,

right? And the anti-abortion movement was fighting for the levers of power. And it turns out power is more powerful than public opinion, certainly when it comes to the courts. So I think there was also this mismatch of goals in a way. Jean Lisa. So you're right about power versus public opinion. But public opinion does not agree with this. agree with this total anti-abortion position. Do people in the anti-abortion movement, A, realize that? And B, is this sustainable over the long term? Oh, yeah, they realize that. I mean, I'm sure you guys have.

I know you guys have talked a lot about the politics of abortion now. Like you just have to look at Donald Trump and how he behaved in 2016 when he eagerly sort of made common cause with this movement and how he's behaving now. I think one big thing that was working in the advantage of the anti-abortion movement was this sense of denial. Nobody can see what they do not believe is going to happen. Right. And now that's just been shattered. And there's this steady drumbeat of news coming out of these states. You know, the cases of women seeking medical attention or some new ruling or some new law that just keeps this issue again and again in the news. And it's sort of showing people like how it is butting up directly against public opinion and what a majority of people in the country want. So I think it's a much harder task for them going forward, for sure.

And we're seeing that play out in the politics. We'll certainly see it play out in 2024. And I think we'll see it play out in several cycles to come. Elizabeth, as Lisa says, the politics of this are tough. You heard even Donald Trump himself blame the abortion issue for the losses in the midterms in 2022. But from your reporting, what are the activists looking at next? Lisa touched on a little bit, trans rights, gay marriage, things like that. We saw IVF come up in Alabama, even very conservative Republicans

even running from that, taking the idea of taking away IVF. But what is next on the list for these activists? Right. The IVF question is so interesting. It's going to keep coming up. It's funny, right after Roe was overturned, we have some reporting about the anti-abortion movement asking, you know, talking behind the scenes with different state lawmakers, when could they do that? You know, how long would that time horizon be? And they said a few years,

but it's actually just happened so much faster. And so that, like, especially for their base, like the people who've talked about themselves as pro-life voters, especially evangelical millennial moms, this is now reframing how they're thinking about this and kind of wondering, okay, there are some bigger questions here that we need to figure out, like, how does our how do our our own cultural, moral and religious views fit in with how that has played out and really become this politically powerful, dominating and kind of one track lane? America is being confronted with questions from, you know, voters to state lawmakers that they never thought they would have to ask. Like, I mean, I'm sure everyone remembers

right after Roe fell, there were these debates over kids and whether a 10-year-old girl could like terminate her. Like, this is not something that was part of our political discourse now. And it was an issue that politicians on both sides could skirt. And now all these politicians have to talk about uteruses, you know, and it's like really not comfortable for them.

So I think it's forcing these really direct confrontations for people and for politicians about like the actual lived reality of what this is beyond sort of the political like talking points and sort of phrases. You know, the obvious irony of the IDF issue, of course, is that it brings the gift of life to people who otherwise could not have it. The new book is titled The Fall of Roe, the Rise of a New America on an Issue that Will Hang Over This Presidential Election. It's on sale now. Co-authors Elizabeth Dias and Lisa Lair. Thanks for being here. Congrats on the book. Thanks. Thank you. Republican Congressman Vince Fong of California was sworn in yesterday, filling the seat once held by former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. With a new Republican in the House, the party breakdown there is now 218 Republicans to 213 Democrats. That means a majority to pass legislation is 216 votes.

So Republicans can afford to lose only two votes from their own party on any one vote. India has begun to count the votes in its general election, widely expected to result in a rare third term for Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The process has taken six weeks as votes were gathered from throughout the world's most populous country. The Associated Press reports roughly 642 million people voted in the general election, equating to an average turnout percent of 66 percent. If Modi wins, he will become the second prime minister in India's history to serve three terms, and the first in 60 years. President Biden will travel to France this week for the 80th anniversary of D-Day.

On Thursday, commemorations will honor more than 150,000 allied troops that stormed the beaches of Normandy on June 6, 1944. The president expected to recognize the American alliances that have defeated dictators bent on world conquest. The president will speak again on Friday, where his remarks will focus on the defense of freedom and democracy. He then will travel to Paris for a state visit with French President Emmanuel Macron. Joe. A new focus group is delving into voter reaction to Donald Trump's guilty verdict. The interactive video platform two way in association with the research from Wick Insights sat down on Sunday with a group of so-called double haters or voters who are unhappy with the prospect of choosing between Joe Biden and Donald Trump.

None of the participants, who live in North Carolina and Georgia, felt Trump's conviction would affect their vote, and none thought Biden would win the election. In addition, they were also asked if the former president was treated fairly at his trial. I think he was treated fairly. I didn't watch the trial, but when you're before a judge or whatever, a jury, and they have to go by the law and by what, you know, the judge and jury say. So I feel like he was.

I feel like he was treated fairly. I feel like he actually got away with saying a lot of disparaging things, not only about the jurors, about the judge as well. I know he said things before about other people who are prosecuting him. And I'm just thinking, you know, if it would have been anyone else on trial and you're bad mouthing, say the jurors or the judge, you know, what would have been the repercussion of that? Yeah, I think he actually benefited from his stature and then definitely, given a gag order, did not abide by it and would, you know, most people would obviously not have as much money as he does and have to get nailed from some fines and things like that. But he skirted by on that. And so I think he was

absolutely treated fairly, if not better than most people during the trial. I do trust the legal system enough that if the prosecution and defense were both able to pick jurors and they presented it so quickly and the jurors and the judge all agreed to follow due process and found him guilty very quickly, I have a hard time believing that there were that many jurors agreed upon that were all in on he's not guilty, but we're going to find him guilty just for kicks. Yeah, so everybody there thought that Donald Trump was given a fair trial, and none of those people said in that focus group that it was going to impact their vote. That said, polling of undecideds in Georgia and also North Carolina

showed that actually quite a few did believe it would have an impact on their vote. And let's bring it right now to talk about the host of majority rules and the undecideds on two way and founder of All In Together, Lauren Leder. Lauren, I'm just looking at the top line on the polling that you all took. 78 percent believe the verdict was the right verdict. Twenty one percent thought it was the wrong verdict. And this is the difference in voting with the threat of prison hanging over Donald Trump. A very large difference. 12%, a large difference, 15%, moderate difference, 23%. And that adds up to over 50%.

So over 50% of these so-called double haters said it could have an impact on their vote, but overwhelmingly, almost all of them believed Donald Trump got a fair trial. Yeah, and that was what was so fascinating, and especially in listening to their conversation is, first of all, they were so nuanced and really thoughtful about their responses.

And, you know, I just want to say, like, this is the only, so far, it's the only swing state poll that's been done since the verdict. And it's going to matter a lot because, of course, swing states will decide the election and undecided voters will be a huge factor in the decisions in the election. But what really struck me was that incredible contrast between this confidence in the legal

system that the jury was fair, that the trial was fair, and that Trump was treated fairly. So they did not buy any of the Trump sort of claims that the whole thing was rigged and it was unfair to him. They didn't buy that at all. And yet, and yet, they also felt that it was unfair to him. They didn't buy that at all. And yet and yet they also felt that it was politically motivated that the trial was brought this year because of the election, that it wouldn't have happened, that it wasn't an important enough issue to have been brought. A number of them talked about the documents case in Florida, the classified documents

as being more important and didn't understand, you know, why this was brought this year. I'll also say they did not understand the charges. They couldn't articulate what it was that he was convicted of. But I think that's what is so fascinating about this dynamic right now, Joe, and we're seeing this in the national polls as well, that Americans are saying it doesn't matter, or at least there have been some polls saying it doesn't matter, that it's not that it was that he was treated fairly, that the verdict was fair, and yet somehow he's still going to win and it doesn't matter that he's treated fairly, the verdict was fair, and yet somehow he's still going to win, and it doesn't matter that he's a felon.

And I think that's going to be a really hard one, hard circle for the Biden campaign to square over the next few months. Well, I mean, and of course, these voters were in Georgia and North Carolina. They may be hearing something different than voters in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. I will tell you that, again, we talked about it earlier, Lauren, that Jonathan Meir brought up how older voters and we've seen that older white voters are staying with Biden, if you look, as Jonathan said, who believe in the rule of law, who believe in decorum. And another part of your survey that I find just absolutely fascinating on these double haters. You ask people why they don't like Joe Biden and they'll talk about issues. They'll talk about the economy. They'll talk about immigration.

You ask why they don't like Donald Trump. Forty percent almost say his personality and almost 30 percent say his corrupt administration. Why is this important? Because for those double haters in the upper Midwest who already have a problem with Donald Trump's personality, all already have a problem with his, quote, corrupt administration. Doesn't this just feed into Trump's vulnerability among the very voters he has to win over? Yeah, I think it does. And I think, look, I mean, the other factor that we talk about so much on the show that I always bring up is around what are the motivators and the turnout drivers? And we know, you know, from that last segment, which was so fascinating, look, women remain extraordinarily angry and frustrated with the overturning of Roe. They

know that that sits on Donald Trump. And we saw in the midterms, even when Trump was president, the backlash against the chaos, right, which was so motivating for midterm voters in his first term. And I think that's the piece of this that's really hard to put your finger on. You've got this, like, meaningful percentage of undecided voters in key states. But then how does that square against the really intense motivation of people who will vote against him, even if they're not—even if they don't love Joe Biden? And will they come home and turn out for him because of what's at stake, because the issues, and because they don't want the chaos. And I think you're right.

We're seeing this in the over 50 voters. I think we will continue to see the strength among women voters, including independent women in the middle, who will, I believe, turn out over these issues. And by the way, Trump's been in court. We haven't even begun to hear the chaos coming from him. We got a taste of it in that Fox News interview this weekend. Just wait. I think a lot of Americans, the more they hear,

the more they have to reconnect with the chaos and the personality issues. I think they're going to ask those questions. But all in all, the trial seems to have made very little impact, despite the fact that people believe it was fair. He was treated fairly in our justice system. So, Lauren, you just mentioned that's always been the Biden theory of the case, that the more Americans hear Donald Trump, the less they'll want to sign up for another four years of that.

But beyond the negative argument the Biden folks can make about Trump, in this focus group and other work you've done, are there any sort of positive pro-Biden messages that are resonating? Or is it simply, hey, we're not the other guy? I mean, you get so much complaining about the economy when it comes to Biden. We saw that in the poll, too, as Joe pointed out, that when it comes to what are people frustrated with on with

the president, it's the economy and they don't see him taking enough action. And, you know, I really think that's going to continue to be critical. He's going to have to address that. And continuing to say to people, you know, we're doing great, everything's great, does not seem to be breaking through. I mean, people are not feeling it, especially in the middle class. One of the other women in our focus group also said she felt that neither of the candidates were looking out for the middle class, that they perceive Joe Biden is looking out for more of the poor. Trump is looking out for the rich and nobody looking out for them. So I think that's going to need to, it's a fascinating dynamic for these folks that remain undecided. But that's an opportunity for the president to potentially win people over. All right. Host of majority rules

and the undecideds on two way and founder of all in together, Lauren Leader. Thank you so much. Greatly appreciate it. Fascinating.