Morning Joe - Morning Joe 7/20/23

Episode Date: July 20, 2023

Trump’s target letter included three federal statutes

The president bears responsibility for Wednesday's attack on Congress by mob rioters. He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding. And make no mistake, those who are responsible for Wednesday's chaos will be brought to justice. After January 6th, you said Donald Trump bears some responsibility for the attack on the Capitol. If he is found criminally responsible, will you respect the results? I don't see how he could be found criminally responsible. He did not charge it. What criminal activity did he do?

He told people to be peaceful. So, Willie, it's like telling people, hey, first savings and loan on Main Street. Be there on January the 6th. Like overrun the guards, beat everybody up inside. If you have to go to the bathroom, go ahead and wipe it on the walls. Take their money, beat people up, cause the death. Be seen as theimate cause of the death

of four guards there, and then two, two and a half hours afterwards, I'll tell you to stop. For Kevin McCarthy to say, what did he do? What did he do? Well, Willie, let me read from you while we look at this video. This is Jamie Gangale from February 12th, 2021. In an expletive lace phone call with Kevin McCarthy while the U.S. Capitol was under attack, Trump said the rioters cared more about the election results than McCarthy did. McCarthy insisted the rioters were Trump supporters and begged Trump to call them off. And then the shouting match began. A furious McCarthy told then President Trump rioters were breaking into his office and through the windows and asked Trump, quote, who the F, except he didn't say F, who the F do you think you are talking to? That's Kevin McCarthy shouting while his office is under siege, begging Donald Trump to stop the rioters, begging Donald Trump to stop the riot. And then Donald Trump saying, oh, Kevin, it's

Antifa. His response, again, a shouting match. And McCarthy went around telling all of the Republican caucus he was very proud of the fact that he shouted down the president who, you know, sat there for two hours while they were being attacked, while rioters were looting the Capitol and while police officers were getting brutalized. You know, there's a reason that Donald Trump refers to Kevin McCarthy and has over the years as my Kevin, because it is his Kevin. And you saw his Kevin on display there against yesterday, which means he'll say and do anything to protect Donald Trump. And he had that one moment on January 6th, the phone calls you just laid out that night. Lindsey Graham was another of them who said that's enough.

Enough is enough. He bears responsibility for this. You can't change that video. And it does make you wonder. We've talked about this, Joe, how someone like Kevin McCarthy looks in the mirror at night. What does he tell his family? What does he tell his kids? What does he tell his kids?

He was there. He knows what happened on January 6th. We show the video because we have to remind people, yes, your eyes were right that day. The thing you saw is exactly what happened. No matter what now, Speaker McCarthy wants you to believe. And the political question, Joe, is for what? They're putting their political lives,

their political careers on the line, their integrity on the line. For Donald Trump, for a guy who has lost them election after election after election and may well lose them another one next year. Yeah, I mean, they're they're they're putting they're putting everything on the line to defend a loser that has brought the Republican Party to new lows. And we're not even talking about the shamelessness, the hypocrisy, the lying. We're talking about election results. And you look at the latest Quinnipiac poll, the head to head matchup between Donald Trump and and Joe Biden that just came out. I mean, it has Donald Trump losing again. I know there's some polls that show it close, but this recent one, most recent one has Donald Trump down five

points. People know you look at public opinion strategies. You look at their head to head matchups in one state after another. It doesn't look like this. It looks like Ron DeSantis and other Republicans giving Joe Biden a much better race. But here, Joe Biden up 49 percent to 44 percent. And this was even before the latest Jack Smith letter, another indictment for what happened on January 6th, it does beg the question, seriously, man, I was in Congress. I can tell you it's not worth it. Nothing's worth it, Willie. To be this shameful. And I will say, you know, I didn't know people. I just didn't know many people in Congress that would do this because you could never get away with it. I mean, you say one thing one day and the next day you turn around and play the Kevin McCarthy.

They just look at you and laugh at you and never trust you again and be just saying, God, what fools. But this Republican Party, this Trump Republican Party, it's a cult. They all go along with it. And to live in fear every day of your life. The thing I'm about to say, is that going to upset Donald Trump? If so, I better not say it. And by the way, we're seeing it among the candidates, Mika, who are trying to defeat Donald Trump. They're measuring their words. Now, wait, I know this is really bad.

I know January 6th was bad. I know stealing nuclear secrets and hiding them at your beach club is really bad. I know all the defamation that we're going to talk about is really bad. But boy, if I say something mean or something that Donald Trump even could interpret as critical, I'm in big trouble. So I better defend the guy, even though I'm trying to beat him in a political race. It's wild. Well, we're going to be talking about it. But you look at the ruling out of New York where district judge yesterday in New York said, hey, maybe Donald Trump, maybe he didn't rape E. Jean Carroll by the letter of the law and under the New York penal law. But my gosh, in common parlance among the people, the U.S. Army, the AMA, every other measurement, he did rape her.

That's what the judge said. And get quite short with Trump lawyers who suggested their client did not rape E. Jean Carroll. Had that happened any time before Donald Trump, there would be, my God, there would be phone calls an hour, hour and a half later, that person would be out of the race. But, well, it's just not the case here because this is a Republican Party, I guess, that not only is shameless and hypocritical, but they just like to lose. And I can't figure out why they like losing so much. But I just I have to come to that conclusion that they're afraid to win. Since you mentioned the E. Jean Carroll case, let's just let's look at exactly what the judge said, because the jury only found Trump liable for sexual abuse. And then there was a new court filing.

A judge clarified that the jury found that Donald Trump did rape writer E. Jean Carroll. And that was in the way that the word is commonly used. The jury handed down that verdict during a civil trial between the writer and the former president, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages. Trump's lawyers filed a motion seeking either to reduce that award or get a new trial, arguing that he was not found liable for rape, like Carroll alleges. Yesterday, Judge Lewis Kaplan, as Joe mentioned, denied that request, saying that the way New York law defines rape is much narrower than how it's commonly defined by some dictionaries and other criminal statutes. In the opinion, Kaplan writes, quote, the finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was raped within the

meaning of the New York penal law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump raped her, as many people commonly understand the word rape. Indeed, as the evidence at the trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump, in fact, did exactly that. This filing comes as Trump faces a second defamation lawsuit from Carol over comments he made about her shortly after she came forward with her allegation, as well as comments he made the day after the jury in the first trial handed down its verdict. Remember that? He just couldn't stop. Attorneys for Trump have not responded to requests for comment. But it's interesting. Kevin McCarthy is so scared of this man. He's so frightened of his shadow. And yet this woman will hold Donald Trump accountable no matter what she has to go through and no matter how long it

takes. Just saying very, very, very different, different abilities to handle stress. Let's put it that way. And if you want to really look at just how much this party has devolved from 2016, when the Access Hollywood tape came out, you actually had had Republicans saying Mike Pence. Everybody said we can't we can't follow this guy anymore. We we we we. And they they were speaking out against him. And so you now have a president, as you said, that has been indicted three times, indicted for stealingS. government, hidden in his beach club. You have a district court judge calling Donald Trump a rapist, saying that he is a rapist. Again, this is any one of these things would have finished anybody's political career in either party pre Donald Trump. It is truly frightening what the Republican Party has become because any time a politician was was was was, you know, it just a judge is working in your business.

Well, a judge, a judge says he's a rapist. What what company would continue having this guy as their CEO stealing nuclear secrets? They would be fired immediately. Just leave the building. We're going to box your stuff up and leave the building. I mean, these are the sort of things, Willie, that again, I mean, the fact that the Republicans are sitting back and they're fine with all of this, they're fine with nuclear secrets being stolen. They're fine with military secrets being stolen. They're fine with military plans to invade Iran being stolen. Donald Trump lying to the government when they try to get those secrets back. And a judge saying Donald Trump raped E. Jean Carroll.

They're fine with that. Again, it just it keeps getting more and more bizarre every day. Yeah. And I think it's important you say that it wasn't always like this. We all have kids of a certain age who are growing up in this last decade in this political culture, asking us and wondering, has it always been like this? No, it has not always been like this. It shouldn't be like this. We should go back to it not being like this, where people are held to a certain standard of behavior. Leaders are held to a standard of behavior. But it takes not even courage, but it takes some integrity to do that.

And man, is there a deficit of that in the leadership of the Republican Party? You even had Republicans coming out yesterday desperately saying, well, the only reason Jack Smith and the government and the Biden administration is coming out with these indictments is to silence us and to overwhelm the news day on our investigation of Hunter Biden in the oversight committee. They don't they can't bring themselves to express concern about very serious potential crimes, because, again, that would mean criticizing Donald Trump. It's hard to explain to somebody who hasn't been watching it as closely as we do every day. If you drop down from another planet and you ask somebody, you know, why is this happening? How can you allow this to happen? It's a tough thing to explain, except for the fact that

they are afraid. They're afraid of Donald Trump. They continue to be afraid of his voters. And it's unclear, really, inside the Republican Party anyway, what breaks that fever. And we're going to get to the investigations also. I mean, again, so-called whistleblowers. I mean, I mean, these IRS whistleblowers at least weren't spies. At least they didn't illegally smuggle Iranian oil to the Communist Chinese Party. At least they weren't an active agent for the Chinese Communist Party like the last whistleblower was. But this whistleblower admitted, yeah, yeah, I brought this up to the Trump administration, the Trump Justice Department.

They didn't see anything there either. And oh, yeah, all those things Republican congressmen have been saying about Merrick Garland that I said about him, supposedly, those are lies, too. So they're just throwing things at the wall because they're so desperate. They don't want Americans to hear that a judge called Donald Trump a rapist. They don't they don't want the American people to focus on the fact that Donald Trump stole nuclear secrets, wouldn't give them back to the government. That Donald Trump stole military secrets and secret plans to invade Iran and wouldn't give it back to the government. They don't they don't want people. So they make things up and they have all of these so-called whistleblowers who, again, admit. The Trump Justice Department said, yeah,

there's nothing there. We'll get to all of this with us. We have the host of way too early in White House bureau chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire, member of the New York Times editorial board, Mara Gay, founder of the conservative website, The Bulwark. Charlie Sykes is with us and former U.S. attorney and senior FBI official Chuck Rosenberg. And Chuck, ahead of a possible third indictment of Donald Trump, we are learning more about the serious new charges the former president could potentially face. Two attorneys with direct knowledge of the matter tell NBC News that in a target letter sent to Trump this week, special counsel Jack Smith

mentioned three federal statutes, deprivation of rights under color of law, conspiracy to defraud the United States, and witness tampering. It's worth noting, although new charges against the former president are extremely likely, a target letter is not an indictment. And if Trump is indeed charged, the counts could extend beyond the three statutes mentioned in the letter. Chuck, what do you make of those three charges, those three possible charges? All right. Well, so first, Tamika's point, the target letter is not an indictment. But having been a prosecutor and having sent out target letters, you don't do that unless

you intend to indict. So it means an indictment is coming. What do I make, Joe, of those three charges? You and I have talked about this before. I've always said that the most compelling case would be the most serious charge. And the most serious charge I can imagine in a democracy would be the effort by an officeholder, a president, Mr. Trump, to overturn a fair and free election. I can't imagine in a democracy a crime more serious than that. And so these three charges articulated in the target letter, deprivation of rights,

which would be related to voting, I believe, the efforts to defraud the U.S. government by overturning the election, and then certainly, you know, an effort, it's called witness tampering in the title of the statute, but it actually means attempts to obstruct an official proceeding, are as serious as you can imagine, because they all relate to January 6th. They all relate to an effort, a criminal effort, to retain power by unlawful means. And so, you know, look, the proof will be in the pudding. When Jack Smith and his team of prosecutors and agents say something, they have an obligation that Kevin McCarthy and members of Congress don't have. They've got to prove it in court beyond a reasonable doubt

to a unanimous jury. So they don't write these letters lightly. They don't indict cases lightly. Their words have meaning and they have to prove it. And so it's of a different order. But what do I make of it, Joe? This is as serious as it gets. One of the things we've learned over the years covering Donald Trump is even if there's some bluster in front of a microphone, his true feelings are often revealed when he's alone with his phone on Truth Social. And I should note, it is all caps creed after all caps creed after all caps creed, clearly freaking out about this particular potential indictment. And Charlie Sykes, Chuck just said it. He said in his estimation, this is the most serious charge in a democracy. But yet, it doesn't seem like most Republicans are viewing it that same way. Yes, Asa Hutchinson,

Chris Christie, they were sharply critical of Trump. Most others in the GOP, though, who are running for the White House are attacking the DOJ instead. And I want to get your assessment of this. Doesn't it feel like this is the byproduct of two years worth of Trump really sort of softening the ground and downplaying what happened on January 6th, normalizing what happened on January 6th? It was always a protest that got a little out of hand and it was Antifa or whatever it might be. And it feels like despite this being the most serious charge in democracy, for most Republicans, it's a shrug.

It's a witch hunt. It's the deep state. It's not going to change their vote. No, that's probably right. This is one of those many mornings where I think America wakes up thinking that they took crazy pills. I mean, can we just stop on the federal judge just said that the former president is, in fact, a rapist. And to Joe's point, there is no job in America that this would not be disqualifying for,

except apparently being the Republican candidate for president of the United States. And no, your point is exactly right. You've had two plus years of Donald Trump gaslighting the nation about what happened on January 6th, retconning the whole thing. But you've also seen this long march of Donald Trump and his allies to the institution of the American justice system, the delegitimization of prosecutors, of grand juries, of courts, of any institution that might hold him accountable. And now we're seeing this. The Republican Party has completely internalized this.

It's not just that they're afraid of him. They've actually internalized the idea that they don't have to take federal grand juries seriously. They don't have to wait to see what the charges are. They have completely internalized the idea that the attempt to overturn the election, to lie about the election, you know, the you know, the the deception, the obstruction of justice, in fact, is no big deal. So here you have this moment.

And I do think that it's worthwhile just recognizing how truly bizarre it is. I think Willie made the point, you know, if somebody came in from another planet, they couldn't understand this. Well, many of us probably feel like we did come from another planet, you know, the world before 2016, where you see all of this conduct and the Republican Party deciding, you know what? Well, we're all in on this. We, in fact, will make obstruction of justice in these particular cases central to our legislative agenda. This is not a normal moment. We, in fact, will make obstruction of justice in these particular cases central to our legislative agenda. This is not a normal moment. We've said this again and again. But I think that what you're seeing this week is really kind of an illustration of how fast all of this

has moved and, again, how extraordinary it is that the candidates for president, like Rhonda Sanders, are running as these strong candidates who want to be the leaders of the free world by illustrating absolute unwillingness and inability to stand up against Donald Trump. It is an extraordinary moment once again in American politics. And Mika, what's so extraordinary about it is, again, for former Republicans like Charlie and myself, we were the party that defended the institutions against what we thought were over the top assaults in the 60s and the 70s. Right. Defending the United States military, defending the intel services, defending the FBI, even with flaws, defending the Justice Department, even when they made mistakes, saying we have to respect the institutions. These are the institutions that tie us together as a society, that tie us together as a culture, that tie us together politically,

that protect and defend us, whether overseas or at home. Now you look and see it's just savage attacks against the United States military from Republicans. It's savage attacks against the Intel community and believing Vladimir Putin more than you believe our intel community. Remember Helsinki in 2018. And also it's so selective, right? The Republicans, again, as Charlie said, doing everything they can do to assault our institutions, to assault the Justice Department, to undermine the Justice Department's credibility, even though it was Donald Trump's Justice Department that decided not to move on Hillary Clinton for four years. And now they're talking about unequal justice. No, they time and again told Donald Trump there's nothing to charge

Hillary Clinton with. Donald Trump's handpicked attorney generals came to that conclusion. It also, of course, was the FBI that helped elect Hillary Clinton with a bizarre letter 10 days out. Right. They don't say anything about that. So they ignore the fact that the Trump Justice Department didn't go after Hunter Biden. The Trump Justice Department didn't go after Hillary Clinton. But now they say, oh, there's a two tiered justice system. So let's destroy the preeminent law enforcement organization in America that protects us from terrorists. This is the party, the same thing, law, all about the right. The same thing with the Justice Department, the Trump Justice Department, the Trump FBI. They don't go after

Hillary Clinton. They don't go after Hunter Biden. Donald Trump keeps telling them to. And they keep coming back going, sorry, no crimes. We can't do it. And yet, as Charlie said, they have been spending years moving toward this moment where they knew Donald Trump was going to get arrested. And they undermine all of these institutions to try to tear them down. As Charlie said, so people are numb to it in the Republican Party. They're like, I saw. Did he really steal nuclear secrets? Did he really steal military secrets? Did he really? I'm not exactly sure how they explain away the rape, the judge's conclusion of the rape. But they're going to figure out a way to do it because they figure out how to explain away the rape, the judge's conclusion of the rape, but they're going to

figure out a way to do it because they figure out how to explain away everything else. Brought up the word gaslighting and Mara Gay. I mean, that what you saw Kevin McCarthy doing there, what I thought it was as bad as it gets. You may as well, you know, be standing right there next to Trump on January 6th, telling everyone to run to the Capitol and telling them it will be wild and telling them to go for it. And then two hours later calling for let's not even. It's just as bad if you don't stand up for the country when you're asked. And by the way, that's what Kevin McCarthy did the day of. And yet later they act like it didn't happen. This word gaslighting is important because ultimately isn't there an impact on our politics

and the race for the White House in 2024? That's right, Mika. And, you know, part of what's so disturbing here is these new charges that may be coming that we now know of in this Target letter that suggests that the president may be coming that we now know of in this target letter that suggests that the president may be prosecuted under a section of the U.S. code that was enacted to go after Klan members and Southern whites in the wake of the Civil War, you know, during Reconstruction, who were intimidating

black voters and Republican white voters across the South at the time. You know, that is so interesting and so important. It's significant because at the heart of Donald Trump's lies and at the heart of the lie of Trumpism is really this idea that only certain kinds of Americans are really part of the democracy, that only certain voters are legitimate voters voters that some people who are part of our who are citizens, actually, you and I would obviously recognize that really shouldn't be recognized as equal citizens under the law or in the eyes of their fellow countrymen. And that is what's so dangerous about this. It's this idea that the country is really only a country for certain people, white men, Christians, et cetera. That is what's so dangerous about this. And that is kind of what has fueled so much of the political hatred, the fear, and unfortunately, political violence. It's not new in this country, but it's very scary. And I also just have to say that it's so just breathtaking to Joe's point to see within my

lifetime, you know, and I'm in my thirties, right? Just this devolution of one party that went from, you know, Reaganism, which maybe I don't agree with the policies of Reaganism, but just a deep commitment to the American experiment to now all of a sudden government is, for some members of this Republican Party, it seems, simply a vehicle to express the will of their donors or maybe to gain power based on extremism in one small segment of the American population that can't quite seem to break this fever, as Willie said. So it's really scary. It's an example of how, as extraordinary as the American republic is, you know, things that have happened elsewhere can happen here. Democracy is not guaranteed. And this is a really a moment to strengthen those institutions and to fight for them. And to your point about Reagan, a vision of America as a shining city on a hill now to American carnage, a hellhole that only Donald Trump can save, even though he had a chance to save it for four years. Chuck Rosenberg, more specifically on the

charges that we think may be brought against Donald Trump, at least the statues that were laid out, those three inside the target letter that the former president received. What is, as you sort of interpret the document a little bit, what is your view of the burden of proof here? What would the government have to show Donald Trump knew or that Donald Trump did to prove a case like conspiracy to defraud the United States? Yeah, good questions, Willie. So, generally speaking, the burden of proof is always with the government. It never passes to a defendant in a criminal case, and a government has to prove its case unanimously by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. But what is the thing that they have to prove? And generally speaking, it's that somebody acted with intent, corruptly, right? Making a mistake, an accident, negligence.

All of those things are bad, but none of those things are criminal. And to show then that Mr. Trump or his minions or his conspirators tried to defraud the U.S. government, perhaps, or that they tried to obstruct an official proceeding, that would be the counting of the electoral vote. They would have to show that these people acted with intent. That's hard to prove. In order to prove intent, you have to crawl into someone's mind. One way you do that, of course, is to talk to people around the defendant. We saw reporting in the New York Times and in other outlets recently that a number of people near to Mr.

Trump when he was still president were subpoenaed to a federal grand jury. Inevitably, they would be asked, did Mr. Trump understand that he had lost? Did he articulate that he had lost? Did you tell him that he lost? Why do you ask all of those questions to help prove his intent? So generally, Willie, in answer to your question, that's what the government will have to prove. It's their burden of proof. It never passes to a defendant. My guess is that they have ample evidence or they would not have sent a target letter,

and we will inevitably see this laid out in an indictment that is forthcoming. So interesting. And those who testified, there were some who have talked publicly about their testimony. Alyssa Farah, who's now a host on The View, saying that was her understanding. He understood that he lost to Joe Biden. And our knowledge of Trump is that he pushes a lie to the point where he almost believes it, but then breaks a little bit with people that he's trying to show off to and admits that he knows the truth, that he's lying. We've seen it in real time. What Alyssa says, they had a conversation. Trump said, I can't believe I lost to Joe Biden. Yeah. And probably more that she shared with investigators. Former U.S. attorney, senior FBI official Chuck

Rosenberg. Thank you. We'll be following this with you very closely and still ahead on Morning Joe. Yet another legal blow for Donald Trump. We'll go over yesterday's order surrounding the hush money case, the criminal case against the former president in New York. Plus, there's new concern about technology's role in the spread of disinformation in politics. We'll have a look at how artificial intelligence could impact the 2024 election. The growing use of AI is also a concern of striking Hollywood writers and actors. Steve Rattner will join us with charts on how the issue reflects the changing media landscape. And we'll also talk about that new Quinnipiac poll that shows, well, the weight

of all the charges on Donald Trump and the impact it's having on the race in 2024. Morning Joe, we'll be right back. Hey, beautiful view. Not really, actually. That looks terrible. It's gorgeous. You can almost just breathe it in. That doesn't look good at all. Don't breathe it in. Stay inside. I think those Canadians, once again, polluting.

35 past the hour. What's that a boot? I don't get it. Well, you know, I told you before, I like to let people in to my life, right? I like to let people know a little bit more about Joe. Because I know that's what people are saying. So anyway, as you know, my grandpappy,

while he always holds me on his knee, he had some rules. What are you sharing? We've gone through some of these rules before. Don't overshare. Number one, my grandpappy said, Joey, never go swimming before a Little League baseball game. We all know that's true. Right?

Number two, he's a smart guy. Joey, don't ever start a ground war in Asia, especially Southeast Asia. Yeah. I didn't really understand at the time. I was six years old, but I've grown to understand the wisdom of it. Grandpappy was smart, man. Grandpappy, number three, said, Joey, never bet on the Baltimore Orioles to finish any higher than fourth place in the American League East.

This was the post-Boog Powell era, post-Earl Weaver era, and Grandpappy was right. But not this year, Willie, not this year. That was a long windup, wasn't it? That was not great. Was your grandfather the pilot in airplane? I just picture him up front with you saying, never get in a ground war in Asia.

Ever been in a Turkish prison? All the rest of it. Yeah, look at the standings right there. Orioles are in first place, tied now with the Rays. First place in the American League. The Orioles, who have the second lowest payroll in all of baseball, are in first place, tied now with the Rays. First place in the American League East. The Orioles, who have the second lowest payroll in all of baseball, ahead of only the lowly Oakland A's.

Now in first place, Joe, they've got the second best record in all of baseball. I don't love seeing our two teams down there, but you can't help but be happy for an Orioles organization and a fan base that has suffered for a very, very, very long time. They got a really good team. At this point in the season, it's not a fluke. They're a really good team. They won again yesterday, and they are tied for first. They've got the best record, along with the race, in the American League.

Awesome story. It is such an exciting story. And Jonathan Lemire talking about not exciting stories. Let's talk about the Boston Red Sox for a second, who were actually on a winning streak going into the All-Star break, did well afterwards. And then for some reason, you know, decided to go to Oakland and drop two out of three.

And I will tell you one thing I can't understand, although I never questioned Alex Cora, I do not understand why we continue to bench our most dynamic offensive force in Jared Duran. He and Ushita together should be in every game, absolutely every game they can be in. And it seems like Duran is getting benched every other game, despite the fact you put him out there, you let him hit four times. He's going to get a double one or two times and figure out how to steal third and get

home. But again, they keep benching him. It makes no sense. Yeah. Durant was one of the hottest hitters in baseball there for a few weeks. He's 26 year old. He's dynamic and fast. He can always take the extra base. He occasionally struggles against lefties, but he's earned the right to be in there every day. It doesn't make sense why core doesn't just pencil him in the lineup. And like they're all Red Soxx, they had been playing well. You're right. They had the best record in baseball there for a couple weeks. But then they just lost two out of three to an Oakland A's team

that has won 27 games all year. The A's are 27 and 71. But yet they beat the Sox two out of three. Now, mind you, that's still better than the Yankees' fair out west. They got swept by the Angels. Oh, come on. This is just so – No, you don't do that.

But I want to note something about the AL East. Here's the AL East. Look, these are facts. But I just want to note something about the Orioles there atop the standings. It's not just they're in first place. Their team is so young and so cost-controlled, and they have so many stars that we've pushed. They also have a really, really deep farm system.

So if there's any team out there at the deadline this year that could go make a big move, like go all in and trade prospects they don't need for a superstar, even a, shall we say, Shohei Otani, it's the Baltimore Orioles. You know, Willie, let me clean this up for him. I look at those standings,

Willie, and you know what scares me the most? The Yankees? I feel the hot breath. There it is. I feel it on my back. It's the New York Yankees. I feel the hot breath. There it is. I feel it on my back. It's the New York Yankees. Look at them. It's almost like, I don't know why they like doing this, but they're like secretariat. They like holding back, right? We're in the position of sham, thinking we're going to win the Derby.

We're going to win the Preakness. And here come the New York Yankees. You're New York Yankees. Your New York Yankees, they're even putting on these routines knowing the Sox will see it. They're not happy. And they're trying to lull us into a false sense of security. You watch this Yankees team, they're going to end up winning it all this year. Willie, I promise you, they are. It's all a setup.

That was pure theater. He waited for the cameras to be on to get this on Morning Joe. We know the Red Sox and their management will watch it. Let's make them a little bit more comfortable. But losing two out of three to the Rockies, getting swept by the Angels, all coming out of the All-Star break before coming home, it's all a setup, Joe. We're going to charge ahead and maybe, maybe step out of the basement, come up the stairs,

and finish in fourth place. No, you're going to get to the playoffs. Judge is going to hit a home run, send you to the World Series, and then you're going to win in five. I said it here first. I said it here first. So, we'll move. I have to do a lot of

cleaning up for Lemire. Jonathan, you have got to pull back, okay? Yeah. It's been a tough couple years. You're right. You're right. We'll change the tone there.

I'm just playing my part to setting up the Yankees' comeback will be that much sweeter when it devastates Red Sox fans like me. So I'm just playing my part in this generational opera that we see year after year. The little team that could does. OK, beautiful politics now in the latest Quinnipiac University survey, former President Trump holds a 29 point lead over Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, 54 percent to 25 percent. All other candidates poll under five percent. I wonder how that's going to work out in the general election. In a hypothetical 2024 general election matchup against President Joe Biden, the poll shows Biden ahead of Trump by five points, 49% to 44%. This survey was conducted just before Trump

announced the news of his possible third indictment. Maura, they just can't help themselves. They really just can't help themselves. They would rather lose with Donald Trump than win with somebody else. It's pretty stunning. You would also like to see some political courage, right? I mean, you want to, I mean, it's nice to see Chris Christie out there, but he's looking pretty lonely. Asa Hutchinson, too.

It's a lonely game. And, you know, somebody's got to try and break that fever, as Willie was talking about, you know, earlier this hour. You have to give some political leadership to say there's another way to win. In fact, we're not going to win. We're probably going to lose again. But yet they can't quite seem to quit him. So I don't get it. I mean, the only thing that that I will say here is there is another element here, which is these voters. I mean, we have to be able to be able to be honest about this. Voters are still deeply invested in Donald Trump and alternatives haven't seemed to interest that part of the party.

And, you know, I think it's OK at this point to ask why that is. Of course, you know, things could change. Things could change, but it's hard to see. I mean, Donald Trump, when you're being accused by a judge of rape and it just does nothing, the polls just kind of, you know, blink and keep carrying on. You have to wonder, you know, I mean, this is a cult. So so what will change this for these voters? Well, even evangelicals, I mean, they'll they'll just ignore all of this. The same evangelicals who would come up to me and be so shocked and stunned and deeply saddened that we immediately didn't yank Bill Clinton out of office, saying you must be a moral

man to be president of the United States. And, you know, when character was king, you know, people running around doing things, saying things like that, looking to the good old days when people weren't like Bill Clinton and Bill Bennett writing his book of virtues. Now, just another hack defending Donald Trump and going to the wall. Charlie Sykes, it's it's crazy. I will say this, Charlie, and I've talked about it on the show. Some of my family members, my friends, the people that had no problem telling me even when Donald Trump was calling me a murderer, who voted for Trump in 16, who voted for Trump in 20, they're done with it. I hear it time and it's anecdotal. And I always hear,

I don't ever believe anecdotal evidence. I will tell you on a campaign trail, when you start hearing something, you can believe it because it's just time and time again. But I'm hearing this. That's why I still am a little surprised that Trump's numbers are staying so high because everybody I know that voted for him in 16 and 20, especially in suburbs, suburbs say we can't stand him. We're so exhausted by him. And by the way, we don't want to lose to Joe Biden again. I'm starting to hear that more and more with a quickening pace. I'm not exactly sure, though, how those numbers are still holding up. I'm curious what your experience is. Well, first of all, I think it's shocking that you didn't mention that the Milwaukee Brewers are leading the NL Central,

and they're 10 games ahead of the St. Louis Cardinals, and they have a record of 7-3 in the last 10 games. So I just wanted to lay that out there. The NL Central, is that a hockey league? See, this is the problem with you coastal elites. You know, there's baseball here in the heartland as well. Here we go. I just want to point this out, you know, and just look up the 1957 World Series.

I'm just laying that out here. Okay, so in terms of Donald Trump, look, people may be disgusted about all of this, but this fever is not breaking. I think you look at these poll numbers and, you know, tomorrow, I think people are a lot of these voters have become so deeply invested. The sunken cost of rationalizing Donald Trump has taken its toll. There appears to be no willingness on the part of the Republican establishment to the extent extent there is one, to take him on, with the exception of people like Chris Christie. So I think that we know where they're going. Now, the crazy pill aspect of this is that any, I think, intelligent Republican will tell you that 2024 is their election to lose. You look at Joe Biden's poll numbers. He ought to be much

more vulnerable. To be five points behind Joe Biden right now with his approval rating where it is, is an extraordinary moment. Virtually any other Republican candidate would, I think, be considered the favorite in this election. So not just it's not just the matter that this is a cult. It has become a politically irrational cult where the Republicans, in fact, are snatching defeat, the jaws of victory. And this could cost them the Senate, the House. It's already cost them governorships and legislatures around the country. But even so, I mean, how do you get out of this? I mean, how does the Republican Party get out of the tailspin when you have defended and accepted and rationalized everything? How do you turn around and go, hey, you know, do we have one of those old Bill Bennett books about character around?

Maybe we ought to dust it off. I mean, that that's that's gone that that era. And it's not coming back. Even if Donald Trump disappeared tomorrow, this party is not going back to basically saying Herter is king. Right. We have to take these things seriously. That's. Yeah. You know, those those books have probably been banned, at least in Republican Party Florida. Yeah. So. So, by the way, Charlie, you open it up. I'm going to walk through that door about the 1957, about the little team at Milwaukee 1957. As a long-suffering Braves fan, the only thing we had to root for for years or point to was Hank Aaron, 1957, and the Milwaukee Braves beating the Yankees in seven games. Bush still wins.

Spine, Sane, and a day of rain. Wow. That held up. And Willie, you know, speaking of that, while we're talking about great teams in Central Time Zone, you know, you look at the 57 Braves. I mean, the New York teams won every year, absolutely every year. But perhaps one of the greatest teams of the 1950s was the 54 Indians,

who actually somehow managed to blow it to the Giants. So we know a few things about the Central Time Zone teams, don't we? Yeah, we do. Charlie doesn't realize what he's opened up on this show. I've been doing my research since his comment as well. So in game seven, okay, it's at Yankee Stadium. It goes to a game seven. Don Larson and Warren Spahn are the scheduled pitchers.

Warren Spahn comes down with the Asian flu, DNP, Asian flu. He can't pitch. The Braves win anyway and go on to win the 1957 World Series over the New York Yankees. Thank you, Charlie Sykes. Proving once again, though, that the Yankees always get the final word and they're going to crush the hearts of Red Sox fans. Yes, yes, yes. The Milwaukee Braves won the World Series in seven games in 1957.

They lost in seven games in 1957. They lost in seven games in 1958 to your New York Yankees. Charlie Sykes, thank you so much. Thank you, Charlie. Marge, we greatly appreciate your patience. It can't be easy. But thank you so much, Ma, for being here. Thanks for having me. Good.

That's good. All right. Coming up, an update on Senator Tommy Tuberville's blockade of military promotions, a stunt that military leaders have called a threat to national security. And you're looking at a guy right there that is responsible. Tommy Tuberville is responsible for the Marine Corps not having a commandant. That's nuts. For the first time in 150 years, because of Tommy Tuberville, the United States Marines don't have a commandant.

We'll tell you what Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is offering the Alabama lawmaker. Also ahead, new polling on how voters feel about President Joe Biden's handling of the economy. It comes as he's hitting the road again to tout his administration's achievements. We'll be right back. The CEO of Netflix says the streaming giant is, quote, super committed to reaching an agreement that would end the writers and actors strike currently underway in Hollywood. Ted Sarandos said there still remains a lot of work to do to reach a deal. He added that Netflix's wide range of content will help the platform weather the strike, but said the real point is to get the strike to a conclusion so that everyone can move forward.

Joining us now, former Treasury official and Morning Joe economic analyst Steve Ratner. And Steve, you're taking a look at this and its impact. That's right, Mika. It's an interesting strike for a variety of reasons. We're having a lot of strikes this summer, but this one has some unusual issues associated with it. So I started actually today with some words, which is to try to outline what's going on here. So there are a few issues. Pay, obviously, they want more. Artificial intelligence, which you referred to before, they don't want artificial intelligence to replace either the writers or the actors. I don't know how to chart that, so we'll leave

that one there. But let's talk about residuals, which is an interesting phenomenon. So in the motion picture and television industry, writers and directors get residuals, which are additional payments whenever their shows are re-aired as a rerun somewhere or other out there in electronic television world. The issue is that the changing media landscape has affected them because residuals get paid differently if it's on broadcast. They get paid each time it's shown versus streaming where they're paid by the number of subscribers. Now let's just do one quick fun fact. Does anybody know how these actors and directors got residuals in the first place? In 1960, there was a similar strike about five weeks by both groups over this issue of residuals. And that strike was led by the head

of the actors union, who was Ronald Reagan. And Ronald Reagan, of course, went on 21 years later to break the air traffic controller strike as one of his first acts as president. So that's a little fun fact for you to take away with. But let's talk about what's going on in the industry, which is what is driving a lot of this. So you've had back in 19 in 2015, 80 percent of American households subscribed to cable or to direct satellite broadcasting. That number is now down to 49%. Conversely, back then, 52, roughly half of the country, had a streaming service, although they didn't use it much, as I'll show you in a second. Now, 80% roughly have it.

And so the higher payments from this service went down. The lower payments from this service went up. And that's part of why those writers and directors are on strike today. So, Steve, you're talking about how the landscape has changed in one of those ways. And this is your second chart here is how traditional television has really struggled. Give us a lay of the land there. So not surprisingly, as households gave up cable and moved towards streaming, it had an impact on what they were watching. And so you can see back in 2013, 30% of the watching was on traditional broadcast networks, NBC, ABC, CBS, and so on. 60% was on other cable services, everything from ESPN to Bravo or whatever. But even though a bunch of

folks had streaming services back then, they hardly watched them. There are only a couple of them. Now you look at today, 37% of television watching is streaming services, and that is almost double the percentage that watch traditional over-the-air services. And it's actually even more than the number of people who watch cable services. So those, again, provide lower payments to these actors and directors than those, but a huge change in what people are doing. Now, there's another set of competitors that traditional television face as well that affects their bottom line, which are a couple of other services. So TikTok, which barely existed a couple of years ago, now generates

$10 billion a year of advertising revenue, which happens to be almost identical to the amount generated by these four top media companies from Comcast, Warner Brothers, Paramount, and Disney. And so that's money out of the pockets of these guys, again, affecting their bottom line. So Steve, obviously, eyeballs usually equal dollars. And if fewer people are watching, there's fewer less money around. And your third chart gets into that about how media spending has been shrinking, too. Yeah. So that this comes back to what's happening to these companies as a result of all this. So cable television, direct broadcast television, you can see half of the revenues essentially have disappeared

on an inflation-adjusted basis over a 10-year period. Home video, which is the old business of DVDs and things like that, almost gone. Movie theaters, partly due to COVID, but partly due to changing habits. Spending on adjusted for inflation is back to the levels of 1982. And streaming is up by this amount, $27 billion. But streaming is losing a lot of money for these companies. So net-net, when you cut through it, again, on an inflation-adjusted basis, the revenues of this industry have gone down by 36%, $60 billion of lost revenue. And all of that translates into stock prices that are nothing great. So the S&P 500 since 2015 is a bit more than doubled, up 127%. And these traditional

media companies are essentially right back where they started from. So clearly the writers and directors have a lot of legitimate questions about their residuals and how they get paid in general. But the media companies have their own set of issues, which is part of why the strike is proving so intractable. So, again, I'm trying to figure out, Steve, as far as as far as these numbers go, you're saying streaming is just terrible for the media companies as far as their long-term revenue streams and their long-term viability. Well, so far, streaming has been a huge money loser, a fair amount of revenue, as I showed you, but a lot of profit losses because there are so many of them and they're so competitive and they've spent so much money on product.

Over time time that should rationalize as some of them drop out merge and consolidate but it's not going to be like the good old days where you had a few television networks that effectively functioned as an oligopoly and were able to uh were able to make profits because they didn't compete that heavily these streaming services look like they're going to be losing money for a good while to come. Well, and so what that means, Steve, is, I mean, again, I'm just it seems that the only solution for these these companies, these media companies, so we're going to see mass consolidation like we saw in the airline industry. If there are too many of them out there, they're cutting up the pie too much. They're losing too much money. Seems like we're going to have,

you know, we have three, four massive airline companies. Is that where we're going as far as media goes, as far as these streaming services go? Yeah, we will, I think, definitely see consolidation among the streaming services. There are too many that don't have a critical mass of viewers. And as we just were discussing, none of them are making any money. You are already seeing the media, their big parent companies talk about being more disciplined about how much they pay for content, how many shows they put on. Eventually, the competitive marketplace will rationalize it. But it is a brutal, tough competitive marketplace for these companies at the moment. One final one final question. I'm just curious what your thought is as far as the long term. I've always been very skeptical, and we've talked about it before when people talk

about the end of TV, only because people have been talking about the end of TV for 20, 25 years, and television is the new television, as we say there. Sometimes the cameras, they go haywire. You don't know exactly what's going to happen. But TV, if they get the cameras in place, the TV's been able to hold on pretty darn well. I like the effect. We're doing anything we can to keep people here and not on TikTok. That being said, Steve, that being said, it seems to me, Steve, that right now, if you look at a media landscape, and this is just gut, it seems to me the longer the strike goes, the more it helps TikTok. The longer the strike goes, the more it helps YouTube.

It really does seem to me, at least, that things like TikTok and YouTube, I hate to say this because people were saying this about AOL in 1998 before the AOL-Time Warner merger. People were saying this again 10, 12 years ago. But doesn't it seem like the trend lines for services like YouTube and TikTok really suggest that's where the future does lie? Yeah, Joe, often an event like this can accelerate change. There was a saying during COVID that COVID accelerates everything in terms of people's habits and how they just live their lives in general. And you could well be seeing that here. As we get into the fall and as the supply of new shows that the networks and other broadcasters have already put into storage depletes and they then are forced into reruns and who knows what to

fill out their programming schedules. People will naturally go off and experiment even more with some of these other services, whether it's YouTube or TikTok or whatever, and then they'll often form new habits. And none of that is good for this business in the longer run. If people start finding things that are completely off the page of what these big media companies do. Yeah, and therein lies a big, I think, a real challenge for the media companies, also for those who were striking against the media companies. The longer they are out, the longer they're not producing new content, the longer they're not producing scripted content, Mika, the more people are

going to move to alternatives. And again, it's going to be an accelerant for TikTok, an accelerant for YouTube, an accelerant for Instagram reels. All of those things are going to gain the longer there's not scripted television out there. There's many different conversations we can have out of this, and we will continue to do so. Steve Ratner, thank you very much.