Morning Joe - Morning Joe 8/7/23

Episode Date: August 7, 2023

Trump spends weekend testing limits of judge's warning

He said the president asked him to violate the Constitution, which is another way of saying he asked him to break the law. He never said. No, that's wrong. That's wrong. A technical violation of the Constitution is not a violation of criminal law. That's just plain wrong. And to say that is contrary to decades of legal statutes. Let's get out. All right, so let's get this straight. A technical violation of the United States Constitution that Donald Trump said he wanted to terminate.

So if you're keeping score at home, Donald Trump's lawyer has now moved from this being about the First Amendment. Free speech. Being about free speech, which, of course, it's not. In fact, it's laid out in the first couple lines of the indictment that it's not about free speech.

To suddenly admitting last week that, in fact, Donald Trump did attempt to hold up a constitutional proceeding. So he admitted that last week. And then yesterday he admitted that he violated the Constitution of the United States. Just a technical violation of the United States Constitution, mind you. Pretty bizarre. But he violated the Constitution. I mean, the admissions keep rolling. So keep him on. I think. Was this a full Ginsburg? I think this may have been a full. Well, he was on a lot of the Sunday shows trying to sort of own the narrative. Meanwhile, the former president himself spent the weekend raging on social media. And this could get

interesting with posts that could defy the judge's orders. Remember the directions the judge gave him at his arraignment? We'll get legal analysis on that new development also ahead. One of Trump's allies in the Senate makes light of the humiliating nature of his relationship with the former president. Plus, Republican Senator Tommy Tuberville has held up crucial military promotion since February over the Pentagon's abortion policy. His unprecedented campaign has the Pentagon again warning about potential disruptions to troop readiness and military relationships. Because of the Republican Senate and the radicalism of Tommy Tuberville that's being, you know, allowed by the rest of the Republicans. The United States Marine Corps doesn't have a commandant for the first time in 150 years.

Now the Army is without a leader, again, because of the radicalism of Republicans in the United States Senate. That's something we don't usually say. It's usually the House. But they're sitting back, letting Tommy Tuberville do this and just strip the leadership of the United States military, which I guess follows with what Republicans in the House have been doing, where they've been calling the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, I don't know, a pig or just attacking them constantly. So this war against the United States military by Republicans continues. It's a really interesting time for the country. Well, it's a dangerous time. I would agree with that. In so many ways. But also when my former party declares war against the readiness of the United States military, it's a real problem based on, again,

these social issues. Debate the social issues. That's fine. Have the debate. But for God's sake, don't stand in the way of the readiness of the United States Armed Forces, which is what they're doing. With us, we have the host of Way Too Early, White House Bureau Chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire, U.S. Special Correspondent for BBC News, Katty Kaye is back. Katty's back. Yay, Katty's back. And White House Editor for Politico, Sam Stein.

Sam's back. Sam Stein is back. Sam's back, yes. And as always with us, former U.S. Attorney and Senior FBI Official Chuck Rosenberg. Good to have you all this morning. We start this week, of course, with a flurry of legal action in the latest indictment of Donald Trump just days after being formally charged for his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. The former president spent the weekend testing the limits

of the judge assigned to the case. During Thursday's arraignment, the magistrate judge warned Trump against interfering in the case, telling him that his bond could be revoked if he tried to influence a juror, threaten or bribe a witness or retaliate against anyone giving information to prosecutors. despite telling the judge that he understood her warning. Just one day later, the former president posted on his social media site, quote, if you go after me, I'm coming after you. That message set off alarm bells within the Justice Department, where Special Counsel Jack Smith quickly asked a judge to impose a protective order in the case to block Trump from sharing evidence turned over to his defense team on social media. The DOJ's request stated, quote, if the defendant were to begin issuing public posts or using details or, for example, grand jury transcripts obtained in

discovery here, it could have a harmful, chilling effect on witnesses or adversely affect the fair administration of justice in this case. In response, Judge Tanya Chutkan gave Trump's legal team until five o'clock this afternoon to respond to the DOJ's request. The former president's lawyers then in turn asked for a three-day extension. Here we go. Something that the Justice Department balked at. In a response filing, Smith wrote, quote, rather than spend time complying with the court's order, the defendant drafted a filing as to why he did not have time to review and consider the five-page proposed protective order. The judge concurred with prosecutors

and shot down Trump's request to have today's deadline pushed back. While all this was going on, the former president continued to go after those involved in the case over the weekend, despite being warned not to do so. His targets included former Vice President Mike Pence, who is a potential witness for prosecutors. Also, Judge Chutkan herself. And of course, Jack Smith, both on social media

and during a speech in Alabama. Deranged Jack Smith. Doesn't he look deranged? You see the picture with the purple robe? He's a deranged human being. We're getting stronger by the day. Somebody said you should treat him nicer. Maybe he'd be nice.

Let me tell you, this guy is a lost soul, bad guy. So, Chuck Rosenberg, I just keep going back to everything I've ever seen regarding proceedings before federal judges and federal courts. And, you know, we talk about equal justice under the law. Yes, Donald Trump has actually been indicted for trying to overthrow a presidential election. But Chuck, I just, again, in my limited experience, but, you know, being around this a good bit, I've just never known of a federal judge that would allow an defendant to publicly threaten a prosecutor, stir up death threats against a prosecutor, let alone question the integrity of the court itself, the federal judge itself. I'm wondering, I mean, equal justice under the law. Are we carving out a special exception for Donald Trump here if if his bail is not revoked? Yeah, I hope not, Joe. And I don't think so.

I think the judge is handling this properly for now so far, right? She's being patient and firm, and she's laying down clear rules. In other words, for instance, minor point, she didn't give Mr. Trump's lawyers more time to argue a frivolous motion. She's requiring their response today. I've seen judges do something like this. They're patient to a point, and then they're no longer patient. And this is reasons sort of number 37, 38, and 39, why you don't want to be Mr. Trump's lawyers, because you're forced over and over again to say things that are nonsense and to take positions in court that are frivolous. And a little context here might be helpful. When the

government's asking for a protective order, that is not an unusual ask. The government is about to provide reams of information and data, some of it quite sensitive, to the defense team as part of the discovery process. And if the defense misuses that stuff, if Mr. Trump starts posting the names of witnesses and what they say on social media, there are real consequences to that. Not just that witnesses could be intimidated or harassed or threatened, but potentially worse. And so I think the judge is watching this very carefully, handling it appropriately. And if you push her too far, there will be consequences for Mr. Trump and his lawyers, as there ought to be. Well, I mean, there certainly should be, Sam Stein, but you have a prosecutor being threatened by Donald Trump online and in a speech. He's called

deranged. I'm coming after you. He calls a federal judge biased. He attacks a witness in the case trying to intimidate the witness. And listen, let me just help everybody that's involved in this case if they can't figure it out. Donald Trump was trying to get the names or people around Donald Trump were trying to get the names of FBI agents out that searched his Moralago home, desperately trying to get them out. So they would be threatened. We now have the same thing that will happen here. They give they give Donald Trump information. Maybe he doesn't post it on social media, but gives it to Steve Bannon or Roger Stone or somebody else. And they put the names out. I mean, it seems to me that this is going to have to be a tough protective order. And Donald Trump's going to have to be told he's going to jail if if the terms are, you know, bells revoked, if the terms are violated, because we all know the terms are going to be violated.

Yeah. Right. Yeah. I mean, Chuck obviously knows better than me. He's more seasoned in this field than I am. I do happen to imagine, I have to imagine that we are in unique circumstances here. It's probably unprecedented that a high profile defendant in this case makes such overt threats against the prosecutor in such a public forum. You know, I think in any other case, if a client did something like this, you would see a harsh rebuke from the judge. Patience, I suppose, is helpful here in the long run. But Joe, I'm with you. It's hard to see how this is tenable at all. I mean, look, if you look at it, putting aside the legal stuff, you look at the political stuff, Trump's, you know, almost, putting aside the legal stuff, you look at the political

stuff, Trump's, you know, almost the entire reason for his campaign at this juncture is he's going to fight his prosecution. He's running on a platform that he is being unfairly persecuted and unfairly prosecuted here. And so he has to be out there publicly railing against Jack Smith, railing against Mike Pence, who almost undoubtedly will be a witness in this trial. His Trump's own lawyer said he wants to call Mike Pence as a witness. It's compelling him, if not for his personality, it's compelling him also to take these steps that are incredibly radical for a defendant to take. And it's only a matter of time before the judge has to call his bluff. Right. I mean, this is not going to stop. He's not going to rein it in because he has to campaign with this posture. And once the judge calls his bluff,

who knows what the consequences of that are, politically speaking. And, Cady, the silence has been deafening, not only from Wall Street Journal editorial page, the silence has been deafening from, more importantly, from Republicans in the United States Senate, the United States House. The head of their party, the guy most likely to be the nominee, has threatened a federal prosecutor and said, I'm coming after you. He's gone full mobster here. And yet no criticism from Republicans in the House, Republicans in the Senate, very little from Republicans on the campaign trail. Let me say it again. He has threatened a federal prosecutor. And it seems the only thing Republicans know how to do is fall more meekly in line with him like Lindsey Graham this past weekend. Just just fall in line behind a guy who who's behaving like a mobster

and threatening a federal prosecutor. Yeah, because they know who the next nominee of the Republican Party is most likely to be. And it's most likely to be Donald Trump. And they run scared not just of Donald Trump, but of Donald Trump's supporters. And whatever the former president does in this calcified political atmosphere, they don't want to cross him. I mean, you know, he also, when he says that Mike Pence has gone to the dark side, that's a signal too. You know, the best-selling t-shirt in Trump memorabilia stores is the one with Mike Pence has gone to the dark side, that's a signal, too. You know, the best-selling T-shirt in Trump memorabilia stores is the one with Mike Pence on the gallows saying Mike Pence is a traitor. He's putting the former vice president further at risk with that kind of language as well. I mean, the reality is that Donald Trump is not any defendant. He will be treated to some extent differently. I mean, in things like, you know,

when he tries to delay and delay and delay, most likely this court and this judge will speed up the process to try and make sure that they see his appeals for delay quicker than perhaps somebody else's. So that could count against him. But there will be ways in which he's treated differently. But he can't go on carrying on after the judge has said you have to watch what you say with the kind of language he used over the course of this weekend. Speaking of that language, and we're going to show you, Lindsey Graham, it's truly, if it's possible, a new law. It is the most subversive, not subversive, unbelievable, submissive. That's the word. It is so submissive openly.

But we'll get in just a second. But Chuck, I have a question for you. You know, a comment like I'm coming for you if you're coming after me or whatever is kind of thrown out there. But what about when he names people like Mike Pence who, you know, are part of this and are testifying potentially, isn't that more of something that a judge could actually rebuke him for or even like revoke his bail if you start going flatly against, overtly against what the judge has told him to do? Yeah, absolutely. Make a good question. A judge could take steps. But let me add something Good question. A judge could take steps, but let me add something to that. A prosecutor could take steps, right? Threatening witnesses, harassing witnesses, intimidating witnesses is a separate federal crime. And you saw that the

Smith team had no reluctance to supersede its indictment in the Southern District of Florida. So could that happen here? Sure. If Mr. Trump continues to target witnesses, right, for intimidation and harassment, he's committing another crime post-indictment. And if the government decides that the conduct is serious enough and they can prove his corrupt intent, they can charge him with that too. So I don't think that's off the table. And it might be completely appropriate. You know, there's only so much a judge can do. He's running for president. So he's going to talk whether we like it or not, he's going to continue to talk and post. But what he talks about and what he posts about could have serious legal consequences, either as you point out, make a bail revocation, which is a possibility.

And I don't think you want to test this judge on that too many times. Or if he continues to commit federal crimes, more federal charges. Well, I mean, it's exactly what we saw in the case where the judge said he raped E. Jean Carroll. He continued to defame her. So she brought another lawsuit. And again, maybe again, maybe he thinks he's immune from all of this and he can do whatever he can. Or maybe it's a delay tactic. Like if you throw on so many charges, does it delay it down the road? I don't know. Again, it's it's just again, it's not good news. And as Chuck said, this is why you don't represent Donald Trump, because he's going to humiliate you as a lawyer. He's going to make you say things that are

frivolous defenses that are just stupid. And you're going to be defending a guy who talks and threatens like a mobster. Republicans should be standing up to this. They should be. And you even have members in the Senate who have three, four more years in office, and yet they just continue to grovel while the leader of their party is threatening federal prosecutors and really undermining the judicial system of the United States of America, just like they tried to undermine American democracy leading up to January the 6th. Well, here's the person at the head of the class for humiliating themselves. Somebody who said after January 6th, he'd had enough and then got intimidated and actually groveled anymore.

Lindsey Graham. This is Lindsey at a Republican Party dinner Saturday in his home state. People ask what happened with you and Trump? I said, well, he beat me like a drum. And I acknowledge that he did. He sort of liked hearing that. But we found something in common. I've come to like him and he likes him. And that gets us through 18 holes of God. One thing I can tell you, you better not screw with this guy or you'll regret it. I just, Jonathan Lemire, I've got to say, I don't know how you'd do that. It's not in me.

It never was. I don't think it's in most people. I don't. I guess the question I keep asking is what's worth that? And I can tell you having a congressional pen is not. In fact, I don't think anything's worth humiliating yourself the way Lindsay does. But I mean, we can expand this out again. Donald Trump threatened the federal prosecutor saying, I'm coming after you, calling him deranged on stage, no doubt knowing that this was going to amp up the number of death threats that Jack Smith had. And yet Republicans in the House and the Senate sit meekly by, quietly by, and continue to act like this is normal. It's worth remembering that Donald Trump

once gave out Lindsey Graham's personal cell phone number, and Graham was okay with that and got over with it. And just a few weeks ago, Trump held a huge rally in South Carolina. Lindsey Graham was booed. So Graham knows he's got work to do to stay in the good graces of the base, of the Trump voting base, who of course make up, at least for now, the lion's share of the Republican voters, which Graham will need when it is time for re-election again. So he's certainly not going to be one to break with Trump anytime soon. But you're right, it's pure silence from Republicans, the party that used to be known as that of law and order. The GOP was about law and order. They would defend law enforcement. Well, they did until January 6th. They would defend

the court system. Well, they would until now. And you're right. Trump has a way of saying things or tweeting things that is just vague enough that people can read into it as they want. And that allows him to sort of try to explain it away. And maybe even the, if you go after me, I'm coming after you line can fall into that. His campaign put out a statement saying, oh, no, he's talking about rhinos. No, he wasn't. He clearly wasn't. But that's enough reasonable doubt, perhaps, for court. But the other statements aren't about Pence, about the judge, about Jack Smith.

Those are things that are going to be a real issue. And we're going to learn more at five o'clock today. There's going to be a deadline there, a court appearance, and we'll figure out what this judge is going to do for a man who's defendant and also running for the White House and trying clearly to be antagonistic to prosecutors. Chuck Rosenberg, your thoughts on this? Yeah, you know, Joe, I wanted to comment on something you said earlier, how Mr. Trump continually puts his lawyers in a position where they're saying things that make absolutely no sense. They're just abjectly frivolous. I mean, for instance, John Lora, one of Mr. Trump's defense lawyers, said that his plans were merely aspirational. He didn't violate the law.

He just perhaps aspired to violate the law. I mean, it's another example of nonsense. And let me illustrate it in the following way. I might aspire to rob a bank. I might aspire to go in and come out with bags of money. Once I step into the bank, whether I succeed or not, and I pull out a gun and start waving it around and start demanding cash from the tellers, I'm a bank, and I pull out a gun and start waving it around and start demanding cash from the tellers, I'm a bank robber. Even if I didn't fulfill all of my childhood dreams and aspirations of leaving with their dough, I'm a bank robber. And so if you want to defend this guy, you've got to say things that are silly. It's one thing to say things that are

silly on television. That happens. It's quite another thing to say things that are silly in court, in front of a judge and in front of a jury. And so I know people worry that there are going to be no consequences for his conduct and for his rhetoric. I believe there will be. Not yet. Not here. But in court. Well, you know, Caddy K, Chuck does bring up a good point. And Sam, jump in after Katty, if you will.

We would hear people like Rudy Giuliani and others saying the most outrageous things after January the 6th and actually even before when they were trying to overthrow the American presidential election. And we were like, how do they get away with that? Why are they getting away with that? And they didn't. I mean, it appears that, let's keep our eyes on George, it appears that Rudy Giuliani and others will ultimately pay the price for this. And disbarment procedures, you name it, go down the long list. These attorneys also appear to be co-conspirators in this latest indictment.

You would think it would serve as a warning to Donald Trump's lawyers or potential lawyers, but they just keep coming, don't they? Yeah, and look at the politicians who ran mimicking some of what Donald Trump said or saying the kind of things that they knew that Donald Trump wanted them to say about the 2020 election. A whole slew of them in the last cycle didn't get elected. Right. The vote, if it's not in the courts where there's retribution, then in the public there is also retribution. One of the safety nets we have is the right to vote people out of office. And that happened with secretary of state after secretary of state

who Donald Trump wanted to put in place so that he could influence the 2024 election. And the voters said, no, we don't want those people. In this case, they could end up in the legal jeopardy themselves. So there does seem to be, you know, the process seems to be working. The problem is going to be next year on the timetable and how the dates clash. And as we run into the election, you know, whether we get to sentencing dates and we're in waters that could be, you know, potentially violent. I mean, this is the concern, I think, is that all of this could lead to so much tension and the kinds of

language that Donald Trump has been using over this weekend could promote more of the kind of violence that we saw on January the 6th. The only thing I would add to that is I do think it does sort itself out. And Katty's right. We saw a number of election deniers in the 2022 elections who face-planted, frankly. That said, there is a pretty hefty slice of our elected officials who do not have to worry about a sort of centrist voting population. And so what we saw over the weekend is a great example of this. You know, you take the Lindsey Graham clip. I mean, he's not worried about independent voters so much as getting through a Republican primary. And he still, to this day, gets heckled and jeered for the few moments where he was publicly opposed to Trump. You look at Mitch McConnell this weekend at the Fancy Farm event in Kentucky, one of the biggest political weekends in Kentucky.

He was heckled and jeered because he is publicly opposed to Trump for what happened on January 6th. And then you look at Tommy Tuberville, just to tie it all in a bow, because that's what I'm here to do. Tommy Tuberville, he is being boosted by a chunk of his base for his decision to hold up all these army military nominees over abortion policy, over a policy that allows you to travel, get reimbursed for travel for an abortion service. So, you know, there are different incentive structures in different situations. And to this day, I still believe, you know, 40% of the party is very much with Trump and they create an incentive structure that forces Republican politicians to act in ways that they probably know fundamentally are a little bit off.

And the problem is they're not, I don't think it's that they're not smart enough. Most of these people come from deep red states or deep red districts. They just don't give a damn about the party. And so Republicans lose in 2017, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. That's not Tommy Tuberville's concern because Tommy Tuberville thinks, well, I'll just keep getting reelected in Alabama. Meanwhile, swing voters, independent voters, Republicans in suburbs are going, wait a second. The Republicans are debating abortion in a military bill, and they're actually damaging readiness, and they're keeping the United States Marines from having a commandant for the first time

in 150 years because of a debate over abortion. And now they're stopping the army for having a leader for the first time in a really long time because of a debate over abortion? We should be worried about the Chinese. We should be worried about the Russians. We should be worried about Iran. We should be worried about North Korea. We should be worried about readiness and debate military issues in the military bills

and debate abortion elsewhere. So, yeah, so maybe that won't hurt Tommy Tuberville in the reddest of the red states. It'll just damage the United States military. It'll damage our readiness. It'll damage the United States Marines because of Tommy Tuberville. It'll damage the United States Army because of Tommy Tuberville. But he doesn't care. And the most extreme members of his party in Alabama, they don't care. But who does care? Swing voters. So they're going to lose again. And I guess, you know, again, people are, you know, people in the Republican Party, maybe they're, oh, Joe, he's not a Republican, so he's attacked. No, I'm trying to

help you win an election. You were just incapable of winning elections. And you never hear you look at other people. You never look at your own and you don't have the courage or the intelligence to write your path. You keep going towards a cliff with people like Tommy Tuberville damaging the United States Marines. Wow. Katty, I just before we go to break a quick turn here. Breaking news from the BBC. England is through at the World Cup quarterfinals after beating Nigeria on penalty kicks, despite Lauren James being sent off for a stamping. I've been sent off for a stamping myself at times, and it's not fun.

But England is through, and we'll talk about the U.S., but congratulations on that. Thank you. The lionesses. Go lionesses. All right. All right. Former U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg, thank you very much for being on this morning. We will see you again very soon, we hope. And still ahead on Morning Show, another sign.

President Biden is tying his name to a strong economy, and his accomplishments will show you what the White House is doing to remind voters about the benefits of the landmark infrastructure bill. Plus, a special election in Ohio tomorrow could have a major impact on the issue of abortion in the state and serve as a test case for the issue across the country. We'll explain. Also ahead, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears to be walking back some of his original plans to overhaul the country's justice system. Again, what he's now saying about those changes and a wild scene on the MLB base path over the weekend that saw a baseball game turn into a prize fight. Anderson is down. You're watching.

Anderson is down. Morning Joe. Anderson is down. We'll be right back. If she scores, Sweden wins. The U.S. is out. If not, another round of penalties. Hartig. Off there. Did it go in? Waiting on the signal. Wow. The U.S. women's national team has been knocked out of the World Cup following a goal less 90 minutes plus extra time. The U.S. bid to win an unprecedented third consecutive title ended yesterday on

penalty kicks. Megan Rapinoe, Sophia Smith and Kelly O'Hara missed with kicks from the penalty spot before Sweden converted to clinch the third shootout five to four. It is the earliest exit in tournament history for the U.S. women, and only the team's second penalty shootout defeat on the World Cup stage. The U.S. women also ended the tournament on a 238-minute scoring drought, their longest in women's World Cup history. I will say, though, Jonathan O'Meara, obviously, this is this is a team and a program has nothing to have their heads down about. I mean, two World Cup wins in a row. Just an extraordinary achievement. Oh, a team that will be forever remembered and with such gratitude in the United States. Two Cups in a row.

This was always seen as a bit of a transition tournament for them. It's the last run for the Alex Morgans and Megan Rapinos. While they also have this new young talent coming, they think they're better positioned for four years from now than this particular Cup. But still a heartbreaking defeat. And that final goal, that final goal, the replay shows it was over by about a millimeter. They couldn't have lost by a smaller margin. A just heartbreaking way to go out.

Yeah, and it really does. I couldn't believe that that was a goal. But also a lot of other news. Obviously, we're going to stop watching baseball, Jonathan Lemire, this year. It's just same same exact thing that happened last year after after the trade deadline where we didn't pick anybody up and the team just deflated. And we went from being the best team in since the All-Star break to being the worst. Just like that. right after the break. First of all, I saw Mika clap when you announced that you weren't going to watch baseball anymore, Joe.

But yeah, I had the great misfortune of being at yesterday's game at Fenway Park. Great seats, great view, beautiful weather. They got crushed 13-1, and they swept by the Blue Jays. And to your point, this is the second straight deadline where the team seemed like they may be going on a run. They didn't get reinforcements. The general manager, Haim Bloom, very much on the hot seat. Yeah, they're fading and fading fast. Yeah. So, you know, Sam, things have been a little ugly at Politico since Sam Stein arrived. And if you want to know just how it looks inside the newsroom, let's look at what

happened at the White Sox Guardians game a couple of nights ago. Roll the tape. Oh, dear. Oh, my goodness. Here come the benches. Off we go. It started with Anderson and Ramirez.

Swing's being taken. Kopach had to hold him back. And everybody's spilling out here in Cleveland. Tukey Toussaint is. Here it comes. A swing and a smash to first by the diving Vaughn. Down the right field line. Kicks into the corner.

Ramirez on his way to second. Head for slide. Safe and in to score is Jimenez. And another hustle double. Right over the bag at first. Now Hosey and Anderson square off. They're fighting. They're swinging. Down goes Anderson! Down goes Anderson! Wow. What? That escalated. What happened? It escalated quickly.

And Sam Stein, of course, the famed down goes Frazier, down goes Frazier call. I mean, first of all, it was a ridiculous fight. It's like, why? Why did the fight even begin? But we won't play it because it will take the entire four hours. It was the longest baseball fight I've ever seen. It would not stop. And those guys, they're just pushing each other.

But Anderson did walk into a pint. She did not play yesterday after taking on the role of Joe Frazier by actually walking into Ramirez's right hook there. Just walked right into it. Yeah. I mean, it was fine. It was epic.

First thing is I've watched it like 20 times. Still am not entirely clear why they were fighting. No one's really explained what it was about. Second, it was about. Second, it was an incredible right hook. Yes, he walked into it, but he was clearly concussed by that, which explains why he didn't play. And third, yeah, you're right.

This is very reminiscent of what Politico is nowadays. Me and Lemire at the water cooler. And, you know, unfortunately, I'm Anderson in this situation. Lemire just throws haymakers at me. Down goes Stein. Down goes Stein. Down goes Stein. There's some speculation there had been a hard tag the night before that Anderson slapped a Guardian in the face. But, no, that's the best story anyone's given. There's clearly a history of bad blood here.

Two division rivals. I will say the White Sox are long since out of the race, though. The Guardians are still battling for playoffs, but they're about to lose their best player for 10 or so games. There are going to be some lengthy suspensions here. But I agree. That's the wildest fight that I've ever seen, Joe, that didn't involve

fighting Joe Kelly. I was going to say, is it wilder than Pedro versus Don Zimmer? I mean, I feel like those two... We don't talk about that. We don't talk about that. We don't talk about that. That's on the forgiveness. We don't talk about that. No, that's just, that is a moment of shame that we just, we don't bring up.

Simone Biles is a champion once again. The four-time Olympic gold medalist returned to gymnastics and competition at the U.S. Classic outside of Chicago yesterday and won the all-around balance beam and floor titles. She also had the highest score on vault. Biles' return follows a two-year hiatus after she bowed out of the Tokyo Olympic Games due to mental health issues. This is amazing on so many levels, And it's such an incredible message that sometimes you can take the long play. You can take time out. You can come back and you can be better than ever.

Yeah, I love it. Yeah, it's great. It's a great message, isn't it, Katty Kay? Yeah, I mean, it's, you know, she did what she needed to do. She was open about it. She was public about it. She was brave about taking that time off. You know what it's like when you're at the you know, you're at the top of your game and you're in your career and you think, my God, I can't possibly leave. I'll never come back. I'll be irrelevant. Exactly. And she did what she needed to do. And she came back again. And that was just such a great performance. And kudos to her and to and to all of the younger women who are watching her. And let's hope they're taking great messages from that as well.

And by the way, on the Lionesses, I was just looking at the game in the break. Nigeria played really, really well, just as the U.S. played really, really well yesterday. I mean, this game was won on penalties. Yesterday's game was won on penalties. Penalties can go either way. Luck was on our side yesterday. It was not on the U.S.'s side yesterday. But both the U.S. and Nigeria were formidable teams in those matches. All right. Coming up. By the way, I've got to say some on Biles.

That seems like a new chapter for know your value in the confidence code. No, I do. I agree. I think that it's important because for women, it's a long runway and there are lots of reasons why we take a sidestep or a step back and then a step forward. They're realistic reasons. And you know what? It doesn't mean it's the end of your career. In fact, I think sometimes making those steps can actually help you in the long run. And it's important to send that message to women. They always feel like they have to power through everything. Right. And, Cady, as far as the confidence code goes, sometimes it's having the confidence to step away from something. Exactly. To do just that. And then you do something hard and guess what? It gives you more confidence. I mean, that's how we grow our confidence is by going outside of our comfort

zone. And I imagine for Simone, when she decided to take that break and was public about her mental health challenges, that wasn't easy. That's not an easy thing to talk about for anybody. But you do it and you get through it. And look what look what the result is in terms of confidence and value. And she was criticized at the time, just for the record. This is a really great message coming up. New reporting from CNBC. Despite sanctions, U.S. advanced technology is still finding its way into the hands of Russian military. The equipment being used and how it got there. What the investigation uncovered next on Morning Joe. When I bail it out from a victory, it's the chosen few that I've become a hero. And now you've been bad for me. 48 past the hour, the United States dispatched four warships and a recon plane last week in response to another episode in international waters. 11 Russians and Chinese ships

approach Alaska's Aleutian Islands in what's believed by experts to be the largest flotilla yet to approach U.S. waters. This is according to the Wall Street Journal. The ships never crossed into U.S. waters and were shadowed by four U.S. destroyers and a plane as they approached. In its reporting, the journal cites U.S. Northern Command as saying the movement was, quote,

not considered a threat. However, it's the latest international incident in a series of standoffs between the U.S. and either China or Russia, in this case both, amid rising tensions in the Pacific and also Russia's war in Ukraine. Meanwhile, from the beginning of the war in Ukraine, Russia has imported much of the weaponry and technology it's used in its assault on the war-torn nation. From ammunition provided by North Korea to Iranian-made drones, Russia continues to try and find all the help it can get. And now, exclusive reporting from CNBC detailing how Western microchips used to power smartphones and laptops are entering Russia and helping to fuel its military arsenal. Let's bring in CNBC's Karen Gilchrist, who joins us live from London with more on this.

Karen, what more can you tell us? Good morning and thank you so much for having me. You're absolutely right there. I've been investigating mounting evidence that Russia is continuing to obtain US microchips and other advanced Western technologies for use in the military. Now, these are not the types of military hardware that you would expect. These are the kinds of technologies typically found in our phones and laptops. They're what's dubbed dual-use items, meaning they have both civilian and military applications. But that means that they're also being repurposed into drones, missiles and armoured vehicles. One piece of analysis of 58 pieces of critical

military equipment belonging to Ukraine and found on the battlefield in Ukraine, sorry, belonging to Russia and found on the battlefield in Ukraine, was found to have more than 1,000 foreign components, primarily Western semiconductors. Now, I spoke to analyst Alina Rybakova from the Peterson Institute to find out a little bit more about where these technologies are coming from. Let's take a look. Out of these critical components, we see two thirds of the producers being headquartered in the US. The companies themselves should have the infrastructure to be able to track it and comply with export controls. If we have certain moral values or national security objectives, we cannot

be giving with one hand and then, you know, giving to Russia with the other. We cannot be sort of giving multi-billion support to Ukraine and at the same time being happy that our companies produce military for Russia. Now, we can see there that the vast majority of these goods belong to U.S.-headquartered companies, with others coming from Western allies, including Germany and Japan. Now, having reached out to some of these companies whose goods were found on the battlefield, many of them say that they have ceased operations in Russia and no longer supply there. But analysts are saying that really they need to be doing more to clean up their supply chains.

And certainly new sanctions packages from the EU announced in June are looking at new measures to sort of stymie this sanctioned circumvention and make sure that entities operating from these countries cannot supply Russia. Yeah, Karen, I remember that story back in spring of a house in North London, a kind of tiny little detached, semi-detached house being used actually to sanctions bust as well. The same sorts of things, computers and telephone chips, that sort of thing. I mean, what's frustrated American policymakers right from the beginning and Western policymakers is why the sanctions haven't worked better against Russia, why the Russian economy hasn't been brought to its knees in a way that would stop Putin from being able to fund the war. I mean, is this part of that? If we understand this and shut this

loophole, would it have more of an impact on the Russian economy and his ability to have that war machine? Absolutely. If we could do more to clamp down on these goods entering the countries. So if companies are able to do more to clean up their supply chains and make sure that they know who their end clients are. But also some analysts I'm speaking to are saying, you know what, we just have to shut down all dual use items from entering Russia, even if it is at the sort of loss of the Russian consumer. Because ultimately, it's very, very hard to document where these goods end up. And if we're allowing certain ones to enter, but then we realize that they can be repurposed in these sort of nefarious ways, then maybe we just need to cut it off altogether. CNBC London correspondent Karen Gilchrist, thank you very much for coming on

with your reporting this morning. And still ahead on Morning Joe, a look at some of the stories making the front page headlines across the country, including federal prosecutors now going after billions of dollars lost in pandemic aid fraud. Plus, some of Donald Trump's top aides could end up as witnesses in one of his many upcoming trials.

What it means for the former president's 2024 campaign. Ahead on Morning Joe. Always the same, it's just a shame. And that's all I could. A few minutes before the top of the hour, the Biden administration is doing more to show voters which projects are a result of President Biden's bipartisan

infrastructure law. Some construction sites now have signs which actually say that it seems to be part of a push to stop Republicans from taking credit for projects that they did not vote for. One example from late June was Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville posting on social media that his state was receiving crucial funds for broadband access. But the thing is, but he voted against it. That's correct. So wait a second. He voted. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. If he says it's vital to the success of our rural communities and entire economy, why would he vote against that? No clue. Why would he promote something he tried to kill politically?

That's the way he rolls, I guess, there. And President Joe Biden trolled him online later that day, posting, see you at the groundbreaking. So, Jonathan Lemire, this happens time and again. You've got Republicans who vote against bills and then they take credit for bills they tried to kill. Yeah, and it's something that, frankly, deeply and personally irritates this president, who's been known to carry around a list in his pocket, which he brings out at speeches, that has an accounting of Republicans who voted against something and then try to take credit for it.

And I should those signs are interesting because they've been up for a while. That says, like, this project is funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act of lately, though. They've added some words, President Joe Biden's bipartisan infrastructure law, which shows you that they want credit. And of course, there's an election on the horizon. But as we know, guys, this is a White House that has been struggling a little bit to get the credit it thinks it deserves for pretty solid economic markers. Polls suggest that Americans still don't feel great about it. This is a small way in which they're trying to change that. We should also note the president heads on the road today for a three-day Western swing where he's going to talk about the accomplishments done by the Inflation Reduction

Act, by the Infrastructure Act. He's also going to talk about veterans health, which is something very deeply personal to him. His son, Beau Biden, of course, grew ill soon after returning from Iraq, marking the one year anniversary of the PACT Act as well. And we should note among the states on his itinerary, Arizona, one of the true battlegrounds next time around. Expect the president to be out there a lot between now and next November. Well, of course, thank you, Jonathan, so much for that reporting. And Sam, it is, of course, we remember back to Donald Trump making sure that his name showed up on those COVID relief checks. Yeah, he he Trump had his signature on those COVID relief checks. Yeah, he he Trump had his signature on

the COVID relief checks. It was interesting at the time, you know, but it does. I would guess it underscores the limitations of this type of thing. You know, voters may very well see that you provided them a financial benefit. They could see that you got an infrastructure project passed in their district. Doesn't mean they're necessarily going to reward you. And look, Lemire's right. The White House has really struggled with this stuff. They passed a huge amount of stimulus. The Biden administration did early on a COVID release stimulus. The entire premise was they were not going to repeat the missteps of the Obama years where the, you know, then President Obama passed his own stimulus, did not run around taking credit for it. A lot of people didn't see the gains or understand the gains came from Obama.

Biden was not going to repeat those missteps. He was going to tout his progress. He was going to tout all the goodies that he delivered to the public. By and large, if you look at these polls, it's not that the public doesn't believe that Biden did this. It's that they don't know it's happening. And so, you know, if the administration, they have to ramp it up. But they've had what I would say objectively is a mixed marks, if not a failing grade, on actually convincing the public that this stuff is going on, that it's happening in the communities. I don't know if these signs are going to do it, frankly.