Morning Joe - Texas Senate poll: Talarico leads Paxton in key districts

Episode Date: August 27, 2026

August 27, 2026: 7am — Texas Senate poll: Talarico leads Paxton in key districts  To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

I've been sitting out in the parking lot talking to Secretary Kennedy who reached out to me this morning. And while I appreciate his willingness to offer staff to assist us, we think we're able to manage this through the Department of Health. I was very, very blunt with him. And I made very clear that his actions and the rhetoric that's coming from this administration are having a negative impact. on communities across America. That was Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro Tuesday, discussing his phone call with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., after two unvaccinated people in Pennsylvania died from measles.

Kennedy pushed back on social media, writing, quote, during our phone conversation, Governor Shapiro also accused me of promoting vaccine misinformation. When I asked him for an example, he was unable to provide one. He added, Governor Shapiro's press conference was an example

of the same species of gaslighting. Kennedy later questioned the veracity of the reported deaths, saying the CDC had asked Pennsylvania for information, but the state was refusing to cooperate. Willie. Well, one example is his tying autism to vaccines over the last, I don't know, 20 years or so.

We go down the list of vaccine misinformation, Jonathan Lemire, it is a statement of fact that measles cases are up in this country, not just because of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but because of all the misinformation that's been spread. We had Donald Trump from the chair in the Oval Office saying the MMR vaccine is potentially lethal. Of course, it is not. He provided no evidence when asked that. So we can go down the list if Secretary Kennedy wants to talk about this. It's just a fact that the rhetoric is contributing to less vaccination in this country and therefore more disease. No doubt. The number of vaccine skeptics has really spiked in the last decade or so. A lot of

conspiracy theories behind that. The COVID pandemic played a big role. But now that kind of talk is being elevated from the Oval Office, from the head of our nation's health system, Mike, with Secretary Kennedy. And maybe Governor Shapiro was just being polite and didn't provide a list of examples of Kennedy's conspiracy theories. There are many. We'll even hit a couple already. But we know right now the nation is less healthy, whether that's the outbreak of disease, what we've seen from all these food contaminations, and certainly we have seen measles of a disease that was once eradicated.

We're on the verge of losing our status as having eliminated measles because of what's happened. That's the point that you just raised right then. What has happened to this country? What kind of an administration do we have where measles was under control for decades because of your kids getting a measles vaccine and other vaccines prior to school or whatever

at a very early age? Now that's gone? kind of an administration is this? And for Bobby Kennedy to walk away from any kind of responsibility. He knows nothing about vaccines. Of course not. He's a conspiracy theorist. Let's take a turn now.

It's 703 here on the East Coast as millions of students begin the fall semester at schools across the country. Our next guest is asking the question, what happened to college? Author, professor, sociologist Neil Gross interviewed and polled students on how the country's polarized politics has remade the college experience, finding undergraduate today are choosing their schools, majors, their friends, their partners, and activities on the basis of their political beliefs to a degree unthinkable just a decade ago. And Neil joins us now. His new book is titled, What Happened to College, How Politics Broke Higher Education, and What

We Can Do to Fix It? Neil, it's great to have you on this time of year, students starting class this week at a lot of colleges across the country. So what is the answer? I know it's a long one. He wrote an entire book to what happened to college and how the last decade, of our politics plays into that? So the answer is polarization. You know, polarization undermines lots of different institutions from the judiciary to the operations of the parts of the federal government and undermine the operations of college, of higher education.

You know, one of the things that I found after I started researching this book was that students are making all sorts of decisions about the college experience, as you said, where to go, what to study, who to be friends with, based on whether they feel like there will be with someone who thinks the same way that they do. And that's not a good way to run a college. What are colleges themselves doing to try to combat some of this? You don't want to be a college that only thinks one way or has the image or the brand that, oh, that's that kind of college or that kind of college.

How are they working to fix this, if they are? Some are doing a better job than others. This has been a slow-build problem, and it very much ties into the declining confidence in higher education that we've seen from the right, but also from the center, even from parts of the left. You know, for a good number of years, starting 2014 or so, as the progressive movement really bubbled up and became strong in this country, lots of colleges sort of leaned into that and tried to establish themselves as places that you would go if you were on the left and were interested in activism. And that's not good. I mean, that's not the kind of thing

a college should be doing. So that established some colleges as places where you'd go if those were interest and then other colleges basically market themselves as places you would go if you weren't that interested in politics or if you were on the right. So we end up creating these political bubbles in higher education. And that's really antithetical to what a college experience should be, which should be about debate, think about big ideas, and finding people who disagree with you. Neil, one of the things you point out in your book is that as many as 50% of student applicants for colleges seek a political fit to their venture into higher education. That's incredible.

Yeah, I mean, that political fit means different things. You know, most students go to college in state, like 80% of students go to college in state. So they're looking for a different kind of political fit. But I talked to students who said that they wanted to be with students who thought like them. I also talked to students, for example, young women who did not want to go to school in places that had abortion bans because of concerns about that. I spoke to young people on the right who did not want to go to school in states where they felt that the gun control legislation was too strong because they, because they were worried about their safety. So people are factoring politics in

in a whole variety of ways. It's not always the deciding factor. The main thing is still cost and prestige, but it's certainly there, as people are thinking about it. So this is not ideology versus intellect? Well, there is some element of that, for sure. It's interesting, this most recent generation, like the kids were just starting college this year, last year,

the year before. They're a little bit different than the kids who were in college, 20, 21, and certainly during the protests and encampments of 23, 24. For those kids, the ideology, for many of them anyway, the ideology was really strong. College students were pretty left-leaning. And for no small number of them, they really wanted to have a college experience where they could, if not pursue their ideology as a set of ideas, at least take classes that were consistent with it. This most recent generation, it's a little different. They're wary of ideology to a greater extent.

Certainly the rise and sort of self-segregation here is only going to reinforce those silos and make these problems even worse. So, I mean, is there a solution here? Where do we go? So the first step, I think, is for higher education to recognize that we've been part of the problem. You know, it's hard to imagine that an institution can combat polarization all by itself. But that should be one of our things that we do as colleges. We should be all about trying to bridge divides, give people a common sense of ideas and a foundation to understand their worlds. So I think the first step is just recognizing. there's a problem. We shouldn't be contributing to it. But I think there's smaller things we can do as well, including small things like randomized roommate selection, which is something that a lot of colleges have gotten away from. And that's a great way to meet people who disagree with you, but not if you get to choose who you were with. And what about the faculty, Neil? You get into that here as well. You found that faculty, which always has leaned left, I think it's fair to say in colleges, has gotten even more so in the last few years? Yeah, I first started working on this like 20 years

ago in 2005 and six and did some big surveys of faculty. There was a lot of concern back then are faculty brainwashing kids. So did a lot of research and found, you know, those concerns were overstated. Faculty was on the left, but there was a fair degree of restraint on what they did in the classroom. There's been some shifts since then. It's part of what motivated this book. Higher education faculty become even more left-leaning. And I talk to lots of kids who find that professors are bringing their politics into the classroom in ways that sometimes the kids don't mind. Sometimes they really do mind. Fascinating look at this question. The new book

is titled, What Happened to College, How Politics Broke Higher Education, and what we can do to fix it. It's available now. Author, Professor, Sociologist, Neil Gross, Neil, thanks so much. Hey, thanks for having me. Mika. All right. We'll get to our

top stories this morning. The Big One, Meta, has agreed to pay up to $17 billion and to make significant changes to its platforms as part of a landmark settlement with states over teen social media addiction. The lawsuits accused the social media giant of contributing to the youth mental health crisis with its addictive design features and collection of data without parents' consent.

All but two states have agreed to the settlement, which will be paid out over 10 years, with California receiving the largest sum of at least $1.5 billion. Additional safety measures will now be implemented, including two-hour daily time limits and built-in pauses for children. It will also eliminate notifications during weekday school hours as well as overnight and limit social comparison features such as like accounts and makeup filters. Meta will withhold $5.3 billion of the settlement to be released on the condition that YouTube and TikTok will. implement similar features, similar safety features, and pay the same amount. It's an effort by the company not to get singled out and to also make it easier to enforce broader safety policies. And I've been talking to some people directly connected with this, with the conversations with

the AGs, told that Snap is going to follow Meta's lead, which would leave YouTube and TikTok as the remaining platforms that would still have the Wild West going on on their platforms and a lot of problems for young people. What Meta's argument is, is if all social media platforms step up and do the same thing, then there can be an actual positive impact on children around the world. And Meta even says that they will put their limits down to 60 minutes per day for young people, for children, 60 minutes. That would be life-changing.

And Willie, for 10 years here on Morning Joe, we've been talking about the dangers of social media. We've been seeing it in our own kids and their friends and the challenges that they struggle with because of the addictive nature of it, the algorithm, the sort of extremely troubling, concerning behavior we've seen in kids across the country. in cases that were brought to the table of even suicide and suicidal ideation that many have been

concerned are connected to social media in some way. So meta, at least at this point, is taking the lead and putting in some very dramatic changes. I mean, these, if they can be enforced, and that will be one of the questions, enforcement, how do you verify age, how do you monitor whether or not these changes are working. But if they can get other platforms to step up and if the AG's involved who are dealing with these lawsuits can get YouTube and TikTok to step up, that would be hopeful, I think, for kids growing up. Yeah. This has the potential to be a historic first step, this settlement. Not the money that's a rounding error in the budget of meta, but the terms that we've seen laid out. If they have teeth, if they can be enforced, if other companies, you say, follow

suit and make this kind of an industry-wide standard, it could change the conversation. You're right, Mika. The conversation has totally changed over the last 10 years because parents have watched now. The sample size is big enough. The evidence is in what happens to kids, which is that they get anxious, they get depressed, they get isolated. They don't feel like they have to be out in the world making real friends because they have this virtual world that satisfies them. And the book, we have to say, by Jonathan Haidt, among others, the anxious generation, woke up so many people to the problem and said, okay, I'm not the only one noticing this. And my kids are the kids that are around my children at school, schools now implementing phone bans. So people have watched what's

been happening to children. They're taking significant steps to change that, to protect children. And let's hope this is the beginning of something big for social media companies. Yeah, could give the power back to parents, which would be a big change, a change that my children didn't see in their lifetime. Yeah. To politics now. Last hour, we went through reporting from the Atlantic on President Trump's new midterm strategy. He wants Americans to see more of him with ads about his accomplishments so far this term. It comes as he's starting to put this message out to voters. There's a theory that I get the vote.

You know, I see it all the time that when Trump's on the ballot, they win. When he's out of the ballot, the people don't go to vote. And I'm asking the people through your brilliant show, number one show, I'm asking the people to get out and vote, pretend them on the ballot. If they go out and vote, we're going to win. And if we don't, our country's going to be in sad shape because we're going to go through a lot of things. Okay. The president will take that message to Texas today, headlining an RNC fundraiser for Senate nominee Ken Paxton.

The Texas Attorney General spent the majority of his campaign funds in the primary election against incumbent Senator John Cornyn. We'll need all the money he can get as he faces off against Democratic State Representative James Telerico, who has outraged him by nearly $60 million. The Cook Political Report recently shifted its rating for the Texas Senate race from lean Republican to toss-up. And new polling shows Tala RICO with a solid lead over Paxton in three competitive congressional districts that President Trump, won by double digits in 2024. According to the latest poll from Texas Southern University, Tala Rico is up eight points in the state's 15th district, which Trump won by 18 points in 2024.

Tala Rico, also leading by double digits in the 28th and 34th districts. Joining the conversation, we have former U.S. Senator, MS. Now political analyst, Claire McCaskill, staff writer at the Atlantic, Mark Leavovich, and former progressive. congressional candidate, Kat Abugazala, earlier this year. She narrowly lost her bid in the Democratic primary for a U.S. House seat in Illinois. She is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, and it's good to have you all on board this morning. Claire, I just want a gut check with you

on what Trump is doing to get ready for the midterms and making it about himself. It's worked in the best. Well, listen, I think it's great. I congratulate him on a brilliant strategy. I think he should be everywhere. I think it should only be him on the screen and none of these candidates. He should be promoting himself. Go Donald Trump. I don't get it. Clearly, he's not getting the message that the people are sending on poll after poll after poll. But I will say this. I think I think that poll you just showed in those three congressional districts, I would be very wary about how accurate that is. I'm a little worried that Democrats are so excited about poll numbers around the country, both in Senate races and House races, that they forget that 69 of the seats we need to win in the House, Trump won. And so it is really important that everybody not decide this is done, not decide this is a done deal.

Keep calling your friends, keep volunteering, keep doing all the things on the ground, because the ground game is really where the fight is over the next 60 days. Lebo, I know you're as surprised as I am that Donald Trump decided that midterms should be about him, that he should be the center of the ad campaign. So let's set that aside. and talk in particular about Texas, which, of course, as we know, has been the white whale for Democrats for a better decade or more now. They feel really good about James Talleyco. To Claire's point, it's going to be hard, it's going to be close, it's going to be expensive.

But they feel like in Tala Rico, they've got their best shot. They also, I think, obviously, have the most vulnerable Republican candidate they could face here in Ken Paxson, whose political baggage, shall we say, is significant. What's your read here as to where things stand? Is there a possibility that at long last, Democrats' dream could come true? I think there's clearly a better possibility now than there has been over the last few cycles, which is saying something because they were feeling pretty good about the Beto-Oar-Rourke, Ted Cruz race in 2018.

I mean, this is, I mean, as you mentioned, it's a white whale. There's always optimism. There has been recently that Democrats are going to turn this around. I do think Tala Rico has run a really, really solid race, And I think Democrats feel really good about Ken Paxton as an opponent. And so you have Trump going down there to campaign for him now. Texas might be one of the few places where Trump is actually a little less talk. Well, he's less toxic in Texas because he's probably, you know, probably one of his stronger states.

But obviously Ken Paxton has had some real problems down there. To Claire's point, I do think there is a little preemptive giddiness on the part of Democrats. Those polls are just a few congressional districts. They're key congressional districts. But there is still a long way to go. And Texas does have a way of sort of reverting to the gravity that it is Texas at the end of the day. So we'll see. But I do think that Democrats, obviously, the momentum is real.

The enthusiasm is real. And I think that obviously Donald Trump's saying, look at me, is not a bad message for Democrats to sort of rally around. Because I think that's sort of what's going to get them to the polls to begin with. And the polls, we should remind people, have been wildly inaccurate over this cycle so far by double digits. So, Kat, you're in Dallas right now. Let's talk first about James Tala Rico and the race for Senate there. What is the energy like, not just among moderates, who he obviously needs to win to be win in Texas. But what does the DSA think of James Tala Rico as a potential statewide candidate as a potential winner, excuse me, of the Senate seat there?

Yeah, I'm actually here to visit my parents for the first time in two years back home in Texas. and I'm not super involved in any Texas DSA chapters. But, you know, I've seen as someone that grew up in Texas, I think this is the first time I've felt confident that a Democrat might be able to actually win this Senate seat. You know, people across the country like to assume how red states will go one way or the other. And I feel like this is a candidate in a movement

that's really got a chance, especially when your opponent is Ken Paxton. Kat, do you see any difference between Tala rica running as a Democrat and what a DSA candidate would be talking about as a candidate? You know, I think that's a good question. Here's the thing is DSA candidates are kind of this new term that's come out that I feel like is used by a lot of establishment Democrats. But what it really means is people that are standing for where most Americans want the center to be. Right now, we can't afford to go to the emergency room and our lettuce gives us diarrhea.

And Democratic Socialists want people. to be able to afford health care and also not get diarrhea from lettuce. We have been failed time and time again by leaders. And so while they're being painted as radical, Democratic socialists are pushing for the true center, a popular agenda. And I think that other Democrats across the country that aren't Democratic socialists are also getting on board to things like Medicare for all to, you know,

sanctions against Israel or not sending weapons to Israel. popular DSA policies that are also just popular among the American people. So, Kat, let's move beyond Texas and talk a little more nationally about where members of the DSA, or at the very least, progresses in the party need to be. In Michigan, for instance, Senate candidate there, a little bit of say, not DSA, but he supports some of their policies to be sure. And you're right, and that some of the things that DSA stands for actually are broadly, politically popular.

Are there places, though, where you think a, whether you're in DSA, or just, you know, in the left wing of the party, needs to moderate themselves here for a general election. Are there things that, like, should be done just simply if it's political tactics because at the end of the day, winning is what matters most? You know, we've tried this the last three presidential races, and we lost two of the most consequential ones. And at a certain point, we have to be asking ourselves just moderating work.

And it seems like especially this cycle, the answer is no, because it's not actually moderation. the idea of moderate in America is going to the right. I, in my race, I was extremely progressive, and I won not just the most progressive parts of my district, but also the most conservative part of my district, of McHenry County in the 9th District of Illinois. And it's one of these things that I think maybe,

just maybe, the establishment should listen to the DSA, at least a little bit. I mean, there are hordes of young people that are energetic and motivated to do something. And all you have to do is recognize our basic human rights. I frankly don't understand why there is so much anger reserved for people that just want everyone to have their basic needs than there is for literal white supremacists in our government. Like, why are some Democrats talking about Hassan Piker a Twitch streamer on the House floor

in ways that might actually get him hurt or, God forbid, killed instead of literal white supremacists running our government? their priorities are out of whack, and if DSA keeps getting attacked, I just have to assume Democrats don't want to win in a lot of key constituencies. That's a key question. Former Democratic congressional candidate for Illinois, Kat Abba Ghazala, thank you so much for coming back on the show. It's good to see you.

We'll see you again soon. We appreciate it. Claire, I just would love for you to comment on a little bit of what Kat was saying there about establishment Democrats. And, I mean, potentially, should they be more open to parts of the DSA platform. Well, you know, just as much as she hates people calling the DSA's extremists, I hate it when people call people establishment.

There's, you know, I didn't get to the United States Senate by being part of the establishment. I can assure you, I had to fight primaries. I had to fight this. But a lot of good old boys behind closed doors. So there's a whole lot of people holding office. right now that are absolutely not happy with being called quote-unquote establishment. I think really the point she makes is important that the policies that many in the DSA are promoting are ones that the entire Democratic Party supports. And that's what we need to be focusing

on over the next few months. We need to be focusing on the things that unite our party, not the things that divide our party. And there are some extreme figures that have been embraced by some candidates that come from the DSA movement that are hard for a lot of Americans to get comfortable with. That's just a reality. And perception sometimes is reality too. I wish I could turn back the clock of time and call their party something other than socialists because that label, whether we like it or not, whether it's fair or not, perception is sometimes reality in politics. and the perception that a lot of older voters have about the term socialists, especially older Hispanic voters, that we need very badly because of the backgrounds they have in very socialistic countries is a negative one.

So we've got work to do to keep this thing united and stitched up. And I don't think that the DSA candidate should be pointing fingers at people who have been in office. I don't think people who have been in office should be pointing fingers at them. we ought to talk about the stuff that we agree on, which is a bunch of stuff. Yeah, and on that point, Mark Leibovitch, I mean, what do you think? And also, isn't it kind of obvious what Democrats need to be focusing on? This administration, in my opinion, has made it unmistakably obvious what the fight is about. You would think, but Democrats, and, you know, to be fair, Republicans also.

I mean, both parties have a way of sort of wedging themselves into the biggest, divide of the moment. I mean, I do think what Democrats really need to look to is, I mean, clearly, I mean, yeah, the word socialist can be quite problematic from a pure branding standpoint, political standpoint, for reasons Claire just laid out. But I do think, as she also said, there are many parts of, you know, the sort of issue suite in there, whether it's mostly around health care, things like health care affordability, Medicare for a little bit more divisive, but still something that can be debated. And I do think that obviously Trump can be a great uniter, but also candidates.

People like James Talleyko are trying to do this. Candidates like Sherrod Brown in Ohio, right? I mean, he is considered pretty liberal, but he is someone who is over many years triangulated a lot of support around just some core issue things, also around health care, around affordability, around jobs, things like that. So look, there's a lot Democrats have to do, but they also have great opportunities. Mark Leavovich and Claire McCaskill, thank you both very much for coming on this morning and still ahead on Morning Joe. It has been months since the shooting deaths of Alex Prettie and Renee Good by immigration officers in Minnesota.

Now federal prosecutors are turning over evidence. We'll speak with the local county attorney about what this could mean for future charges. You're watching morning, Joe. We will be right back. I was not shocked that he helped somebody. My shock is that he was murdered, and no one has given us the complete truth or anyone has been held accountable. And it's been seven months. There was more effort in vilifying him than pursuing justice. A kid who is out observing. something that should not be happening in this world today, in the United States.

Why? What did he do to deserve to be murdered? To left cold on the ground dead? My child. What did he do? It's a damn good question, and that is the family of Alex Preti, demanding answers and accountability seven months after the 37-year-old was fatally shot by customs and border protection agents in Minneapolis during an immigration crackdown, all seen on camera. That shooting came

just over two weeks after Renee Good was also fatally shot by federal immigration officers in Minnesota. So far, no criminal charges have been filed in the killings, but state, and federal authorities are examining the incidents. Federal officials initially denied state investigators access to the shooting scenes and questioned whether state prosecutors had jurisdiction over federal officers. But after months of delay, federal prosecutors turned over crucial evidence, including body camera footage, statements, and even Renee Goods damaged SUV that they had taken away to Hennepin County attorney's Mary Moriarty's office in July. And Hennepin County attorney, Mary Moriarty, joins us now.

Thank you very much for coming on the show. We very much want to follow these investigations that you are trying to conduct. I'm just first back up. Is that unusual for the state to not have access to the type of evidence that I just listed? And now that you have it, are these cases moving forward in any significant way? First of all, my condolences to the Predi and good families. Nothing justifies the way that they were treated and continue to be treated throughout this ordeal for them. And yes, it's highly unusual.

From the beginning, particularly of the Predi case, that happened on a Saturday morning. We had a prosecutor down at the scene. Our state local agency, the BCA, was also down there. and they were actually denied access to the scene, which is their job to go process the scene. We actually got a search warrant signed by a judge and the federal government denied their access to it. And for a very long time, the federal government denied our access to any of the evidence to the point where we had to file a lawsuit in Washington, D.C. to ask a judge to

order them to give us the evidence in those cases. We are making progress, however. And we did get a substantial amount of evidence from the U.S. Attorney's Office here. I would characterize that more as trying to get back to the normal relationships we have here, which is really working together, not necessarily a directive from the administration or the federal government. So we are making progress. We're not stalled out here. We have a team of very experienced homicide prosecutors working on both the good and pretty cases. And we are making substantial progress. Do you have all the evidence that was taken away? We have a lot of it. And I want to say to people, as a prosecutor, we normally in any case probably don't have every

piece of evidence we wish there were. Sometimes that includes video, sometimes it includes physical evidence. For us, and any prosecutor, the issue is always, given what we have, is that enough to make a decision. And I believe at this point, we do have enough evidence to make a decision. As I said, we got a substantial amount of evidence from the U.S. Attorney's Office. We only knew, probably as you did, from the media that the agents who interacted with Alex Pretti were wearing body cameras. And that was confirmed. They were. And so there's a substantial amount of video for our team to go through. But I believe we have enough evidence to be able to, at some point here, make a decision. about whether charging is appropriate.

And that is what you're looking at at this point, charges in both cases? Well, our job as prosecutors is this. If a police officer in Minnesota shot and killed someone or just shot somebody, the law here is that the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension would do an investigation. They would give the investigation to the prosecutor in the county in which that happened. So I am the Hennepin County attorney. once we get the investigation, we make a decision. That decision is, is there enough evidence to prosecute criminal charges with proof beyond a reasonable doubt or not?

So we either move forward with charges or we decline. But here's what's really important here. We have tried to be as transparent as possible. And any time anything like this has happened in Minnesota with local law enforcement, for instance, and I go back to what the Pretti family here said, those names of law enforcement are released pretty early. And the decision that is made by a prosecutor's office, and this is what we intend to do, would be very transparent. We will talk about what our decision is, and we will be very transparent about why.

And the BCA always posts the investigation. So a key piece of what's missing here is transparency by the federal government. I would expect that every community member wants their government to be transparent and do an impartial and complete investigation. Anytime any federal agent or any agent of the government takes the life of one of its community members. And that simply hasn't happened here on the federal government's part. And in fact, because they came out right away and we're referring to Renee Good and Alex Preti as domestic terrorist, it's a little hard for members of the community here and no doubt nationwide to trust that actually that will happen. But I can guarantee people we are doing that investigation and at some point here we will make a decision.

So is it your sense, Ms. Moriarty, and thanks for joining us this morning, that the federal government, given how long it's taken for you to get this evidence, is it your sense that the federal government is shielding these officers or attempting to shield these officers from prosecution? I would differentiate between the local U.S. Attorney's Office and the staff people here from the main Department of Justice in this administration for years. And in fact, as you know, we had a political assassination here. Both our BCA and the FBI did a joint investigation. They shared the evidence with the U.S. Attorney's Office and our office. Both of our offices chose to charge. The U.S. Attorney's Office settled that case not too long ago. That is the way it's supposed to work. And from the day that Renee Good was shot, I was on the phone with the U.S. Attorney's Office, the BCA, the FBI, everybody was on the phone. And we all agreed this would be the same. It would be a joint investigation. And then the BCA got kicked out of the case.

Our understanding is that was a directive from the administration. Ever since then, we have all been trying to get back to what's normal here, what's right here. And so I think the sharing of evidence was really part of an attempt to get back to normalizing those relationships. I have no inside knowledge about what the administration thought. We still have our lawsuit pending, by the way, to try to get all of the evidence in the good case, Predi, and also Julio Sosa-Selis, to make sure that we have absolutely everything and cooperation of federal witnesses should we need that. I do note on the list of evidence that you've now received, police body camera footage. I think there was some question of whether

ICE agents are even wearing body cameras. The one agent we saw in the publicly available video in the Renee Good case had a phone in his hand as if he was recording it himself. So were the agents who fired the shots wearing body cameras? In the pretty case, some were. So I can tell you that we have reviewed that body camera. That was one of the things that we didn't have. And so we were trying to assess, which is not a position we're usually in, what might that evidence show, you know, what if? And we now have that evidence. And so that's been

extremely helpful. We have multiple views of what happened here. Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty. Thank you very much for what you're doing. And thank you for coming on the show this morning. We'll be following this. Thanks very much. Officials take care. Officials in Danbury, Connecticut, say nearly 50 people have been detained by ICE agents over the past three days, just as thousands of students returned to school. Governor Ned Lamont joined state and local leaders yesterday in Danbury, calling attention to increased immigration enforcement and urging ICE to stay out of Connecticut. The city's mayor, Roberto Alves, says people are being detained near schools, a daycare, and a supermarket,

and claims those arrested are not being targeted for, serious crimes. The Danbury School District says some parents are even afraid to send their children to school. A new safety plan directs bus drivers to return students to school if there is significant law enforcement activity at a bus stop. Danbury police say they are not working with ICE and school officials add counselors and other resources are available to support families. But Willie, again, this was on the first, second day of school and you got kids coming

home to no parents. That is one thing the mayor was talking about in Dan Barry when he was interviewed about this. It's just a nightmare with people being pinned down in the middle of the street, just a rain of terror, honestly, in Danbury, across the city over the past

couple of days. Yeah, you said kids getting dropped off by their parents, by the time they get home from school, their parents are gone because they were detained by ICE. And again, we say this every time one of these stories come up, show us that this is the worst of the worst. They can't. The promises were getting rapists and murderers out of the country, not people in communities, often for decades, working jobs with children being taken off the streets by ICE.

And this is just the latest example in Danbury, Connecticut. Also, an immigration judge in Chicago yesterday ordered more than half a dozen unaccompanied migrant children to be deported from the country. Those children join at least two others who were given removal orders in July. Several Democratic lawmakers attended the hearing and witnessed the process firsthand as they slammed the administration for abandoning the plan to go after again the so-called worst of the worst. Joining us now from Chicago, MS now reporter Nambi Iguan Wu Namdi. So take us inside that courtroom. What exactly happened here? What the judge say?

Yeah, so yesterday we attended a hearing that regarded the most vulnerable of undocumented. immigrants and accompanied minors. But these minors in particular, according to their attorneys, are those that say they were victims of abuse, abandonment, or neglect. Typically, what would happen here is they would file a form I-360 with the United States Citizenship Services, and that would assist them in getting an S-I-J classification, special immigrant juvenile. Historically, if you had that classification, what that meant is not only were you deferred from being removed from the country. But in addition to that, you were placed on an expedited path to citizenship. Well, the Trump administration got rid of that role in April. And what we saw yesterday was

the impact of that, a courtroom that was packed with an accompanied minors that despite pleas from their attorneys saying that they have had a state court, find that they were, in fact, victims of abuse, abandonment, and neglect, found that they'd be at risk if they were sent back to their country. We still saw at least eight children get orders of removal back to their home country. Senator Dick Durbin was in attendance and attended those hearings. He was extremely frustrated and talked to us about it afterwards. Take a listen to what he had to say. You remember how they explained it? We were going after the worst of the worst. The terrorist, the rapist, the murderers, the child predators. We were going to once and forever remove them from

America and make our streets safer. I wish the people who made those statements could see what we saw this morning. I witnessed it firsthand. Is this what America is all about? That we take 20,000 kids in our country abandoned, abused, and neglected, and turn them loose. God only knows where they're headed. No protection. Many of them, no legal representation. Is this America when it comes to children? And Willie, I will point out that attorneys for these kids are also concerned because of a decision made by the Trump administration over the summer to end a contract with the Acacios Center for Justice.

That group was previously charged by the Office for Representatives. Fugia for Settlement for providing legal counsel to these in-accompanied minors. They contracted about 100 legal providers across the country, including several that we interviewed yesterday, and they were providing those services. So that contract is over. Many of the attorneys working with these kids yesterday are doing so pro bono. And the new group that's been appointed to take over that responsibility providing legal counsel, our rescue. It's an anti-human trafficking organization, but really, I will point out that their own website does not list legal services, legal counsels, among the work it does. So a lot of concerns.

in here on the ground from advocates, attorneys and lawmakers like you just heard. So, Namdi, one of the teenagers, a Guatemalan teenager, when the judge said to him, do you have any questions asked simply, why are you sending me back to Guatemala? What did I do? Which I think is a question everyone's asking. Why are these kids being sent out of the country? Well, you know, it's coming amid the backdrop of this deportation drive from the administration. We were talking about over the summer how they were seeking to ramp up the number of removals in

Chicago was a prime location for that. The immigration court here actually saw a 120% jump in removal orders granted between March and June. And part of the way the administration is now sustaining that pace is by going after an accompanied minors of removing protections that previously at a minimum kept them in this country while their claims were adjudicated. That's no more. So now them, just like adult and documented immigrants, are seeing less continuances granted for them and are seeing an accelerated pace of deportations here. MS now reporter Nambi, Iguan, we're reporting this morning from Chicago. Nambi, thanks so much.

Mike Barnacle, I'm going to quote Jonathan Lemire from yesterday. What are we doing here? I mean, you've got parents being taken off the street. Their kids don't know where they are when they get home from school. We got teenagers being thrown out of the country. We saw these scenes a couple of days ago. A woman and her daughter in their hospital gowns being arrested after they were in a car accident, taken from a hospital, deported from the country.

We know what they're doing. They're trying to meet quotas. But stories like this one make you wonder, what's at the heart of this? Can you imagine we're in the uniform of the United States of America? And you're deployed to the Lincoln or to the George Washington, both aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean. You're deployed as a member of the Army or the Marine Corps to the Middle East to perhaps fight another war or participate in a war that's ongoing with Iran. and worrying about a brother, a sister, or a child, back here in America, going to school and perhaps being snatched off the streets to be deported someplace in the world. We don't know where they

deport them. They don't tell you where they deport them. They end up being deported to countries that they have no bearing with. Can you imagine wearing the uniform of the United States of America for this? Or a father, which was a real case a couple of days ago. A sailor on the USS Abraham Lincoln, his dad deported. Still ahead this morning, what we're learning about the funeral arrangements for the legend, the icon, Dolly Parton, and what she left behind for her fans. Plus, a look at the life and career of actor Tim Curry, who also died at the age of 80 this week.

Morning Joe's coming right back. Look at that. That's a live rainbow, Jonathan Lemire, behind. the Empire State Building. How cool is that? Absolutely gorgeous shot here just before 8 a.m. A little bit of rain. Casey Musgraves singing us in just before the top of the hour. We learned yesterday that Tim Curry died earlier this week at the age of 80. The British-born actor brought energy to his roles, especially in movies where he played an eccentric villain like the smug concierge.

And Home Alone, too, lost in New York and the 1970s cult classic, the Rocky Horror Picture Show, where he played Dr. Frankenfurter. Come up to the lab and see what's on the slab. I see you shiver with anticipation. Known for his humor, that expressive face, unmistakable voice, Curry earned three Tony nominations for Spamelot, my favorite year, and Amadeus. He also was nominated for an Emmy in 1994. His other credits include starring as the monster in the 1990 miniseries version of Stephen King's horror novel It in the film's Clue, Annie, and the Three Musketeers.

Curry suffered a stroke in 2012 that left him unable to walk. He died late Tuesday at his home in Los Angeles again at the age of 80. We're also learning details this morning about the funeral arrangements for Dolly Parton. According to a statement from her representatives, Dolly's immediate family will hold a small private service in the coming days, and she's expected to be laid to rest beside her late husband, Carl. We've also learned Dolly left behind one more song for her fans. She wrote and recorded My Place in History over a decade ago with instructions that it not be released until January 19th, 2046, which would have marked Meeker her 100th birthday. Yeah. She's got a place in history. In fact, a piece in the New York Times highlights how Dolly outsmarted the comics and critics who talked. tried to make her a punchline over the course of her career.

Quote, the lazy Deliparton jokes that permeated the culture in the 1970s and 80s, tried to frame her as a dumb blonde. Her responses were funnier, which made them genius. She used self-deprecation as a subversive trick. The jokes were beneath her, but when she played along, she wasn't actually debasing herself. She was reclaiming her body and aesthetic as a point of pride, vaporizing any implied insult of the Appalachian work in class and revealing her critics as fools,

even as she graciously allowed them to laugh with her. Willie, I mean, her remarkable talent was, it spoke for itself, but I think it took some people a little bit of time to like totally understand the totality of this woman's, um, incredible career. Well, as that pertains to that New York Times piece, we have to utter her line, which when she was called a dumb blonde, maybe at some point in the 80s, she said, well, the dumb blonde jokes never bothered me because I ain't dumb and I also ain't blonde, that she wore wings and things like that. So, I mean, she, to the point that she always had the answer, she always stole the criticism or the joke before you could make it. And frankly, there wasn't

much of a joke to be made when you look at the span of her career. but also her life and the good work she did. And we miss her this week and we'll miss her forever. Yeah, I've been playing her songs like on a loop. Yeah. Still ahead on Morning Joe, California Attorney General Rob Bonta will be our guest following the landmark settlement from META over claims its platforms were designed to create social media addictions.

Morning Joe will be right back.