Morning Joe - Trump, Johnson dismiss speculation about third term

Episode Date: October 29, 2025

Trump, Johnson dismiss speculation about third term Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

And, you know, based on what I read, I guess I'm not allowed to run. So we'll see what happens. Johnson says you're trolling when you talk about a third term. Well, I don't think he said that. I don't think he'd use that term, but it's a very interesting thing. I have the best numbers for any president in many years, any president. And I would say that if you read it, it's pretty clear, I'm not allowed to run. It's too bad.

I missed him. But we have a lot of great people. President Trump overnight on Air Force One, dismissing the prospect of seeking a third term. It comes, as he is in South Korea this morning, the final leg of his trip across Asia. We'll bring you an update on what's happened so far, and we'll preview tomorrow's high-stakes meeting with China's leader. Here at home, the government shutdown is about to reach a critical point for millions of Americans. SNAP benefits will run out of money on Saturday, and the Trump administration says it will not use contingency funding for that aid. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, some Republican senators are now

raising concerns about beef prices, bailouts, and Trump's tariffs. We'll go through all of that. Plus, the Toronto Blue Jays evened up the World Series last night after a crushing defeat in the 18th inning. Of game three, what's with these long games? I'll tell you what, Willie. Wow, we have a lot to talk about. Why don't we just start right here? This Blue Jane team, wow, again, come on. I mean, the Canadian.

I'm from the deep south. They don't really usually get attached to Canadian teams unless it's Montreal Canadians. You big Habs got? Oh, my God. Well, they were the monsters, man. They were the back old NHL. Of course, Moody, Mississippi.

Who was it? Right? It's an obvious connection, yeah. But Toronto, they've always just seemed so powder blue to me. They also beat the Braves and not. I do like those unis. They also beat the Braves in 92. I've got to tell you, this team right here, though,

how do you not love the Blue Jays? How do you not get excited about this team? They're not only gritty. They're just a great freaking team. They're a great team. Best record in the American League tied with the Yankees, but they won the division. Last night, after that 18- inning game, you could see it breaking another team's spirit.

You go 18 innings and you lose, they go down 2 to 1. This was the pivotal game last night with Otani on the mound for the Dodgers. He was good, but the Jays were a little better. You saw Guerrero's huge home run there to put the Js ahead for good. They win the game 6 to 2. Now the series is even 2-2, guaranteeing at least that things go back to Toronto. Even if they lose tonight, they're going home to Toronto. Toronto. Exactly. They can claw their way back from a 3-2 deficit if they go back home to Canada

and play the Dodgers the last two. A couple of big items. Of course, George Springer, just an extraordinary player. I wasn't able to play last night because he's hurt. But Bobichette back, took one to the fence. He's an incredible player. This is all very exciting. This is, this is turning out to be a great world series. I know. And there was some concern after that 18-A game. Okay, this is Dodgers, Destiny. Freddy Freeman does it again. Otani's on the mound. Yeah. But the Blue Jays blunted that last night. The series all evened up. You know, it's crazy back

in 2018. They also beat the Red Sox in 18. Right. And then the Red Sox came back. How do you remember this stuff? Well, because, yeah, I mean, it was Boston, first of all. Secondly, my Comcast service went out in the bottom of the ninth inning. And I started screaming and yelling and, you know,

calling people. That's one of like a hundred times that happened. I remember that. I swear to that. It was like ninth inning. No. And went out. Now that I remember.

Now that's an aberration for Comcasts and probably user error. If you look, think back on it. I don't have to say that anymore. I don't have to say that anymore. I really don't. But, okay, so that's number one. Number two. Number two.

Woo! He still does a one third of new company. Number two. You're just joking, Brian. Number two, one of the all-time trolls of all-time. Donald Trump has been putting out one of the all-time trolls of all-time. And at one point, you know, I talked to him once in a while. Talked to him once a while.

And at one point, maybe a month or two ago, he said, can you stop talking about 28? Because when you do, I get a deal with my wife for the next two weeks. He's going to be here. He's a-la-da-da. And then, you know, he gets all the can. caps on the desk when the Democrats come, the all-time troll of all time. And I, by the way, bring this up, I bring this up, because what have you been saying all along, you've got to separate the signal from the ground noise.

And so much of what he does is to troll people. And yesterday, it's kind of like, as Mike Johnson said, eh, it was a great troll. He sold a lot of caps, but he can't do it. And then Donald Trump said the same thing. And by the way, the troll this time came from outside the house from Steve Bannon. who said it in an interview on a podcast. Who believes it, by the right. He believes it. He believes it.

He breathed new life into this idea that Donald Trump could run for a third time. Do you have any question Donald Trump would like a third term? No. Would he go along with it if he could somehow get Congress to overturn a constitutional amendment, which takes a lot of votes and is highly unlikely? Would you put anything past Donald Trump? No. But again, this is perhaps a distraction from the fact that, I don't know,

42 million people are going to lose food assistance on Saturday. Well, we have some numbers that Kristen Welker put up in a story about Donald Trump's approval ratings for the economy. And most of them are below 40%. Lowest numbers he's ever had, he's all over the world, you've got a government shutdown. You've got one in four, one and five Americans who depend, on food assistance, not going to get it. You have health care prices absolutely exploding. You still have concerns about inflation. You've got a $20 to $40 billion bailout of Argentina.

You also, of course, you have tax cuts for the richest people on the planet for billionaires and monopolists. And then yesterday, J.D. Vance got an earful. A real earful from senators going, What's this about Argentine beef? And what's so crazy is you, when you're campaigning, you never know what's going to cut through. And I would tell you, I didn't know that, like, cattle that, you know, that branded with Evita's, you know, emblem, going to cause a problem. But J-Mart sat there yesterday, and he said, it's things like this that really get people going. Wait a second. You're importing beef from Argentina and pull to the next layer. And then you're doing a $20 to $40 billion bail out of Argentina.

That's a problem. While the government shutdown. Yeah. So it's all, there's a big sort of mix brewing out there right now. So let's get to that. But let me get to the part in the middle here. We've reached day 29 of the government shutdown as senators remain at an impasse. for the 13th time yesterday. The Senate failed to pass the House-approved bill to reopen the federal government. This, as the House remains out of session, and Speaker Mike Johnson reiterated

that he won't call Republican lawmakers back until Democrats passed the bill. House Democrats met on Capitol Hill yesterday saying their party remains in lockstep in their fight for health care. Meanwhile, the shutdown is having real consequences for millions of Americans, starting this Saturday, 42 million people are at risk of losing federal food

and nutrition benefits under the SNAP program. WIC, another food assistance program for women and children, could also run out of funds next week. Federal workers who keep air travelers safe are also feeling the pinch. As of yesterday, air traffic controllers are no longer receiving a paycheck. And TSA officers missed their first paychecks last Friday. That's not good.

Vice President J.D. Van said yesterday that military members will get a paycheck this Friday, but didn't say where the money would be coming from. Active duty troops could start going without pay by November 15. I mean, it's just bad all around, Willie. And, of course, whenever you have a government shutdown, there's a blame game. And as I said, at the beginning, the blame usually falls on Republicans. They're in church. The New York Post, they don't give a shock, talking about how the Democrats won't reopen the government, Republicans will tell you, hey, we passed a clean CR.

We've done our job. It's up to the Democrats. Democrats aren't going to move until they feel like working Americans and middle class Americans get some help on health care. Yeah. And the extension of these from the Obamacare, the assistant and the benefits and the subsidies that came with that. That's really the focus there. seeing what Mika just laid out, this is not a Washington political game of whose fault it is for millions of Americans now. It's getting very real and going to get very, very real on Saturday of 42 million people can't get food. If members of the military can't get paid, it's disgraceful and they've got to figure this out. So let's bring in the co-founder and co-CEO of Axios, Jim Van Dhani, and senior congressional reporter for Punch Bowl News, Andrew DeSadario.

Guys, good morning. Andrew, you're covering the hill very closely. Is there any move Is there any behind-the-scenes talk about ending this now that we're on the precipice of so many Americans, not either getting the pay they need or the food assistance they rely on? Well, the short answer is no. We're going to see Democratic senators led by the Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer today raise issue over that snap cliff that you mentioned for November 1st. Their whole argument is that, look, the administration is moving around money to pay the troops, to pay members of the military.

Why can't they move around money to fund? the SNAP program. And what Republicans are saying back to Democrats is, why don't you vote to reopen the government? We're kind of in the same time loop that we've been in over the last 29 days or so here. And at the same time, Senate Republican leaders, they teased a strategy of maybe doing these quote unquote rifle shot one-off funding bills whereby you would fund the SNAP program during the shutdown. And you would fund air traffic controller pay or military pay, for example. But they're backing off of that because the White House, number one, doesn't want it. And number two, the House Speaker, Mike Johnson really doesn't want it because it would force him, of course, to bring the House back from its month-plus long recess before the government is reopened, which has, of course, been his red line throughout all of this.

You know, Jim Vandehi, what's so fascinating to me is that Donald Trump always seems to know how to frame the fight, right? And so before the government shut down, he was talking about crime. That's like the Packers playing at Lambeau Field. That's like Alabama playing in Tuscaloosa, you know, Denny Bryant Stadium. And I'm dead serious. That's his home field advantage. Since the government shut down, what have we been talking about? We've been talking about health care costs.

We've been talking about how health care premiums are spiking for middle class Americans for his supporters, cuts to hospitals in Red State America. Argentina bailouts. I mean, you name it, air traffic controllers, unfriendly skies. And the president's going on a world tour, and Republicans can't seem to get him focused on how this is damaging the Republican brand. I'm curious your take and how long until if these numbers keep going this way, the White House feels the pain. There's no doubt that the president right now is disconnected from where I think his favorabilities. numbers are. He said in that clip where you're talking about a third term that he's the most popular

president ever. You've consistently seen he's actually has a favorable rating somewhere around 40%. And for congressional Republicans, it's worse than that. And the concern you have among Republicans is, listen, it's not just that people might not get their SNAP payments, which is a big deal. It's not just that you might have a little more risk or a little more delay at airports. It said on top of that, everyone's about to see a pretty big increase in their health care premium. and the job market is looking really, really tight, really bleak, especially for college graduates. And so when you have those three things, you can look at polls and parse polls and say, who do you blame? Who do you not blame?

Republicans control everything. So ultimately, they probably take the vast majority of the blame if these things unfold the way that we think that they'll unfold. And I think that is the concern. It's why you have Josh Hawley doing an op-ed in the New York Times talking about we've got to make sure we get these payments to poorer people. It's the reason you have Republicans now saying, hey, we probably do have to figure out some kind of compromise. And so I think it feels like you'll get to a deal soon. But I think the president is pretty disconnected from it.

He's much more interested in cutting these deals overseas, trying to figure out a compromise on China. He sees that the stock market three days running has hit all-time highs. And so he feels like things are on the right trajectory. But I think there's a disconnect between what most people are feeling. Well, and Willie, what we're hearing from him is, like, hey, this is great. We can have Russ vote cut more of the government, thinking that because his very small base, right, on X thinks that's a great idea, doesn't understand that a lot of people in middle America, a lot of people in Red State America, are getting hurt by those cuts,

and maybe that's great for nerds and think tanks. They go, look what we are able to do with the government shutdown. We are strategically, right? They're totally disconnect. And that's how they talk, by the way. But they're strategically, this is a strategic disaster, and they're disconnected from the real politics of this, the real pain. You're hearing some of those voices again yesterday, Marjorie Taylor Green, Republican of Georgia, saying, what are we doing? What are we doing, Mike Johnson, taking health care away from people in my district and your district? Andrew, let's talk about how beef fits into all of this. There was the Senate luncheon yesterday. J.D. Vance, the vice president, stopped by to talk to senators there and kind of got an earful from a bunch of them about this idea of importing beef from Argentina and perhaps hurting those ranchers in America.

Yeah, I was told that inside the room, around six or seven Republican senators confronted J.D. Vance about this issue quite directly. And at one point, he actually responded kind of in a joking manner saying, does anybody have any questions not about beef? And I think it just underscores the fact that we've got this situation here where Republicans have chosen this issue that they feel comfortable pushing back on the administration on. I mean, it's kind of surprising when you consider all the other things that they've been willing to sort of excuse, sort of talk away in favor of the administration and of the president. But they're hearing directly from their constituents, from farmers, ranchers, you know, especially we're talking about senators, who represent these farm-heavy states, not afraid to speak out on this issue in particular. And I was told that a couple of senators even mentioned President Trump's truth social post on the issue in which he essentially tried to insult farmers and ranchers and insinuate

that they didn't understand the realities of the situation. So Republican senators were quite flabbergasted not only by that true social post, but by the fact that the president and the administration don't seem to be listening. to the concerns that they have, again, especially from these agriculture-heavy states that they represent. And Jim, again, there's that disconnect, whether you have Marjorie Taylor-Green going, hey, what are we doing here? We're hurting our own people with these health care cuts. You've got Republicans that are actually yesterday that passed a resolution of the Senate saying you've got to end these tariffs against Brazil. You can't put a tariff on somebody and declare an emergency

because you personally don't like what they're doing to an ex-president there. it's Josh Hawley, writing op-ed, saying, come on, let's get this moving. And then, of course, senators castigating J.D. Vance and will he taking issue with the president insulting farmers? Yeah, I mean, listen, there's still, it's rare when any of these Republicans really speak out against Trump himself. But there has to be frustration. Usually a president doesn't go overseas in the middle of a shutdown, right? Just the optics aren't great. And you want to be seen sort of trying to solve this problem.

mainly because you ultimately hit this deadline, where you run out of ways to pay for these vital programs for a lot of people. And when people get hit, that's when they pay attention to politics. Like, we all get obsessed about whatever's happening in the day. Most people have lives. They're not paying attention to this stuff until suddenly their beef pieces are higher, prices are higher, or you're a cattleman and your industry suddenly feels much less lucrative, or you're having to pay a much higher health care premium, and that's a big chunk of your take-home income. Then you do start to pay attention.

And then you do start to speak out in politics. And that's where Congress is a pretty good early indicator of what's happening in the district or back home because they're hearing this. They wouldn't say something to J.D. Vance if they weren't actually getting a lot of pressure back home. They want to just love J.D. Vance and Trump and make sure that they love them back, right? But so when they do it, it means there's a lot of pressure. Yeah, for sure. It's like my love for Comcast. Oh, gosh.

Really, right? Oh, yeah. Conditional. What do I say? We get it. Except what it doesn't work. What I'm going to talking about. You get that.

How great their services. That was user error. Is my fault. It's my fault. It's always our fault. Senior congressional reporter for Punchball News, Andrew Desideria, thank you very much for coming on this morning. So we're also following Hurricane Melissa, who's made landfall in eastern Cuba as a category three hurricane this morning. As it continues, its destructive path across the Caribbean, Melissa is now one of the strongest,

Atlantic hurricanes on record after it slammed Jamaica yesterday with 185 mile-per-hour winds and storm surge up to 13 feet. Officials report catastrophic flooding, fallen trees, numerous power outages across the island, cautioning that any cleanup and damage assessments could be slow. Jamaica's prime minister warned that there is no infrastructure in the region and that could withstand a Category 5 hurricane. The storm's wind speed dropped to about 130 miles per hour as it traveled north toward Cuba late last night and expected to move toward the Bahamas later today. Let's bring in MSNBC weather reporter Moses Small. Moses, where is it now? Where is it headed? Well, good morning. Well,

at this point, Hurricane Melissa has moved away from Jamaica, but it may blend fall in Cuba at about 3 a.m.R time. And this storm is just so powerful still. Even though it's lost, a lot of momentum. Those wind speed are still at 115 miles per hour. That makes it a major hurricane and still a category three. And it's going to remain a problem for the Caribbean as it tracks further northeast and as it heads through the bomb as it's expected to stay a category two all the way through to tonight. Wind speeds at that time still 110 miles per hour. Now you can see some of the wind patterns shaping up that are going to steal this thing further way to the northeast. You can see this dip, this trough over the United States. And that's not only

going to help carry it out to see, it's also going to keep it pretty far away from the U.S. The only impacts that we're going to see in the East Coast could be a little choppy surf, but for the Caribbean, there is still a level of rain threat, especially for this stretch of southeastern Cuba, where some areas could see isolated rain tolls, according to the National Hurricane Center, of up to 16 inches of rain or potentially even more. So definitely not out of the woods yet if you're in Cuba in terms of things like flash flooding, in terms of mudslides, and especially with so many mountains that you find in a place like Cuba, that can actually accelerate the rainfall rate.

But just take a look at some of these images coming out of Jamaica. the type of damage that can take months to recover from in the short term, and many areas might be uninhabitable for weeks, months at a time. It'll take years for many of these spots to make full recoveries. And I've talked to climate scientists who really think there should be a category six for storms like this that carries so much devastation, a very long word ahead for recovery for the entire Caribbean. All right, MSNBC weather reporter Moses Small. Thank you very much for that update. We'll be watching that. And still ahead on morning, Joe. We'll get to President Trump stop in South Korea this morning as he prepares for key talks on trade.

Plus, the White House fires all the members of a fine arts commission. The commission tasked with reviewing the president's construction projects, like the ballroom. Willie? They're trying. They're trying. Yeah. Why don't they print out baseball caps? Here's a reminder for you about our newly relaunched newsletter, the T, spill.

by Morning Joe. It features our latest takes on exactly that. What's driving the day in news, politics, sports, music, and entertainment, and so much more, plus a direct line to the Morning Joe family, all sent straight to your inbox. To sign up now, you can scan the QR code that's on your screen or go to MSNBC.com slash the T spilled by Morning Joe. We'll be right back. 27 past the hour, joining us now the co-host of our fourth hour staff writer at the Atlantic, Jonathan Lemire, and MSNBC contributor, Mike Barnacle is here.

You can't go wrong. Love's theme. Very white and love on little corkist from baby. It's the pipes. So Mike Barnacle last night, you know, it's kind of like the socks loss in 18s, the Dodgers. in 2018 next day get off the mat and won last night Toronto did the same that's

exactly right Joe 19 well 18 in the game Red Sox Dodgers several years ago 2018 they lost in the 18th inning home run much walk off yeah they come back the next day and win yeah the blue jays are a really good team by the way and they keep winter from coming the world series as long as the World Series has played. We don't have to put the storm windows on. Okay. I like it. Not yet. Jonathan, I mean, this is a, I mean, this is a, we thought we just love them because they beat the Yankees. I mean, we do. This is, okay, but this is a team with character. I mean, they really are. Yeah, really good team. Good team. Good team, good fan base. That hasn't won in 30 years. Yeah, and like to lose, to lose, to lose that gut punch game three,

to lose Springer, to have to put Shane Bieber out there yesterday, who'd been pretty up and down so far at these playoffs, but he gave them exactly what they needed, pitched into the sixth. That's one of the biggest swings of the whole postseason right there. O'Tani made one bad pitch early. Glad, who's one of the two superstars in the game, hits it out, gave the Jay's momentum. Their bullpen got just enough. And now, you know, game five tonight, we got Yassavich versus Blake Snell, a rematch of game one. When neither starter was great. We'll see, but we're guaranteed at least baseball through Friday in Toronto. It's shaping up to be a classic series. Plus, the Toronto manager is very impressive. Very

impressive. Both managers, but the Toronto managers. You have to love in October. I mean, the people that rise to the occasion. Bieber last night the other night, a pitcher that had gone no more than two innings for the Dodgers, goes four and a half. That's crazy.

And those are the guys you remember through history. Even if it's just one series or one appearance, they go in the lore of their team. So somebody's going to play for the World Series title on Halloween night on Friday night, and then it could go into November if it goes to a game seven. Awesome. Yeah. I don't know

where Derek Lowe is living or what Derek Lowe is doing, but if he ever needs anything, give me a call. Because when we needed him the most, he was there, right? But that shows you, again, it's just like, you're right. This is

October baseball is what burns in people's minds for the rest of their lives. Isn't that right, Mika? Yes, we're going to get to the news now. President Trump is... Yes, it's fantastic what you're saying. President Trump is now in South Korea for the third and final leg of his trip across Asia. Over the past few hours, the president met with his South Korean counterpart as the two countries worked to finalize a trade deal.

The president was granted a series of gifts, including a replica of an historic gold crown, as well as the country's highest medal, which was said to be awarded to him for his content. continued role as, quote, peacemaker on the Korean Peninsula. President Trump also addressed a group of leaders and CEOs gathered in South Korea for this year's Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit, where he spoke about his trip so far and previewed his upcoming high-stakes sit-down with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. On this trip alone, I've signed groundbreaking agreements with Malaysia, Cambodia, Japan, And our deal with the Republic of Korea will be finalized very soon, like moments or very shortly thereafter. These agreements will be incredible victories for all of us because everyone is better off when we have stable partnerships, not plagued by chronic problems and imbalances.

You know, probably you know, that President Xi of China is coming tomorrow here. And we're going to be, I hope, making a deal. I think we're going to have a deal. I think it'll be a good deal for both. or a lot of people are interested. They're also interested in what we're doing, but they're interested in that. I can tell you a lot of the world is watching.

And I think we'll have something that's very exciting for everybody. You know, Jonathan, the New York Times frames this so well. You have the picture of the president walking with the head of Japan. And there was a good meeting. He's going all across Asia, all the allies that we need lined up in a fight against economic fight. and what China may believe is a military fight against us. And below that is the headline saying that China's racing to take the lead in nuclear power. You can say the same about AI.

You can say the same about all technology. I mean, this is a trip that needs to be made, but it all builds up to this meeting tonight. Exactly right. I mean, so far, some of the business deal signed in these nations, we'll see how real they are. That's sort of White House. You know, they state something and then we'll see the details down the road. certainly, though, in terms of relations with foreign leaders, in fact, with the new prime minister, they even watched some of the World Series.

The White House put out some footage, the two of them, watching Shohei Otani the other night. But that's all the opening act. It's all about this meeting with Xi Jinping this weekend, to try to get the, tomorrow, to try to get the details of this trade deal locked in. We certainly know there's been a lot of up and down, and it's been a up-relationship. But it's also about, it's about Taiwan, too. We'll have to see what the president says here. We know Beijing has carefully been watching the U.S.

in terms of how it's handled the situation in Ukraine. Frankly, even some of its moves in its own hemisphere around Venezuela. There's been some in China who have said, well, look, if you were going to be, you're taking more aggressive posture in your side of the world, why can't we do the same, Mike? So there's a lot riding on this meeting tomorrow, which many would say the most important leader-to-leater summit that president's had so far this term. You know, everything that he's speaking about is obviously critical. All the business deals, as you indicated, we hope they all work out well for.

the United States. But the Taiwan aspect of it is really interesting. You wonder what is going to happen when they talk, the two of them, talk about Taiwan. Willie, I mean, it's a vital component of peace in the South China Sea, and we still don't know where we are going on Taiwan. Would we actually go in defense of Taiwan if anything happened? There's always concern with President Trump when he gets in those closed doors about what he's going to promise or perhaps give way to a leader to get something that he wants. So there is talk about if they get the big trade deal, if there's some relief on tariffs, is there also a conversation on not defending Taiwan the way it needs to be defended? We will see shortly. Meanwhile, the front page of the Wall Street Journal has

some new reporting on the wave of white-collar layoffs with major companies like Amazon, UPS, Target announcing cuts, slashing thousands of corporate roles in their statements, companies cited in part growing pressure to operate more efficiently and to embrace the use of the use of the U.S. of artificial intelligence. So Jim Van DeHy, that brings us around to your piece with Mike Allen, looking at how an AI job apocalypse unfolds in front of us. And it does seem to be accelerating, especially yesterday with that news from Amazon to 14,000 jobs cut. And then explicitly writing in their statement about the role of AI in the cuts. Yeah, I think it's hard for viewers and readers to sort through all the news and really sees on what matters.

I cannot stress to parents, to students, to anyone who's in a job that could be imminently affected by AI, what a big deal this is. You have all of these companies basically saying they're either laying off employees or that they're dramatically slowing hiring over the next year because of automation and because of AI. At the same time, you had this company, Mercor, a couple days ago, raised money at a $10 billion valuation. It's a two-year-old company started by and run by 22-year-olds who were college roommates and then dropped out not long ago. What that company does, and the reason it got such a high valuation, is it basically pays doctors and lawyers and other professionals to train AI to basically

do their job so that companies can then do the work of humans using robots or using artificial intelligence. This is unfolding very fast. And maybe it's not as bad as the naysayers say. There's no doubt I've not found a single CEO that I have talked to in the last six months who's not told me privately that they are dramatically slowing, hiring, or not backfilling jobs when people leave or considering layoffs specifically because of AI. This should be the only topic that Congress is thinking about and talking about. I don't think most workers realize what's happening. In our piece, we linked to this report by Microsoft that was done this summer that shows you all of the tasks and all of the jobs that are most vulnerable. If you're in one of those jobs,

or if your kid is going to school and considering those professions, you've got to be thinking about this. You have to be thinking about how can I do that job if artificial intelligence can do it for free or do it better. In some cases, it can make you a better employee, but it might force you to think about doing something differently. And I don't think politicians are leveling with the American people. They're not talking about the extent of what's going to happen over the next three years. That doesn't mean AI couldn't be a massive boom like other technologies over a long horizon. But in the short term, it's really hard to see how a lot of people aren't going to end up struggling and trying to find a new job, especially if you're entry level coming out of college. Jim, you're so right.

This is, we're watching politicians and podcasters, other people fighting and debating over the dumbest things right now. This is an existential threat to working America. for middle class Americans, it's a one-to punch. It's AI. It's robotics. You start talking about robotics with leaders of a lot of these tech companies, and they will talk about, you know, basically it's sort of a space race for robotics and what country is ahead of the other country. So you've got white-collar workers getting hit, blue-collar workers getting hit. And Mike Varnicle, I remember, in 1992, Bill Clinton's campaign. campaign being saved from the Jennifer Flower scandal by him going into the snows of New Hampshire

and explaining to those people that were suffering from factories closing post-industrial rot that was brought on from the Information Age Revolution and then the Tech Revolution. We're going to get those jobs back. That was 33, 34 years ago. Politicians in either party haven't gotten those jobs back for the those working Americans, the factories have closed. They're not coming back. And if they do come back, they're going to be run by A.I.N. Robots. And yet Washington, D.C., just not doing anything about it. Joe, one of the most critical things that Jim just alluded to that he just talked about is if you're at

home and your children are in college or whatever, and they're training themselves educationally for a specific series of jobs or a specific profession that they're, interested in? Will that profession still be there when they graduate from college? And the after effect of that is what you just raised. Are we confident that the United States Congress has a significant membership, a percentage of membership, of its membership, that realize the threat of AI. They have no idea. That's the point. All they look at are the people that are contributing money from these monopolies in Silicon Valley. It's all they, and if you ask them to, like, even and talk about AI, they go, well, we can't be, China may beat us.

They have no idea. They're clueless. They've been clueless for 30 years, again, about, you know, how do you help communities, whether it's in New Hampshire, whether it's textile mills in South Carolina, whether it's, you know, factories all across the Rust Belt, up and down, New England that have been shuttered for decades. They have no answer. And now the biggest one-two punch is coming to working Americans, and they're fighting about the stupidest things imaginable and focusing on the stupidest things imaginable. And yes, I will put a ballroom at the White House and a $40 billion bailout of Argentina near the top of that list. But talk about, Mika, kids. Kids that are coming out of college. I say kids, young,

adults coming out of college, how things have gotten so much bleaker today than they were even five years ago. It already is hard. Because of what Jim's talking about because of AI. No, I mean, kids are putting out applications that they spend hours on and they'll get an AI response. This is the beginning of, I think, what you said, the existential crisis. I mean, it is going to be a generation of young people with no jobs if we're not caring. with nowhere to go. I mean, it's frightening. And Willie, we can't say we haven't been warned. I mean, it's one of the things that Jim Vanda has done so well in Axi is they're talking about this, but I'm surprised more people aren't talking about the coming wave of layoffs.

Yeah, and we get the executives you're talking about who run these tech companies show up what once a year, once every couple of years, they take their hits on Capitol Hill. They run circles around some of the members who, as you say, don't really understand the issue. they go back to business. And by the way, now get massive tax cuts and subsidies to continue doing what they're doing effectively unregulated. Jim, one interesting byproduct of all this, though, is a rethinking of what a good education is, of what good career training is. There was a report put out that these very AI companies are going to need 130,000 electricians in the next couple of years, for example. So people thinking differently about what education means. How am I

educating myself. How am I preparing myself for the future? Yeah, and this is why leadership matters. It doesn't actually have to be this way. So I've done a bunch of phone calls over the last two weeks with Chamber of Commerce in some of the biggest cities, so from Phoenix to Des Moines to Pittsburgh. And a common theme in a lot of these cities is that they actually have jobs that have been open for a while and they can't fill them because they don't have people who live there who have those skills. So one of the things Congress could be doing is build some kind of database, make it very clear about what type of jobs are open, where are they, what type of education do you need? If you don't have that education, how could you get the skill

training to do it? I bet you the AI companies would be glad to help even fund that because a lot of those jobs are either AI specific or they're dependent or adjacent companies like energy companies, chip companies, or data companies. And so what Joe was saying about the lack of understanding among a lot of members of Congress about AI, in some ways, is criminal because it is one of the biggest topics of our generation. And there are things that lawmakers could do and they don't necessarily have to cost people. And I think people are being misled by the fact that the stock market is booming. Unless you are directly invested in the stock market or you have a robust 401k, you're not benefiting from a big stock market. So yes, people

who are in the stock market, I am, I'm benefiting from it. But if you're just, if you're not, if you don't have enough money or you don't have a 401k, who can, who can? cares what's happening to the S&P 500. It's making rich people richer. It's not helping the people who are about to have their health care premiums go up or might need that snap payment that's about to expire. That is the role that Congress could play in this, but they just keep doing weird things when you could be looking at the most substantive thing unfolding in real time. Joe, you know ahead of time it's coming. They're telling you. It's there. Again, there are two Americas right now. And you have a GDP that is fueled a lot by what you're saying, the top

1%. And even the stock market, Mika, you got the Mag 7, the Magnificent 7, fueling so much of the stock market's growth. You take out those seven companies, most of them monopolies. Stock markets, you know, not close to where it is right now. No. And again, it comes down to jobs. Millions of jobs ultimately are going to be lost as we go into the things. future here and what is going, what is Congress going to do? It's a very uncertain time. Axis co-founder and CEO, Jim Vandehy, thank you very much. And coming up, MSNBC senior legal reporter and former litigator Lisa Rubin joins us for the latest on the indictments of New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI director James Comey. Morning Joe. We'll be right back.

Just about 10 minutes before the top of the hour, New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey are both pushing to have their federal charges dismissed because of the U.S. attorney that brought the cases. Their legal teams argue interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan was improperly appointed and therefore the cases against them are invalid. Let's bring in MSNBC senior legal reporter and former litigator Lisa Rubin with reporting on the judge assigned to decide on the motions to dismiss from both James and Comey. Tell us about the judge. So the judge, Cameron McGowan Curry, was nominated by President Bill Clinton. She is a judge in the District of South Carolina. You might be asking yourself, why is a South Carolinian whose chambers are in Columbia have anything to do with either of these cases, the Tish James case? or the Jim Comey case. And the reason is because both of them have made this motion to dismiss their indictments on the grounds that Lindsay Halligan was unlawfully appointed. And both of the judges

in their cases in the same district have said, you know what? It would be sort of unconsure for us to rule on that. We are people who see the U.S. Attorney's Office before us each and every day. The statutory scheme here gives power to the judges of the district if there's a vacancy. And therefore, we're sort of conflicted here. So they pushed the matter off to the chief judge of the Fourth Circuit and said, you appoint somebody to hear these motions. And the motions have now been consolidated with this judge, Judge Curry in South Carolina. She's going to come to Alexandria, Virginia, sit in a courth house on November 13th, and hear oral argument on these motions. Judge Curry seems skeptical. Judge Curry does seem skeptical. But, Joe, she issued an order in

both cases yesterday that has some people scratching their heads as well. And here's what she's asking for. She's telling the government by Monday at 5 p.m., which is not coincidentally the day on which they have to respond to these motions to dismiss the indictments because of Lindsay Halligan. You also have to give me all evidence of Lindsay Halligan's involvement in the grand jury proceedings affecting both Tish James and Jim Comey. Now, there are some people who look at this and say, this should be an open and shut issue. Lindsay Halligan signed both in. indictments by all accounts in reporting. She's the only person in the room. I mean, the judge knows this, though, right? Right. Sounds like a setup. Well, I think part of it.

I'm not saying, I'm not saying in any bad way. I'm saying she's, you know, she knows the answer, but she wants Lindsay Halligan to say it. It was just me. And maybe she exactly that, which is to say, if you know where this is headed from a legal perspective, maybe you want to shore up your legal analysis with more evidence so that you can say, I'm not just relying on public reporting, Right. But I know now on the basis of these grand jury transcripts that she was the only person in the room. And I can see from the face of both indictments that she is the only one to have signed it. That makes Lindsay Halligan totally differently situated than, let's say, Alina Haba in the District of New Jersey, Segal Chata in the District of Nevada, and even Bill Ossaly, who last night was ruled by another court to be the third Trump appointed acting U.S. attorney to have been found acting unlawfully. So now we've got three.

The question is, is Lindsay Halligan going to be the fourth? And is it going to have a more detrimental effect on these two very high-profile cases that she's brought? Because unlike in those three situations, she signed the indictments. So let's go what the next step might be. If this is a successful gambit, if it is that she was improperly appointed, what would be the recourse then for the government? We know it's been a struggle for President Trump to find prosecutors to do his bidding here. What could come next? Well, I think the recourse for the defendants here would say, if she's unlawfully appointed, the instruments must fail, the cases must be dismissed.

Then the question is, can they be refiled? And in the Comey case, because it was so close to the statute of limitations, most people would say, no, it can't be refiled. This is where I have to give a hat tip to our colleague, Kendallanian, who is familiar with a statute that says, uh, uh, not so fast. If a case that is otherwise time barred is dismissed for other reasons, government has six more months to bring it again. They just couldn't bring it necessarily in Lindsay Halligan's name. And as for Tish James, theoretically, somebody else acting as a U.S. attorney might be able to bring that case. But does anybody else want to bring it? Is anyone else willing to bring it?

I mean, let's remind ourselves, who is Lindsay Halligan conducting these cases with? In one case, she pulled two guys from the Eastern District of North Carolina in the Comey case. In the James case, she had to pull a prosecutor from the Eastern District of Missouri. That guy, while he's been with the Department of Justice for 30-something years, was sort of from what our colleague Fallon Gallagher describes a little bit of a fish out of water in the Eastern District of Virginia. And Willie, she can't even get anybody in her own district to go in with her and argue the case. Right. In fact, they made a strong case, sir, that there's no case here. she proceeded anyway. So as you look at how this plays out, you've got these two motions being brought up by the same judge. It's interesting, these two disparate cases. What's the most likely

outcome? I mean, I know you can't predict what's going to happen here, but what are you looking at? Well, look, I'm looking at three prior opinions from three judges in different places in the country who have all said all three of these other people were unlawfully appointed. Now, the facts of each are slightly different, Willie. But if I were a betting person, I would bet that there's going to be a determination that Lindsay Halligan was not acting lawfully. And like I said before, the consequences of that for her are going to be different than they are with respect to defendants in other places. How's that? Because she's the only one who signed the indictment and therefore the instrument itself, the charging instrument, is facially invalid if the only person to have signed it is themselves not validly or lawfully in their role.

That distinguishes it from, for example, cases being prosecuted by Alina Haba in New Jersey, career prosecutors are signing the indictments. A judge there has found she can't supervise the office any longer. Even the prosecutors working under her can no longer prosecute their cases. But the indictments themselves should not be thrown out because in many cases, they predate her involvement with the office. MSNBC senior legal reporter Lisa Rubin, thank you. We'll be watching this and see you soon.