Morning Joe - Trump set to deliver speech in Davos

Episode Date: January 21, 2026

Trump set to deliver speech in Davos 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.

And, you know, they use the word affordability. They just say affordability and they don't talk about it. They created the affordability problem and we are solving it. We have solved a lot of it. We are going to give guidance at some point to see what is a mom and pop that someone, maybe your parents for their retirement, about five, ten, 12 homes. So we don't want to push the mom and pops out. We just want to push everyone else out.

Oh, I get it. The Trump administration says the economy all sort of have. Five, ten, twelve homes? Yeah, the economy is sorted out. Mom and dad did pretty well. If your parents bought 12 homes to help them weather the storm. What storm? Like, was this like the guy from Monopoly that had a monocle? A storm where they're having some competition? Maybe it's the Arctic Front that's coming into New England. Yet it's not domestic issues.

The president is focused on this morning. Instead, he remains focused on getting Greenland, a move that could threaten the future of the NATO alliance in the global world order. He's said to meet today with European leaders who strongly opposed of his efforts, obviously, will bring you a line. Well, you know, they made a deal.

A deal is a deal if you talk to Ursula von der Leyen. Oh, that deal. Yeah, they made a different deal. They made a deal, yeah. We'll talk about that in a second, but yeah, we'll also get a live report from Davos, but there was a deal made. A deal is a deal. That's a different deal. Greenland for Rape Island, but we'll talk about that a second.

That's what you call it T. Plus, federal prosecutors served grand jury subpoenas yesterday to top officials in Minnesota, accusing them of impeding ice operations there. We're going to look at whether the DOJ actually has any evidence to back up these claims. And the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments today on President Trump's attempted firing of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook will bring you expert legal advice and analysis on that case as well. Good morning and welcome morning, Joe. It's Wednesday, January the 21st.

Willie. It's so good to have you here. We also have John Lemire. And are you, are you aware of, he does work here? Are you aware, Willie? As Mr. Lamere, like, have you read Rupert Murdoch's New York Post this morning to understand the history behind the Danish getting Greenland? No, I think John's going to bring that to us. I'm not familiar. John's going to bring this. This, This comes to us. This comes from us from Rupert Murdoch's New York Post. And proving that all things are interconnected, we learn, thanks to the New York Post, that the United States, in 1917, Jonathan, recognized the Danish right to Greenland,

not because they brought chips there 500 years ago, but tell us exactly. Why did the United States State Department agree to the Danish controlling Greenland in 1917? So this update comes to us from the investigative journalists at The New York Post, and I posted a story last night, and I'll just read from it. The last time, the United States purchased land from Denmark. The sale included Jeffrey Epstein's future notorious island, known as Epstein Island. It's because of the 1917... Wait, wait, wait, hold on the sake. Hold on sake. Hold on.

Oh, oh, oh. You see, you're saying that actually the Danish have rights to Greenland today in a large part because the United States recognized that right after a part of islands, which contained Jeffrey Epstein's Rape Island, was part of that deal. They haven't released all those files yet. Is that right? They have not released the files. That's true. But this is correct. It's according to the 19. Treaty of the Danish West Indies, which saw what is now known as the U.S. Virgin Islands bought by the United States for then $25 million in exchange for, in part, accepting Danish sovereignty over Greenland. So not only is it a twist of historical fate that these two stories are connected, but also undermines what President Trump wrote to the Prime Minister of Norway.

We talked about yesterday saying that the Danes had no claims to Greenland, just because their boat showed up there, that's actually not. the case per New York Post. So Willie, so Willie, it's not because we're read in now of 500 years, because the Danish sent a boat 500 years ago, it's because in World War I, the United States gave the Danish rights to Greenland for Rape Island. We can ring the bell. It's official. It's official. Greenland for Rape Island. Congratulations. our Danish friends. First of all, I didn't know we had an ISO cam on the bell.

That's just great work by our team in the control room. Wow, it's there when you need it. Yeah, get it. Fantastic. I think it was called something else at the time. It later became the island that you're describing there. But the larger point that you and John are making is the island belongs to Denmark for a reason, not arbitrarily because some ships sailed and landed there 500 years ago.

Right. Right. But we are also bringing up the fact. that rape island, which was a part of St. Thomas, was part of the deal in 1917, where the United States said, you're going to have St. Thomas and a couple of other islands that used to be called the Danish West Indies and Exchange for Greenland. So there you go, Willie, a perfect circle. Thank you.

It's what in the Lion King, what did they call it? Circle of Life? The Circle of Life. Yeah. It is. Or scandal. The Circle of Scand. Yes.

And that bit of reporting from the New York Post fits in a little bit to what we're seeing in Davos. The president's about to land there in this what's really like a maelstrom of criticism from European allies and also from the Canadian prime minister who made quite a speech not too long ago suggesting basically the relationship is not frayed between the United States and Canada and Europe and its other allies, but that it has ruptured completely and suggesting its time to. move on from the United States of America. Extraordinary stuff happening in Davos right now. Carney taking all advantage of the situation and stepping up and stepping in to the void being created by President Donald Trump. So also with us, MS now senior national security reporter David Rowe. We will also be asking him about the 1917 transfer. Yeah. Let's just leave that. And presidential historian and Pulitzer Prize winning author, John Meacham, Charles, this morning. The Pull of Surprise, based on that land transfer in 1917.

Also had a camera focused, just like on the bell. Exactly. You know, so there you go. I'm still trying to figure out, Willie, though. How did he pull in? How did he pull in the French Indian War and Chey's Rebellion? Yes. Into the 1917 transfer of Greenland for St. Thomas and Rape Island.

Yeah, he does. Only John Meacham could do that, Willie. It's a lot of years of practice, my first. friend, a lot of years. Oh, so knowing. Okay. So let's get to our top story this morning. President Trump will address the World Economic Forum today in Davos, Switzerland.

His trip there from Washington was delayed several hours last night after Air Force One experienced a minor electrical issue and returned to joint base Andrews. Trump boarded a replacement plane and is expected to arrive about three hours late. The president's highly anticipated remarks come against the backdrop of his continued push to acquire Greenland and the growing resistance from some of our country's closest allies. Yesterday in an appearance in the White House briefing room. I know. I know. Go ahead. No, I just don't mean. I get it. I don't mean to be. This is yesterday. We're about to hear about baseball and insane asylum. and foreboding buildings there. But Willie, just a little too long.

Don't you think a little too long? Just a little too long? He just talked a little too long, going down these paths that were way off target, and just a little too long. That's like saying the four and a half hour movie is a little too long. It was a little too long. Take it to editing. It was a sign.

It's a sign of something. I'll tell you that, Willie. But don't you think Willie that there would be, One person in the White House. Just one. We don't need 10 people in the White House. Just one person in the White House. That every time the President said,

well, you know, they just put chips there 500 years ago and they shouldn't have pep. Don't you think there should have one person in the White? So one. Just say, okay, I'm going to just open Wikipedia. Since I don't own any books at home, they're saying to themselves, I'll just open Wikipedia and see what Wikipedia's saying. And it's all right there.

the transfer is all right there. You could just say, how did the Danish get control and U.S. recognition? And they would read it, and within three minutes, or if they just check the Google machine, which, of course, they check, because they don't have books at home, I'm sure. But if they just check the Google machine, the Google machine would say, the Danish got the rights to Greenland because, in the United States, 17, the United States said, give us the Danish West Indies, which includes St. Thomas, which includes Rape Island.

Oh my God. Wasn't called that, of course, until Jeffrey Epstein bought it. But don't you think there'd be one person there saying, Mr. President, you know, probably be better for you not to say that because it's going to lead back to the very thing that you're trying to distract the American people in the world from that, of course, is Jeffrey Epstein and the fact that the White House and the DOJ continues to break the law every single day for over a month now. For over a month by not releasing all the files, which they're required by law to release, but they're only released about 1% of them. Don't you think there have been one person in the White House that would have checked that out and told the president?

You would think so, but it's a question you could ask 10 times a day about the things the president says. Wouldn't somebody check him on that? Wouldn't somebody point out to him that it's not a good idea, to do this. There's nobody in the White House to do that, except you're making the point in this case that it could come back, not from us, but from the New York Post this morning, to the story that, as you say, he's trying to duck. Rupert Murdoch's New York Post at that, right? Rupert's, New York Post. Yeah, that the story that they have pointed out this morning, it was, pick your adjective, the appearance in the White House yesterday, rambling would be one way to put it. It was almost two hours. It was supposed to mark one year since the president

returned to office. It was all over the place. The president speaking about his desire to acquire Greenland one way or another and his ongoing frustration with NATO. How far are you willing to go to acquire Greenland? You'll find out. What happens to the tariff threat to Greenland if the Supreme Court comes out and rules against you on the tariffs? Well, I have to use something else. I mean, look, you know, take a look at the word license, take a look at other things. I mean, we have other alternatives. But what we're doing now is the best, the strongest, the fastest, the easiest, the least complicated. A consequence of your determination to take control of Greenland is the ultimate breakup of the NATO alliance. Is that a price you're willing to pay? You mean the breakup of

it's very interesting? So I think something's going to happen that's going to be very good for everybody. I think that we will work something out when NATO is going to be very happy. and where we're going to be very happy. But we need it for security purposes. We need it for national security and even world security. It's very important. You said your comment,

something's going to get worked out in Greenland, but Greenlanders have made it clear they don't want to be part of the U.S. Well, I haven't. I haven't. I haven't. When I speak to them, I'm sure they'll be thrilled. You know, should have gotten the Nobel Prize

for each war, but I don't say that. I save millions and millions of people. And don't let anyone tell you that Norway doesn't control the shot. It's in Norway. Norway controls the shots. They'll say we have nothing to do with it. It's a joke. They've lost such prestige. I did more for NATO than any other person alive or dead. Nobody's done for NATO and I think for the most part they'll tell you that. I think you could ask the secretary general about that, but he said it a lot. I've done more for NATO than anybody and I see all this stuff, but

NATO has to treat us fairly too. The big fear I have with NATO is we spend tremendous amounts of money with NATO. And I know we'll come to their rescue, but I just really do question whether or not they'll come to ours. Huh? Has he driven down to the 9-11 memorial and museum? That's in New York City, by the way. because that points out that on September 12th, 2001, the day after the 9-11 attacks on America,

NATO met in an emergency session. Now listen to this. For the first and only time in NATO's history, for the first and only time in NATO's history, NATO invoked Article 5. That's a century. and voted Article 5. All 18 of the United States allies in NATO stated they would support America's response to the attacks. And John Meacham, one NATO country after another NATO country, after another NATO country sent troops to fight alongside the United States in Afghanistan. again, so many things are said in these press conferences that have no connection to reality. But there are some that you would think. Some staff member would correct when they would hear him saying that behind the scenes,

say, no, Mr. President, far from them not coming to our defense. In fact, the only time Article 5 has ever been evoked is when terrorists, attacked American citizens on U.S. soil, and all of them came rushing to America's defense. Yeah, and let's go back for a second about why NATO exists, just for a brief moment here. The deadliest war in human history had just ended. It had been driven by appetite, by ambition, by authoritarianism, by totalitarianism, by racial, genocide by ethnic genocide. It had been a global disaster. And President Truman and then General Eisenhower and presidents of both parties all the way until 2017 stepped up and said with the Europeans,

we cannot have just fought the Second World War and then let any kind of weakness or division, invite a third world war. That's what NATO was about. It was to try, and it was a bipartisan thing, right? And I'm not saying that there was some, you know, Valhalla of bipartisanship and my God, only if it could be 1951 again, wouldn't everything be great. It'd be great if you looked like us, Joe.

I mean, it would, you know, white guys. So this is not nostalgic. This is not sentimental. That was when America was, great because America spent blood and treasure at the last possible moment, by the way, right? If you ask people, what was the greatest thing the United States ever did? I think most people would probably, they'd think about it, would say World War II, right? The defeat of Nazi Germany, right?

Pretty high on the list. But we got into it at the last possible moment and only after we were attacked and then after Hitler declared war on us. But by God, once we were there, we in some ways NATO sanctified the sacrifice of so many Americans who stood against Nazi Germany in particular. And the threat had mutated to Soviet totalitarianism. And we stood in the breach for 40 years. And then we prevailed. The Berlin Wall comes down in 1989.

the Soviet Union collapses in 1991. If we had been sitting, if we'd been sitting somewhere, and even in 1981, and we had said, you know what, the Soviet Union is going to collapse without a single American troop being in an active forward position, people would have thought we were crazy. But the alliance prevailed, democratic capitalism prevailed, freedom prevailed. The man's instinct, humankind's instinct to be free. The point of that, NATO was the military. military manifestation of the insight that was starts with the Declaration of Independence and just

for Mika goes to the glorious revolution and back to Magna Carta, right? This instinct that there is liberty under law. That's what's at risk now is when you take this, when you start saying, which they have done, that this is about the rule of the strong and not the rule of law, you get back to a state of nature. And people can say that's hyperbolic and, oh, you know, Morning Joe says Trump ending Magna Carta. Have at it. Because at some point, we have to say what we see. And that's what is unfolding before our eyes.

And we need the Americans who are children of this sacrifice. Grandchildren, great-grandchildren of people who fought that war need to remember why NATO exists and why America matters and why the rule of law matters. And David Road, John's right. Not only has people like Stephen Miller, the president himself, said this is about strength, this is about power. We've got the biggest guns, the strongest economy, we can do as we please. You now have the Treasury Secretary, Scott Besson, when he wasn't talking about people with 10 or 12 homes, mocking the Europeans in Davos, saying, oh, what are you going to do? Write a strongly worded letter. We're the United States of

America do as we say. That is the posture that the president arrives in Davos with. And now that's why we see and we'll play some sound in just a moment, these European leaders banding together with Canadian leaders and others and saying it's time for us to push back. David? Yes, I'm sorry. I was expecting a thought there. I apologize. So yes, and I've heard that in person yesterday here. I'm down in Washington. There was a delegation of seven members of parliament from different countries in Europe, Spain, Finland, Sweden. And there was amazing eloquence from this one member of parliament from Lithuania. His name is Zygometheus Pavilionis.

And he was sort of begging the United States to defend its own ideals. He said, sometimes we feel more Americans than Americans themselves. We fight for your ideals. We die for freedom. And he was sort of begging. He said, we've been around Russia and just saying how Putin will eventually betray the United States. And then separately, I had a European official. And this was a person I met a month ago in Brussels. And they were very, you know, they didn't want to say anything critical of President

Trump, but this was somebody I texted with by phone. And they're just baffled about how this is happening. And this, the second official said, this is an American political issue. They sort of called out American politicians and Congress. And they said, you know, will American politician accept this behavior, will American politicians accept what Trump is doing? And they just feel that this entire Greenland issue is just a distraction from what Russia is doing in Ukraine, from the threat from China and Russia. And it's just this, it's, they just don't understand it. They're baffled and they're, they're deeply frustrated. So here's what some of those foreign leaders have been saying, beginning with the prime minister of Canada. We knew the story of the international rules-based order.

was partially false. That the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient, that trade rules were enforced asymmetrically. And we knew that international law applied with varying rigor depending on the identity of the accused or the victim. This fiction was useful. An American hegemony in particular helped provide public goods, open sea lanes, a stable financial system,

collective security, and support for frameworks for, resolving disputes. So we placed the sign in the window. We participated in the rituals, and we largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality. This bargain no longer works. Let me be direct. We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition. Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy, and geopolitics have laid bare the risks of extreme global integration. But more recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons. Tariffs is leverage. Financial infrastructure is coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited. You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through

integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination. It's clear that we are reaching a time of instability of unbalances, both from the security and defense point of view and the economic point of view. Competition from the United States of America through trade agreements that undermine our export interests, demand maximum concessions, and openly aim to weaken and subordinate Europe. combined with an endless accumulation of new tariffs that are fundamentally unacceptable, even more so when they are used as leverage against territorial sovereignty. That geopolitical shocks can and must serve as an opportunity for Europe.

And in my view, the seismic change we are going through today is an opportunity, in fact, a necessity to build a a new form of European independence. And this need is neither new, nor a reaction to recent events. It has been a structural imperative for far longer. The president of the European Union there. So Jonathan Lemire, going back to the Prime Minister of Canada, extraordinary speech that he made at Davos this morning talking about this rupture with the United States of America.

Remember, he too has been threatened by President Trump with invasion. He keeps joking about Canada becoming the 51st state. They run military exercises in Canada just in case the United States comes in. But I think the bottom line is the White House doesn't care. They're not, they don't see a threat here. They don't worry about the relationship. In fact, they're taking the other approach as the president arrives in Davos. Yeah, President Trump very much does not care.

And is it about national security? Sure. Is it about perhaps the minerals in Greenland? Sure. But it's also about him simply thinking about legacy. wanting to seize land. If the U.S. were to take Greenland, it'd be bigger than Louisiana purchase. It'd be bigger than when they acquired Alaska. I am told that's part of the president's thinking here. And also, they miss no opportunities to troll the Europeans. That

seems to be a feature, not a bug, of this administration. But you just heard there for the prime minister of Canada and others real alarm that even if the president of the United States stops short of authorizing a military operation to seize Greenland. It's incredible that I even have to say that, but it's still on the table, that even this coercion, this efforts to buy it, efforts to pressure them, the tariffs the president has issued, to try to punish Europe to giving us Greenland, is already rupturing that alliance. It is already, as the Prime Minister of Canada said, more than just a blip. I think the rest of the world no longer thinks they can count on the United States, even if President Trump, you know, leaves office again in a few years' time.

And, Mika, I wrote for the Atlantic last night about exactly this, about how this is going to change the world order, one way or the other. And not to step on John Meecham. corner here, but I opened the piece with talking about FDR back in 1940 ahead of World War 2, saying that the U.S., Lend-Lease, was going to give Great Britain, warships other military supplies in its defense. And he used an analogy. He said, well, if your neighbor's house is on fire, you give them a guarding hose, in part because you're charitable.

You don't want your neighbor's house to burn down. But also, if that house doesn't burn down, it doesn't risk the flames coming to your house. And that is the point of alliances, those buffers, that security, not. not only is President Trump ignoring that, but he's heading to Greenland thinking he's going to burn down the whole neighborhood. Well, and again, I brought this up yesterday, but what doesn't make sense here at all, and why I'm just really am stunned that Republicans on Capitol Hill are such cowards, that they're even afraid to bring this up to the president is that Willie Broad and Scott Bassel.

I brought up yesterday people across the administration, they have such contempt for Europe. And they're they're constantly mocking and ridiculing Europe. Europe are allies. The EU and Great Britain combined have a larger GDP than China. Second largest GDP in the world. Now, I know Donald Trump loves to go it along. But why are Republicans on Capitol Hill who understand this NATO alliance helped bring down the Soviet Union, helped liberate and free a hundred million people in Central Europe, has helped push Vladimir Putin back, despite the fact he's wanted to invade Poland. He wants to go to Kiev. He wants to go to Warsaw. his dream is to constitute the old,

reconstitute the old Warsaw pact. He called the collapse of the Soviet Union the greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century and Republicans who I've known for 30 years, some who are still in the Senate, they know this. They understand this. And yet they're letting Donald Trump,

who represents one-third of the guys, government. By the way, anybody on the Supreme Court watching, anybody in Congress who's watching, you all control two-thirds of America's government. Donald Trump only controls one-third of America's government. But how they sit back, how the Supreme Court continues to let him use tariffs as a threat, instead of just putting out the damn opinion and letting people know what the law is, not sure why you're dragging your feet. But it's not doing America. It's making America. The Supreme Court, you're making America weaker by the day. You're making America weaker by the day by what you allow the president do internally, domestically, and you're making America weaker by the day. But what you're allowing him to do on the world stage, using tariffs improperly and illegally as a threat. And you just sit back and do nothing while America burns. And the same thing can be said for the United States Congress and especially the Senate.

They know better, and Republicans will do nothing about this fact. And continue to allow Donald Trump to undermine the greatest alliance we could ever have again. If you combine China's GDP and Russia's GDP, Europe and Great Britain have a larger GDP, that's the alliance that we stood shoulder. shoulder to shoulder with for 80 years that helped shape the world in a way that benefited us primarily. Mika, this does just the opposite. Well, and two other people who absolutely know better, and we know that for sure, is Marco Rubio and Scott Besant. And yet. Scott Besant is mocking the Europeans. Scott Besant has been a surprise. I will say that's one big surprise. All right,

Joining us now live from Snowy Davos, MS now international reporter Innesda Laquitera. Innes, tell us more about world leaders, making it clear this rupture or seismic change that is happening, really breaks all deals and alliances. Hey, good morning. Yeah, we are hearing lots of frustration from world leaders here in Davos, European allies, who do not understand what the president is doing when it comes to Greenland. And the French president, Emmanuel Macron, told Trump as much in that text exchange that President Trump, released on Truth Social yesterday.

But we are hearing from a number of world leaders. You heard it in that sound off the top that are voicing their frustration. I will say it does appear that we might be at a turning point when it comes to how the Europeans handle the U.S. So I think over the course of the last year, they were really trying to appease President Trump to keep him happy. It does appear when you look at the comments that they made here in Davos yesterday, that they are trying to be more forceful and to present a really united front.

So you heard the French president, Emmanuel Macron, there, talking about how. how the EU should not bend to the law of the strongest. He says it's crazy that the bloc is having to contemplate using its anti-coercion instrument against the U.S. The EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen talking about how it is time to build a new independent Europe. The Belgian prime minister is saying that Europe should rearm. And the Swedes are saying that flattery with Trump is not going to work this time around.

So they appear to be more forceful, at least in their rhetoric. The big question is whether they actually take any. action will have to see a European official telling us that they are considering retaliatory tariffs. The U.S. Treasury Secretary urging Europeans not to do that. He's telling them to sit back and take a breath. And I will say they will all be meeting. The Europeans will be meeting in Brussels on Thursday for an emergency summit. MS. Now international reporter, Inest Lecuiterra, live from Davos, Switzerland. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. All right, presidential historian, John Meacham and MS now, senior national security reporter David Rode.

Thank you both very much as well. And John Meacham, if you could keep us updated, whenever the president starts making contact with you demanding your Pulitzer Prize. Oh, don't give it to them. Keep us informed. We certainly would hate to see, you know, Tennessee have to secede from the union yet again. I appreciate that. And when I, you'll probably come into the men's grill. in pursuit of it.

So I will hide behind the various Peter Millar Republicans. I think will be okay. How are the Peter Millar vested Republicans? How are they taking recent developments and how many of them are planning, since they love Greenland so much, are planning to go move perhaps to Greenland?

I think there'd have to be golf trips involved, mainly to get an interest. I'll tell you one thing that Peter Malar Republicans noticed yesterday was a down drop of over 800 points. Yeah. You know, it's one way of looking at it. Remember your elementary school thing, you know, it's always funny till somebody gets their eye put out. You know, this is all, you know, sort of, you know, troll the libs, you know, make fun of Europe, uh, until suddenly your portfolio is really sagging. And then maybe there's a moment of, uh, constitutional sobriety. We'll see.

All right, John Meacham, thank you very much. And just for the record, I think our viewers are known us long enough to stay in the cone here. But absolutely, nothing about this is funny at all. Coming up on Morning Joe, the very latest. No, no, but humor at this point is one way to go. The very latest on the unrest in Minnesota. Don't you say that about everything?

Nothing is funny, Joe. Yeah, that is what I say. It's kind of, yeah. As the Justice Department moves to subpoena, at least five Democratic officials there, MS Now's Jacob Soberoff has been speaking with protesters in Minneapolis and joins us ahead. Plus, the Trump-appointed federal attorney

who tried and failed to indict some of the president's biggest critics is out at the Justice Department. It took a while. The Trump charge, that went after her for continuing to lie about being a U.S. attorney, that was vicious. What we're learning about Lindsay Halligan's departure. And as we go to break, a quick look at the travelers' forecast this morning from Accuethers, Ariela Scalise.

Arellia, how's it looking? You know, Mika, it's not as cold. That's some good news here. We're back to the 30s, Boston, New York City. Back to the 40s in D.C. Still a little bit breezy with the lake effects snow across interior portions of the the northeast. The southeast temperature is also coming up. Watch for some showers and some low clouds in Miami. That can lead to some minor flight delays in your acueather travel forecast. New York City

looks good to go, but the wind could impact Boston and Philadelphia with minor delays. To help you make the best decision to be more in the know, download the acueather app. During its press conference at the White House yesterday, President Trump spoke about the ongoing deployment of ice to Minneapolis, specifically about the fatal shooting. of Renee Good by an ICE agent. They're going to make mistakes sometimes. Ice is going to be too rough with somebody. You know, they're dealing with rough people.

They're going to make a mistake. Sometimes it can happen. We feel terribly. I felt horribly when I was told that the young woman who had the tragedy. It's a tragedy. It's a horrible thing. Everybody would say, ICE would say the same thing.

But when I learned her, her parents and her father in particular is like was a i hope he still is but i don't know was a tremendous trump fan he was all for trump loved trump and uh you know it's terrible i always told that by a lot of people they said oh he loves you he he was a i hope i hope he still feels that way and i saw a hard hard situation but her father was a tremendous and and parents were tremendous Trump fans. I'd so sad it just happens. Initially called a domestic terrorist by the Trump administration now a tragedy because the president said her father reported to have been a supporter of Donald Trump.

The Justice Department has subpoenaed top Minnesota officials as part of a criminal investigation into their response to the Trump administration's immigration crackdown in the state. Those officials include Governor Tim Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Fry, and State Attorney General Keith Ellison. Meanwhile, the Pentagon reportedly has ordered about 1,500 active duty soldiers to prepare for possible deployment to Minnesota amid the protests there in what would be an extraordinary escalation. Joining us now, MS Now contributor Mike Barnacle, MS now Justice and Intelligence reporter Candelanian, and MS Now senior political and national reporter, Jacob Soberoff. He is live in Minneapolis. Jacob, you've been talking to protesters there.

telling you about what they're seeing on the ground and the potential use of active duty military forces in that state. Oh, they despise what's happening, obviously Willie here on the streets of Minneapolis. And it is a supersized version of what I have seen play out across the United States of America for the better part of the Trump administration, at least since the beginning of the summer when this started in Los Angeles. It's the same thing that we saw there, the same thing we saw in Chicago, the same type of opposition we saw in Charlotte, North Carolina, in the halls of 26 federal plaza in New York. And the escalation is only growing. And Commander Greg Bovino, who is in this sort of makeshift position in the Border Patrol, he's not the head of the Border

Patrol, but they keep sending him around the country to lead these operations, terrorizing residents in cities across the country with these masks and heavily armed federal agents was here yesterday, talking about how proud they are to have taken 3,000 people, off the streets since the beginning of January. They say 10,000 since the beginning of this second Trump administration. But the protesters continue to show up every single day, particularly since the killing of Renee Nicole Good. And yesterday I met one who happened to be a U.S. military veteran himself. And we talked a lot about this idea that there are potentially 500 troops that are poised to come down here with the president threatening to invoke the Insurrection

Act as he has time and time again. This is what that veteran told me. Let's take a look. I think the main thing is that the soldiers that are poised to deploy are not trained for this fight. This fight is a fight that they shouldn't be a part of. They're not trained as police. They're trained to kill. They're trained as combat soldiers. And I want to impress upon them that we don't want them here. They don't really want to be here. In fact, we want to recognize that they have rights as soldiers to refuse illegal orders, and also that this order to come here doesn't make a ton of sense. If I were a soldier coming here, I would be extremely concerned, extremely upset. Like I had soldiers, when I was on my deployment to Kosovo, our mission was peacekeeping, but we were combat soldiers, right?

So we were not trained initially to do, you know, peacekeeping operations, to do riot control. listen, you know, they're taking this deadly seriously here. The temperatures on Thursday are going to go negative 45 with the wind chill, but people continue to come out to the streets every single day. And I have to tell you, Mike, it's an opposition not only that I have seen everywhere, but it's an opposition that Greg Bevino has said is the strongest here in Minneapolis of any of the cities that he's seen so far. Jacob, could you give us a portrait of the city as a whole during a moment?

all of this that's going on in terms of how many, what school enrollment is like? Is it up? Is it down? People losing work time. People staying home rather than walking down the corner to a grocery store, the fear element of the city. I was just talking to Alex Tabin, who's here producing with me today, but has been doing some extraordinary reporting on the streets of Minneapolis over the course of the last several weeks. And he was saying to me how he himself has seen how we have heard from so many people on the streets that people are literally not going out. Shopping centers, malls are closing. Some of them are going to close entirely at the end of the week as an act of solidarity with the community

to stand up against this. People are showing up, Mike, inside of big box retailers like Target to protest here and keep people out of stores. People are not showing up at schools. Some people feel scared to go to work. Rosa Flores, our colleague, was in a predominantly Latino community yesterday and was talking to a man who said, his own employees and colleagues are not showing up.

The impact on the local economy here is also devastating. And that's why you see in the face of these subpoenas, the mayor, the governor, the state attorney general, continue to speak out, push back, and say that they're going to fight this every way they can. Mika. All right, MS now, senior political and national reporter, Jacob Sovroff, live from Minneapolis.

Thank you very much. Kendallanian, I want you to please, if you could, give us your analysis on these subpoenas where they may go. But also, in listening to President Trump, the soundbite that we played before we went to Jacob, talking about the shooting of Renee Good, he used the word mistake. And he talked about her and invoked her name. And it seemed to be an admission against the interest of the ICE agent, something that in the aftermath of the attack, the moments after, the administration at the position that was very much the opposite. But again, alluding to the fact that this was a sad mistake, your thoughts.

It's a great point, Mika. Good morning. No, it's an excellent point. But I'm not sure that it's going to matter because the federal government has done everything it can to block any investigation of the circumstances of the shooting and the role of the officer. in a situation where normally it would be just a matter of course that the FBI would begin investigating and the Justice Department would back that up and the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department would go out there. None of that is happening and local officials are forestalled from investigating because of the supremacy clause of the Constitution. So right now, no one is examining the behavior of that officer other than amateur video sleuths

and all of us and the public. So that's the situation there. In terms of the subpoenas, this is an extremely. extraordinary use and assertion of federal power. The awesome force of the Justice Department and the federal government and a grand jury is descending on these local elected officials, supposedly investigating them over their public statements to see whether they violated an obscure statute that makes it a crime to conspire to obstruct federal officers in the course of their duty.

What have these people done? They've essentially advised their constituents, the governor and the mayor and the Attorney General, on their civil rights, on how to how to, how to, comport themselves if they're confronted by mass ICE agents. And make no mistake, what's happening in Minnesota and around the country is extraordinary. Yesterday, a local Minnesota police chief had a news conference and talked about how he is perfectly happy to support immigration enforcement and work with ICE. But he says that what he's seen is that it's people of color being pulled over with no

reasonable suspicion, including his own officers, he said. He told the story of one female officer whose car was boxed in by masked ice agents, their guns drawn. She started to film the encounter. They knocked the phone out of her hand, according to this police chief. And only when she produced her police ID did they wordlessly walk away. He said that's happening around the state. He said it's got to stop. And these subpoenas, it seems like, are a brushback pitch by the federal government to try to stop senior officials and local officials in Minnesota from pushing back.

on what's happening there. And finally, Ken, your latest reporting details the abrupt end to Lindsay Halligan's tenure as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia yesterday. Her resignation came after a series of filings between Halligan and a federal judge who demanded to know why she continued to use the U.S. attorney title despite a November court decision that she was appointed unlawfully. The judge criticized Halligan's response to him, writing in part that the combative filing had, quote, a level of vitriol more appropriate for a cable news talk show and falls far beneath the level of advocacy expected from litigants in this court, particularly the Department of Justice.

So explain what she was doing here? Was she literally walking around saying she's a U.S. attorney when she was not a U.S. attorney? Essentially, yes, Mika. And that judge, by the way, is David Novak. And as Joe alluded to earlier, he was appointed by Donald Trump. And not only that, he spent 18 years as a prosecutor in that office. He was head of the criminal division, so he knows that office very well. And you could just read into his lengthy 18-page opinion there. He was offended by what was going on, by what Lindsay Halligan and the Justice Department were doing. He said that she had no business calling herself the U.S. attorney or signing documents or being. in the signature block of documents in that office as the U.S. attorney. And there's also another bit of context. As I reported yesterday, the judges in the Eastern District put out a notice that they were soliciting applications for U.S. attorney, which put everyone on notice that they were prepared to appoint someone because even if you leave aside this current court ruling, her next

vacancy, 120-day vacancy, was about to expire January 20th. And everyone agreed she couldn't stay after that if she wasn't Senate confirmed. And so these judges were prepared to install someone that the Trump administration had no say in. And that was a kind of a nuclear option. I believe the people of the Justice Department were concerned about how that would play out. You know, Pam Bondi could fire anyone at the Justice Department who was named as U.S. attorney. But if the judges found someone from outside and brought them in, that would set up a confrontation. What are they going to do?

Lock that person out of the office. And so Lindsey Halligan, the insurance lawyer, brought in to prosecute Donald Trump's enemies is out. And we don't know really who is going to run the office going forward, guys. Well, I'll tell you what. I mean, it was remarkable. Like Ken said, first of all, that they're making suggestions for new U.S. attorneys and that it's a Trump judge that just issued an absolutely blistering statement saying, basically if I have to tell you this again, like they're going to be saying, it really, really, and attacking the DOJ. Say, wait a second.

This is language more suited for cable news than it is court filings. It was really something to see. MS now, Justice and Intelligence reporter Ken Delaney, and thank you very much. We'll talk to you soon. And coming up, as we await President Trump's speech at Davos, world leaders there, are focused on more than just economics. We're going to dig into the questions surrounding the president's pursuit of Greenland and the fears over what it could mean for the future of the NATO alliance. Morning Joe will be right back.