Morning Joe - Trump's reported "deal" with Iran could give Tehran $300B just to keep negotiating

Episode Date: June 12, 2026

June 12, 2026 - 6am: Trump's reported deal with Iran could unlock $300B for Tehran just to keep negotiating 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.

We have a deal that Iran will never have a nuclear weapon, which was the whole purpose of what we had to go through to get this. It was a very big thing. But we have a signing soon, and the documents are in pretty final shape. So we'll see. We'll see. Very good. It should be done. That should be done pretty quickly.

And if it doesn't get done for any reason, which I can't imagine that not happening, they want to sign. as much as I do or more. I would say they want to sign it more, maybe a lot more. That was President Trump in the Oval Office yesterday, talking about the negotiations with Iran, very similar to what we've heard from him many times over the past three months of this war. And part of a pattern for the president threatened strikes, call off strikes, claim a deal is near, then nothing happens. We'll go through the latest reporting on what could be in this supposed agreement. Meanwhile, the president now has a nominee to become the permanent director of national intelligence will bring you the reaction on Capitol Hill to his latest pick.

Plus, the president's hand pick board for the Kennedy Center is making a last-inch effort to keep his name on the Washington landmark. We'll have more about that effort just ahead. Good morning and welcome to morning, Joe. It's Friday, June 12th. We made it. With us, we have the co-host of our 9 a.m. Our staff writer at the Atlantic, Jonathan Lemire. MS now National Affairs analyst, John Heilman, his partner and chief political columnist at Puck, and editor at The Insider, Michael Weiss is with us this morning. Good to have you all this morning.

And Willie, guys, we came in with a clip of the president talking about Iran saying they'll never have a nuclear weaponist in New York Times, kindly a note in several days ago. That's something that the Iranians have been saying now for 50 years. So, again, this is a breakthrough that's, not been a breakthrough because there's the same exact position again that Iran has taken for a half century. Yeah, and we've seen this pattern, as Mika pointed out, this is what the president does. He threatened these massive strikes yesterday and then back down a couple of hours later because

he said the threat of the strikes brought Iran to the table. We now have a deal. He's been talking about a signing ceremony with Vice President J.D. Vance this weekend in Europe, to which Iran says not so fast we don't have a deal. And I would add also, Mika, Israel said we are unaware of any deal being brokered between the United States and Iran. That's a problem. The thing is, though, John Lemire, how many times has this been? I read this morning that CNN had a banner last night that said something like, this is a 39th time Donald Trump has said peace is at hand. I mean, it just would exhaust even Evel Chamberlain talking about peace being at hand and peace not being at hand. But again, it's at least happened three dozen times. And my question is this, especially given what everybody knows about Iran, what we certainly have known about Iran since 1979, the more desperate any president seems for a deal, the more president goes out and says, hey, we're very close to a deal. And allows the Iranians to say, no, we're not. We haven't seen it. We're not sure how close we are. We don't know if we even want this deal.

it seems to just undermine the president. So is this about the markets? I know certainly a lot of people make a ton of money, betting, shorting markets that somehow have information right before the president's going to say it. What is going on? Why does he keep doing this 36, 37, 38, 39 times? Yeah, a theme of this entire second term for President Trump, he likes to boast about how many wars he's ended.

Well, he's done this one 39 times, the same one. There is a sense here of a few things that, yet undoubtedly, there have been moments where people have made some money off of his proclamations, and most of them timed to just before the market's open. That was not the case for this one. I think this one is just more of just his desperation to get out of this, that he's trying to almost will it in existence. And as you and Willie just ran through,

not only is Iran saying no, but Israel is also saying, We don't know anything about this. We're not sure this is a real thing. And that, I think, is the key here. Trump, we know he's looking for an off-ram. He knows he wants to put this war behind us, behind him. He's well aware, even though he won't say it publicly, he is well aware, per reporting, that it did not go as they hoped it would.

And he is trying to get the page turned. But you're right. Iran sort of makes habit out of humiliating American presidents. We have seen it over the decades. And this is a case where, no doubt, their economy is hurting. You know, no doubt that there will be things they will need at some point to end this or to bring some sort of ceasefire here. But they're willing to tweak the president a little bit more, and they're going to come out of this stronger than the war began. Hardliners are empowered, Joe Amika, and of course they have shown they can close the Strait of Hormuz and suddenly, forget the nukes.

That is their biggest weapon, the economic weapon they have to shutting that vital waterway. Which is exactly what everybody's warned about since 1979. If you go into Iran, then Iran can shut down the Strait of Hormuz. And as Mekhis, his own father said in 2012 to Charlie Rosen in an interview, they can't win a war against us, but they can shut down the strait and set the world economy on fire. That's exactly what's been going on. But again, I just want to underline the president to stop, start, stop, start, stop, start, stop, start. A couple days ago was very obvious that negotiations weren't working.

So the president then talked about doing some military strikes. It lasted today. The Iranians unmoved. And so the president said, we're going to do it again the next day, pulls back. Again, that's stop, start, stop, start, stop, start. That's exactly what the Iranians want. They believe it shows weakness. That's what the Wall Street Journal editorial page was saying yesterday.

So again, it is confounding. Not only to those of us in the United States, but certainly confounding to people on Capitol Hill, confounding to people across Europe, confounding to people actually in Iran, who, again, see that as weakness. It's a pattern that's very bad for the president politically because unlike maybe a lot of members of the Republican Party or some members of the media where the president can say something and sort of wave a wand and others will, will it, yeah, and others will parrot it. Iran looks at what he says and laughs. It's a different, it's a different entity completely. So here's how yesterday played out. President Trump once again threatened new military strikes on Tehran before announcing he had once again called off the attacks. Since the U.S. and Israel launched the war in Iran back in late February, the president has publicly delayed or canceled planned military action at least eight times. Trump claimed progress in negotiation as the reason for backing off the strikes yesterday.

We just made a great settlement of the war with Iran, and we're going to be subject to finalization of documents. We should get done over the next few days. We probably have a signing maybe in Europe, and it's a great thing. All right. The president offered a few other details, and he has claimed a deal could be imminent several times in recent weeks. Later last night, Trump put it like. this, quote, we ended the war with Iran today. Tehran, however, is at least publicly telling a very different story.

Iran's foreign ministry spokesman told state TV that the country has not reached a final decision regarding any agreement and no signing date is set. Axis, meanwhile. That just keeps happening. It just keeps happening. Yeah. Axis, meanwhile, has details of what is in the agreement. President Trump says he's ready to sign.

According to a diplomat from one of the mediating countries and U.S. official, the memorandum of understanding would extend the ceasefire for 60 days, including Lebanon, during which time nuclear negotiations would be held. On the Strait of Hormuz, the key waterway would be reopened immediately without tolls with the return to pre-war shipping volumes within 30 days. In return, the U.S. blockade would also be lifted. Iran would also be given temporary sanctions waivers to allow it to sell oil for 60 days. Axis reports the tentative agreement was reached on Wednesday night after hours of negotiations between a Qatari mediator and Iran's foreign minister with the mediator coordinating by phone with Trump on voice Steve Whitkoff and Jared Kushner. Okay, I think we made, Michael Wise, I think we made a mistake here.

It's Friday. People get tired. And so I guess Alex just put in an old script. Not an old script. Because we've read that 12 times before. And a couple new details, though, now. You have Netanyahu, obviously, is fighting for his own political life, being called a weakling, saying he follows Donald Trump around.

He's getting hammered literally from the left, center, and right in Iran, even though the left center and right in Iran, is all sort of center-right right now at the very least. But, but again, Michael, maybe you can give us some insight. Why do we keep hearing the same thing over and over and over again when the Iranians have rejected this deal time and again? And hardliners in America have rejected this deal. I mean, I just want to read you Iran's mayor news agency put out their version of this deal. Now, again, underscore, we don't know that this is the thing that Axis is reporting.

We don't know if this is going to be the memorandum of understanding, but in their version of the deal, they get $300 billion in reconstruction money, $24 billion in a cash infusion, half of which will come before the negotiations begin. Remember, Joe, this isn't a deal. This is an agreement to keep talking, an extension of a ceasefire. There's nothing in here, again, the Iranian version, that talks about the missile program or financing or arming terrorist proxies like Lebanese Hezbollah. I mean, this would be an utter humiliation. I could see why Trump would want J.D. Vance to go to a signing ceremony instead of Donald Trump, if this is any pale shade of what this thing is going to look like. Look, I think he knows he's being had.

He knows he's been abased by a regime that shouldn't exist by his lights, right? We were going in to do regime change. The Israelis certainly thought we were going to do regime change. We were going to arm the Kurds. We were going to install Ahmadinejad, a Holocaust denying former president. as our preferred satrap. All of these plans came to dust. And he just wants out of it.

I think Jonathan is right. You know, he's got buyer's remorse. He thinks he's been sold a bill of goods. He probably has been. And he just wants this thing over and done with. He's already looking at Cuba, right? But the problem is he can't sell this kind of thing. He can't sell it to his base.

He can't sell it to the Hawks? I mean, can you imagine Lindsey Graham on Twitter, if anything like what I just read you is the agreement here? I mean, this makes the JCPOA look like the Iraq war. I mean, Donald Trump ran against Barack Obama saying he just gifted all this money to Iran, pallets of cash. This is pallets of cash, probably with a little crypto action thrown in for the Whitkoffs and the Kushners on the side, too. I mean, I don't know how anyone can look at this. And I've been talking not only to hawks in this country, who are very pro-war, I've talked to Israeli, national security strategists, former Israeli spies who tell me this is a disaster for us.

And why is it a disaster? Prior to this war, Israel had freedom of action, right? They get bombed. Iran launches a missile at them. A terrorist blows something up. They don't ask our permission. They go in and they do what they have to. Now what happens?

Donald Trump gets on the phone with every journalist and says, BB listens to me. You know, I'm the big boy here. The Israelis don't lift a finger unless I allow them to. This is not what Israel wants. You know, this war for them, I think, has become like a pair of golden handcuffs. Yes, we help them bomb Iran. Yes, we help them, you know, get rid of at least most of the missile program.

The Iranians took a beating. They've taken a beating with the economic penalties imposed by this blockade. But now the Israelis feel like, you know, they oversold and underdelivered. And, you know, Bibi has a problem too at home. Israelis do not feel like they're getting value for dollar for this thing. So he's facing a political revolt in his country. Yeah, and there will be, obviously, John Heilman, a revolt in this country, if those numbers are accurate.

And I did notice that the president didn't talk about sanctions relief. He didn't talk about the so-called reconstruction dollars that he'd been talking about for quite some time. Just look at these numbers that Michael just talked about. You're at about $325 billion that the Iranians would be paid just to go and to negotiate. for six months. I want to remind everybody the great meltdown among all Republicans

regarding Barack Obama's pallets of cash was $400 million. I want to underline this. Maybe somebody can tell me how much more as far as multiplying goes

$325 billion is than 400 million, right? What is it? A hundred times more? At least a hundred times more. And let me, this reminds me so much of when people were talking about the Biden crime family and the corruption that Hunter may have taken a trip on Air Force 2 once and introduced Daddy to a business partner when he was vice president, comparing that to what's going on now. Remember those days? Our Burisma, Hunter getting a $3 million fee, which he may have, I don't know, maybe maybe made a million, a million and a half from it after it was all over, are selling his NFTs or selling

his art for $50,000 or $100,000. And now you've got $4 billion in personal wealth accumulated by the Trumps over the first 18 months of the second term. So again, it's multipliers. And John, you tell me, who is going to support a plan that will give any? reconstruction money to the Iranians that will give any sanctions relief to the Iranians, especially if it's $325 billion, which is basically just ransom money for them to stop holding the president and stop holding America hostage in this war. Well, I don't know about that, Joe. I think certainly there are going to be people on the right, as Michael said, who are going

to be adamantly opposed to any such deal, although those people are. so enthralled to Trump that maybe they'll try to figure out some way to cloak those payments and make them palatable, not to use a puny or about palates, but there are a lot of people in the Republican Party and a fair number of people in the Democratic Party who are desperate to bring this conflict to an end and so desperate because the politics are so bad for Republicans and because Democrats think that the war is so bad for the country and for the world that there may be people who are willing to accept this deal, these kinds of terms, that kind of cash, again, if it's dressed up in the right way, I've heard people saying from almost the

outset of the war that in the end, this is how it would come to an end, that there would have to be a bunch of reconstruction money that would go back to Iran and that it would be politically unpalatable, but that people would have to ultimately swallow it. I want to focus on one other thing, though, Joe, which is that the other thing we never hear about that's not discussed is now in all these negotiations that are not, there are deals that are not deals, memorandums of understanding that would create ceasefires and then push all the hard issues to later is a resolution of the Iranian nuclear issue, which after weeks of Donald Trump not being able to explain why we'd gone to war in Iran in the first place, he finally decided, almost to a comical level,

to settle on they cannot have a nuclear weapon, they cannot have a nuclear weapon, they cannot have a nuclear weapon, he says it over and over and over again. And in every one of these deals that turns out to not be a deal, the nuclear issue is kicked down the road and to be negotiated later. So the ludicrousness of Trump saying yesterday, we have ended the war when the largest issue, according to Donald Trump on the table, is that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon, has never been addressed, has never been resolved, has never been negotiated, and it's still something we're going to talk about on another day, is thrown into even higher relief, the ludicrousness, that is, of that claim,

which is not that, hey, we have a deal that I like, but that we've ended the war. That's what Trump said yesterday. We've ended the war. We ended the war and not address the central reason that we supposedly went to war, according to Donald Trump. I can't imagine how that's politically palatable in any corner of the Republican Party, any quarter whatsoever. Any corner, any corner, there's no way. Again, pallets of cash, 400 million, and then sanctions relief and reconstruction for the Islamic Republic of Iran, hundreds of billions of dollars, that will never.

ever wash. And Willie, I just got to say, I mean, talk about amateur hour. We know it's amateur hour, but you have, you have Marco Rubio going out, going, the war is over now. And then our allies got bombed. Kuwait's airport got blown apart. Donald Trump tried to dismiss it. Oh, that was nothing. Apache helicopters shot out of the sky. Again, continued attacks over the past couple of days. You know, not saying that wasn't militarily necessary, but following up, the war is over now. And we all knew, the world knew the war wasn't over. Donald Trump saying we ended the Iraq war tonight. Why? Why? Because, again, they keep saying this, and then they keep hoping they can somehow make it all go away. They're not going to make it go

away if they're paying hundreds of billions of dollars to the Islamic Republic of Iran as ransom money to get out of this war. $300 billion, Joe, that's a lot of pallets of cash. According to our team in the control room with their abacus out, it's 812 times more pallets of cash than Barack Obama. And that administration sent over to Iran. That's a lot of money to give to that regime that's been the epicenter of terrorism since 1979. But you're absolutely right. The central issue, according to President Trump,

time and time and time again, the reason gas prices need to be high is because Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. Well, this deal, as Heilman just laid out, doesn't even get at that. It's basically another ceasefire. And yet he wants the president wants to have a signing ceremony in Europe this weekend, like they're on the deck of the USS Missouri at the end of World War II. It's just not that. Let's talk about this some more with decorated combat veteran, and former commander of U.S. Army Europe, retired Army Lieutenant General Mark Hurdling. He is an MS now military analyst. So, General, good morning.

The President of the United States effectively saying the war is over because I say it's over. We're going to have a signing ceremony with J.D. Vance this weekend in Europe. Except Iran says, no, not so fast on this deal. Israel says we haven't even heard about this deal. And when you look at the details, as reported out here, it's basically an extension of the ceasefire, including in Lebanon, so that they can talk more. about the nuclear program. So what's your assessment of where we are and what this news really means? Well, it may change in the next couple of minutes, Willie, because I woke up yesterday like so many

did, to a presidential post that said he was going to invade Carg Island and also continue the bombing from the night before. And then by the end of the day, peace is broken out. You know, the one thing that I keep coming back to, Willie, is the fact that having spent a couple of years in the Middle East. One of the things we're missing is the cultural dynamics of the Iranian people and the Iranian leaders. I don't know what the Farsi term is, but in Arabic, the term is Wasta. And it means respect. You don't get respect through talk. You get it through actions. And as all of you have been talking this morning, there's a repeated theme of the president continuing to say things that the Iranian government or the Iranian leaders or the negotiators

have not said they're going to do. So that's basically he's not only sending mistruths to the American people, he's also sending it over his true social post to those in Iran. And that just really degenerates the trust issue for any negotiations between a country that puts a lot of emphasis on trust and not what happens in meetings. But what happens after meetings? You know, if you talk to anyone who's negotiated in the Middle East, they will tell you nothing's decided when you're sitting around the table. It's all decided over a glass of tea outside those tables when you're really getting in the discussion.

So, again, a cultural issue. Number two, you know, if I once had a mentor tell me, if you want a new idea, read an old book, we are not reading any old books. The subject yesterday of attacking Karg Island, I immediately went back a few decades to my time as a young major at Fort Leavenworth when we were conducting a contingency war plan against Iran in the late 1980s. One of the things we were looking at is what would happen if you attack Kog Island or if you conducted an amphibious assault on that particular facility? Well, we learned a lot from the Iraqis who during the eight-year war with Iran had spent four years trying to subdue Kara Island and take away the economic issues within the Iranian government. It didn't work. Saddam Hussein was continuously thwarted. So you need to take a look at history in terms of what has happened in the past in these areas, but you also have to understand the culture.

This is not a business deal. The president can't get away with this. This would be like taking the same kind of efforts into, oh, I don't know, the Vietnam negotiations of the 1970s or the Dayton Accords of the late 1990s. All of these things you have to consider what the other culture understands and what they rebel against. And I think the president's postings and his open suggestions of what he's going to do in the Oval Office is going to bring nothing but failure when you're doing. dealing with the Iranians. All right. Still ahead on morning, Joe, we're digging into new reporting on President Trump's efforts

to void his two impeachments from his first term in office. Plus, outgoing Republican Senator John Cornyn is predicting a miserable future for President Trump. After November's midterms, we're going to run through his blunt new comments. And as we go to break, a quick look at the travelers' forecast this morning from Acqueweathers, Bernie Rayno. Bernie, how's it looking? Hot and steamy in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast on your Friday.

Your exclusive acuether forecast, 94 in New York City, 97, Washington, D.C. Heavy-drenching thunderstorms in the afternoon. Much better day in the Midwest, sunshine, less humid, not as hot. Stevie from Texas across the southeast with a few spotty thunderstorms. Your acuether travel forecast, there will be delays. New York City and Philadelphia. To help you make the best decisions and be more in the know, download the Accuether app today and enjoy your weekend.

So John Hyleman, you know, we have, there are reports that there may be $300 to $325 billion and basically ransom payments to get out of this war, quote, reconstruction money, the lessening of sanctions, which of course, Donald Trump attacked Joe Biden for doing repeatedly. But think about this. The number that we've heard this morning, and we haven't verified it yet, Michael Weiss saw this. It's not verified yet. But if we're talking those numbers, as we've said, if Barack Obama was weak, this is 812 times weaker

than Barack Obama. And I want to read you a quote, a pallets of cash quote. It's amazing how these things don't go away. Things that you say in another iteration of your political career. Senator Marco Rubio, President Obama's disastrous nuclear deal with Iran was sweetened with an illicit ransom payment and billions and billions of dollars for the world's foremost state sponsor of terrorism. This was, John, $400 million. And you saw what Marco Rubio said about that. Anything above, well, anything at $400 million, it applies obviously to this administration. But whatever that number ends up being, we're going to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars. I don't know how that's politically sustainable, given all the quotes,

that Marco Rubio, John Thune, you name it, every other Republican. John McCain at the time, all said, you know, John Thune, Iran is counting pallets of ransom money and is in a better position to develop a nuclear weapon. Is that John Thune in 2015, or is that John Thune right now nervous that Donald Trump is going to make this terrible deal. You know, well, it's hard to tell, Joe. I mean, I'm not sure what John Thun is saying right now, except probably looking at that quote and thinking,

oh, my God, this is going to come back to haunt me. Marker Rubio, even worse there. I mean, the guys of the advocates in the control room who came up with that 812 times, I just think you're going to have to give up on the pallets, right? It's going to have to be like, that's going to have to be direct deposit. I mean, you're not going to get,

there aren't enough pallets at all in Washington to move that cash, unless they create some new currency, like Trump is always talking about, like there'll be a new million-dollar bill with Donald Trump's face on it, and then they can pay it that way. I think this is, I just, as I said before,

very early in the war year, there were people in the intelligence world and in the security analysis world who were like, when you said, well, what's the way out of this? Like, within the first couple weeks, people were saying, well, in the end, there's going to have to be a payment.

There's just not going to be a way, Once it was clear that Iran had the degree of leverage that it had because it had effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz. I think this writing has been on the wall for some people for quite a long time. That doesn't make it any more politically tolerable because I don't think it is politically tolerable. And I think the notion that in that first formulation that Rubio that you just read there, Joe, he said, you know, Joe, Barack Obama's nuclear deal has been paid for with ransom in these pallets full of cash. I say again, Donald Trump doesn't even have a nuclear deal here. So he wants to do 812 times as many pallets for what, like a pile of magic beans? This is the, this is like a central thing.

It is the nuclear deal. There is no nuclear deal. This is terrible. This is we'll talk money. We'll pay you 812 times as much as Barack Obama paid for it. You just talk to ways. If you please just let us talk to you about maybe, maybe getting rid of your. nuclear program. It's never, it's never going to work. And I will say, I know John Thune. I don't know

what John Thune is thinking right now, but I guarantee you he's thinking, yeah, we don't want to give the, the, the, the epicenter, the country that's been the epicenter of international terrorism since 1979, $325 billion, either in pallets of cash or in sanctions relief or in whatever it is. Yeah. That would be a nightmare for Republicans. They obviously would not want that. It already is a nightmare. Michael Weiss, you have a new piece out today for the eye paper titled MAGA is not just divided over Trump. Now it's split on Putin.

What more can you tell us about that? So it's an interesting state of affairs. Since the Trump came back to power, there have been two parties in Russia. The war party and the reconciliationists or the people who are in favor of rapprochement with the United States. You know, the reconciliationist thought that with a guy like Trump, who is desperate for Putin to like him, to respect him, you know, he sees Putin as the best friend he just hasn't made yet, going back to term one, that with a guy like Trump in the White House, this was a chance for them to strike a grand bargain, if not foment a kind of strategic realignment of Russia with the United States. And that bargain would include, you know, Ukraine, settling Ukraine with territorial concessions, relitigating the post-Cold War security architecture in Europe. Europe. These were the things that were supposedly discussed at Anchorage last summer. It was called the spirit of Anchorage the Russians kept referring to. Then there's been the war party, which said,

we'll never be able to trust those dastardly Americans. You know, the United States still represents the main adversary from the Cold War period. Whatever they're doing, if Donald Trump sounds like he's pro-Russian, it's just a dirty trick. They're going to screw us over in the end. Well, what's happened, and this is accelerated since October 7th and certainly the U.S. war in Iran, you have a faction of Tucker Carlson, Candice Owens, Marjorie Taylor Green, Thomas Massey, who have broken with the president. They've come out very strongly against Israel. Many of them have trafficked in anti-Semitic tropes and Holocaust revisionism, if not Holocaust, denial. The war party sees these guys as a fifth column or as a political insurgency that can not only chip away at Trump's base,

but can also probably represent a political alternative to Trump either now or in the future in 2028. You know, the Russians think that J.D. Vance is their best hope because of his isolationist tendencies. Their great fear is a guy like Marco Rubio, who's more of a neo-conservative. So the Russians are now investing in an element of MAGA, which see themselves as a more authentic version of MAGA, who are not just anti-Israel, but they're also anti-Trump now. And, you know, these guys are all coming to Russia. Candice Owens was just in St. Petersburg. She's singing hymns to how wonderful the Russian churches are.

I mean, all of the kind of stuff you saw in the Soviet period of useful idiots. going over there and thinking that this was the future. They're now being cultivated by the Russian side. And the interesting bit is you have people from the Maggie world, such as Laura Lumer, who are going to war against these guys on the basis of their pro-Russian bona fides, right? Lumer is now tweeting things about Russian atrocities in Ukraine. So the same kind of conspiracy theorists who were all aligned at one point are now breaking. And the weird part is the dividing line, the battle lines are being drawn on Russia. The one thing they could all agree about when Donald Trump was re-elected.

Well, you know, but talk about some of the people that get paid off. Some of the right-wing MAGA influencers with podcasts that actually get money funneled to them from Russian sources. Oh, absolutely. I mean, I talked to a Western intelligence officer who said that, you know, the guy to look out for in all of this is a, he's known as the Orthodox oligarch, Constantine Malofiev. This is a guy who financed the first invasion of Ukraine in 2014. He has a think tank which put out a white paper presented at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum at which Candice Owens was in attendance.

This white paper suggests that the positive outcome for Russia in 2030 would be the use of a nuclear weapon against the West, the collapse of the European Union, and the military conquest of Kiev and Odessa. And the rest of Ukraine, of course, falling under the hegemony of Russia. This guy is a, not just the war party. I mean, he's part of the ultra-nationalist extreme. This guy is going to be paying Americans, this Western intelligence official told me, if he hasn't already started. So, yes, you know, financing their podcasts, their YouTube chat channels, whatever. Because, you know, with the Russians, when they see an opportunity, they think the best way to keep somebody on the hook is through compensation.

He who pays his boss, right? So a lot of the stuff you saw in the Soviet period, you know, when it used to be the left fellow travelers, true-believing communists, now it's this kind of bizarre, conspiracist, anti-Semitic wing of MAGA that are looking to Moscow as the third Rome. You know, this is the place of family values, Christian conservatism. Moscow, which, by the way,

has now made it illegal to criticize the Taliban, right? This is the bulwark of Christian civilization to these guys. Yeah, and again, they've paid already, Willie, as we know, they've paid podcasters and other MAGA

influencers over the past several years, that scandal erupting. I just want to read something. Again, it was hard to believe when I saw it growing up in the Republican Party that was a Cold War Party for Cold Warriors, the party of Reagan and John McCain. This is from February 2017 of Gallup. I went back and looked it up after reading Michael's article. Republicans fuel rise in Putin's favorable ratings. A major reason for the overall rise in Putin's favorable ratings this year is Republicans are more positive, and they have more positive views of the Russian leader from 12% in 2015 before Donald Trump to 32%. So they went from about 10% the year before Donald Trump got into politics

to almost a third one year into his presidency. And of course, I look this up for you, the 2023 Vandy poll, 52% of Maga, Republican. Republicans believe Vladimir Putin is a better president than Joe Biden. That was in 2023. There's a real sickness there. There's a real love for a guy who pushes generals out of windows and push other people out of windows when he's done with them. When we had Donald Trump on in December of 2015, you know, he kept talking about how Obama was so bad. And I said, well, Putin, you know, kills his political opponents. You remember this? He kills journalists. And Donald Trump would hear none of it. And now you have a lot of MAGA Republicans to say they're fine with this guy being a dictator.

They're fine with him killing political opponents. They're fine with him killing people in his own party. They're fine with him killing anybody that gets in his way. It's quite a turn of events for Ronald Reagan's party of Cold Warriors. I remember that morning well, Donald Trump called into the show when he was running for president. You presented all of that to him. He said, well, we kill a lot of people too, basically making a moral equivalence between Putin and the United States. I mean, Vladimir Putin still today is killing civilians in Ukraine in the war

that he started that he thought was going to last a couple of weeks now four and a half years on, still attacking apartment complexes deep inside of Kiev. That's who he is. And what's changed? You cite those staggering numbers in the way Republicans support Putin, specifically MAGA, Republicans. What changes that Donald Trump has told them what to think? And he says, Putin's not so bad. Zelensky's kind of a sleazy guy. He's a little bit. He's kind of a sleazy guy. He might be a little bit corrupt, too. Remember in that infamous White House meeting when President Trump and Vice President Vance cornered and harassed Zelensky, he had members of friendly media, I put that term in quotes,

joining him and harassing Zelensky, some of those same paid people you're talking about, Joe. Why aren't you wearing a suit? You're disrespecting the White House. That was the same group tearing down Zelensky. So General Hurdling, let's talk about, though, the state of the war. Ukraine's still standing and then some four and a half years later. President Zelensky sent Putin a letter last week saying, let's get together, let's sit down. He kind of insulted him throughout, and Putin said, no thanks.

But clearly, Zelensky has more confidence today than he did four years ago. And he should, Willie, because things are going relatively well, much better for the Ukrainian forces. They have learned a couple of techniques. At the beginning of the war, they needed a lot of equipment, and they got some of what they needed. But now what they've done is they've taken the adaptation on the battlefield to a new level. They used their old methods of what they used to do under the Soviet, when they were part of the Soviet army, and seeing artillery as the main strike for battlefield victory. And they've turned it into long, deep strikes within Russian territory.

And because they have attacked the logistics system, because they can now, they've adapted to doing that, it has caused a great deal of challenge for the Russian military and the Russian government. They have struck all sorts of targets within Mother Russia. We've been watching this for over a year now, but it is becoming increasingly effective in terms of draining, not just the kinds of things that a frontline army needs like fuel and ammunition, but also what the Russian people need and they're seeing it. So it's not only happening from long-range strikes that, that Ukraine has perfected and which truthfully we could learn a lot from and we're not doing

as much as we should in terms of learning how they're doing deep strikes. But it's also messaging the Russian people when they see billows of smoke over St. Petersburg right before an economic forum. Or they see targets being hit are in and around Moscow. Or they see the president of Russia being fearful for moving around and knowing that anywhere he goes, he might be struck with a drone or some type of long-range system. It tells me that they are winning not only the will battle, but the resource battle. They are also basically causing the Russians to stop moving forward across the southern route along the Black Sea, and they are retreating from there. So we can't judge the Ukrainian army right now for any ground they're taking, because they are

not moving from an operational maneuver perspective as much, but they are exceedingly damaging the Russian military. And in the long term, you know, they're going for the long term. In the long term, that's going to cause problems. And I believe, as I've always had from the very beginning, that it will create our Ukrainian victory. And they will eventually push Russia out all of their territories. We don't know. It's so remarkable, Mika, is that we are not trying to get the information. We're not trying to get the weapon systems. We're not trying to get the working knowledge from the Ukrainians that the rest of the world is getting. Even though our own Secretary of Army says they are on the cutting edge, they're the future of warfare. General Petrae is

saying you want to see the future of warfare. Just see what the Ukrainians are doing right now. And yet Donald Trump and the administration, they won't admit what our allies all across the Gulf region have admitted that we need Ukraine's technology and know-how, especially in this war with Iran. MS now military analyst, retired Army, Lieutenant General Mark Hurdling, and editor at the insider Michael Weiss. Thank you both very much for coming on this morning. And coming up on morning, Joe, we're going to dig into President Trump's new nominee for the Director of National Intelligence and explain why he seems to have passed his audition

earlier this week. Plus, reporters got an up-close look at the octagon on the South Lawn for a fight that's supposed to celebrate America's 250th anniversary. It's happening on Sunday, which, oh, is the president's birthday? Morning Joe will be right back. Boy, is that a beautiful live picture of Washington at 6.50 on this Friday morning? At least five states have declined to participate now in President Trump's Great American. state fair event marking the country's 250th anniversary. Connecticut, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Oregon all have withdrawn.

Some states noting budget constraints kept them from the event, while others have been planning state-specific celebrations. And officials from Oregon also noted there were concerns the D.C. event was becoming, quote, a more partisan affair than originally presented. The Freedom 250 planning committee said that even if officials from those states do not participate, all 50 states will be represented in some way at that fair. Another event marking the country's anniversary and the president's birthday, final preparations are underway for that planned UFC event on the White House South Lawn this weekend.

Reporters were allowed inside the area yesterday for a preview of the octagon. The South Lawn has been turned into a makeshift ultimate fighting championship arena with a massive 600-ton steel arch that's called the Claw. seating that will hold about 4,300 viewers. Seven mixed martial arts matches are scheduled for Sunday, which is Flag Day, and as I said, also happens to be President Trump's 80th birthday. Jonathan Lemire, when this idea was first proposed, I don't know, a year or so ago, some people kind of laughed it off, but here we are.

That's a live picture. The arena has been built. The octagon is in place. These fights will be taking place at the White House on Sunday. There's all kinds of corporate cross-cress. current here. You've got logos for crypto.com and polymark and bud light there right on the ring as they would be at any UFC fight. You've got the president's personal investment in TKO, the company that runs the UFC. You've got David Ellison and Paramount Skydance winning the broadcast rights to it.

There's just a lot going on at President Trump's birthday party on Sunday. Yeah, it's just, first of all, let's just say it's an extraordinary surprise that President Trump would turn the 250th anniversary of the country into a true celebration of himself. No one saw that coming. And certainly all the events, not just Sunday, the events going forward, there is a real split. There was a bipartisan group that was supposed to organize the nation's birthday, and now it has been sort of pushed aside by a separate group, which is much more Trump-centric. And yes, I mean, the White House is not shy, though nominally this fight on Sunday is for the 250. The White House is not shy acknowledging that it is about President Trump's birthday as well. And if you permit me, I wrote about this for a story that just popped up on the Atlantic's,

website this morning. Take you back to November 2022 when Joe Biden turned 80, and he really tried to downplay it. He knew there was already talk about his age. He spent that week, this is how he celebrated. It was a birthday brunch, Thanksgiving week, between a family trip and his granddaughter's wedding. Very

low-key, he stayed out of the spotlight that week. President Trump, meanwhile, is building an illuminated octagon with a 92-foot portable canopy stage known as the claw, where he and thousands of spectators will watch half-naked men brutally assault each other. So to each their own, I suppose, and I think it's representative of Trump, you know, focusing on just his own personal whims and legacy.

The fact that he's turned 250 into a celebration of himself, that he's built this stage on the White House lawn, we go through it. The Kennedy Center, the East Wing, the Arch, et cetera, et cetera. He's doing what he wants to do in focusing a legacy, even at political cost to the Republican Party. And speaking of UFC, a new investigation by the New York Times digs into the comeback of, of one of that sports biggest stars, and what they have deemed a tale of banned drugs and a famous doctor behind the miraculous recovery of Connor McGregor nearly five years

after he broke his leg in the octagon. And joining us now, the reporter behind that piece, Michael Schmidt. So, Michael, great to see you. Thanks for being here. Connor McGregor, one of the sports biggest stars. And you have brand new reporting as to how exactly he was able to make his stuff. coming back and why it's raised a lot of questions. Basically, what we learned was that after

McGarger breaks his leg in 2021, he has not fought since then. In the aftermath of that surgery, he was overseen, his treatment was overseen by Dr. Neil Eletrosch, who's the most high-profile doctor in all of sports. He's the team doctor for the Dodgers. He's the team doctor for the Rams. And Dr. Eletrosch sent McGregor to a specialist who said that McGregor should take ban drugs, performance-enhancing drugs, to help his leg recover. Now, that is something that anti-doping experts would say they've really never heard of, the true need for a performance-enhancing drug to repair a broken leg. And what happens is that Dr. Eletrash, after the specialist makes this recommendation, writes a letter to anti-dopening. doping authorities saying, yes, Connor McGregor should have a special exemption that allows him to use performance-enhancing drugs and not face a penalty. The signal is sent back, hey, that's not

kosher. And McGregor then takes himself out of the UFC's drug testing program. He comes out of the program and is essentially out of it for two years. He's not drug tested for two years. In that period of time, there's mass speculation that he is doing something. And as we reported in the story, it is indeed true that while he was outside of the testing pool, he used banned drugs. 2023, he comes back in the testing pool. There have been different fits and starts of trying to get him to fight again. And he will be returning to fighting next month in Las Vegas, the same place where he broke his leg. So, Mike, the rise of UFC has been, you know, one of the much of extraordinary sports, sports business stories of the last decade, right?

Kind of came not out of nowhere, but really rose to this enormously profitable, enormously successful sports media property, right? You know, your history includes a period of time when you covered Balco and the steroid era in baseball. And you remember there was a period of time where performance-nancing drugs and that crisis have threatened the future of Major League Baseball. the integrity of the game, et cetera, et cetera. What do you think the potential implications are for UFC of not just this story, but the broader issues of PEDs in the mixed martial arts fighting

that they traffic in? So I think that baseball faced a really unique problem for performance and dancing drugs, because it was seen as sort of like truly cheating and it messed up all the record books and all of the things that fans really take so seriously with stats and history. I'm not sure that that culture is the same in the UFC. And I'm sort of seeing that in the reaction to the story. You know, Connor McGregor is a bigger star in many ways than Barry Bond ever was, certainly internationally. He was really, like truly the face of this sport and known by people all over the globe. I don't think that there's like deep outrage amongst the U.S.

UFC fans, I think they would say, well, we kind of knew he was doing this. You know, no big deal here. The UFC has defended the way that this was handled. So even though this is a, there's a legitimate question here about, is this how an anti-doping program is supposed to work? Is this supposed to work in a way where I go and say, hey, can I get an exemption to use this? The signal back is no. And then I come out of the program and then I come back two years later, anti-doping experts would say that this is just not how the system is supposed to work. And that's a legitimate question. But I'm just not sure that the average USC fan is sitting around saying, oh, or Connor McGregor's 2018 or 20-whatever victories still, you know, okay in the record book size. It's just a different, it's a different

animal. Not the same kind of legacy. Correct. Yeah, let me ask you, Michael. Maybe you, You know about this. Talk about also this, quote, comeback. It also follows Connor McGregor being found liable in Ireland for rape allegations, sexual assault allegations, and a jury found for Nikita Han in Dublin. Is that not correct? Yeah. Look, McGregor.

is someone who has gotten into different, you know, problems off the, you know, outside of the octagon during this period of time. As you were pointing out, he had these legal problems in Ireland. He also at one point during that was going to run for office in Ireland. He has been in the Oval Office with Trump. He is, you know, an aligned Trump supporter. Obviously, we we see and know and understand the connections between the UFC and Trump. But McGregor is someone that during this period of time, in which there were questions about whether he was using drugs, did run into larger legal issues that you were pointing out in Ireland.

I'm not sure how much of any of that matters to the average UFC fan. McGregor built a reputation as someone who would basically trash talk his enemies, his opponents, and then get in the ring and knock him out. And truly, you know, his stardom paralleled the explosion of interest in the UFC in the

United States to where the sport is such a foundational part of American sports today as we see so dramatically on the South lawn of the White House. Yeah. Well, you are right, though. I mean, he was in the White House. And John Lemire, you know, this is reason I'm bringing this up.

is. I mean, this is a White House that, of course, spin over backwards to try to help Andrew Tate, who has an extraordinarily horrific history with women. And here, you know, from last year from the BBC, a former mixed martial art fighter, Connor Greger, has begun an appeal against the finding of the civil rape case. He lost that appeal. In 2024, a woman who accused him of raping her, won her claim against him for damages. And yet despite this, despite these charges going back to 2018, civil, it was a civil verdict like the president's civil verdict, Eugene Carroll's civil verdict against the president.

This is civil, not criminal. That said, the jury found him guilty of this. And yet, like Andrew Tate, for some reason, the White House, wanting to throw their arms around him. Yeah, Andrew Tate, a right-wing influencer. You know, you're right, though. I mean, you anticipate what I was going to say. This is a White House that is, at times,

thrown their arms around these characters, and at other times, has turned a blind eye to allegations in their own midst. I mean, you mentioned the E.G. and Carol, and, of course, we can't lose sight of the way the White House has handled the Epstein files and all that's come with that. You know, we were reminded of that this week

with the Blockbuster reporting by Michael's colleagues, Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan in the New York Times and ahead of their new book. That this is something that this administration simply has not wanted to take on. They have not wanted to distance themselves. And at times, have flat out ignored victims of these crimes, Joe and Mika. And it's something that as best as they can't shake the story. And I think we all believe that at some moment the Epstein matter is going to start shadowing them again. Well, it certainly, when you look at their problem,

Reporting from earlier this week from Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan that you have a guy that Donald Trump wants to be Attorney General leading the cover up, what many people consider to be the cover up in the situation room. Yeah, I don't know how that's going to go over with even the Republicans in the Senate. The full report is online now. Investigator reporter for the New York Times. Michael Schmidt, thank you very much. We'll be following this. And at three minutes past the top of the hour, President Trump once again threatened new military. strikes on Tehran before announcing he had once again called off the attacks. Since the U.S. and Israel launched the war in Iran back in late February, the president has publicly delayed or canceled planned military action at least eight times. Trump claimed progress in negotiations as the reason for backing off the strikes yesterday. The president offered few details and he has claimed a deal could be imminent several times in recent weeks. Later last night, Trump put it like this, quote, we ended the war with Iran today.

Tehran, however, is at least publicly telling a different story. Iran's foreign ministry spokesman told state TV that the country has not reached a final decision regarding any agreement. And no signing date is set. Let's bring in Chris Matthews to this discussion. Chris has a speechwriter for former president Jimmy Carter, you saw firsthand. what it's like to deal with Iran and how the Iran hostage crisis affected the Carter administration. In a new opinion piece for the Daily News, you question if the Iranian regime would treat Trump any kinder. Talk to us about what you think about that.

Well, you know, this is all from my notes from 46 years ago flying on the Air Force One with Jimmy Carter. The last two days of the election, we were in Chicago. but the Ayatollah still had our 52 hostages over in Tehran, and that was asymmetric warfare, but played all the way. They teased us with a possibility of a deal. Jimmy Carter canceled all his campaigning for Sunday that Sunday before the election, flew back to Washington, and realized that there wasn't a deal there. This was classic Tehran deal-making.

They make it look like there's going to be something, but there's nothing there. And then the day before the election, on the eve of the election, this is the big fight with Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter had to watch as the Ayatoll announced on all three American U.S. networks that he's so proud of the Iranian people for how they humiliated the United States. It is amazing how much the Iranians know every day, every minute, how to exploit the American media, our free media. For all those weeks of the Iranian hostage crisis, we had America held hostage on every night at 1130. Walter Cronkite every night would say, this is the 102nd day, the 103rd day. Every night, every single night, he announced that there was another day, a day of the hostage

taking. It was totally humiliating to Carter. It probably had the big role in costing him the election, a major role, certainly. And they know how to do it. So I watch today, and I watch how they do it every day. They tease him a little bit. They make him look stupid. And every day, what's 38 times now, he has said, we're close to a deal. It's just around the corner.

They're going to pull that. They also say, now, there'll be 60 days of negotiating over the nuclear deal. Well, that's pushing it very close to the elections of the midterms. They know asymmetric war. They know that we have. have midterms, they have our hostages, and they know how to, they did, and they know how to exploit us in the media every night. And Chris, let's talk about how you balance those foreign policy negotiations with what's happening back at home. You can think about Jimmy Carter, but let's look at

today as well. Donald Trump wants this war to go away. He thought it would be quick. He thought he could bomb Iran into submission. Somehow, despite warnings from generations of foreign policy experts and generals today didn't understand that Iran could quickly shut down the strait of Hormuz and affect the entire world economy. So Donald Trump is seeing high gas prices. Americans don't really understand what the objective of the war is. They're just feeling the consequences of it at home. So how does the administration balance those foreign policy objectives versus what happens because of them back in the United States? Well, I don't think they can. And I think the gas prices keep going up. It'll probably be

$7 for regular by November at least. It just keeps climbing. And every day it does, people have to pay out of their pockets or with their credit cards. And they look at those signs. As we drive by those signs every day at every gas station, we see different levels, but it's all higher than it was, and it's getting higher. And this is actual cash out of your pocket, and people have to pay it right away, and they know about it, and they talk about it.

And everybody in America knows about gas prices. I mean, Trump's problem was he got advice from BB Netanyahu in the situation room. He should have taken advice from people who had been in the war with Iran. They know what they're doing. They know how to play us. They know our weaknesses. We have elections. We have a democracy where people can actually vote their feelings and attitudes.

And they don't like a foreign policy. They let the government know it. They don't have that situation over there. And they know how to play geography. The hostages, they know how to play the strait of heart. Hermuz. It's so clear, and it's so much a part of our history that any president should know it. We fought in Vietnam in the jungle, and the jungle was used against us. The Vietnamese knew they had the geography on their side. We knew we had the geography on our side in the American Revolution.

It matters. Geography matters. Hostages matter. Elections matter. And if you're cognizant of at all, like the Iranians are, they're very aware of this. It's a real country, by the way, Iran. It's a real country that has real feelings. And the biggest mistake you make in politics, I think, or one of the big mistakes in wars, is to despise your enemy too much. We can really dislike the Iranians because of their terrorism and with really good reason.

But don't despise them too much to make them think, make yourself think they're stupid because they can watch us every day and exploit us every day. Well, and anybody that knew the history of the Iranians, new history of the Persian Empire, knew the history going back thousands of years, would not have underestimated what the Iranians were going to do. Anybody that knew the history of 1953, 1979, and then from 79 forward would have known going in, would have listened to Amika's father and a thousand other people who say, don't go into Iran, because when you do, they're going to shut

off the Strait of Hormuz. And then, as Dr. Prasinski said in 2012, you set the world's economy on fire. It's exactly what's happened. Chris, you remember. very well when Barack Obama was just absolutely excoriated by Republicans, and we have a lot of the quotes up for the quote pallets of cash, the $400 million and pallets of cash.

Marco Rubio, who was then a United States Senator, talked about how this was a ransom that Iran was, do we have that quote, Alex, the Marco Rubio quote from the negotiating deal?

But all of the Republicans lined up and said it was a nightmare. Marco Rubio, then Senator said President Obama's disastrous nuclear deal, which ends up being a hell of a lot better than anything we've had since, with Iran was sweetened with an illicit ransom payment and billions of dollars for the world's foremost state sponsor of terrorism. It was $400 million in, quote, pallets of cash, Chris. Now we're talking about out of Iran this morning talking about a deal. $300 billion in reconstruction costs, $24 billion in sanctions relief, all so the Iranians will talk to us for 60 days about their nuclear program. Chris, Chris, you were there.

I, you know, this ends disastrously, not only with the Iranians, because they're just going to play it out, end up taking the money and running, but also with the hawks on the right in Congress. There's no way they're going to support $300 billion and ransom payments to the Iranians just so they'll let Donald Trump get out of this war. Yeah, well, remember Princess Bride, the great Rob Reiner movie? You killed my father, prepared to die. My name is Enigo Matoia. Remember that guy? You killed my father prepared to die. We killed his father, okay? And the Ayatollah.

And so it's real. And I think they want to humiliate the president, our president, and our country, really. That's what they want to do. And get some cash besides. But it wasn't a great phrase for America, billions for defense, millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute. We don't pay off our enemies. We don't pay them off with cash. Ronald Reagan, a beloved president,

look what happened to him with Iran-Contra, where he got caught paying for the tow missiles for Iran. I mean, that is exactly what we don't do as Americans. We don't pay tribute. We don't do that. And we don't pay it to the bad guys. And if we get caught cashing out, I don't think we're going to look very good.

And I don't think President Trump's going to look any better than he is now. This was his war. He wanted it. didn't ask the American people for this war. He didn't ask the Europeans for this war. He didn't bring NATO with, he did it all by himself with BB in the Situation Room. By the way, the only person allowed in the Situation Room should be Brzynski, our National Security Advisor. We shouldn't have foreigners in the Situation Room. I'm sorry. What was he doing in there? Was Ron Dermott escorting him in? What kind of a finesse did this guy have? A lot of weird things have been in the

room lately. Yeah. I'll tell you what happened in the room. Netanyahu talked our president into going into a disastrous war. That's what happened. Chris Matthew, thank you very much. We appreciate your analysis and insight this morning. Good to have you. Still ahead on morning show, President Trump's allies have launched a last ditch effort to keep his name on the Kennedy Center. We'll run through that new legal effort. Plus, we'll get to Republican. Senator John Cornyn's prediction of a miserable next few years for President Trump. Also ahead, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries will be our guest later this morning. We'll be right back with much more Morning Joe.