The Daily - Trump 2.0: A Cabinet Full of Surprises and an Awkward Visit With Joe Biden

Episode Date: November 14, 2024

Warning: this episode contains strong language.In his first week as president-elect, Donald J. Trump moved at breakneck speed to fill out his cabinet with a set of loyalists who were both conventional and deeply unconventional, the U.S. Senate chose a leader who could complicate Trump’s agenda, and President Joe Biden welcomed Trump back to the White House.Times Journalists Michael Barbaro, Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman, sat down to make sense of it all.Guest: Julie Hirschfeld Davis, who covers politics for The New York Times.Peter Baker, the chief White House correspondent for The New York Times.Maggie Haberman, a senior political correspondent for The New York Times.Background reading: Matt Gaetz is Mr. Trump’s pick for attorney general.John Thune is set to become the next Senate majority leader.Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump’s brief public display of civility was followed by a two-hour meeting behind closed doors.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

From the New York Times, I'm Michael Bobarro. This is The Daily. Today. In his first week as president-elect— We begin tonight with breaking news and a lot of it. The appointments are coming pretty fast and pretty furious. Donald Trump moved at breakneck speed to fill out his cabinet with a set of loyalists who were both conventional. We have just learned that the president-elect Donald Trump is officially naming now Florida

Senator Marco Rubio to be his secretary of state. And deeply unconventional. Matt Gaetz as attorney general. Well, that'll knock you right off your feet. The United States Senate chose a leader who could complicate Trump's agenda. We have a new leader in the United States Senate. It is John Thune, the Republican from South Dakota. There was some acrimony between Trump and Thune over the years.

The hatchet was buried. And President Biden welcomed Trump back to the White House. The reason that this scene is so striking is because there is no actual warmth between those two men. I gathered three of my colleagues to make sense of it all. Julie Davis, Peter Baker, and Maggie Haberman. It's Thursday, November 14th. November 14th. Friends, welcome to the first post-election daily roundtable, which we are taping at around 2.45 p.m. on Wednesday.

We always disclose that in case something happens during or after our taping that's significant that we don't cover here. It turns out there is enough news post-campaign to merit a return to this glorious format. In fact, there's so much news happening that we did this very last minute, which explains why none of us are in the same room, which is the idea of a roundtable. And you're all spread out across, I believe, the city of Washington, D.C.,

in different tiny rooms with phones held up to your face. Maggie, Julie, Peter, thank you for making time for us. Thank you, Michael. Thanks for having us. I think we have to start with the blizzard of appointments that President-elect Trump has made over the past few days, seemingly an appointment every hour. And just to begin with, the pace of it, correct me if I'm wrong, is unusually fast. I went back and checked the clips.

Many of you wrote the stories from four years ago. Biden was elected and it took him about a week or so to make his first appointment, chief of staff. It feels like Trump has filled half his cabinet in that same week long period. Is that right? I don't know about half, but he's filled certainly a number of the top roles and it's not just faster than what Biden did. It's faster than what Trump did the first round. Trump announced his chief of staff along with his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, on November 13th, which was

five days after election day. This was two days after election day that he announced his chief of staff. He has announced picks for secretary of defense for DHS. The list goes on and on, but that's a huge number of major appointments filled very fast. What's the rush, Peter? Well, clearly he doesn't wanna sit on his laurels here. He's eager to get going.

He knows what he's doing this time in a way he didn't know eight years ago, right? He's thought a lot about who around him he trusts. Last time he had to be introduced to a lot of Republicans he didn't know, and then think about how they fit into a government which he had never served in. So he has the advantage in effect of doing this from scratch in a way that frankly,

no second term president's ever done. Most second term presidents are already in the office. They're not having a whole new government started from scratch in effect after an election the way this one has, but he has the advantage of having had four years of experience in the office. They're not having a whole new government started from scratch in effect after an election the way this one has. But he has the advantage of having had four years of experience in that way. Well, we can't cover all these appointments. There are simply too many of them.

So we're going to focus on just a few that really begin to tell us about Trump's priorities in the second presidency and his approach to governing. So I want to begin with two people whose portfolio will be heavily focused on immigration, Stephen Miller and Tom Homan. Julie, you know a lot about Stephen Miller because you covered immigration heavily during the first Trump presidency.

Right. And Stephen Miller was really sort of the architect of a lot of the immigration policies and really the whole sort of language and vision for immigration that Trump brought not only during the campaign, but in the very beginning of his first term of his presidency, when Miller led a very sort of aggressive, all encompassing effort to try to get a bunch of executive orders and a bunch

of policy on the track. Before Trump came into office, we all remember the Muslim ban. There were executive orders that had to do with sanctuary cities and cracking down in various ways. And then, of course, starting the initial stages of this build the wall plan that never actually reached fruition. But he really made it his business to figure out ways to pull the levers that Trump would need to pull in order to massively change the way

immigration happens in this country. And what we saw at the beginning of his first term was he ran into a lot of obstacles and it was very clear very quickly that some of the stuff just couldn't happen in the way that Miller was trying to make it happen and that Trump wanted to see. But he has all of that experience under his belt from the first term. And I think we could expect that to be, you know, very much his portfolio. Again, he's learned a lot of lessons about how government works and how you would go about implementing those things.

Peter Miller's job in the first term was senior advisor to the president. Now he's got a big promotion, right? Deputy White House Chief of Staff. So given what Julie just said, should we expect that everything she just said is gonna basically be on steroids? Well, yeah, I mean, again, what they can do, first of all, is click back on a lot of the things that Joe Biden clicked off, right?

They went through four years worth of crafting orders and crafting policies that took him time to figure out, took them time to lawyer, took them time to understand how the bureaucracy worked. And of course, Joe Biden comes in, he didn't change all of them, but he did change a lot of them. And they have the advantage now on January 20th of being much more ready to do what they wanna do.

The Muslim ban that Julius referenced was such a disaster the first time around, because they had no clue what they were doing. Lawyers are talking to each other, but they weren't talking to the justice department, which normally vets these kinds of things. They suddenly did announce they're gonna do it at the Pentagon

because he liked the symbolism of it, but they were literally still crafting and editing this order as they were driving in the motorcade over to the Pentagon at the last second. One of his aides actually is handwriting adjustments to the order he's going to sign by pen on the order before he puts his his signature on it. So it's not going to hopefully or from their point of view, hopefully it's not going to be as chaotic as that.

They have a better sense of how to do it this time. But we'll see, obviously, you know, chaos does tend to follow Trump wherever he goes, but they have the advantage of that four years experience. Now let's talk about Tom Homan. And I think the best way to introduce our listeners to him, he's going to be Trump's border czar, is to play a piece of tape from an appearance he made last year at the Conservative Political Action Committee's

annual meeting just outside Washington, where he talked about his zero tolerance policy, which he created with Stephen Miller in the first Trump presidency. And in particular, he had just been asked about child separation, which was a component of the zero tolerance policy. This is what he said. I wake up every day pissed off, because this administration destroyed the most secure board in our lifetime. And I'm sick and tired of hearing about the family separation. And no, I'm still being sued over that. So come get me. I don't give a shit. Right? Bottom line is we enforce the law.

Maggie, what do we make of this kind of rhetoric that was during the campaign where he wanted Trump to become president and he's critiquing Biden's policies, that rhetoric is now the man who's overseeing the border and defending child separation, which a federal judge struck down during Trump's presidency as illegal. He's saying, I have no problems with it. Julie's point about Stephen Miller's role, I think is the right one, Michael, he is running all of this. He will work very closely with Tom Homan. Homan is a hardliner. He is very clear about this. He was very pro-family separation as a policy. He pushed it for years before Donald Trump was in office. And then once he was in office, saw it as a very effective

deterrent. Donald Trump moved off of that after negative press. And frankly, negative press coverage may still be one of the few guardrails that Donald Trump is responsive to. I think that that could stay the same in this White House. But Holman is moving very quickly. He talked about this on Fox News earlier this week, that they are going to go after sanctuary cities to try to have an impact there, such as New York, which has faced a big influx of migrants, in which Mayor Eric Adams has been very vocal about and much more on the side of Donald Trump than President Biden. Right. Surprisingly so for a Democrat.

Correct. But I think that you will see, there are a number of Democrats who in major cities in blue states who are concerned about this. And so I think that you are going to see Homan, maybe he won't be quite so colorful as he was in that speech, but I think that you are going to see him lean in to what he plans to do because the feeling in the incoming Trump administration is, unlike 2016, where he certainly campaigned on a ban on Muslims entering the country, that mass deportations came pretty late as a concept in that campaign.

He talked about a border wall mostly. This campaign, he has been talking about the largest mass deportation operation in US history for over a year, and he won the popular vote and he won the electoral college. And so they believe that they are going in with a majority of people voting for this vision that Trump has articulated and Homan is going to talk about that and try to implement it as aggressively as possible. But I also think it's really important to point out that a lot of this Trump understood this very well in his first term Miller certainly, Homan is a perfect example of it, a lot

of this is about messaging and Homan is a former cop, he is a person who likes to talk about enforcement and getting tough and he looks tough and he talks really tough as your clip just demonstrated and I think one of the reasons you're seeing Trump name him and Miller early on is because he wants to send the message that this is going to be a different approach. This is going to be aggressive and a crackdown, and they want to lean really far into that

because the implementation is probably going to be very difficult and there are probably going to be a lot of obstacles they run into, but Trump is very focused on sending this message right off the bat that this is what he's doing and he's not shy about it. The two appointments we're talking about here were expected, more or less. One of the next appointments I want to focus on really caught a lot of people off guard. Everyone, perhaps except you, Maggie, you always seem to know what's happening inside Trump world. And that

was Trump's choice to lead the Department of Defense. This one, Maggie, you wrote in the pages of the Times, was quite outside the norm. So Pete Hegsef, the expected nominee for Secretary of Defense, is a Donald Trump favorite. He is a Fox and Friends figure. He is a Fox News personality. He is also somebody who has served in war and that is part of his appeal to Trump. It's worth noting two things about Pete Hegseth. He is somebody who Trump wanted to appoint for Veterans Affairs in 2018. And there was a lot of blowback to that and it didn't end up happening because Trump was following a more conventional approach to some of his nominations in his first term, even though

some of them were obviously pretty controversial. Pete Hegseth is something that I think would be hard to imagine for Secretary of Defense back then. Now it's in keeping with a lot of what Trump has done and talked about. Hegseth is most notable for advocating on behalf of Eddie Gallagher, a Navy SEAL, who was accused of war crimes and was convicted of posing with the corpse of a suspected ISIS fighter. And Gallauger, in Pete Hegseth's argument, should not lose any military status. And Trump sided with Hegseth and sided with Gallauger and did not think he should lose any military status. Right. We actually did several episodes about this. Trump ultimately intervened on Gallagher's behalf despite what the military saw as Gallagher's

abhorrent conduct. Correct. And Trump's intervention was very upsetting to military leadership. But Trump likes people who he sees as tough and he sees as willing to be tough in their defense of the United States. And I am not saying that, you know, that's a good thing or a bad thing. I'm saying that is how Donald Trump views the world. And that is a lot of what appeals to him about Pete Hegseth.

But Peter, I've always understood the Secretary of Defense role as being drawn from current or former senior military leadership, folks who've made a career out of rising through the ranks and ending up with stars on their shoulders in the highest ranks of one of the branches. And in choosing a Fox News personality who's outside the military and who was never in those highly senior ranks of the military in his career, I think we have to assume Trump is deliberately disrupting that model, bucking it consciously and saying something. What is he saying exactly? Yeah. I mean, look, I mean, most Secretary of Defense actually have been civilians, but

when they have been drawn from the uniform ranks, they were, of course, as you say, highly ranked people like Jim Mattis or Lloyd Austin, people who've been four-star generals. And the civilians that have been the Secretary of Defense over the last 70 years since or so since the, you know, the position was created after World War II, were highly thought of defense thinkers or political leaders, senators and so forth, people who had pretty substantial experience in government or the national security area. Clearly this is a break from that. And clearly, as Maggie says, it goes to Trump's fixation on television personalities.

He likes people who defend him on television. He likes people who buck the conventional wisdom, as he did with the Eddie Gallagher case. But it's really important because you've also heard the former president, the president-elect, talk during the campaign about using the military in ways that traditionally the military has not been used before, which is to say,

as more of a political tool, right? He wanted to send the military into the streets during the George Floyd protests to stop violent riots and his military leadership and civilian defense leadership at the time resisted and said, no, that's not appropriate. He doesn't want those kinds of people around next time. Remember in the days after the 2020 election, he had Michael Flynn in the Oval Office saying,

maybe think about some version of martial law in which you send the military to seize election machines and rerun elections in states you lost until you win. Also something that the current and past military leadership would have resisted. So in picking Pete Hegseth, I think the worry for a lot of people is he's picking somebody who's pliant

and will do things that traditionally have been way outside the boundaries of a nonpartisan, apolitical military. Maggie, is Hegseth a yes man who happens to oversee two million soldiers? I think that Donald Trump is absolutely picking Hegseth along with most of the people that he is picking for defense or national security roles on the assumption and belief that Hegseth is going to do what he wants and that Hegseth's views align with his. What that means, Michael, we don't know. Does that mean that he is going to align with Trump's priorities vis-a-vis troops, US troops

in Europe? Or is this going to be about using the military for domestic law enforcement purposes? And I think we are going to know in due time what that looks like. Okay. And we're going to get to the Senate in the second half of this conversation, but is this appointment going to be the one that a United States Senate might look askance at and say this is a bridge too far?

The military needs to be run by somebody who sees their fidelity as less bound up in the president. I think it's notable that people haven't been putting out statements saying this is a great pick let's go ahead and confirm this person as soon as possible. Obviously very early in the process they may snap to and embrace him but if there is one person who's been and not so far who could be a problem it's certainly him. To wrap up the conversation about Trump's appointments I want to talk about his foreign policy appointments. We

understand Trump might make Senator Marco Rubio his Secretary of State, but that's not official. We're talking- It has become official since we started this conversation. Get out of here. Get out of town, it's the truth. Breaking news. Like literally since we started this conversation?

Two things have happened since we started this conversation. Marco Rubio- Have you been multitasking? I never. Marco Rubio became official and Tulsi Gabbard, the former Democratic Congresswoman, was named for the Office of Director of National Intelligence. This is the sound of me tossing out a digital script. So let's talk about Rubio. I had thought that we couldn't talk about Rubio because he wasn't official. If he's official, let's

talk about the fact that Senator Marco Rubio from Florida, a once forceful opponent of Donald Trump who has turned himself into an ally, uh, might be the leading diplomat in a second Trump presidency. Peter Rubio once stood for a robust American foreign policy. I covered him. I was on the campaign trail with him in 2016 when he articulated that vision. It is not America first when he articulated it. It wasn't nationalist. He's somebody who has spoken out forcefully in favor of American military aid to Ukraine. If he becomes Donald Trump's secretary of state, those will not be his positions. He will have to contort them significantly to Trump or will he not?

Yeah. The Marco Rubio you covered in 2016 is not the Marco Rubio who's just gotten this nomination. He's a very different character at this point. He has over the last eight years adjusted his positions on foreign policy to move away from the sort of more neoconservative or John McCain part of the Republican party to the Trump part. And he's now, he voted against Ukraine,

a last time around. He has in fact expressed more support for the idea of an America first look at things. Now he's a hardline voice on like say Iran, which is in keeping with President-elect Trump, and on China, which again, I think is at least in keeping with a lot of people around President-elect Trump. So Marco Rubio will not be as much of an outlier

as we would have thought, right, when he was an independent candidate running against Trump. But he also passes for what, you know, he is what passes these days for establishment Republican inside this cabinet. For a lot of mainstream traditional Republicans, they're kind of glad to see Marco Rubio. And they're not because they think

he agrees with them anymore necessarily, but because at least he at one time agreed with them and maybe a more conventional Republican viewpoint than say a Pete Hegsath. So I think that there is some relief in that part of the party. That's probably why some of the MAGA world was resisting Rubio appointment in the first place. So everything has changed since 2016 in a way that is not comparable really.

Okay, final question on these appointments before we go to break. What unites all of them in your minds because they're actually somewhat diverse in their own way Well fidelity to Donald Trump. Yeah, I mean I think loyalty. That's it Especially if you compare it to the 2017 cabinet, right that the original cabinet He put in include a lot of people didn't know a lot of people who were going into government not necessarily Because they thought Trump was great, but because they were actually hoping to protect, you know, the United States, the government, policy, what have you, from the president that they didn't necessarily trust.

You're not seeing that this time. Okay, we'll be right back. Now we're back. I want to turn Maggie, Peter, Julie, to what we expect Trump's relationship to be like with a Republican controlled Congress. We're still waiting on a call unless, Maggie, the news broke during this conversation as well of who controls the House of Representatives. I think we don't know that just yet. It's quite likely to be Republicans.

Up on the hill today, just a few hours ago, Trump threw his weight behind the current House Speaker Mike Johnson, the very conservative Republican Mike Johnson to be reelected speaker. But the real battle was over in the Senate where there was a fight over who would lead that chamber and how loyal they would be to Trump, which of course will have a huge bearing on his ability to get things done in that chamber. Julie, tell us a little bit about that battle, who prevailed, and if they are in fact a Trump loyalist. So Senator John Thune of South Dakota won that race to succeed Mitch McConnell, who has been the longest serving Senate leader

of either party, and that was the first time that Republicans had chosen a new leader in 17 years. So big moment for them. But it wasn't really much of a turning of the page. He was McConnell's, he is McConnell's number two right now. He is an establishment Republican. He has clashed with Trump in the past. Trump was very angry that he did not support the effort in 2021 to overturn the 2020 election

results. He was one of a handful of Republican holdouts for that effort and Trump did not appreciate that. He only narrowly beat out John Cornyn, another establishment Republican, Senator from Texas. He's been in the Senate a long time as well. Trump also didn't think much of John Cornyn initially because again, he's an institutionalist. He is not seen as a MAGA person. He didn't see him as particularly loyal.

The third candidate was Rick Scott, Republican Senator from Florida. He's in his first term, the least experienced of the lot. And he really styled himself in this race as the Trump candidate. Elon Musk came out very supportive of him, said he was the person to vote for if you were for Trump. There was a big grassroots effort on the hard right to try to get Republican senators to drop their commitments to Thune and Cornyn and to go with Scott instead because he was the MAGA guy. Scott ended up with 13 votes and he... Not a lot.

It was not a lot. But the really important thing to keep in mind about this election is that it was by secret ballot. So if we think that this is... People were allowed to oppose the MAGA candidate. Because it was a closed door meeting in the old Senate chamber by secret ballot, the old fashioned way, you could go up against the MAGA candidate and vote against him without repercussion. So while it's notable and I think important to understand that this is who we have in the Senate Republican Conference, a bunch of people who would rather have the more experienced

seasoned establishment guy at the helm, it's also important not to over read it because this is not going to be a group of Republicans who are going to be in the mood to put their thumbs in Trump's eye when it comes to public questions of policy or personnel. So we should not perhaps Peter see this as evidence that the Senate leadership will be a check on Trump because it certainly looks like soon just by his history and his politics could put up a fight to Trump on some of the perhaps more out of the norm nominees or pieces of legislation that are very, very hard right. Something like mass

deportation legislation. Yeah, I think Julie's right about this. I mean, these guys are willing to be courageous when their names aren't public about it, right? And they're not necessarily going to be standing up to him when it will be known. Now, it does suggest that three quarters of that Senate Republican caucus is not naturally aligned with Trump on all things, right? You know, unlike the House Republicans, which have become increasingly Trumpy, the Senate Republicans always been more independent.

And mind you, a lot of these people won't be running again until after Trump is out of office, assuming he steps down in four years, and they see a future beyond him because they have six-year terms. And so, you know, they may be looking at waiting him out, but they're not necessarily gonna take him on either. But the real question is,

do they protect their prerogatives as the Senate? As Trump talks about having recess appointments, that's the kind of thing a Senate normally, regardless of party, wouldn't stand up for because they are a co-equal branch of government. What he's telling him is you need to be much more subservient to my wishes at this point. Can you just explain that? And, Julie, I want you to weigh in on this. Trump has asked the Senate for what Peter has described as recess appointments. Those are basically appointments that would occur outside of the normal Senate being in session.

Basically, it's asking the Senate to abdicate its role in the Constitution as the place that confirms presidential nominations. I was looking at social media before this began, and John Thune, the new Republican majority leader, was asked about recess appointments, and he said he was open to them, which suggests that he's bending to the president's will pretty much within the first hour of his time as majority leader? Well, he said that also in the days before the election.

All three candidates, very quickly, in using various words, essentially said, listen, we're gonna get his people confirmed as quickly as possible, and Thune in his statement said, and that includes being open to recess appointments. I think it's important to note that the emphasis was, we're gonna get his personnel confirmed, not on we'll go on recess anytime the president asks us to,

whereas Scott was much more willingly ready to say, yes, we're on board with that, we'll do what he wants. But it is, you know, in a lot of ways, it is the fundamental role of the Senate. And if it does come to a situation where there are a bunch of nominees that can't get confirmed and it's become clear that they can't get confirmed if the Senate is in and Thune takes the chamber out of session for a prolonged period of time to allow Trump to essentially go around them, that would be extraordinary.

And while he certainly hasn't ruled it out, I wouldn't read what he said today as saying he's ready to do that tomorrow. Maggie, does the president elect see the Senate as blind and is he planning accordingly? The president elect sees the Senate as better for him than it was the last time that he was in office. The last time he was in office, Mitch McConnell was the majority leader and Mitch McConnell

had an enormous amount of sway over the Senate Republicans and Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump were not friends and they were not like minds. And I do think that you are certainly going to see a majority leader who is more favorable to Trump and more willing to do things that Trump demands directly. But that does not mean that there are not going to be some senators who break away for their own purposes on specifically on certain appointments. And we'll see what this looks like. So finally, Trump himself returned to Washington and most specifically to the White House

today triumphantly and he ends up in a meeting in the White House with President Trump. I think we should just pause to reflect on how absolutely strange that encounter must have been given what happened four years ago, right Peter? Yeah, yeah look first of all I mean historically these meetings of an have been given what happened four years ago, right Peter? Yeah, yeah. Look, first of all, I mean, historically, these meetings of an outgoing president and an incoming president, often quite frosty because they're often from people from different parties who've just campaigned either against it directly or against their party.

You know, you can go back and find Hoover and FDR or Eisenhower and Truman and so forth. But this is radically different, I think, because in this case, Trump did not extend Biden the same courtesy four years ago. In fact, quite the opposite, was insisting he was still gonna be the president into the new term and didn't even show up for the inauguration.

Biden is trying to say, well, I'm gonna follow the protocols, I'm gonna follow tradition, I'm gonna show the way it's supposed to be done, even if it kills me. If you watch the tape of them having this meeting today, it looked like it was about to kill him. I mean, he was certainly not, I think,

happy to have Donald Trump there, but he was polite, and Trump was polite back. Neither of them said anything nice about each other, but they were certainly, you know, civil. Peter, can we play that audio for just a moment? Because I think it's worth bringing it to life. It's only about 43 seconds. Well, Mr. President, elect and former president, Donald, congratulations.

Thank you very much. And looking forward to having a, like we said, smooth transition. Do everything we can to make sure you're accommodated, what you need. We're going to get a chance to talk about some of that today. Good. Welcome. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And politics is tough, and it's in many cases not a very nice world, but it is a nice world today, and I appreciate it very much. A transition that's so smooth, it'll be as smooth as it can get,

and I very much appreciate that, too. You're welcome. As smooth as it can get and I very much appreciate that you Does anyone care to translate? What's actually being said here because through the polite ease there's a lot going on Maggie I do want to interrupt Michael just for one second because we have more breaking news Which is that Oh President-elect Trump just announced that congressman Matt Gates from Florida is going to be his nominee for attorney general. Wow. This is getting a bit precarious for them.

They are only on track to hold the house by about four or five seats, maybe at the most. Should we point out that Matt Gates has some serious ethical acu... Investigated by the department they're about to put him under. He has... He's been accused of sexual misconduct with an underage woman. Yes, but Peter, so has the president who nominated him. Yes, that's true too. He has denied allegations against him, just to be clear.

But yes, he has faced some challenges in terms of some accusations. I don't quite know what this looks like in terms of a confirmation hearing, but this will be potentially another test. I mean, I wish we could go back in time and make that news happen earlier in our conversation because I... So sorry. You can't change time. You can't. One direction the arrow goes.

That is, I think, going to become its own separate conversation, its own separate episode, Attorney General Matt Gaetz, if it happens. But just to conclude this remarkable exchange between Biden and Trump, I heard Trump doing something I don't normally identify with him. Peter, please tell me if you think I'm wrong here. When he said, thank you very much, politics is tough. It's not nice, but it's a nice world today. Is that the closest thing to an olive branch that he may ever extend to Joe Biden? Yeah, I mean, exactly. I think what these two men said about each other, right? Biden

said for years that Trump was not fit to be president, that he was a threat to democracy, that he was dangerous. He said many other things, of course. Trump, of course, has said many of the same things about Biden and by the way, promised to appoint a special counsel to investigate Biden and the whole quote, Biden crime family, including his son, once he gets in office, whether he follows through or not, we don't know.

But certainly there's no love loss between these two. And it goes beyond just normal political disagreement. This is an Obama Romney. This isn't even Bush Gore, which was probably pretty tense as well. But this is something very visceral. So yeah, Trump there is trying to say, hey, it's not so nice.

I'm, you know, I had to be not nice because that's the way it is, but today it's nice. And we'll see how long nice lasts. I was in the Oval in 2016 when he went to meet with Obama after that victory, which was quite obviously very different circumstances, unexpected and all the rest. But I wasn't in the room today. It seemed like a similar vibe because he was sitting next to Obama, who he had accused of not being eligible to be president after all of the things that he had said about him during that campaign.

And it was this very fleeting moment of we can all sit down together and be civil, which we all know what that was followed by. Right. Just as a final note, and perhaps I'm overanalyzing all of this, which I tended to do in my job as a political journalist, but in Biden's conduct, I think we also saw something really

interesting, which was a man kind of willing the last ounces of normalcy that he promised he was going to bring to the presidency out of the presidency in its waning days. He clearly doesn't owe Trump this. Trump never gave it to him. Trump denied the legitimacy of his term. But he was sitting there almost kind of forcing normalcy back into the system. Oh, I think that's exactly right.

I think that's a very good way to put it. He is determined not to let Trump change him, that is Biden, and change the presidency outside of his own term in office. You know, just because Trump did it this way doesn't mean I'm going to follow suit. That tradition and protocol and civility and decency still matter, and he's going to follow suit that tradition and protocol and civility and decency still matter and he's going to follow those Guidelines again, no matter how much it may pain him. I don't think either one of them walked away from that meeting I'm guessing saying gosh I really like the other guy more than I thought I would but they went through that show that's and I think it's you know

traditionally done in America as an important statement of unity following a divisive campaign. The question here, of course, is whether or not Trump then follows suit. At the same time, I think that he's got so many things on his plate, policy-wise, you could argue, and I think some of the people around him are arguing, let's not spend our time on the retribution you promised.

Let's focus on the retribution you promised. Let's focus on the deportations and the tariffs and all the other really important and difficult policy initiatives he's outlined. We'll see where that goes. But I think history has given us a pretty good map. I don't think that anyone would be surprised to know that Donald Trump generally views the world sort of in walking casino terms, which is heads he wins and tails you lose.

And so if Joe Biden is adhering to norms because Joe Biden believes in those norms and Trump believes in these things if they work for him and if they don't work for him, then he's going to buck against them. And as we have seen, our country discovered after the 2016 election, how much of our system is based on norms and not laws. And that is going to be shown again in the coming months. Well, I want to end this conversation now so that there are no more pieces of news,

no more announcements that occurred during this conversation. Peter, Julie, Maggie, thank you all for sticking with us, literally through a storm, a blizzard of news. We really appreciate it. Thanks, Michael. Thank you, Michael. Thanks, Michael.

There'll be more. There'll be more. After our conversation, several Republican senators expressed alarm at Trump's choice of Representative Matt Gaetz for attorney general. Asked about the appointment, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said, quote, I don't think it's a serious nomination for the attorney general. Her Republican colleague from Maine, Senator Susan Collins, said she was shocked by the choice and would

have quote, many questions for Gates during his confirmation. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know today. On Wednesday, an Israeli court rejected a request by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to delay testifying at his corruption trial next month. As a result, Netanyahu must take the stand, even as his country is at war in both Gaza and Lebanon. Netanyahu is battling charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust in three separate but interrelated cases.

And, in a landmark decision for renters, New York City has passed a bill that would end broker's fees as they currently exist across the city. Under the law, the burden of paying broker's fees, which can reach thousands of dollars, would in most cases be transferred from renters to landlords. The city's mayor, Eric Adams, is expected to allow the bill to become law. Today's episode was produced by Stella Tan and Jessica Chung. It was edited by Rachel Quester and Liz O'Balin, contains original music by Pat McCusker and Diane Wong, and was engineered by Chris Wood. Ben Lansfer of Wunder Lake.

That's it for the daily. I'm Michael Bobarro. See you tomorrow.