Listen to your favorite MS Now shows anytime as a podcast. Enjoy new episodes of Morning Joe, Deadline White House, and the Rachel Maddow show. Every small D Democratic muscle that we have is flexing. Plus the last word with Laurence O'Donnell, the beat with Ari Melbour, The Weeknight, and more. On the go, wherever you get your podcasts. For ad-free listening to all of your favorite shows, subscribe to MS Now Premium on Apple Podcasts. Knowing what little time we have and how quickly this can spiral out of control, we still have a lot of questions. For instance, was the president fully briefed about the risks of all of this from the beginning? And was he then able to take it all in and understand the complexity of this, how complex it could actually get, and further possibilities of casualties or other damage, the difficulty of dealing with his people? Or was he told this would be relatively quick in and out? Where does it live forever? Was he, Donald Trump, able to take it all in? Laura Ingraham wants to know the answer to that question. Hi again, everybody. It's now five o'clock in New York. It's quite convenient. Apparently, Donald Trump is never wrong, but when he is wrong, when he gets something wrong, as the MAGA newscasters are starting to worry, maybe he has, it must be someone else's fault, right? Maybe he wasn't briefed. So he can't fail. He can only be failed or incapable of, quote, what'd she say? Taking it in. This isn't the first time the American people have been on the receiving end of the, he got bad advice or a bad briefing that he, quote, couldn't take in story where Trump's grew up. We heard precisely the same narrative from his allies on tariffs, which he's always loved, on immigration, which he's always pumped the adrenal glands of, on Greenland, which he's always been obsessed with, and on the Fed, on judicial nominations and on and on. But this particular iteration about whether or not he could, quote, take it in on Iran is quite different. One, men and women have died. Two, the MAGA coalition, as we've come to understand it over the last nine years, is blowing up before our eyes. So this justification that, quote, maybe he can't take in information represents a new, rather insulting, subtle and ingenious effort to split the difference, maybe, to criticize Donald Trump's acuity and capacity without criticizing the little Tiber himself. Of course, it completely contradicts what Donald Trump is saying about all this. The White House is saying, the Cabinet's saying. They've all insisted from the beginning that military action in Iran, the war, was a result of Donald Trump's gut feeling, an instinct, a hunch that Trump, quote, felt in his bones. Somebody who thinks on a higher plane than the rest of us, I guess. And it was my opinion that they were going to attack first. They were going to attack. If we didn't do it, they were going to attack first. I felt strongly about that. I think the president, prior to that phone call, had a good feeling. And the president's feeling based on fact, this was a feeling the president had based on facts. When are you going to know when it's over? When I feel it. Okay. I feel it in my bones. So we are all waiting on Donald Trump's bones. So back to Laura Ingraham and the friends of Donald Trump's in the media. We are now to believe that Donald Trump, who makes life and death war-related decisions, the president says from the podium based on his, quote, feelings, and as Donald Trump says, quote, from his bones, we're now to believe that none of that is true, that Caroline Levitt was lying, that Donald Trump's lying to Brian Kilmeade. And as Laura Ingraham put it last night, Trump was the victim of a bad briefing that he, quote, couldn't take in, end, quote. But who had assembled the bad briefing? I don't know. Lady Vance, Marco Rubio, Tulsi Gabbard, these are his people. They're nobody else's, God knows. Former Fox anchor Megan Kelly made a, should we call it an adjacent point yesterday? She targeted Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who she said was, quote, frothing at the mouth right now at the thought of thousands of our soldiers going into Iran. She said a bunch of other stuff about bubble wands, but we'll leave that out. This is the rest of her quote. So what is Lindsey Graham doing to support those troops and their families who are preparing to put their lives on the line? He's at Disney World, she added. Little mermaid themed bubble wand and all. Now, whether or not these excuse makers understand that in questioning the advice that's been provided to Trump, they're also questioning Donald Trump's mental fitness for the office he holds and his ability to understand information is not clear to me, right? You have to decide for yourself. But again, to quote Laura Ingraham to take what she said on her program, which she seemed to be reading from a teleprompter, and I don't know that for a fact, but she said this, quote, was he able to take it all in? End quote. For now, apparently the buck stops somewhere around there. That's where we start the hour. President of Media Matters for America, Angela Karisana is here. Officer joining us, Jo Wall. She's a former Republican congressman. He ran for president in 2020. He's now trying to, I don't know, what are you trying to, we'll get into your mission. Get us all talking again. And joining me at the table for the hour, political analyst Molly Jung Fass. She's the host of Fast Politics, New York Times contributing opinion writer. Angela, I have to start with you. It is awkward maybe to have to spin this, which is obviously the charge they keep, the burden they've decided to carry. But I've not heard them say in what seems like a prepared read that quote, maybe he couldn't take it in. Does that rank as the first time his mental fitness has been challenged on Fox in a scripted open? It is probably the most significant, you know, sort of critique of his mental challenge from Fox News in particular. And I think the point about it being scripted and not enough to comment is actually quite significant as well, because it shows that it was deliberate and calibrated on purpose. And, you know, Ingram is obviously a little bit out front here when it comes to that core part of the pro Trump media of the Fox ecosystem. And I think it's an indicator of a larger trend that we've been observing that we've talked about, but this is a feedback loop beginning to break down. And that is the other takeaway. It's not just that she made that critique, that nature of the critique itself is an illustration that this is extending beyond just, you know, Trump's handling of the war now. I mean, Joe Walsh, other than, as Marco Rubio barely lived to tell, criticizing the size of his hands. Criticizing the size of his business man who walks around taking like the Alzheimer's screen in public. He walks around taking the mocha test. Tomato, tomato, tamale, man, woman, child, I aced it, I aced it. He's been telling us that for years for Laura Ingram to challenge his mental fitness just feels like a big red line for her to have crossed. Nicole, I don't, I don't know that she's crossed a red line. It's the first potential suggestion. But to me, the biggest takeaway is they're all afraid to say he's responsible. He still owns this party. They'll go after his advisors. They'll go after everybody who works for him, but they won't blame him and be, and Nicole, they can't blame him. Look, when you are a conservative and you came out like I did seven years ago and said, he's the problem. He's what's wrong. He's bad. I lost everything in a day. If anybody right now came out in the MAGA, you know, the podcast media world and said, Trump owns this, he screwed up. It's his decision. They'd be gone. They'd lose their audience in a nanosecond. They're all competing to be kind of the MAGA voice when Trump is gone, but they're not going to go after the king. Let me challenge you on that. I mean, I made the same move in 2015. And so I know the path that you traveled. I see something very different in the last people to join the coalition. I mean, in Shane Gillis and Joe Rogan and the, you know, Manusphere podcasters, they are outright disgusted by the treatment of the Epstein files. They are outright disapproving of the war in Iran. I would add Sean Ryan to that group as well. They are saying all these things out loud. Are you sort of cleaving off the establishment Fox anchors? Brian Killmage, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingram as people who won't go after Trump because I see something different in the younger group of the MAGA coalition members. I think any voices who are not overtly political like Rogan will venture further off. And Nicole, I'm not going to, I'm not going to disagree with you because I still engage with MAGA every day. There's impact on the margins. The Epstein scandal file scandal. That's moved some MAGA folks on the margins. This war has moved some MAGA folk on the margin. I guess I still believe that the 28 nominee, Republican nominee is going to be a Trumpy voice. And I think all of these folks know that they're just scrambling to get the most crumbs that they can get so they can sit at that table when Trump no longer runs. I see, I think this will be a great conversation for you and I to have for the next three years. I think that there's something, I think it'll be someone who may have staked out a different position on Iran. I think that Tucker Carlson and Megan Kelly are making very deliberate comments and calculations. Let me play what some of the people who we may be covering as 2028 people who aspire to be president in 2028 have been saying. We're not interested in being in Iran a year down the road, two years down the road. We're taking care of business. We're going to be out of there soon and gas prices are going to come back down. What I want the American people and the people watching this broadcast to know is that fundamentally what this is about is the destruction of their air force, which has been largely achieved, the destruction of their navy, which has been largely achieved, the destruction of their factories that they make all these weapons with, which is we're well on our way to achieving and a substantial reduction in the number of missile launchers that they have so that they cannot continue to threaten their neighbors in the future. All of those objectives are being met ahead, on or ahead of schedule and should be able to achieve in a matter of weeks. It's very important that there are no troops involved currently in this conflict and there have not been troops involved at any point. That to me has always been a red line. It was with Venezuela. I think that if there were troops committed to combat operations, Congress would need to authorize that. That's currently not the case. And so I think the president and the administration are complying with the law. I do not believe there is any scenario in which President Trump puts ground troops for any extended period of time in Iran. Iran is not Iraq. They are very different conflicts. But extended is the key word here. The reason I'm not saying no ground troops under any circumstances is the president may well have an aspect of the mission that requires ground troops. What's not going to happen is what we did in Iraq, which is sending in hundreds of thousands of troops to be there for years and to try to run the country. I think that would be a serious mistake. Molly, I don't have enough time left to play all the times Trump said he would never take the country to war. But suffice to say it's a factor of about 200 of what I just played from them. Now, all the tapping their feet together in shiny red shoes and saying, you know, there's no place. I mean, that is delusion. None of them can really be sure that the things that, you know, JD Vance, we're going to be out of there soon and gas prices are going to come back down. Really? So evidence that that is true. You know, the calculations, they're following the law because there are no troops there. They just moved 10,000 troops to the re... I mean, what is your sense of the distance between what they're saying and what Trump is actually doing? I mean, and also even Trump says things like it's almost done. It's over. It's not over. So look, they're responding to the fact that this is very unpopular. Boots on the ground polls at like a single digits. I mean, there is no world eight. Right. Eight. So Boots on the ground is not popular. This war, and we saw this from CPAC, we saw this from this, these polls at CPAC, the straw polls. Boots on the ground, the war is super unpopular. So I actually have a slightly different take on Laura Ingraham because I think Laura Ingraham is on a network owned by Rupert Murdoch. Rupert Murdoch, you know, is Trumpy, but he also there's a larger goal of keeping the Republican Party together and not getting shellacked in the midterms. And so what I heard when I was listening to that was a little bit of manipulation. Like, you're obvious, this is obviously you don't want to do this, but so probably someone is giving you bad advice. And then the other question I would... You didn't hear that maybe he can't take in. I mean, that's how people talk about aging relatives who are losing their ability to take in whatever they heard from the pharmacy, but when the prescription will be ready. I mean, yes, yes, but I also did hear like a sort of gentle push to like if you really knew... To throw Tulsi Gabbard under the bus? Yes, and to throw them all under the bus. But I also think that this, I do really see that there is like people are trying to get him not to do this. And the question I have is like who is... Because we're seeing so many stories leaked about, you know, movement. So the question I think is like who is leaking all of this stuff and why are they leaking it? And I think they're worried that Donald Trump is going to do this. Do what? Do this invasion, this ground invasion which no one wants, which is not enough troops. I mean, we've seen the reporting on the ground invasion is just that it's a terrible idea every which way and that nobody wants it. I mean, I guess the other problem I should have with the ground invasion is it's not clear what they would do. I mean, the Iran deal much maligned by Republicans was about the nuclear program. Marco Rubio's list of objectives, you didn't even talk about it. Marco Rubio there said we are there for the destruction of the Navy. We are there for the destruction of the factories where they make weapons. And we are there for reduction in missile launchers. Those are the stated military objectives. Trump is talking about troops on the ground and it doesn't even align with what his secretary of state articulates as the objectives of the war that's ongoing. Yeah, and I think that, you know, this latest round of escalating critiques from newer voices, even Bannon is beginning to say some things that are waffling, but the Ingram thing comes at a very specific time that we can't ignore the context of because it gets to your question, which is that it comes right after he does an announcement telling everybody to watch Fox News's Mark Levine, who gets out there and makes a very vigorous case as to why, you know, boots on the ground, troops need to be sent into Iran to secure all the nuclear material and then get out. And Trump tells everybody to watch this. And that to me is the catalyst for this latest round of critique. And it gets to the point that you were all discussing before about trying to walk him back or stop him from doing this. The mere fact that he said, hey, everybody watch this thing, because it explains the thing I'm really thinking about doing, was a warning shot to everybody like, maybe we need to start being more, you know, aggressive about pushing back against Mark Levine. And then it gets to this broader issue that you're seeing play out and this is one of the sharp critiques that Megyn Kelly has, is they don't really have clarity as to what the goal and the objective is, because what Trump is saying is really different than what you laid out from Marco Rubio. And it's really different from what the right wing media wants. And it's certainly very different from what Pete Hexeth wants, who's the single biggest cheerleader of this. And I think that is partly what Ingram was trying to play on as well. But it is leading to the chaos, to the confusion, you know, or the last thing I'll just say is that, you know, part of the benefit that Trump has had, we've talked about this, is that he has this massive media machine that can backfill or carry the narrative for him. But even if they were all in sync, they still couldn't do that under these circumstances. Even if they fully agree that this was a good thing, they couldn't do it because there is not even the slightest bit of consensus as to what story they're even telling right now. And Trump is the center of that confusion and chaos. Yeah, and let me take age out of it. Like, I'm not sure this is about an older person. I mean, anyone that saw Jane Fonda literally with the ability to articulate the entire mission behind... This is not an age story. This is about one of Trump's closest allies in the media saying, quote, I don't know if he could take it in, about a president who literally walks around talking about the results of a mental acuity screening test. And the synchronicity of those two things, a president acutely obsessed. He started taking the Mocha test in Fox News interviews in the year 2017. And now one of his closest allies, someone who I think was rumored to have aided with one of his debates during one of the three times he ran for president, is wondering on TV, quote, whether he could take in a briefing about what would happen when he launched a war in Iran. Just let that sink in. No one's going anywhere. When we come back, Donald Trump's big, gaudy obsession, the other sign that, I don't know, the lights are on, but I'm not sure who's decorating the ballroom. His massive gilded ballroom with stairs to nowhere. It has been put on ice by a judge. A judge blocked further construction for now. We'll show you what the judge told Trump after a short break. Also ahead, why Republicans 10 years into the Trump experiment refused to do anything to hold him accountable, as Joe Walsh was talking about. Whether it's his unilateral decision to take the country to war or his corruption and grift, which are now taking place in full view of the entire country, they continue to let a deeply unpopular president run roughshod over everything our country has stood for. Senator Cory Booker will be here. Another possible 2028 presidential contender. He'll be our guest later in the hour. Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere. Samone Sanders Townsend and I have known each other for more than a decade. We're friends and colleagues and on our new podcast, Clock It, we are positioning ourselves at the intersection of culture and politics. Clock It is where we talk about what we see and hear in the news so you can start to clock it too. An important update to a story we told you about yesterday and another welcome instance of the judiciary or a judge reining in what Donald Trump is doing and what he insists is within his powers and authority. Late this afternoon, a federal judge said no. In order to temporary halt on construction of that monstrosity currently being attached to the White House, the planned 900,000 square foot ballroom in his exclamation point laden decision granting a preliminary injunction to the National Trust for Historic Preservation. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon writes this quote, The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of first families. He is not, however, the owner. I have concluded that the National Trust is likely to succeed on the merits because no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have. We're back with Angelo, Joe and Molly. I have no fury like a real estate guy told he can't destroy something beautiful and put in place something gaudy. Yes, and I want to point out Richard Leon, George W. Bush appointee, so not some Obama judge. Yeah, the writing in this opinion is pretty str- you know, pretty shocked. And it says, you know, you don't own the White House. The White House belongs to the people, which has fundamentally been a big problem in Trump 2.0, his belief that this is all sort of his. The thing that I find the most interesting in this story is that then he decides, Trump, that the true enemy here is the National Trust, the National Trust, which is a historic trust, a historic preservation organization, and then goes on social media to call them a radical left group of lunatics whose funding was stopped by Congress. I promise you, I don't know these people, but I know that the National Trust is not filled with radical left lunatics. It's just another lawless act, Angelo, by Donald Trump, that by the time it was seen by a federal judge, as Molly points out, when appointed by a former Republican president, the sum of it is you have got to be effing kidding me. Yeah, and you know, it's something we've seen as a pattern overall. Like, laws aren't really a thing for him. They're obstacles that you just sort of either break through or work around. And that is part of the real threat that we talk about. It's not these individual one-offs. It's the cumulative effect of a president that is out there tearing down or undermining the rule of law, which is really the things that sort of helps sustain Americans, because it's something to grow on. It's one of our biggest strengths. And I think about, you know, one of the things that I thought about with that ruling, aside from the judge's use of exclamation mark points as well, is something Jamie Dimon said. Because one of the, you know, he didn't give money to that ballroom. And when he was pressed on why he didn't, he explained, I don't know if this is legal. I don't know what the next administration is doing. And I go back to that because it's a shame that more of the companies that enabled and facilitated this at the time didn't hold firm. This is also a consequence of capitulation, because they didn't have to enable and participate in this. And that to me is the one takeaway, is that to your point, he's always proven to be breaking the rules. And if there was a little bit of a stiffer spine from those that helped enable this, it would be a lot harder for him to do that. They'd be like speed bumps in a school zone. Yeah. I mean, I feel like it's important to point out that our former parent company Comcast is one of the companies that paid for the destruction of the East Room ballroom. Joe Walsh, on this topic of capitulation, it's also unattractive. I mean, politically, it is unappealing to be a brand or company that capitulated. These are the sorts of people that not even Donald Trump particularly respects. He's out there trying to get former adversaries because they represent to him conquest, not weak people who capitulate. What are you learning for the first time here in whatever it is, the 700th year of the time of Trump, the ninth year, I think, from the conversations you're having around the country about what still works and what doesn't work so well? Nicole, quickly, I just, he does not own that house. He's not the owner. It's our house. And when we talk about capitulation, Nicole, oh my God, Trump's been able to be the fascist and the dictator he is, because we don't have a Congress and we have not had a Congress from the moment Trump was sworn in, but thankfully the courts are catching up. Look, Nicole, you know how I feel about Trump and my former political party. They are an existential threat to democracy and the rule of law. But I also believe that no matter who's in the White House, if we all continue down this road where we hate the people we disagree with, I think the country and the democracy is in a lot of trouble. I mean, think about this. The most radical thing you can do in America today is have a conversation with somebody you disagree with. That's messed up. So what I'm doing is every two weeks I'm traveling the country. That's what we're doing. I'm putting people in a room who fundamentally don't agree where I'm locking the door and we're having really tough, honest conversations, not debates or fights, just honest conversations so that people can learn how to listen and hopefully understand we're filming these conversations and we're going to blare them out all over the country because there's a yearning, I think, from a lot of Americans to do that. The organization Nicole is called Hope Not Fear right over my shoulder. HopeNotFearProject.org. One of the things that's tricky and I think it's great to get people in a room together, most Americans, I think, live in a family or a relationship or a workplace that is already divided along these lines. So God bless the people that don't navigate these relationships in their day-to-day life. Most of us do. One of the things that's tricky is this post-fact dynamic. I mean, and I wonder, Joe, what, I mean, most many, some, a few, you know, I'm sensitive to not maligning people. A lot of mega people don't believe the facts of the killing of Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretty, of the abduction of Liam Ramos, the six-year-old, of the treatment of children at the Dilly Detention Center, of the deportation of men to El Salvador without the Supreme Court and a 9-0 ruling described as the denial of due process. What is your best advice for injecting facts into the conversations? To Nicole, to respectfully but firmly put facts in the truth in front of them. We had 70-some people in Columbus, Ohio, from Maga right to far left and everywhere in between, and immigration was the big topic because, Nicole, we filmed that conversation the day that Alex Pretty was shot and killed. And there were Maga folk in the crowd who didn't believe it. There were Maga folk in the crowd who liked what ICE was doing, but we respectfully and firmly kept putting nuggets of truth in front of them to the point that by the end of a conversation, the conversation, a couple of these hardcore MAGA supporters, they acknowledged publicly in front of the entire room that ICE is going too far. And everybody else in the room broke into applause, but you're right, Nicole, these conversations have to be fact-based. Well, God bless you for doing this work. I want to hear more about it as the cycles sort of speed up. Joe Walsh, Molly Jung-Fass and Angelo Carason, thank you so much for starting me off today. Up next for us, a potential Democratic candidate for President of the United States in the year 2028, Senator Cory Booker will be right here at the table. Don't go anywhere. You can start to clock it too. And as a surrendering of our duties, it is the submission before Donald Trump and his authoritarian-like inclinations to declare war and not come to Congress as a constitution dictates. That was Senator Cory Booker calling out as Republican colleagues for ceding their constitutional duties, their constitutional powers to Donald Trump, even as his incompetence is on full display and now being remarked upon by Laura Ingram, along with his sinking approval rating, which is now down to 33%. It comes even as Trump is concerned with defending renderings of his White House ballroom and talking about his future presidential library far more than he is with cleaning up his own policy decisions and messes, things like reopening the Strait of Hormuz or fixing gas prices back home, prices that have now hit $4 per gallon, and then he's addressing the speculation about corruption and rampant insider trading moments before his own major policy announcements, many of them involving the U.S. military. I want to bring in Democratic Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey. He's the author of a new book, Stand, which we'll talk about in a second. I love that you write about what John McCain told you to do. Let's start there. Because I think what's so great about what you write about is that being a statesman has nothing to do with how hard you fight for your ideals. And John was a guy that showed a lot of the virtues I talk about in this book as strategies for how do we get through bad times because he showed his vulnerability too. He literally would tell me, I haven't been perfect. He's like, I failed at times, but I want you as this old lion says to me, a new kid in the Senate, I want you to not be a politician. I want you to be a statesman. And this is after he had been pulling out documents from filing cabinets of one picture I'll never forget of his lifeless body being pulled out after his plane crash and told me stories about what it was like to be in a POW camp for years. And there's something missing in our country now, those kind of ideals that were held by people on both sides of the aisle. We're going way adrift of that and we need a national renewal. And that's so much of what I wanted to call for in this book. You seem to have sort of put the pieces together, being vulnerable and being honest and talking about this moment in ways that a lot of people that resonate with a lot of people that watch this show, but also fighting harder than a lot of other Democrats. Why is that combination tricky for other Democrats? Look, I come from my tradition. So in the black community, you see people who often you can see their scars, you can see their wounds. They're not being silent about their pain and their hurt. And yet there's something about that breaking when the society sort of shatters you. That gives you more points of connection to create more contact points with other people. And I want for my party. I think we help to pave the road to where we are right now. I think we have failures that have to be owned up to. This is exciting time, though, as dark as it is. We're about to see something that happens every 20, 25 years, which is a generational shift in American politics. The last baby boomer president, the last baby boomers heads of the Senate. It really is time for new leadership. And I think we need to get out of this easy reflexive left-right divide. The real battles coming up are between the past and this future with a lot of challenges from AI and technology. It's also about the top versus the bottom. We're creating this power of billionaires now that are putting more money than ever possibly thought could be imagined into our politics, corrupting our government. You've been reporting on it today about how people are using their privilege to trade stocks to get on these futures markets and trade on insider information. We're seeing the corrupting, the highest court in the land has the lowest ethics laws as billionaires take them on fancy vacations and give them gifts. So this has got to be a moment in a... We don't just beat Trump. It's not just what we're against. We need to start talking about what we're for and having a bolder vision for what we can be as a country and who we can be together. I mean, no one likes any of those things, right? Voters hate corruption. And they're doing it out in full view. There's a brazenness that suggests that they don't think Democrats can beat them. Yeah, I think... So first of all, take a little responsibility. I think that the Democratic Party should eschew a lot of this same kind of gross money in politics, individuals trading stocks. I'm happy that a lot of people in my party are leaning on some of those things. But what Donald Trump is doing is taking it to a level never before imagined. He's made more money in one year in office than all the other U.S. presidents in American history combined, openly grifting, taking millions and millions of dollars in payments through his crypto schemes. From the very countries that have huge national security interests and they want things from us, and suddenly he's giving them things that were refused by President, Republican and Democrat. We are in a time of crisis. But if we make this all about Donald Trump, if we make him the main character in the American story now, we make a mistake. The main character has got to be what are we doing? As King said, yeah, we're going to have to repent for the vitriolic words and violent actions of the bad people. But ultimately, what we have to repent most for is the appalling silence and inaction of the good people. That's why I wrote this book, Stand, because I want people who ask me what to do to tell them we're the heroes we're looking for. Let this be some inspiration and instruction about how other people who didn't have high office in our past and in our presence are still forging change in these times. What do you do if you regain power as Democrats in November? I think we show that we are a governing party and not just an opposition party. I think if we can get the Senate back, which is becoming more and more likely, especially if we see the turnouts sustain like they are, I think we show not only our ability to check and balance a president. Remember, this is a Congress controlled by Republicans that has completely submitted to Donald Trump. They have shown an advanced form of yoga to bend over backwards and do what he wants them to do. Really blowing up what our founders said is that the Senate should be a check on those things. Why do you think? I think it's fear, Jefferson said it. Of what? Of losing or of violence? So, Jefferson said if the people are afraid of their government, there's tyranny. If the government is afraid of its people, there's liberty. And so I see my colleagues who know what Donald Trump is doing wrong, but they're afraid. And they're afraid, for some reasons, we talked about with some people in media are as well. They're afraid that Donald Trump will come after them. They're afraid that they'll $20 million will be put in a primary against them. There's a lot of reasons why they're fear, but that doesn't in any way excuse them. Jeff Flake, Mitt Romney, I can tell you the colleagues I've had who stood up, whose politics I don't agree with, but they showed profiles encouraged by in the worst of times when Donald Trump was doing horrifically bad things to our democracy and to the American people, they stood up. But right now we have a bunch of spectators in the Senate who are doing nothing as prices go up, as millions lose health insurance, as we're in the worst oil shock we've had, as they commit tens of billions of dollars to wars overseas, as they're cutting feeding programs at home. And they're silenced to me that complicity is almost worse than the actions of Donald Trump himself. Yeah, because for some of them they have public statements that prove that they don't believe in any of it, but they're going along with it. It also projects incredible weakness. We're going to ask you to stick around. We have to sneak in a short break. We'll talk more on the other side of the book. Okay, stay with us. Twelve hours now I'm standing and I'm still going strong because this president is wrong. And he's violating principles that we hold dear and principles in this document that are so clear in playing. The powers of the Article One branch are spelled out and he is violating them. Don't take my word for Republican appointed judges. Democrat appointed judges are saying it and stopping him. And then he maligns the judge that did that. When is it enough for people to speak out and not just fall in line to put patriotism over a person that's in the White House? That was exactly one year ago. Senator Booker began his record-breaking speech on the floor of the Senate. People still, when they talk about who they like and who's fighting, people still talk about that moment. And I think as someone who sort of covered the second Trump term, it's sort of the first moment where it was clear that Democrats could fight, that at least you were going to fight. Yeah, I think that we have a nation's national history that's littered with incredible examples of people when it was necessary that stood up. I know that night one of the things that made it powerful was not me, but just reading the stories of courageous Americans and what they were doing. But in the book I write about a nine-year-old, Jennifer Keelan Chathans, who, when the ADA is not moving in Congress, she rolls her wheelchair up to the Capitol steps and inaccessible building, throws herself out and crawls up the Capitol step using her elbows and her chin, scraping them up. You can give Alice Paul during the suffrage movement, again, frustrated. This young 30-something-year-old woman goes to the White House and does something that had never been done before. The first person ever to protest in front of the White House is a 30-something-year-old woman from Jersey. And then she's jailed and does something years before. Goddy would do it. She went on hunger strikes. There are so many examples throughout our history of people in times like this that stood up and showed that one person standing in adversity, standing strong, is more powerful often than the people in the highest office in the land. And that's what we need right now, a lot more of. There's still too many people who are watching what's going on, but they're treating this democracy like they're spectators. And it doesn't take much. I show in the book in the very first chapter what one guy just volunteered one more hour a week with a chain reaction that set off that changed a generation that was yet born. So I'm excited about this time. I'm anguished. I'm hurt. I am afraid. I said to you off camera, things will get worse before they get better. In what way? I think that this president is liable to do anything. If you don't believe me, look at the storming of the Capitol. But now he's gotten us into this quagmire in Iran. We don't have an off-ramp. He's made things worse. A more extreme government, the choking of the streets of Ramuz, what can get worse? He could put American boots on the ground. Thousands of troops are being sent there. We see two now, National Heads of Department of Homeland Security, two of them saying, I'm not going to commit to not putting armed ICE agents at our polling places. And where would those polling places would be? They would be in probably blue cities where they would try to cause as much chaos as possible. I am telling you, this man is liable to do as much as we let him get away with without checking him and balancing him. And that's not only the job of a cowardice Congress right now. It's also the job of the American people. Because in a democracy, we still have the power of the people being greater than the people in power. In fairness, I feel like the American people are doing their part. The first page of Timothy Snyder's On Tyranny is about obeying in advance. And what do you make of corporations obeying in advance? Media companies obeying in advance. Law firms, like Paul Weiss, this renowned democratic sort of heavyweight filled law firm obeying in advance. What do you make of all the capitulation happening as though Trump won't be gone in two years? Yeah, I do not understand the levels and extent of cowardice of wealthy, wealthy people and corporations, law firms, corporations, universities with massive endowments, all bending at the knee, tech firms, all bending at the knee. History is going to look back at this, especially because he's liable to do more extreme things, more outrageous things. History is going to look back on where did you stand when our democracy was being tested in the courts, being tested in Congress? Where did you stand when millions were losing health and care and many people couldn't make a decision between rent and paying for their prescription drugs? Where did you stand? But it is also at dark periods like this that we find our backbone, that people realize their power. And it's usually after dark times like this that we see new eras, really revolutionary times of thought. FDR, JFK often came out of really tumultuous, painful times. And I think this is the makings of an American renewal, an American rebirth. And I think at a time that half our country is losing faith that the American dream can work for them. I think we have a chance at the other side of this if we fight to redeem the very American dream. I'm glad you're at the book. It's really important. It's great reading. And thank you for being here to talk about it. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. Thank you. The book stand is out now. Senator, thank you very much for being here to talk about it. Great cover. Quick break for us. We'll be right back. My guest on this week's episode of the Best People podcast is my dear friend and colleague, Alex Wagner. We got to really get into it. We had a conversation about exactly where we find ourselves right now over one year into 2.0. And the question she has right now for his supporters, take a listen. These become, at least for me, much more psychological than political conversations. It's much more like, how are you hurting? Like, how is this man feeling a gap or making you feel not less than? Like, and how can we, as your friends, family members or society, help? I mean, not everybody can be dealt with like this. But I feel like because I have personal relationships with these people, it's like, okay, how do we like fill in the cracks here so that you can understand that what this like drug dealer is promising you is a short-term high at great expense. So, I mean, it's not even like I try and argue immigration policy anymore. Right. It's just like, why are you lonely? Why are you sad? Why are you depressed? Why are you angry? You know, like, let's get at that. As always, she is brilliant and full of insights. You can listen to the entire conversation. It's out now on YouTube. You just scan the QR code on your screen to hear the rest or to listen by downloading it wherever you get your podcasts. One more break. We'll be right back. Thank you so much for letting us into your homes. We are grateful. Thank you.
