two years of trump and the conservative media downplaying what happened on january 6th, conditioning republican voters to say, hey, it wasn't that bad, and now they're seeing that here. trump has convinced them that, hey, this is not a thing to criticize me on. we're all in this together. yet again, his lead just grows. "axios'" alex thompson, great stuff this morning. thank you, sir. thanks to all of you for getting up "way too early" with us on this thursday morning. "morning joe" starts right now. the president bears responsibility for wednesday's attack on congress by mob rioters. he should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfoldunfolding. make no mistake, those who are responsible for wednesday's kay yot will be brought to justice. >> after january 6th, you said donald trump bears some responsibility for the attack on the capitol. if he is found criminally responsible, will you respect the results? >> he's not -- i don't see how he could be found criminally

responsible. >> why? >> what criminal activity did he do? he told people to be peaceful. >> um, so, willie. >> wow. >> my god. >> it is like telling people, "hey, first savings and loan on main street, be there on january 6th, like, overrun the guards, beat everybody up inside. if you have to go to the bathroom, go ahead and wipe it on the walls. take their money. beat people up. cause the death, be seen as the proximate cause of the death of four guards there, and then 2, 2 1/2 hours afterwards, i'll tell you to stop." for kevin mccarthy to say, "what did he do? what did he do?" willie, let me read for you, while we look at this video. this is from february 12th,

2021. in an expletive-laced phone call with kevin mccarthy while the u.s. capitol was under attack, trump said the rioters cared more about the election results than mccarthy did. mccarthy insisted the rioters were trump supporters and begged trump to call them off. and then the shouting match began. a furious mccarthy told then president trump rioters were breaking into his office and through the windows and asked trump, quote, who the f -- except he didn't say f -- who the f do you think you are talking to? that's kevin mccarthy shouting while his office is under siege, begging donald trump to stop the rioters, begging donald trump to stop the riot, and then donald trump saying, "oh, kevin, it's antifa." his response, again, a shouting

match. mccarthy went around telling all of the republican caucus, he was very proud of the fact he shouted down the president who, you know, sat there for two hours while they were being attacked, while rioters were looting the capitol and while police officers were getting brutalized. >> you know, there's a reason that donald trump refers to kevin mccarthy and has over the years as "my kevin." you saw "his kevin" on display yesterday. he'll say and do anything to protect donald trump. he had that one moment on january 6th, the phone calls you just laid out, that night lindsey graham was another of them who said, "enough is enough. he bears responsibility for this." you can't change that video. it does make you wonder, we've talked about this, joe, how someone like kevin mccarthy looks in the mirror at night. what does he tell his family? what does he tell his kids? he was there. he knows what happened on january 6th. we show the video because we have to remind people, yes, your

eyes were right that day. the thing you saw is exactly what happened, no matter what now speaker mccarthy wants you to believe. the political question, joe, is for what? they're putting their political lives, their political careers on the line, their integrity on the line for donald trump, for a guy who has lost them election after election after election, and may well lose them another one next year. >> yeah, i mean, they're putting -- they're putting everything on the line to defend a loser that has brought the republican party to new lows. we're not even talking about the shamelessness, the hypocrisy, the lying. we're talking about election results. you look at the latest quinnipiac poll, the head-to-head matchup between donald trump and joe biden that just came out. i mean, it has donald trump losing again. i know there's some polls that show it close, but this recent one, most recent one has donald

trump down five points. people know. you look at public opinion strategies, their head-to-head matchups in one state after another. it doesn't look like this. it looks like ron desantis and other republicans giving joe biden a much better race. here, joe biden up 49% to 44%, and this was even before the latest jack smith letter. another indictment for what happened on january 6th. it does beg the question, seriously, man, i was in congress. i can tell you, it's not worth it. nothing is worth it, willie. to be this shameful. and i will say, you know, i didn't know people. i just didn't know many people in congress that would do this, because you could never get away with it. i mean, you say one thing one day, and the next day, you turn

around and play the kevin mccarthy. they just look at you and laugh at you and never trust you again and think, "oh, what fools." but this republican party, this trump republican party, it's a cult. they all go along with it. >> and to live in fear every day of your life. the thing i'm about to say, is that going to upset donald trump? if so, i better not say it. >> oh, my god. >> we're seeing it among the candidates trying to defeat donald trump. they're measuring their words. now wait, i know this is really bad. i know january 6th was bad. i know stealing nuclear secrets and hiding them at your beach club is really bad. i know all the defamation we're going to talk about is really bad. but, boy, if i say something mean or something donald trump even could interpret as critical, i'm in big trouble, so i better defend the guy, even though i'm trying to beat him in a political race. it's wild. >> we're going to be talking about it, but you look at the ruling out of new york where

district judge yesterday in new york said, "hey, maybe donald trump, maybe he didn't rape e. jean carroll under the law, penal law, but, my gosh, in common parlance against the people, the u.s. army, the ama, every other measurement, he did rape her. that's what the judge said. again, quite short with trump lawyers who suggested their client did not rape e. jean carroll. had that happened any time before donald trump, there would be, my god, there would be phone calls an hour, hour and a half later, that person would be out of the race. well, it's just not the case here because this is a republican party, i guess, that not only is shameless and hypocritical, but they just like to lose. i can't figure out why they like losing so much.

i just have to come to that conclusion, that they're afraid to win. since you mentioned the e. jean carroll case, let's look at exactly what the judge said. the jury only found trump liable for sexual abuse, and then there was a new court filing. a judge clarified that the jury found that donald trump did rape writer e. jean carroll, and that was in the way that the word is commonly used. the jury handed down that verdict during a civil trial between the writer and the former president, awarding carroll $5 million in damages. trump's lawyers filed a motion seeking either to reduce that award or get a new trial, arguing that he was not found liable for rape like carroll alleges. yesterday, the judge denied that, saying the way new york law defines rape is narrower

than how it is commonly defined by some dictionaries and statutes. he wrote, the finding that ms. carroll failed to prove that she was raped within the meaning of the new york penal law does not mean that she failed to prove that mr. trump raped her, as many people commonly understand the word rape. indeed, as the evidence at the trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that mr. trump, in fact, did exactly that. this filing comes as trump faces a second defamation lawsuit from carroll over comments he made about her shortly after she came forward with her allegation, as well as comments he made the day after the jury in the first trial handed downverdict. remember that? he couldn't stop. attorneys for trump have not responded to questions for comment. it is interesting, kevin mccarthy is so shared of this

man, so frightened of his shadow, yet this woman will hold donald trump accountable no matter what she has to go through and no matter how long it takes. just saying, very, very, very different, different abilities to handle stress, let's put it that way. >> if you want to, willie, look at just how much this party has changed from 2016 when the "access hollywood" tape came out, you had people, mike pence, saying, "we can't follow this guy anymore," and they were speaking out against him. now, you have a president who has been indicted three times. indicted for stealing nuclear secrets and hiding them in his beach club. other military secrets also stolen from the u.s. government, hidden in his beach club. you have a district court judge calling donald trump a rapist,

saying that he is a rapist. again, this is -- any one of these things would have finished anybody's political career -- >> anybody. >> -- in either party, pre donald trump. it is truly frightening, what the republican party has become, because any time a politician was, you know -- it just -- >> listen, you wouldn't want someone like this working in your business. >> a judge says he is a rapist. what company would continue having this guy as their ceo. stealing nuclear secrets, they would be fired immediately, "leave the building. we'll box your stuff up, and leave the building." willie, again, the fact the republicans are sitting back and are fine with all of this, they're fine with nuclear secrets being stolen, they're fine with military secrets being stolen, they're fine with military plans to invade iran

being stolen, donald trump lying to the government when they try to get those secrets back, and a judge saying that donald trump raped e. jean carroll, they're fine with that, again, it keeps getting more bizarre every day. >> yeah. i think it's important you say that it wasn't always like this. we have kids who were grewing up -- have been growing up in this political culture asking, "has it always been like this?" no, it hasn't. leaders have been held to a standard of behavior. it takes not even courage but some integrity to do that. man, is there a deficit of that in the leadership of the republican party. you even had republicans coming out yesterday desperately saying, "well, the only reason jack smith and the government and the biden administration is coming out with these indictments is to silence us and overwhelm the news day on our

investigation of hunter biden and the oversight committee." they can't bring themselves to express concern about very serious, potential crimes, because, again, that would mean criticizing donald trump. it's hard to explain to somebody who hasn't been watching it as closely as we do every day. if you dropped down from another planet and asked somebody, you know, "why is this happening, how can you allow this to happen," it is a tough thing to explain, except for the tornadic fact they're afraid of donald trump and his voters. it is unclear, really, inside the republican party anyway, what breaks that fever. >> we're going to get to the investigations, also. i mean, again, so-called whistleblowers. >> my god. >> these irs whistleblowers at least weren't spies. they didn't illegally smuggle oil to the communist chinese party. at least they weren't a chinese spy like the last whistleblower was.

this one said, "yeah, i brought it up to the trump administration department and, yeah, they didn't see anything there either." all the things that congressmen have been saying about merrick garland, that i said, too, those are lies, too. they don't want to hear a judge called donald trump a rapist. they don't want the american people to focus on the fact that donald trump stole nuclear secrets, wouldn't give them back to the government. that donald trump stole military secrets and secret plans to invade iran and wouldn't give it back to the government. they don't want people to know, so they make things up. they have all of these so-called whistleblowers who, again, admit. the trump justice department said, we'll get there. we have the host of "way too early" and bureau chief at "politico," jonathan lemire.

"the new york times'" mara gay. the bulwark's charlie sykes. and chuck rosenberg. we are learning more about the serious, new charges the former president could potentially face. two attorneys with direct knowledge of the matter tell nbc news that in a target letter sent to trump this week, special counsel jack smith mentioned three federal statutes. deprivation of rights under color of law, conspiracy to defraud the united states, and witness tampering. it's worth noting, although new charges against the former president are extremely likely, a target letter is not an indictment. if trump is indeed charged, the counts could extend beyond the three statutes mentioned in the letter. >> chuck, what do you make of those three charges, those three possible charges? >> right.

first, to mika's point, the target letter is not an indictment, but as a former prosecutor, it means an indictment is coming. what do i make of the three charges? we've talked about this before. i've always said that most compelling case would be the most serious charge. the most serious charge i can imagine in a democracy would be the effort by an office holder, a president, mr. trump, to overturn a fair and free election. i can't imagine in a democracy a crime more serious than that. so these three charges articulated in the target letter, depravation of rights, which would be related to voting, i believe, the efforts to defraud the u.s. government by overturning the election, and then, certainly, you know, an effort -- it's called witness tampering in the title of the statute, but it actually means attempts to obstruct an official

proceeding -- are as serious as you can imagine. they all relate to january 6th. they all relate to a criminal effort to retain power by unlawful means. and so, you know, look, the proof will be in the pudding. when jack smith and his team of prosecutors and agents say something, they have an obligation that kevin mccarthy and members of congress don't have. they've got to prove it in court, beyond a reasonable doubt, to a unanimous jury. so they don't write these letters lightly. they don't indict cases lightly. their words have meaning, and they have to prove it. it's of a different order. what do i make of it, joe? this is as serious as it gets. >> one of the things we've learned over the years covering donald trump is even if there's bluster in front of a microphone, his true feelings are often revealed when he is alone with his phone on truth social. i should note, it is all caps after all caps, clearly freaking out about this particular,

potential indictment. charlie sykes, chuck just said it, in his estimation, this is the most serious charge in a democracy. yet, sure doesn't seem like most republicans are viewing it that same way. yes, asa hutchinson, chris christie, they were critical of trump. many republicans are attacking the doj instead. i want to get your assessment of this. doesn't it feel like this is the byproduct of two years' worth of trump softening the ground and downplaying what happened on january 6th, normalizing what happened on january 6th, saying, "oh, it was a protest that a little out of hand, that it was antifa," whatever it might be. despite it being the most serious charge in a democracy, for republicans, it is a shrug, a deep state, a witch hunt, and it won't change their vote. >> this is one of the many mornings that americans wake up thinking they took a crazy pill. can we stop on the fact a

former -- that a judge said the former president was a rapist? this would be disqualifying, except apparently for being the republican candidate of the united states. your point is exactly right. you've had two plus years of donald trump gaslighting the nation about what happened on january 6th. you've also seen this long march of donald trump and his allies through the institution of the american justice system, the delegitmiization of any institution that may hold him accountable. now, the republican party internalized this. it's not just that they're afraid of him, but they internalized that they don't have to take a federal grand jury seriously. they don't have to wait to see what the charges are. they've internalized it, that the attempt to overturn the election, to lie about the

election, you know, the deception, the obstruction of justice, in fact, is no big deal. so here you have this moment, and i do think that this is worthwhile just recognizing how truly bizarre it is. i think willie made the point, if somebody came in from another planet, they couldn't understand this. well, many of us probably feel like we did come from another planet. you know, the world before 2016, where you see this conduct, and the republican party deciding, "you know what? we're all in on this. we'll make obstruction of justice central to the legislative agenda." this is not a normal moment. we've said this again and again. i think what you're seeing this week is really kind of an illustration of how fast all of this has moved. and, again, how extraordinary it is, that the candidates for president, like ron desantis, are running as these strong candidates who want to be the leaders of the free world by

illustrating absolute unwillingness and inability to stand up against donald trump. it is an extraordinary moment once again in american politics. >> mika, what is extraordinary about it is, again, for former republicans like charlie and myself, we were the party that defended the institutions against what we thought were over the top assaults in the '60s and the '70s. >> right. >> defending the united states military. defending the intel services. defending the fbi even with flaws. defending the justice department even when they made mistakes, saying we have to respect the institutions. these are the institutions that tie us together as a society, that tie us together as a culture, tie us together politically, protect and defend us, whether overseas or at home. now, it is just savage attacks on the american military from republicans. it's attacks on the intel community and believing vladimir putin more than you believe our intel community. remember helsinki in 2018.

also, it is so selective, right? the republicans, again, as charlie said, doing everything they can do to assault our institutions, to assault the justice department, to undermine the justice department's credibility, even though it was donald trump's justice department that decided not to move on hillary clinton for four years. now, they're talking about unequal justice. no, they, time and again, told donald trump, "there is nothing to charge hillary clinton with." donald trump's hand-picked attorney generals came to that conclusion. it also, of course, was the fbi that helped elect hillary clinton with a bizarre letter ten days out, right? they don't say anything about that. so they ignore the fact that the trump justice department didn't go after hunter biden, the trump justice department didn't go after hillary clinton. now they say, "oh, there is a two-tiered justice system, so let's destroy the preeminent law enforcement organization in america that protects us from

terrorists," right? >> this is a party all about the rule of law. >> right. the same thing with the justice department. the trump justice department. the trump fbi. they don't go after hillary clinton. they don't go after biden. donald trump tells them to, but they say, "sorry, no crimes. we can't do it." yet, as charlie said, they have been spending years moving toward this moment, where they knew donald trump was going to get arrested. they undermined all of these institutions to try to tear them down, as charlie said, so people are numb to it in republican party. did he really steal nuclear secrets, military secrets? i'm not exactly sure how they explain away the rape, the judge's conclusion of the rape, but they'll figure out a ay to do it. >> charlie brought up the word

"gaslighting." mara gay, what you saw kevin mccarthy doing there, i thought it was as bad as it gets. you may as well, you know, be standing right there next to trump on january 6th, telling everyone to run to the capitol and telling them it will be wild, telling them to go for it, and two hours later, calling for -- let's not even. it's just as bad if you don't stand up for the country when you're asked. by the way, that's what kevin mccarthy did the day of, and, yet, later, they act like it didn't happen. this word "gaslighting" is important. ultimately, isn't there an impact on our politics and the race for the white house in 2024? >> that's right, mika. you know, part of what is so disturbing here is these new charges that we -- that may be coming, that we now know of in this target letter that suggests the president may be prosecuted under a section of the u.s. code

that was enacted to go after clan members and southern whites in the wake of the civil war, you know, during reconstruction, who were intimidating black voters and republican white voters across the south at the time, you know, that is so interesting and so important. it's significant because at the heart of donald trump's lies, at the heart of the lie of trumpism, is really this idea that only certain kinds of americans are really part of the democracy. only certain voters are legitimate voters. some people who are a part of our -- who are citizens, actually, you and i would obviously recognize that, really shouldn't be recognized as equal citizens under the law or in the eyes of their fellow countrymen. that is what is so dangerous about this. it's this idea that the country is really only a country for certain people. white men, christians, et cetera. that is what is so dangerous about this, and that is kind of what has fueled so much of the

political hatred, the fear, and, unfortunately, political violence. it's not new in this country, but it is very scary. i also just have to say that it's so, just, breathtaking, to joe's point, to see within my lifetime, and i'm in my 30s, right, just this devolution of one party that went from, you know, reaganism, which maybe i don't agree with the policies of reaganism, but just a deep commitment to the american experiment, to now, all of a sudden, government is, for some republicans of this republican party it seems, simply a vehicle to express the will of their donors or maybe to gain power based on extremism in one small segment of the american population that can't quite seem to break this fever, as willie said. so it's really scary. it's an example of how, as

extraordinary as the american republic is, things that have happened elsewhere can happen here. democracy is not guaranteed. this is really a moment to strengthen those institutions and to fight for them. >> to your point about reagan, a vision of america as a shining city on a hill, now to american carnage, a hell hole that only donald trump can save, though he had a chance to save it for four years. chuck rosenberg, more specifically on the charges that we think may be brought against donald trump, at least the statutes that were laid out, those three inside the target letter that the former president received, what is, as you sort of interpret the document a little bit, what is your view of the burden of proof here? what would the government have to show donald trump knew or that donald trump did to prove a case like conspiracy to defraud the united states? >> yeah, good questions, willie. generally speaking, the burden of proof is always with the government. it never passes to a defendant

in a criminal case. a government has to prove its case unanimously by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. but what is the thing that they have to prove? generally speaking, it's that somebody acted with intent corruptly, right? making a mistake, an accident, negligence, all of those things are bad, but none of those things are criminal. to show that mr. trump, his minions or conspirators tried to defraud the u.s. government, perhaps, or that they tried to obstruct an official proceeding, that would be the counting of the electoral vote, they would have to show these people acted with intent. that's hard to prove. in order to prove intent, you have to crawl into someone's mind. one way you do that, of course, is to talk to people around the defendant. we saw reporting in "the new york times" and other outlets recently that a number of people near to mr. trump when he was still president were subpoenaed to a federal grand jury. inevitably, they would be asked,

"did mr. trump understand that he had lost? did he articulate that he had lost? did you tell him that he lost?" why do you ask all those questions? to help prove his intent. generally, willie, in answer to your question, that's what the government will have to prove. it is their burden of proof. it never passes to a defendant. my guess is that they have ample evidence or they would not have sent a target letter, and we will inevitably see this laid out in an indictment that is forthcoming. >> so interesting. and those who testified, there were some who talked publicly about their testimony. alyssa farah, now a host on "the view," said it was his understanding that he lost to joe biden. our knowledge of trump is that he pushes a lie to the point where he almost believes it, but then breaks a little bit with people that he is trying to show off to and admits that he knows the truth, that he is lying.

>> and -- >> we've seen it in real time. >> what alyssa says, they had a conversation, trump said, "i can't believe i lost to joe biden." >> yeah. probably more that she shares with investigators. former u.s. attorney, senior fbi official, chuck rosenberg, thank you. we'll be following this with you very closely. still ahead on "morning joe," yet another legal blow for donald trump. we'll go over yesterday's order surrounding the hush money case, the criminal case against the former president in new york. plus, there is new concerns about technology's role in the spread of disinformation in politics. we'll have a look at how artificial intelligence could impact the 2024 election. the growing use of a.i. is also a concern of striking hollywood writers and actors. steve rattner will join us with charts on how the issue reflects the changing media landscape. also, the new quinnipiac

poll that shows, well, the weight of all the charges on donald trump and the impact it is having on the race in 2024. "morning joe" will be right back. my husband and i have never been more active. shingles doesn't care. i go to spin classes with my coworkers. good for you, shingles doesn't care.

because no matter how healthy you feel, your risk of shingles sharply increases after age 50. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. shingles doesn't care but, shingrix protects. shingrix is now zero dollars for almost everyone. ask your doctor about shingrix today.

first, there's an idea and you do something about it for the first time with godaddy. then before you know it, (it is a life changer...) you make your first sale. small business first. never stopped coming. (we did it!) and you have a partner that always puts you first way. (no way!) start today at godaddy.com. (vo) in one second, sara (woman) (yesway!) (vo) will get a job offer somewhere sunnier. relocating in weeks. (woman) weeks? (vo) yeah, weeks. (woman) gotta sell the house. (vo) don't worry, sell to opendoor, and move on your schedule. (woman) yes! (vo) request a cash offer at opendoor dot com. psoriasis really messes with you. try. hope. fail. no one should suffer like that. i started cosentyx®. five years clear. real people with psoriasis look and feel better with cosentyx.

don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infection, some serious and a lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. tell your doctor if your crohn's disease symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reaction may occur. best move i've ever made. ask your dermatologist about cosentyx®. beautiful view. >> not really, actually. that looks terrible. >> you can almost -- >> nope, doesn't look good at all. >> don't breathe it in. stay inside. i think those canadians, once again, polluting our air. >> 35 past the hour. >> i don't get it. >> yeah. >> willie, you know, i told you before, i like to let people into my life. >> sure. >> i like to let people know a little bit more about joe. >> yeah. >> because i know that's what people are saying.

anyway, as you know, my grandpapi, he had some rules. >> what are you sharing? >> we've gone through some of the rules. >> don't overshare. >> number one. >> yeah? >> grandpapi said, never go swimming before a little league baseball game. we all know that's true, right? number two, he's a smart guy, joey, don't ever start a ground war in asia, especially southeast asia. >> yeah. >> i didn't really understand it at the time. i was 6 years old. i've grown to under it. >> grandpapi was a smart man. >> number three, joey, never bet on the baltimore orioles to finish any higher than fourth place in the american league east. >> oh. >> this was the post lou era, andgrandpapi was right. it but not this year, willie. >> was your grandfather the

pilot in picture him up front w, "ever been in a turkish prison," and all the rest of it. >> exactly. >> orioles are in first place, tied with the rays. >> come on. >> first place in the american league east. they have the second lowest payroll in all of baseball, ahead of only the lowland oakland a's. now, they have the second best record in all baseball. i don't love seeing your two teams down there, but you can't help but by happy for an orioles organization and a fan base that's suffered for a very, very, very long time. they got a really good team. at this point in the season, it is not a fluke. they're a really good team. they won again yesterday. they are tied for first. they have the best record, along with the rays, in the american league. awesome story. >> okay. >> it is such an exciting story. jonathan lemire, talking about not exciting stories, let's talk about the boston red sox for a second, who were actually on a

winning streak going into the all-star break. did well afterwards. then, for some reason, you know, decided to go to oakland and drop two out of three. i'll tell you, one thing i can't understand, though i never question alex gora, i do not understand why we bench our most dynamic offensive force in durant. he and yoshida should be in absolutely every game they can be in. it seems like durant is getting benched every other game, despite the fact you put him out there, you let him hit four times, he's going to get a double one or two times and figure out how to steal third and get home. but, again, they keep benching him. it makes no sense. >> durant was one of the hottest hitters in baseball there for a few weeks. 26-year-old. he's dynamic and fast. he can always take the extra base. he occasionally struggles against lefties, but he's earned the right to be in there. doesn't make sense. sox had the best record in

baseball for a couple weeks but lost two out of three to an oakland a's team who are 27-71. yet they beat the sox two out of three. mind you, that is better than the yankees out west. they were swept by the angels. >> come on, you don't do that. >> i want to note something about the a.l. -- just, look, these are facts. i want to say, about the orioles top of the standings, it's not just that they're in first place. their team is so young and so cost controlled, and they have so many stars, they also have a really, really deep farm system. if there is any team at the deadline this year, they could make a big move, like go all in and trade prospects they don't need for a superstar, say, shohei ohtani, it's the baltimore orioles. >> willie, let me clean this up for him. i look at the standings. you know what scares me the most? >> the yankees. >> i feel the hot breath. >> there it is. >> i feel it on my back, the new york yankees. look at them, it's almost like i

don't know why they like doing this, but they're like secretariat. they like holding back, right? >> mm-hmm. >> we're in the position of sham, thinking we're going to win the derby. >> sham. >> we're going to win the preakness. >> see? >> here come the new york yankees. youroh, my goodness. >> they're putting up these routines, knowing the sox will see it. they're trying to lull us into a false sense of security. watch this yankees team. they're going to win it all this year, willie. i promise you, they are. >> it's all a setup. that was theater. he waited for the cameras to be on to get this on "morning joe." we know the red sox and their manager watch it. let's make them a little more comfortable. losing two out of three to the rockies, getting swept by the angels coming out of the all-star break before coming home, it's all a setup, joe. we're going to charge ahead and maybe, maybe step out of the basement, come up the stairs, and finish in four place. >> no, you'll -- you're going to

get to the playoffs. judge is going to hit a home run, send ya to the world series, and win in five. i said it here first. i said it here first. >> i like it. >> so we'll move on. >> i have to do a lot of cleaning up for lemire. jonathan, you have got to pull back, okay? >> yeah. >> yeah, it's been a tough couple years. you're right. we'll change the tone there. i'm just playing my part to setting up the yankees comeback, it'll be that much sweeter when it devastates red sox fans like me. i'm playing my part in this, which we often see year after year, the little team that could, does. >> okay. politics now. in the latest quinnipiac university survey, former president trump holds a 29-point lead over florida governor ron desantis. 54% to 25%. all other candidates poll under 5%. >> i wonder how that's going to work out in the general election. >> in a hypothetical 2024 general election matchup against president joe biden, the poll

shows -- >> oh. >> -- biden ahead of trump by five points, 49% to 44%. this survey was conducted just before trump announced the news of his possible third indictment. >> mara, they just can't help themselves. they really just can't help themselves. they would rather lose with donald trump than win with somebody else. >> it's pretty stunning. you would also like to see some political courage, right? i mean, you want to -- i mean, it is nice to see chris christie out there, but he's looking pretty lonely. asa hutchinson, too. it's a lonely game. you know, somebody has to try and break that fever, as willie was talking about, you know, earlier this hour. you have to give some political leadership to say, there's another way to win. in fact, we're not going to win. we're probably going to lose again. yet, they can't quite seem to quit him. i don't get it. i mean, the only thing i will say here is, there is another

element here, which is these voters. we have to be able to be honest about this. voters are still deeply invested in donald trump, and alternatives haven't seemed to interest that part of the party. you know, i think it's okay at this point to ask why that is. of course, you know, things could change. things could change, but it's hard to see. >> things can change. >> donald trump, you know, when you're being accused by a judge of rape and it just does nothing, the polls just kind of, you know, blink and keep carrying on, you have to wonder. i mean, this is a cult. so what will change this for these voters? >> well, yeah, evangelicals, i mean, they'll just ignore all of this. the same evangelicals who would come up to me and be so shocked and stunned and deeply saddened that we immediately didn't yank bill clinton out of office,

saying, "you must be a moral man to be president of the united states." you know, when character was king, people running around, doing things, saying things like that, looking to the good old days when people weren't like bill clinton. bill bennett writing his book of virtues. >> oh, my god. >> now, another hack defending donald trump and going to the wall. charlie sykes, it's crazy. i will say this, charlie, and i've talked about it on the show some, my family members, my friends, the people that had no problem telling me, even when donald trump was calling me a murderer, who voted for trump in '16, who voted for trump in '20, they're done with him. i hear it time -- and it is anecdotal. i always hear, "don't believe anecdotal evidence." i'll tell you, on the campaign trail, when you start hearing something, you can believe it. time and time again. but i'm hearing this. that's why i still am a little

surprised that trump's numbers are staying so high, because everybody i know that voted for him in '16 and '20, especially in the suburbs, suburbs say, "we can't stand him. we're so exhausted by him." by the way, we don't want to lose to joe biden again. starting to hear that more and more at a quickening pace. i'm not exactly sure, though, how the numbers are holding up. i'm curious what your experience is. >> well, first of all, i think it is shocking that you didn't mention the milwaukee brewers are leading the n.l. central, and they're ten games ahead of the cardinals. they have a record of 7-3 in the last ten games. i wanted to lay that out there. >> wait, wait, the n.l. central, is that a hockey league? what -- >> see, this is the problem with you coastal elites, you know? >> oh! >> there's baseball here in the

heartland, as well. >> here we go. >> i just want to point this out. look up the 1957 world series. just laying that out here. okay. so in terms of donald trump, look, people maybe discussed it, but the fever is not breaking. you look at the poll numbers, and i think people are -- a lot of these voters have become so deeply invested. the sunken cost of rationalizing donald trump has taken its toll. there appears to be no willingness on the republican establishment to take him on, except from people like chris christie. we know where they're going. the crazy pill aspect of this is that any, i think, intelligent republican will tell you that 2024, they're going to lose. you look at joe biden's poll numbers, he ought to be much more vulnerable. to be five points behind joe biden right now with his approval rating where it is is an extraordinary moment.

virtually any other republican candidate would, i think, be considered the favorite in this election. so not just -- it's not just the matter that this is a cult. it has become a politically irrational cult. >> right. >> where the republicans are, in fact, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. this could cost them the senate, the house. it's already cost them governorships and legislatures around the country. even so, i mean, how do you get out of this? how does the republican party get out of it when you have defended, accepted and rationalized everything? how do you turn around and go, hey, you know, do we have one of those old bill bennett books about character around? maybe we ought to bust it off. that's gone. that era is not coming back, even if donald trump disappeared tomorrow. this party is not going back to basically saying, character is king, right? we have to take these things

seriously. that's done. >> those books have probably been banned, at least in the republican party. >> in florida. >> yeah. by the way, charlie, you opened it up. i have to walk through that door about the 1957, the little team, milwaukee in 1957. as a long-suffering braves fan, the only thing we had to root for for years or point to was hank aaron 1957 and the milwaukee beating the yankees in seven games. >> bush bill wins. >> spawn, sane and the day of rain. that held up. >> wow. >> willie, speaking of that, while we're talking about great teams in central time zone, you know, you look at the '57 braves. new york teams won every year, absolutely every year, but perhaps one of the greatest teams of the 1950s was the '54

indians, who actually, somehow, managed to blow it to the giants. we know a few things about central time zone teams, don't we? >> yeah, we do. charlie doesn't realize what he's opened up on this show. i've been doing my research since his comment, as well. game seven, yankees stadium, goes to a game seven. larson and spawn are the scheduled pitchers. warren spawn comes down with the asian flu, dnp asian flu, he can't pitch. the braves win anyway and go on to win the 1957 world series over the new york yankees. thank you, charlie sykes. >> you're welcome. >> proving once again, though, that the yankees always get the final word. they're going to crush the hearts of red sox fans, yes, yes, yes. the milwaukee braves won the world series in seven games in 1957. they lost in seven games in 1958. to?

your new york yankees. charlie sykes, thank you so much. >> thank you, a charlie. >> seven games. >> mara gay, we greatly appreciate your patience. it can't be easy. >> i like baseball. thanks for having me. >> that's good. >> good having you. an update on tommy tuberville's blockade of military promotions, a stunt that leaders called a threat to national security. >> you're looking at a guy right there that's responsible, tommy tuberville is responsible for the marine corps not having a commandant. >> that's nuts. >> for the first time in 150 years. because of tommy tuberville, the united states marines don't have a commandant. >> we'll tell you what majority leader chuck schumer is offering the alabama lawmaker. also ahead, new polling on how voters feel about president joe biden's handling of the economy. it comes as he's hitting the road again to tout his

administration's achievements. we'll be right back. why do dermatologists choose dove? the dove beauty bar, is gentle. it not only cleans, it hydrates my skin. as a dermatologist, i want what's best for our skin. with 1/4 moisturizing cream, dove is the #1 bar dermatologists use at home.

are you still struggling with your bra? it's time for you to try knix. makers of the world's comfiest wireless bras. for revolutionary support without underwires, and sizes up to a g-cup, find your new favorite bra today at knix.com age-related macular degeneration may lead to severe vision loss and if you're taking a multi-vitamin alone, you may be missing a critical piece... preservision. preservision areds 2 contains the only clinically proven nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of moderate to advanced amd progression. preservision is backed by 20 years of clinical studies. so ask your doctor about adding preservision and fill in a missing piece of your plan. like i did with preservision. now with ocusorb better absorbing nutrients. my late father-in-law lit up a room, but his vision dimmed with age. he had amd.

i didn't know it then, but it can progress to ga, an advanced form of the disease. his struggle with vision loss from amd made me want to help you see warning signs of ga. like straight lines that seem wavy, blurry, or missing visual spots that make it hard to see faces like this one, or trouble with low light that makes driving at night a real challenge. if you've been diagnosed with amd and notice vision changes, don't wait. ga is irreversible. it's important to catch it early. talk to your eye doctor about ga and learn more at gawontwait.com

the ceo of netflix says the streaming giant is, quote, super committed to reaching an agreement that would end the writers and actors strike, currently under way in hollywood. ted serrando says a lot of work remains to reach a deal. netflix's wide range of content will help the platform weather the strike, but says the real point is to get the strike to a conclusion so that everyone can move forward. joining us now, former treasury official and "morning joe" economic analyst, steve rattner. you're looking at this and the impact. >> that's right, mika. it is an interesting strike for a variety of reasons.

we have a few strikes this summer, but i started this with words to try to outline what is going on here. there are a few issues. pay, obviously, they want more. artificial intelligence, which you referred to before, they don't want artificial intelligence to replace either the writers or the actors. i don't know how to chart that, so we'll leave it there. the other is residuals. in the industry,writers and directors get residual payments when their shows are reran somewhere else there in the electronic television world. the issue is the changing media landscape has affected them because residuals get paid differently if it's on broadcast. they get paid each time it is shown, versus streaming, where they're paid by the number of subscribers. let's do one quick, fun fact. does anybody know how the actors and directors got residuals in the first place?

in 1960, there was a similar strike, about five weeks by both groups, over this issue of residuals. that strike was led by the head of the actors union, who was ronald reagan. ronald reagan, of course, went on 21 years later to break the air traffic controllers strike as one of his first acts as president. that's a little fun fact for you to take away with. let's talk about what's going on in the industry, which is what is driving a lot of this. so you've had, back in 2015, 80% of american households subscribed to cable or to direct satellite broadcasting. that number is now down to 49%. conversely, back then, 52%, roughly half the country had a streaming service, though they didn't use it much, as i'll show in a second. now, 80% roughly have it. the higher payments from this service went down. the lower payments from this service went up. that's part of why those writers and directors are on strike

today. >> steve, you're talking about how the landscape has changed, and one of those ways, and this is your second chart here, is how traditional television has really struggled. give us the lay of the land there. >> so, not surprisingly, as households gave up cable and moved toward streaming, it had an impact on what they were watching. so you can see back in 2013, 30% of the watching was on traditional broadcast networks, nbc, abc, cbs, so on. 60% was everything from espn to bravo or whatever. even though a bunch of folks had streaming services back then, they hardly watched them. there were only a couple of them. now, you look at today. 37% of television watching is streaming services, and that is almost double the percentage that watched traditional, over the air services. it is actually even more than the number of people who watch cable services. so those, again, provide lower payments to these actors and

directors than those, but a huge change in what people are doing. now, there's another set of competitors that traditional television face, as well, that affects their bottom line, which are a couple other services. tiktok, which barely existed a couple of years ago, now generates $10 billion a year of advertising revenue, which happens to be almost identical to the amount generated by these four top media companies, from comcast, warner brothers, paramount and disney. so that's money out of the pockets of these guys, again, affecting their bottom line. >> steve, you know, obviously, eyeballs usually equal dollars. if fewer people are watching, there is less money around. your third chart gets into that, about how media spending has been shrinking, too. >> yeah. this comes back to what's happening to these companies as a result of all this. so cable television, direct broadcast television, you can see that half of the revenues essentially have disappeared on an inflation-adjusted basis over

a ten-year period. home video, the old business of dvds, things like that, almost gone. movie theaters, partly due to covid but partly due to changing habits, spending on adjusted for inflation is back to the levels of 1982. streaming is up by this amount, $27 billion, but streaming is losing a lot of money for these companies. net-net, when you cut through it, on an inflation-adjusted basis, their revenues have -- the revenues of this industry have gone down by 36%, $60 million of lost revenue. all of that translates into stock pricing that are nothing great. the s&p 500 since 2015 is a bit more than doubled, up 127%. these traditional media companies are essentially right back where they started from. so, clearly, the writers and directors have a lot of legitimate questions about their residuals and how they get paid

in general, but the media companies have their own issues, which is part of why the strike is proving so intractable. >> again, i'm trying to figure out, steve, as far as these numbers go, you're saying streaming is just terrible for the media companies, as far as their long-term revenue streams and their long-term viability? >> so far, streaming has been a huge money loser. a fair amount of revenue, as i showed you, but a lot of profit losses because there's so many of them, they're so competitive, and they've spent so much money on product. over time, that should rationalize as some of them drop out, merge and consolidate, but it is not going to be like the good, old days where you had a few television networks that were functioning as an oligopoly. these streaming services look like they'll be losing money for a good while to come. >> what that means, steve,

again, i mean, it seems that the only solution for these companies, these media companies, is we're going to see mass consolidation like in the airline industry. if there are too many of them out there, they're cutting up the pie too much, they're losing too much money, seems like we're going to have, you know -- we have three, four massive airline companies. is that where we're going as far as media goes, as far as these streaming services go? >> yeah. we will, i think, definitely see consolidation among the streaming service. there are too many that don't have a critical mass of viewers. as we just were discussing, none of them are making any money. you're already seeing the big parent companies talk about being more disciplined about how much they pay for content, how many shows they put on. eventually, the competitor marketplace will rationalize it, but it is a brutal, tough, competitive marketplace for these companies at the moment. >> one final question. just curious what your thought is as far as the long term. i've always been skeptical, and

we've talked about it before, when people talk about the end of tv, only because people have been talking about the end of tv for 20, 25 years, and television is the new television, as we say there. sometimes, the cameras, they go haywire. you don't know exactly what is going to happen. but tv, if they get the cameras in place, the tv has been able to -- >> i thought it was cool. >> -- hold on. >> not the effect. we're doing anything we can to keep people here and not on tiktok. that said, steve -- >> we'll never win. >> it seems to me, steve, that right now, if you look at the media landscape, and this is just gut, mika, seems to me the longer the strike goes, the more it helps tiktok. the longer the strike goes, the more it helps youtube. it really does seem to me at least that things like tiktok and youtube, i hate to say this because people were saying this about aol in 1998, before the aol/time warner merger.

people were saying it 10, 12 years ago. but doesn't it seem the trend lines for services like youtube and tiktok really suggest that is where the future does lie? >> yeah, joe, often, an event like this can accelerate change. you know, there was a saying during covid, that covid accelerates everything in terms of people's habits and how they live their lives in general. you could well be seeing that here. as we get into the fall and as the supply of new shows that the networks and other broadcasters have already put into storage depletes, and they then are forced into reruns and who knows what to fill out their programming schedules. people will naturally go off and experiment even more with some of these other services, whether it is youtube, tiktok or whatever. then they'll often form new habits, and none of that is good for this business in the longer run, if people start finding things that are completely off the page of what these big media companies do. >> yeah, and therein lies, i

think, a real challenge for the media companies, also for those who were striking against the media companies. the longer they're out, the longer they're not producing new content, the longer they're not producing scripted content, mika, the more people are going to move to alternatives. again, it's going to be an accelerant for tiktok, an accelerant for youtube, accelerant for instagram reels. all of those things are going to gain the longer there's not scripted television out there. >> there's many different conversations we could have out of this, and we will continue to do so. steve rattner, thank you very much. we are just a few minutes past the top of the hour on this thursday, july 20th. joining the conversation, we have the president of the national action network and host of msnbc's "politics nation," reverend al sharpton. former u.s. senator, now an nbc news and msnbc political analyst, claire mccaskill joins us. and politics bureau chief and

senior political columnist for "politico," jonathan martin is here today. good to have you all on board this morning. let's start with the new development in the recent sexual abuse verdict against donald trump. in may, you remember, a jury found trump liable for sexual abuse, not rape. however, in a new court filing yesterday, a judge has clarified that the jury found donald trump did rape writer e. jean carroll, in the way the word is commonly used. the jury handed down that verdict during a civil trial between the writer and the former president, awarding e. jean carroll $5 million in damages. trump's lawyers filed a motion seeking either to reduce that award or get a new trial, arguing that he was not found liable for rape like carroll alleges. yesterday, judge kaplan denied that request, saying the way new york law defines rape is much

narrower than how it is commonly defined by some dictionaries and other criminal statutes. in the opinion, kaplan writes, quote, the finding that ms. carroll failed to prove that she was raped within the meaning of the new york penal law does not mean that she failed to prove that mr. trump raped her, as many people commonly understand the word rape. indeed, as the evidence at the trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that mr. trump, in fact, did exactly that. this filing comes as trump faces a second defamation lawsuit from carroll over comments he made about her shortly after she came forward with her allegation. as well as comments he made the day after the jury in the first trial handed down its verdict. attorneys for trump have not responded to requests for comment. >> so let's see, claire -- >> and they hope he doesn't. >> -- in the years since we've

both been involved in politics. >> my lord. >> what would be the impact if you had a national leader charged with stealing nuclear secrets from the federal government, charged with stealing top secret military plans to invade iran from the federal government, lied to the fbi and the justice department of that, and had a district court judge in new york say that, regardless of what the new york penal code said, that donald trump, in fact, did rape e. jean carroll based on common usage of that term? what would happen in the past, and why does it seem nothing seems to matter to this republican party? >> well, first, it is profiles in cowardice. it is a desire for power, trumping everything else. love of country, patriotism, integrity, character. let me tell you a true story. you know, i think people forget

what it used to be like, joe. i had an opponent in 2012 who said that if a woman was raped, if it was a legitimate rape, she could not be impregnated. that's what he said. that's all he did. he had no other ethical transgressions. he wasn't charged with crimes. he didn't lie every day 45,000 times. that's all he said. and the reason he didn't beat me that year was not because of what he said, but it was how the republican party reacted. the leaders of the republican party rejected him because of what he had said. it was their ability to stand up and say, "we do not accept this, what todd aiken said. this is wrong." they disinvited him to the republican national convention. play said thin

said things like, "he should not be running." these were leaders of the republican party. the main difference here is not the conduct of the candidate. it is the reaction of the leaders of his party. all that would have had to happen here is for them to have stood up after january 6th and stay in the place they were, which is, "this is unacceptable. the government should take over now and prosecute this man." mitch mcconnell said it. lindsey graham said it. kevin mccarthy said it. they all said it right after it happened. but then they got scared. they just became little, lily livered cowards and were too afraid that, somehow, they couldn't hold on to their precious office or their precious power if they stated the obvious. it is not so much what donald trump has done. it's the rest of the republican party who has elevated him and kept him elevated that has brought this upon america. >> well, again, it's just not worth it. claire and i have been there.

it's just not worth it. i could still be there if i chose to have stayed in office. i can tell you, it's not worth it. i'm not sure what they're selling their soul for. that's exactly what they're doing, selling their political soul. take a look at kevin mccarthy here. >> after january 6th, you said donald trump bears some responsibility for the attack on the capitol. if he's found criminally responsible, will you respect the results? >> i'm not -- i don't see how he could be found criminally responsible. >> why? >> what criminal activity did he do? he told people to be peaceful. >> yeah, he told people to be peaceful. >> my god. >> mika, 2 1/2 hours later, after he told them to come to washington on the 6th, it was going to be wild, after he told them they had to be strong, after he encouraged this, after he sat and watched for 2, 2 1/2 hours, police officers getting

the hell beat out of them. after he sat in his office, according to testimony for people who worked for him, and re-wound his dvr to the most vie leapt parts, was celebrating it. after he said that, actually, mike pence deserved hanging. when his lawyer came in and begged him to stop it. when ivanka begged him to stop it. when don jr. was texting, begging him to stop it. when all of his staff members were begging him to stop it. when his main lawyer, when the white house counsel was asked, "was there anybody in the white house that didn't want him to stop these riots," and the answer was, "no, no, it was just donald trump that wanted the riots to continue." even when cops were getting the hell beaten out of them. that's why kevin mccarthy called up screaming, screaming at donald trump, yelling at him and saying, "who the f -- except he didn't say f -- who the f do you think you are talking to?

your people are storming the capitol. stop it!" that's why he went on the floor the next day, blamed donald trump, like lindsey graham blamed donald trump. said he was responsible for this. yet, you see the cowardice there. again, i'm not exactly sure what -- well, i actually am sure what's worth that. nothing. nothing is worth that. nothing is worth selling your soul and making a fool of yourself in front of your family, in front of your constituents, in front of everybody. they've got the tape. i mean, willie, they've got the tape. they know, like you said before, they've seen it. they've seen what he said about donald trump. they know he was bragging to other republican members about screaming to trump, yelling at him, "who the f do you think you're talking to?"

yet, now, he continues to back down, continues to be craven, continues to just humiliate himself every day. >> as claire says, that is the opposite of leadership. leadership is doing something difficult, that maybe your voters, supporters, donald trump supporters don't like or don't want to hear, but it's the correct thing, the accurate thing, and, in the case of kevin mccarthy, something you said before, in the wake of january 6th, that, of course this was bad, and of course donald trump had a big part of it. he was, as you point out, on the phone yelling at donald trump, and donald trump said back to kevin mccarthy on the phone on january 6th, reportedly, "well, i guess these people are more upset about the election than you are, kevin." kevin yelled back at him, according to these accounts. now, of course, it only took him a few days to reverse course, head down to mar-a-lago, and to begin the excusing of donald trump for january 6th, among republican leadership. now, we're learning of a promise house speaker kevin mccarthy

reportedly made to donald trump. mccarthy suggested in an interview last month that trump may not be the best 2024 presidential candidate. trump, infuriated by mccarthy's comments, insisted he had to make up for it. this is according to "politico." mccarthy promised the house would vote to expunge the two impeachments against trump before the august recess. but that promise puts mccarthy in a bind. several moderate house republicans are hesitant, of course, to revisit trump's impeachments, especially the charges stemming from the january 6th insurrection. the speaker has denied he made this promise to trump, indicating he would discuss the matter with members of his caucus. jonathan martin, this is from not your reporting specifically but from "politico," from your outlet. >> sure. >> this falls in line with everything we've known about speaker mccarthy over the last several years, particularly since january 6th and his relationship with donald trump, was if he or anyone else in the

party backhandedly, mistakenly, whatever it is, makes some oblique criticism of donald trump, they've got to scramble to make up for it. >> seven years and counting of a party that is handcuffed to the whims of donald j. trump. it never changes. this is the kind of story that comes out when that is your plot in life politically, willie. yeah, kevin mccarthy basically blurted out during a television interview that he didn't think trump was the best candidate in 2024 in the general election. he didn't say it exactly, but in so many words, and trump was infuriated. mccarthy promised he'd help trump expunge the two previous impeachments on the house floor. first of all, that is constitutionally questionable, how you can expunge previous

impeachments from previous congresses, but, again, mccarthy is trying to buy himself some time. the challenge you have is a five-seat majority that the gop has in the house, and you have plenty of republicans in that majority who do not want to take a vote on expunging donald trump from his previous impeachments, especially as he's about to face a federal indictment for his role, it looks like, inciting the riot of january 6th. one of those two indictments is directly tied to his conduct leading up to january 6th. willie, bottom line, it is a mess of mccarthy's own making here, and it is just one more illustration of a party that just can't quit donald trump. it is tied to him why? because their voters don't want to move on. that's the bottom line here, guys. this is a voter issue. the leaders are deferring to their voters. the voters still like trump,

therefore, the leaders zip their mouth. >> yeah. of course, any effort to expunge the impeachments from the congress record, though, even if they were to be technically successful, they still happened. not leaving the history books, reverend sharpton. >> right. >> kevin mccarthy is a microcosm, to jonathan martin's point there, about the republican party's relationship with donald trump. the denouncement happened on january 6th in the hours that followed. it wasn't just that he went to mar-a-lago a few weeks later. when he went there, he apologized to donald trump. he apologized to donald trump for speaking sharply to him during the riot. and any effort, people said to me in the party, any effort the republican party could have made to move on from trump ended in the moment, when mccarthy, who wanted to be house speaker, was still latching himself to donald trump. it's not going to change any time soon. that's what the voters want, and we're going to see more displays of political cowardice and bending the knee to donald trump. >> i think you're going to continue to see that because that voting base is what they're

responding to. i agree with that. i think the democrats and the republicans challenging trump need to deal with the more expansive voting block of independent voters and others, to really bring this issue home. the thing that, you know -- i'm a preacher. you illustrate a text. when you preach, you illustrate. they need to illustrate to the country, if you elect donald trump, you're electing a man that will be going on trial at least on two occasions. even if he was successful in holding the trials after te the election, he has two trials, maybe four. do you really want a president that, in the middle of an international crisis, can't respond because he's on trial, he's sitting at the defendant's desk? do you really? i mean, they need to paint that picture. this guy is going to be sitting in court at least twice, maybe four times. even if they make some

arrangements, do it virtually from the white house, he's got to be there. do you really want to show the world the sitting president of the united states can't respond to a crisis in ukraine or taiwan because he's on trial? we have to get him after the trial is over. they're not driving that point home. what would we look like as a country? >> yeah. i mean, it's just a great question. jonathan martin, i want to show you the latest quinnipiac poll. it's just a snapshot in time, but i don't think things are exactly going to be better for republicans running against trump in the primary, or better for donald trump in the general election. here's a quinnipiac. first of all, donald trump has a comfortable lead over ron desantis. it's about as much as rudy giuliani having a comfortable lead in 2007 or hillary clinton having the same. still, what's so significant about this is, you go to the general election, and it looks about like i'd expect it to

look. >> right. >> you have a five-point lead. jonathan, you look where this election is going to be decided, the suburbs of atlanta, suburbs of philly, the suburbs of detroit, of milwaukee, maricopa county. >> yeah. >> those people that went away from donald trump, they ain't going back to donald trump. now, they may be like some of my friends and family members who just say, baden -- biden and trump, i'm going to vote for everybody else and leave the top line empty." that's what happened in wisconsin to donald trump, as ron johnson explained. >> yes. >> help me. >> sure. >> in all of your reporting, help us all understand why republicans are still attracted to a guy that they know, most likely, is going to lose. >> well, i think the easy way to relate this is that you've got two parties effectively under one tent now. you've got traditional

republicans, what i call kind of the pre-trump party, that still places the biggest premium on winning. they're making a cold-eyed assessment that trump can't win and they have to find an alternative. you see this in the u.s. senate. you see it among governors. certainly, you see it on the editorial pages of the "wall street journal," which nearly every day is pleading with the republican party not to pick trump again. but you also have a post-trump party, which is significant. you see it there, that national survey, joe, that you posted. frankly, doesn't think trump lost the last time and thinks that he could win this time. simply does not believe the polling data. frankly, is attached to trump for reasons that are more fundamental than traditional american politics. he's the leader of their movement. they're not going to easily come off of him because they see a bad survey head-to-head against biden. i think that's the real challenge going to '24, is the republican party is bifurcate in

a way that i don't think we've seen, necessarily, in our lifetime, where you've got a -- >> yeah. >> -- faction of the party that simply doesn't care about issues of electability or not, pause they don't believe he lost in '20. they saw him beat hillary clinton in '16. >> jonathan, let's talk a little bit more about this. you said something that's so important. we talk, not you, but we talk about donald trump as the head of a party. >> right. >> he's not the head of a party. he is the head of a movement, not a political movement. it is a cultural movement. >> there you go. >> yes. >> it's people who say they're evangelicals but they never go to church. >> right. >> they identify. it's a cultural marker. they call themselves evangelicals. they don't read the bible. they don't go to church. but that's a large chunk of people who now call evangelicals. >> yes. >> it's the same thing with trump. talk about how it's a movement and how issues that matter to

me, that matter to conservatives in the past just don't matter to them. it's not about the issues. >> yeah. >> it's about the movement. >> yeah. no, these voters aren't looking at the christian coalition scorecard from 1997 and sort of going down the list, joe, to put it mildly. trump reflects their identity. it was really driven home to me, and probably was to you, too, when you drive around parts of the country that love trump, well after the election is over and you still see trump signs and trump flags, that never happens in american politics. lawn signs and flags are for the fall of the election year. it's not year-round thing. i think that, to me, reflects kind of the hold he has on people. we almost don't have the language for it in american politics because it really hasn't happened here in our lifetime. this is much more of sort of an overseas phenomenon, when you have a cult of personality

leader, and he's using the party as a vehicle. republican party exists to serve donald trump's ambitions, take it or leave it. a lot of his supporters don't give much to the republican party. yet, we cover the race, i fear, in a way that tries to put it in the language of a normal primary. oh, can gary hart catch mondale in '84? mondale is the establishment favorite. he's got a lot of early endorsements from labor. we're not dealing with mondale in '84. we're talking about somebody who is an exiled strongman trying to reclaim his grip on political power, in a way we just haven't seen in recent american history, really any american history at all, and the language we have is almost inadequate to convey that. >> jonathan martin, thank you for your insights this morning. we'll be reading "politico

magazine" on the uncertain future of the national governors' association. ahead on "morning joe," we've spoken a lot about the dangers of social media, particularly about its impact on the mental health of young girls. our next guest says kids are even more in the bag of social media companies than we think. democratic senator chris murphy joins us straight ahead to explain that. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. i'm saving with liberty mutual, mom. they customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. you could save $700 dollars just by switching. ooooh, let me put a reminder on my phone. on the top of the pile! oh. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

your brain is an amazing thing. but as you get older, it naturally begins to change, causing a lack of sharpness, or even trouble with recall. thankfully, the breakthrough in prevagen helps your brain and actually improves memory. the secret is an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription.

the best advice i ever got was to invest with vanguard for my retirement. the second best? stay healthy enough to enjoy it. so i started preparing physically and financially. then you came along and made every mile worth it. hi mom. at vanguard you're more than just an investor, you're an owner. helping you prepare for today's longer retirement. that's the value of ownership. subway's now slicing their meats fresh. that's why subway's proffered by this champ. and this future champ. and if we proffer it, we know you'll proffer it too. he's cocky for a nineteen year old.

for too long, big oil companies have bought off politicians so they can get away with ripping us off. that's changing now. joe biden passed a plan to jumpstart clean energy production in america. it's creating good jobs that can't be outsourced and will lower energy costs. $1800. that's how much a new report says the inflation reduction act could save just the average american family on energy costs. [narrator] learn how the inflation reduction act will save you money. half past the hour. beautiful shot of capitol hill in washington, d.c. blue skies this morning. this week in new york, members

of the united nations security council met for the first time to discuss the growing threat posed by artificial intelligence to international peace and stability. the u.n. secretary general called for a watchdog to act as a governing body that would regulate, monitor and enforce a.i. regulations. as concerns over artificial intelligence continue to grow, our next guest says there is a similar problem with our children and social media. democratic senator chris murphy is warning in "the new york times" that due to a lack of regulation, algorithms are making kids desperately unhappy. senator murphy joins us now. you know, we've talked a lot about teens and the data that shows suicidal ideation, depression, anxiety is plaguing our teens and, in many cases, young girls and developing minds, as they become addicted

to social media and influenced by social media and made to feel less than by social media. now, we're seeing that it's not just teens. it's kids? >> yeah, this is an epidemic that is really hitting our kids regardless of age. it is not just teenagers that are on social media. we know that even though the sites say they don't let anybody under 13 on, whether it be instagram or tiktok or youtube, there are plenty of young kids on these sites, as well. what we've seen is an epidemic of young people who are reporting intense feelings of loneliness, are withdrawing from social connection, and are often having suicidal ideations. there's just not a coincidence between that rise in loneliness and sadness and the social media age. what i wrote about in this piece is, you know, one of the real problems with social media,

being that this algorithm, which sort of feeds kids' content and connection on a conveyer belt, is robbing from kids one of the real rituals of childhood, which is discovery, exploration, the search for things they're interested in and people you want to connect with. when that connection and when those interests are fed to you by an algorithm on a smartphone, you are robbed of that really important exercise, of going out and discovering for yourself what you're interested in. i think that's part of what is driving kids' unhappiness today, the fact that they are just being delivered content and interests and hobbies and connection on their phones rather than going out and doing the work that often provides you with more value when you find something that really interests you or you find a connection that is really meaningful. it's that effort that often makes it even more fulfilling once you make that connection. >> senator, good morning.

as the parent of two teenagers, i appreciate your persistent attention to this issue. it is so serious for so many families across the country. i'd like for you to tell our aud audience for, if you would, about the 90-minute conversation you had with teenagers in suburban connecticut, and what so, i don't know if it shocked you because you're aware of the problem, but it threw you on your heels, what you heard. and off that, what solutions you might there may be. a lot of it falls to parents to have the kids put the phones down and do the discovering you're talking about. what can be done for this problem? >> it was that conversation that caused me to write this piece for "the new york times." i was talking about a piece of legislation i've introduced in partnership. it requires parental consent. it requires age verification to be sure kids under 13 aren't getting on the sites like

tiktok. it bans the use of the algorithm for teenagers, meaning you can't use your swipe history in order to continue to perfect content, which often is sending kids down really dangerous rabbit holes. kids are often swiping on pretty disturbing content. i thought it'd be the parental consent provision that was most concerning to these kids, but it wasn't. it was the ban on the use of the algorithm. these kids were really dependent on the algorithm. they really couldn't envision a world in which they had to expend effort to find content that they were interested in. a google search to these kids was way too onerous in their minds, and they were scared of the fact that tiktok or youtube might not just be delivering them content tailored for them. they feared that they would be more unhappy if they had to do that work. of course, the evidence is exactly to the contrary. the evidence is that a decade ago, when teenagers actually had to do more work to find things

they cared about or to make connection with peers, that they were actually happier. they were less lonely. that part of the conversation really scared me. it convinced me that these kids today have become addicted to the algorithm. have become addicted to these platforms. they don't know what they're missing. it made me feel that the legislation we've introduced, getting rid of that algorithm for kids under 18 is even more important than we had thought when we first introduced it. >> senator murphy, i agree with you on the algorithms and your concerns, but let me ask this, how do you deal with, not in any way impeding someone's right to free speech, right to decision, or even as a parent, looking like you're dictating to your kids? i remember, i joined civil rights activism when i was 12,

13. the more my mother was concerned, the more i wanted to do it. how do you balance what is needed for these young people without incurring their resentment or them saying that you're stepping on their rights? >> yeah, i think that's a really important question. there are plenty of other examples in society in which you need parental consent for a child to participate in an activity, to have access to a technology. of course, there are plenty of technologies that we just decide are not appropriate for children, that you can't have access to until you're 16 or 18. i do think there's plenty of examples here where we do give parents some rights. so, you know, to me, parents in this country are really clamoring to, you know, be empowered, to have a conversation with their children about when their children are ready to be on social media. because, right now, that parent has no right and, in fact, the

social media companies make no effort to keep the really young kids off these sites, the social media companies are in charge, not the parents. >> senator chris murphy, thank you. thank you for staying on this. we appreciate your being on the show this morning. >> thank you. bloomberg is out with new reporting this morning that congress may not be able to act in time to implement guardrails for artificial intelligence in political campaigns before the next elections. right now, campaigns have no legal regulations when it comes to the developing technology, which means that we will likely see more of it in the lead-up to 2024. meanwhile, the republican party is already using a.i. to create new ads targeting president biden. joining us now, government reporter for "bloomberg," oma saadiq. thank you for being on to talk

about this. what can we expect? if there are no regulations on a.i., what is it, the wild west? can political campaigns make a fake joe biden saying something he didn't say? >> i mean, the amount of deepfakes we are going to see in this election is going to be unlike anything we have seen before. obviously, mika, we've seen disinformation in previous election cycles, but experts who are following this technology and following disinformation are predicting in 2024, it is going to be unprecedented. as you mentioned, you know, we've already seen campaigns starting to play with this technology, starting to experiment with it and releasing deepfake audio, video, and that's only just going to ramp up from here. i mean, we're still almost more than a year out away from election day, and so as ad spending ramps up, we're going to be seeing a lot more of this deepfake, a.i.-generated content. >> so, claire mccaskill, you know, you have seen the ramifications, especially given the conversation we just had

with senator murphy, of social media and big tech on our kids, creeping into their lives, made by companies who, the people who work at these tech companies won't let their kids on social media. that pretty much says it all. yet, our kids now are dealing with just a boatload of problems, given the new influences that have been brought into their lives by what is on their phones. we kind of got a sense that everyone was preparing for a.i. that we were ahead of the game on this. yet, the election, it could be the wild west if there aren't some sort of constraints on it. doesn't sound like there's anything that can be done. >> yeah, and remember, traditionally, the most powerful political ad has always been the candidate speaking. typically, most powerful in negative ads, particularly.

if you get your opponent on tape saying something out of their mouth -- >> right. >> -- that is something that is gold in a political campaign. what this technology does, it allows everybody just to make it up. what i'm curious about and would like to ask the reporter about this from bloomberg, what's really interesting, this is going to impact both sides. this isn't, like, the democrats are going to be victimized here. i mean, trump's voice has already been faked by desantis in an ad. you already see them faking joe biden's voice in ads. why isn't there more bipartisan push to require disclaimers? it would be simple. all you'd have to do is when the candidate says, "i'm so and so and i approve this message" or "this message paid for," "artificial intelligence used in

this ad." i don't see why there would be a bipartisan roadblock in getting this done quickly. i think both sides would be scared to death of this. >> the main problem right now is to do with timing. i've been talking to lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, and they do believe that a.i. needs to be regulated in some form. the problem is, though, they're still really learning what this technology is. they don't want to jump in too quickly to set these guardrails, to mitigate some of the most serious threats, such as disinformation in elections. so there is fears on both sides of the aisle. right now, some democrats have unveiled proposals to at least require this disclaimer, but some of the democrats are even saying that doesn't go far enough. they're hesitant to jump in really early because they believe this technology has the power to do good, to promote innovation, to progress, to make our lives easier. they're really meeting with industry executives, advocates, civic society groups, experts, academics across all industries

right now, holding briefings, hearings, just to get to terms on what this technology is capable of before they set these guardrails. according to senate majority leader schumer, congress is still at least months away from releasing comprehensive a.i. legislation. in the meantime, there are no guardrails against this technology. we're just going to be seeing a lot of disinformation. it's really up to the voter. it's up to voters to become educated, to become aware of what this technology can be used for or even misused. it has the power to deceive them, manipulate them and to, you know, the biggest concerns are to eventually lead them to make a decision at the ballot box that may be misguided and based off of complete disinformation. >> absolutely. a lot of concerns here. government reporter for "bloomberg," oma saadiq, thank you very much for coming on the show this morning with your reporting. coing up on "morning joe," the republican-led committee

took a swing at hunter biden yesterday with testimony from two irs whistleblowers. we'll talk to house minority whip congresswoman katherine clark about that, and much more straight ahead on "morning joe."

when nature and science get together... pretty sweet things can happen. like our senokot laxative gummies. to relieve occasional constipation, senokot starts with the natural senna plant that science transforms into a yummy gummy! sweet! senokot laxative gummies. subway refreshed everything and now they're slicing their deli meats fresh.

that's why this qb profers the new five meat beast. and this qb profers it. and if we profer it. we know you'll profer it too. are you trying to outspokesperson me? maybe.

majority's long-promised star witness turns out to be a fugitive from american justice, an arms trafficker indicted in an unregistered foreign agent for china, who tried to trade chinese arms for iranian oil. i guess he's not going to be a witness for the majority anytime soon. well, after the report, banks records, 1023, we can conclude this inspector quest for something that doesn't exist has turned our committee into a theater of the absurd. >> ranking member of the oversight committee, maryland democrat jamie raskin, blasting his republican colleagues over

their failed efforts to paint president joe biden as the mastermind behind a family crime ring. that hearing featured a pair of irs investigators, gary shapley and joseph ziegler, who testified the doj essentially slow-walked its investigation into hunter biden and ignores recommendations to file tax felony charges, instead, striking a plea deal that allows the president's son to avoid prison time. >> slow walking by the trump justice department. >> trump folks, yeah, right. that along with everything else we've been talking about this morning should tell you everything you need to know. the pair allege to trump-appointed u.s. attorney, david weiss, the prosecutor leading the hunter biden probe, was prevented from bringing charges in jurisdictions outside delaware.

weiss has told congress he was granted, quote, ultimate authority over where, when and whether to file charges in the case. ziegler said he was the lead irs case agent on the investigation, and that the irs had recommended both felony and misdemeanor charges against hunter congressman raja of ohio said he got them to admit federal officials he was dealing with, and with whom he had concerns were members of the trump administration. >> what? >> before the biden administration ever took office. >> what? >> you say, quote, i started this investigation in november, 2018 after reviewing bank deposits. then you later say career irs staff were not initially supportive of starting the investigation. of course, in november, 2018, joe biden was not the president, correct? >> joe biden was not the president, correct. >> and then in page 20, you lay

out another concern. you had a concern about bill barr, attorney general bill barr consolidating these series of cases into the u.s. attorney's office in delaware. at that point, you said, quote, what was the potential issue i saw with working the case in delaware? we were working with a small u.s. attorney's office who might not have ever worked a case of this caliber. now of course, bill barr was appointed by donald trump, correct? >> yes, that is correct. >> let me turn to another concern you lay out in your testimony. you were concerned about the quality of the prosecutors. on page 14, you say, quote, the prosecutors were the jv squad, and they weren't up to the task of handling such a big case. now sir, u.s. attorney weiss was also appointed by donald trump, right? >> so as far as the actual

nomination and what went into why -- >> i'm not asking you why. i'm just saying, usda weiss was appointed by donald trump, correct? >> that's correct. >> you have lies, exaggerations, arms dealers, chinese agents, people that smuggle iranian oil to the chinese communist party, and now trump irs agents, trump attorney generals, trump prosecutors all appointed by donald trump, and these complaints starting in 2018 when donald trump would be president for two more years. over two years. democratic congressman roh khanna also got him to admit he decide not to charge the vast majority of cases like hunter

bide's. it's a small amount of people that got targeted like hunter biden did. he never said despite republican lies -- he never said that merrick garland lied to congress, that that right wing talking point was, in fact, a lie. let's bring in the house minority whip, katherine clark of massachusetts. it's just -- again, i mean, we started with durham. he was going to prove that hillary clinton tapped donald trump's phones and the fbi was in on it. he ended up being made a fool of himself, 24 jurors in two separate trials dismissed charges. i found those he charged not guilty, it was a complete bust. then we have house republicans bringing in arms dealers,

chinese agents, people that illegally smuggle iranian oil. now we have these so-called whistle-blowers who are saying, yeah. we're really angry. it's really terrible what trump's irs people did and trump's attorney general did, and trump's prosecutor did. i mean, it's -- these -- it's just a clown show with these house republicans, isn't it? >> absolutely. listen. the circus has come to town with the house gop, and what's dangerous about this is that the american people and their needs are not part of their agenda, and they want to focus on this political theater. they are so wrapped up in their own, you know, salaciousness that they have totally lost the thread that what they're here to do is find solutions for the

american people, and they don't want to talk about that with the biden administration and the democrats in congress, we have been able to grow the economy by growing the middle class. we have been able to reduce health care costs. just look at one year ago. we capped insulin at $35 a month. there wasn't a single republican vote because their focus is on this chaos, and it is not what the american people need, but we're going to keep doing our jobs. we're going to keep focusing on the solutions that matter, whether that's reducing the cost of health care, groceries, gasoline, or whether that is making sure that we are addressing climate change as most of this country is suffering from an incredible heat wave and making sure that we have the energy and the renewable energy to meet those

demands. gun violence, they don't want to talk about it, but they put a bill on the floor this week that was completely manufactured crisis about migrants in schools. let's talk about how we keep families safe at home. let's put the focus back on the american family and stop this theater. >> claire mccaskill, part of that hearing at the oversight committee included marjorie taylor greene holding up photographs of hunter biden in the nude taken from his laptop. unclear what point she was trying to make other than, you know, create some chaos and get some attention for herself. they would like to have the country believe that the alleged crimes of hunter biden are somehow equivalent to what we talk about with donald trump every day which is taking nuclear secrets and military plans back to his beach club, helping to overturn a 2020 presidential election. they say, why aren't you talking

about hunter biden? why do you just talk about trump? in fact, yesterday they said james comer said, we step out of our committee like posterboard-sized photographs of a nude hunter biden. >> yeah, and marjorie taylor greene said something yesterday in the hearing that i want to quote her exactly what she said, and i want to say this very slowly for everyone in the back of the room. "when evidence is presented, no prosecution should be denied no matter who the person is." um, you know, and i think comer said something similar, and the irony of this hearing is what they were underscoring is when evidence is presented, someone

should be prosecuted and that's exactly what's happening to donald trump. the difference is there's no evidence against joe biden, and i would certainly be interested, congresswoman, if you have heard these rumors that mccarthy in order to hold onto the speakership by a thumbnail which is what he has it by, barely, barely holding onto it, have you heard the rumors he's going to bring to the floor some kind of weird vote on expunging the impeachment votes of donald trump that occurred under the last congress? >> yeah, and it's worse than just rumor. those have actually been filed in the last few weeks in the house of representatives, and this is what happens when you have a speaker of the house who is not working for folks at home, not working for everyday americans, but working to appease donald trump. that is his goal in all of this, is how do i keep my power?

how do i keep my position as speaker of the house? what happens to the american people? they are in the rear-view mirror, and donald trump is the focus, and he is the one who is calling the shots for the gop and the house, and what happens is you have an agenda that they've put forward where they are dramatically cutting veterans' benefits. they are not addressing the issues that the american people sent us here for. they are kowtowing every single day to what donald trump wants them to do. that is not leadership. that is being a cult member, and this is why we are fighting so hard to put the american people back into focus.

let's put people over politics. that's what the democrats do every single day here in the house. >> congresswoman clark, i want to talk about biden-omics and own what the white house views what are positive views. job growth is still very high, but we see poll after poll including one that came out today that suggests that americans just don't feel that great about the economy right now. they still -- they're worried about it and they don't like how the president is handling it and they're not sure things are going to get better. how do you explain the disconnect there, and what can the white house and fellow democrats do to change that? >> biden economics -- biden-omics is working and that's the great news for if american people. we are recovering from dual shocks, the pandemic and then russia's invasion of ukraine. that's going to take time for the american people to be able to trust that what they are seeing is actually happening, and what we are seeing is great

news. 13 million jobs created. 800,000 jobs in manufacturing brought back to our shores and to places that feel like they have been overlooked by the past administration, and for decades in some cases. we are seeing right now, that wages for the first time as inflation continues to fall, are outpacing the costs that have increased. that's great news, and that's going to be reflected in polls and public sentiment, but i can tell you as i travel the country in my district, people are feeling that optimism. they are feeling that the attention that joe biden has put into growing the middle class, making sure there are great paying jobs, and lowering costs and just capping insulins's just one example, we were able almost

a year ago to extend benefits for veterans under the pact act, and make sure that they have the health care that they need. it is so critical to addressing those exposed to toxins. what do we see in the gop in the house? just a few months ago, they defunded those trust funds that we established to make sure that that health care was going to be available to our veterans. so biden-omics is good for the american people. it is good for growing our economy, and the metrics are coming in to show that it is working. >> i mean, the numbers, mika, are extraordinary. i mean, it's just the reality. the congresswoman talks about capping insulin at $35. i can tell you i have a son who's type 1 diabetic. >> right. >> we were able to afford it. i feel so badly for people who come up to me and talk about it because they know andrew is a

diabetic and they say, they can't afford it. democrats support limiting it because the numbers skyrocketed. you look at vets' benefits and the unemployment -- record level of unemployment. you look at u.s. manufacturing exploding. you look at all of these things, and inflation down, jobs up, wages up. my god, and 75% of americans saying they're doing pretty well. >> doing pretty well, and then on some key issues, this administration is with most of the americans that would be on guns and abortion. house minority whip congresswoman katherine clark, thank you very much for being on the show. >> thank you so much, congresswoman. and still ahead on "morning joe," the new movie "oppemheimer," hits theaters nationwide this friday. joe sat down for an exclusive interview with two of the film's stars, emily blunt and matt damon. we'll bring you that conversation. plus, what we're learning this morning about the new and potentially serious charges

former president trump could face in the wake of that target letter from special counsel jack smith and the continued defense of trump by republican leaders. of trump by republican leaders >> the president bears responsibility for wednesday's attack on congress by mob rioters. he should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding and make no mistake. those who are responsible for wednesday's chaos will be praugt to justice. >> after january 6th, you said donald trump bears some responsibility for the attack on the capitol. if he's found criminally responsible, will you respect the results? >> i don't see how he would be found criminally responsible. what criminal activity did he do? he told people to be peaceful. >> so willie, it's like telling the people, hey. first savings and loan on main street. be there on january the 6th,

like, overrun the guards. beat everybody up inside. if you have to go to the bathroom, go ahead and wipe it on the walls. take their money, beat people up. cause the death -- be seen as the proximate cause of the death of four guards there, and then two, two and a half hours afterwards, i'll tell you t stop. for kevin mccarthy to say, what did he do? let me read for you while we look at this video. this is jamie gangel, from january 12, 2021. in an expletive-laced phone call with kevin mccarthy while the u.s. capitol was under attack, trump said the rioters cared more about the election results than mccarthy did. mccarthy insisted the rioters were trump supporters and begged trump to call them off, and then

the shouting match began. a furious mccarthy told then-president trump rioters were breaking into his office and through the windows and asked trump, quote, who the ef -- except he didn't say ef. who the ef do you think you are talking to? that's kevin mccarthy shouting while his office is under siege, begging donald trump to stop the rioters, begging donald trump to stop the riot, and then donald trump saying, oh, kevin, it's antifa. his response again, a shouting match. mccarthy went around telling all of the republican caucus -- he was very proud of the fact that he shouted down the president who, you know, sat there for two hours while they were being attacked. while rioters were looting the capitol and while police officers were getting

brutalized. >>, you know, there's a reason that donald trump refers to kevin mccarthy over the years and he still does refers to him as my kevin and that's because he is his kevin. he'll say and do anything to protect donald trump, and he had that one moment. on january 6th, the moment, lindsey graham was another who said that's enough. enough is enough. he bears responsibility for this. you can't change that video, and it does make you wonder -- we've talked about this, joe. how someone like kevin mccarthy looks in the mirror at night. what does he tell his family? what does he tell his kids? he was there. he knows what happened on january 6th. we show the video because we have to remind people, yes, your eyes were right that day. the thing you saw is exactly what happened, no matter what now-speaker mccarthy wants you to believe, and the political question, joe, is for what? they're putting their political lives, their political careers on the line. their integrity on the line for donald trump, for a guy who has

lost them election after election after election, and may well lose them another one next year. >> yeah. i mean, they're putting -- they're putting everything on the line to defend a loser that has brought the republican party to new lows, and we're not even talking about the shamelessness, the hypocrisy, the lying. we're talking about election results, and you look at the latest quinnipiac poll, the head to head matchup between donald trump and joe biden that just came out. i mean, it has donald trump losing again. i know there are some polls this show it close, but this most recent one has donald trump down five points. people know. you look at public opinion strategies. you look at their head to head matchups in one state after another. it doesn't look like this. it looks like ron desantis and other republicans giving joe biden a much better race, but here joe biden up 49% to 44%,

and this was even before the latest jack smith letter. another indictment for what happened on january 6th. it does beg the question, seriously, man. i was in congress. i can tell you. it's not worth it. nothing's worth it, willie, to be this shameful, and i will say, you know, i didn't know people. i just didn't know many people in congress that would do this because you could never get away with it. you say one thing one day and the next day, you turn around and play the kevin mccarthy -- they just look at you and laugh at you and never trust you again and just think, god, what fools, but this republican party, this trump republican party, it's a cult. they all go along with it. >> and to live in fear every day of your life. the thing i'm about to say, is that going to upset donald

trump? if so, i better not say it. >> oh my god. >> by the way, we're seeing it among the candidate, mika, who are trying to defeat donald trump. they're trying to measure their words. i know this is really bad. i know january 6th was bad. i know stealing nuclear secrets and hiding them at your beach club is really bad. i know all the defamation that we're going to talk about is really bad, but boy, if i say something mean or something that donald trump even could interpret as critical, i'm in big trouble so i better defend him even though i'm trying to beat him in a political race. it's wild. >> you look at the ruling out of new york where district judge yesterday in new york said, hey. maybe donald trump -- maybe he didn't rape e. jean carroll by the letter of the law, under new york penal law, but my gosh in common among the people, every

other measurement, he did rape her. that's what the judge said, and got quite short with trump lawyers who suggested their client did not rape e. jean carroll. had that happened any time before donald trump, there would be -- my good. there would be phone calls an hour, hour and a half later. that person would be out of the race, but -- well, it's just not the case here because because this is a republican party i guess that is not only shameless and hypocritical, but they just like to lose and i can't figure out why they like losing so much. i have to come to that conclusion that they're afraid to win. >> since you mentioned the e. jean carroll case, let's just look at -- let's look at what the judge said. the jury only found trump liable for a sexual abuse and then there was a new court filing. the judge clarified that the jury found that donald trump did

rape writer e. jean carroll and that was in the way that the word is commonly used. the jury handed down that verdict during a civil trial between the writer and the former president, awarding carroll $5 million in damages. trump's lawyers timed a motion seeking either to reduce that award or get a new trial, arguing that he was not found liable for rape like carroll alleges. yesterday, judge louis caplan deied that saying that the way new york defines rape is much narrower than how it's defined in other statutes. caplan writes, quote, the finding that ms. carroll failed to prove that she was "raped" within the new york penal law does not mean she failed to prove mr. trump raped her. as most people commonly

understand the word rape. indeed as the evidence at the trial recounted below makes clear the jury found that mr. trump, in fact, did exactly that. this filing comes as trump faces a second defamation lawsuit from carroll over comments he made about her shortly after she came forward with her allegation as well as comments he made the day after the jury in the first trial handed down its verdict. remember that he just couldn't stop. attorneys for trump have not responded to requests for comment, but it's interesting kevin mccarthy is so scared of this man. he's so frightened of his shadow, and yet this woman will hold donald trump accountable no matter who she has to go through and no matter how long it takes. just saying, very, very, very different -- different abilities to handle stress, let's put it that way. >> and if you want to, willie,

look at just how much this party has devolved from 2016 when the "access hollywood" tape came out, when you had mike pence and everybody saying, we can't follow this guy anymore, and they were speaking out against him, and so you now have a president as you said that has been indicted three times, indicted for stealing nuclear secrets and hiding them in his beach club, other military secrets also stolen from the u.s. government, hidden in his beach club. you have a district court judge calling donald trump a rapist saying that he is a rapist. again, this is -- any one of these things would have finished anybody's political career in either party pre-donald trump. it is truly frightening what the republican party has become because any time a politician

was -- was -- was, you know, it just -- >> listen. they're working in your business. >> a judge says he's a rapist. what company would continue having this guy as their ceo? stealing nuclear secrets. they would be fired immediately. just leave the building. we're going to box your stuff up and leave the building. i mean, these are the sort of things, willie, that again -- the fact that the republicans are sitting back and they're fine with all of this, they're fine with nuclear secrets being stolen, they're fine with military secrets being stolen, they're fine with military plans to invade iran being stolen, donald trump lying to the government when they tried to get those secrets back, and a judge saying donald trump raped e. jean carroll. they're fine with that. again, it keeps getting more and more bizarre every day. >> yeah, and i think it's important you say that. it wasn't always like this. we all have kids of a certain

age who are growing up in this last decade in this political culture asking us and wondering, has it always been like this? no. it has not always been like this, and it shouldn't be like this, and we should go back to it not being like this where people are held to a certain standard of behavior. leaders are held to a standard of behavior, but it takes not even courage, but it takes some integrity to do that, and man, is there a deficit of that in the leadership of the republican party. you even had republicans coming out yesterday, desperately saying, while the only reason jack smith and the biden administration's coming out with these indictments is to silence us and to overwhelm the news day on our investigation of hunter biden and the oversight committee. they can't bring themselves to express concern about very serious potential crimes because again, that would mean criticizing donald trump. it's hard to explain to somebody who hasn't been watching it as closely as we do every day. if you dropped on from another planet and you asked somebody,

you know, why is this happening? how can you allow this to happen? it's a tough thing to explain, except for the fact this they are afraid. they're afraid of donald trump. they continue to be afraid of his voters, and it's unclear really inside the republican party anyway, what breaks that fever. >> and we're going to get into the investigations also. again, so-called whistle-blowers. i mean -- >> oh my god. >> these irs whistle-blowers weren't spies. at least they didn't illegally smuggle iranian oil to the chinese communist party. at least they weren't an acting agent for the chinese party like the last one was. this one admitted, i brought this up to the trump administration. the trump justice department, and they didn't see anything there either, and oh yeah, all those things republican congressmen have been saying about merrick garland that i said about him supposedly, those are lies too. so they're just throwing things at the wall because they're so desperate. they don't want americans to hear that a judge called donald

trump a rapist. they don't -- they don't want the american people to focus on the fact that donald trump stole nuclear secrets. wouldn't give them back to the government. that donald trump stole military secrets and secret plans to invade iran, and wouldn't give it back to the government. they don't -- they don't want people to know that, and so they make things up and they have all of these so-called whistle-blowers who, again, admit the trump justice department said, yeah. there's nothing there. >> we'll get to all of this. with us, we have the host of "way too early," jonathan lemere, mara gaye, founder of the conservative sykes is with e are learning more about the serious new charges the former president could potentially face. two attorneys with direct

knowledge of the matter. tell nbc news that in a target letter sent to trump this week, special counsel jack smith mentioned three federal statutes, deprivation of rights under color of law, conspiracy to defraud the united states, and witness tampering. it's worth noting although new charges against the former president are extremely likely, a target letter is not an indictment, and if trump is indeed charged, the counts could extend beyond the three statutes mentioned in the letter. >> what do you make of those three charges, chuck? those three possible charges? >> so first, to mika's point, the target letter is not an indictment, but having been a prosecutor and having sent out target letters, you don't do that unless you intend to indict. it means an indictment is coming. what do i make of those three charges? you and i have talked about this before. i've always said that the most compelling case would be the

most serious charge, and the most serious charge i can imagine in a democracy would be the effort by an officeholder, a president, mr. trump, to overturn a fair and free election. i can't imagine in a democracy, a crime more serious than that, and so these three charges articulated in the target letter, deprivation of rights which would be related to voting i believe, the efforts to defraud the u.s. government by overturning the election, and then certainly, you know, an effort -- it's called witness tampering in the title of the statute, but it means attempts to obstruct. they all relate to january 6th. they all relate to an effort, a criminal effort to retain power by unlawful means. coming up, senate judiciary chairman dick durbin and sheldon whitehouse join the conversation amid a new push for a supreme court code of ethics.

"morning joe" is back in a moment. f ethics "morning joe" is back in a moment permission to dig in? granted. breyers carbsmart is so rich, so creamy, it tastes totally off-limits. but with only 4 grams of net carbs in every delicious serving, you've got the green light. better starts with breyers. he snores like an angry rhino. you've never heard an angry rhino. you've got the green light. baby i hear one every night... every night.

okay. i'll work on that. the queen sleep number 360 c2 smart bed is now only $899. plus, free home delivery when you add an adjustable base. shop now only at sleep number. the promise of america is freedom, equality, but right now, those pillars of our democracy are fragile and our rights are under attack. reproductive rights, voting rights, the right to make your own choices and to have your voice heard. we must act now to restore and protect these freedoms for us and for the future, and we can't do it without you. we are the american civil liberties union. will you join us? call or go online to my aclu.org to become a guardian of liberty today. your gift of just $19 a month, only $0.63 a day, will help ensure that together

we can continue to fight for free speech, liberty and justice. your support is more urgently needed than ever. reproductive rights are on the line and we are looking at going backwards. we have got to be here. we've got to be strong to protect those rights. so please join the aclu now. call or go to my aclu.org and become an aclu guardian of liberty for just $19 a month. when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special we the people t-shirt member card magazine and more to show you're part of a movement to protect the rights of all people. for over 100 years, the aclu has fought for everyone to have a voice and equal justice. and we will never stop because we the people, means all of us.

so please call or go online to my aclu.org to become a guardian of liberty today.

in the latest quinnipiac university poll, donald trump holds a lead over ron desantis, 55% to 25%. all other candidates poll under 5%. >> i wonder how that will work out in a general election. >> in a hypothetical matchup against president joe biden, the poll shows biden ahead of trump by 5 points, 49% to 44%. this survey was conducted just before trump announced the news of his possible third indictment. >> they just can't help themselves. they just really can't help themselves. they would rather lose with donald trump than win with somebody else. >> it's pretty stunning.

you would also like to see some political courage, right? i mean, you want to -- i mean, it's nice to see chris christie out there, but he's looking pretty lonely. asa hutchinson too. it's a lonely game, and, you know, somebody's got to try and break that fever as willie was talking about, you know, earlier this hour. you have to give some political leadership to say there's another way to win. in fact, we're not going to win. we're probably going to lose again, but yet they can't quite seem to quit him. so i don't get it. i mean, the only thing that i will say here is there is another element here which is these voters. i mean, we have to be able to be honest about this. >> yeah. >> voters are still deeply invested in donald trump, and alternatives haven't seemed to interest that part of the party, and, you know, i think it's okay at this point to ask why that is. of course, you know, things could change. things could change, but it's

hard to see. >> yeah. >> when you are being accused by a judge of rape, and it just does nothing, the polls just kind of, you know, blink and keep carrying on. yet you have to wonder, you know, i mean, this is a cult. so what will change this for these voters? >> yeah. coming up, legendary singer/song writer, and playwright, david burn is with us ahead of opening night for his new immersive opening musical on broadway "here lies love." "morning joe" is coming right back. love." "morning joe" is coming right back ur car insurance so you only pay for what you need. you could save $700 dollars just by switching. ooooh, let me put a reminder on my phone. on the top of the pile! oh. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

i need it cool at night. only pyou trying to iceeed. me out of the bed? baby, only on game nights. you know you are retired right? am i? ya! the queen sleep number 360 c2 smart bed is now only $899. plus, free home delivery when you add an adjustable base. shop now only at sleep number. my husband and i have never been more active. shingles doesn't care. i go to spin classes with my coworkers. good for you, shingles doesn't care. because no matter how healthy you feel, your risk of shingles sharply increases after age 50. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older.

shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. shingles doesn't care but, shingrix protects. shingrix is now zero dollars for almost everyone. ask your doctor about shingrix today. sleepovers just aren't what they used to be. a house full of screens? basically no hiccups? you guys have no idea how good you've got it. how old are you? like, 80? back in my day, it was scary stories and flashlights. we don't get scared. oh, really? mom can see your search history. that's what i thought.

introducing the next generation 10g network. only from xfinity. the ceo of netflix says the streaming giant is, quote, super committed to reaching an agreement that would end the writers and actors strike currently under way in hollywood. he said there still remains a lot of work to do to reach a deal. he added that netflix's wide

range of content will help the platform weather the strike, but said the real point is to get the strike to a conclusion so that everyone can move forward. joining us now, former treasury official and "morning joe" economic analyst, steve ratner, and steve, you're taking a look at this and its impact. >> that's right, mika. it's an interesting strike for a variety of reasons. we're having a lot of strikes this summer, but this one has some unusual issues and i started today with some words which are trying to outline what's going on here. there are a few issues. pay obviously, they want more. artificial intelligence, which you referred to before. they don't want artificial aelgs to replace either the writers or the actors. i don't know how that chart, that but we'll talk about residuals which is an interesting phenomenon. in the motion picture industry,

writers and directors get paid when there is a rerun in the electronic television world. the issue is the changing media landscape has affected them because residuals get paid differently whether it's on television or streaming. does anyone know how they got these in the first place? in 1960, there was a similar strike, about five weeks by both groups over this issue of residuals, and that strike was led by the head of the actors union who was ronald reagan, and ronald reagan of course, went on 21 years later to break the air traffic controller strike as one of his first acts as president. so that's a little fun fact for you to take away with, but let's talk about what's going on in the industry which is what is driving a lot of this. so you have had back in 2015,

80% of american households subscribe to cable or to direct satellite broadcasting. that number is now down to conversely, less than half of the country had a streaming service, and now 80% roughly have it, and so the higher payments from this service went down. the lower payments from this service went up, and that's part of why those writers and directors are on strike today. >> so steve, you're talking about how the landscape has changed, and one of those ways and this is your second chart here is how traditional television has really struggled. give us a lay of the land there. >> so not surprisingly as households gave up cable and moved towards streaming, it had an impact on what they were watching, and so you can see back in 2013, 30% of the watching was on traditional broadcast networks, nbc, abc, cbs, and so on. 60% was on other cable services. everything from espn to bravo or

whatever, but even though a bunch of folks had streaming services back then, they hardly watched them. there are only a couple of them. now you look at today. 37% of television watching is streaming services and that is almost double the percentage that watch traditional over the air services and it's actually even more than the number of people who watch cable services. so those again, provide lower payments to these actors and directors than those, but a huge change in what people are doing. now there's another set of competitors that traditional television face as well that affects their bottom line which are a couple of other services. so tiktok which barely existed a couple of years ago now generates $10 billion a year of advertising revenue which happens to be almost identical to the amount generated by these four top media companies from comcast, warner bros., paramount, and disney, and so that's money out of the pockets of these guys. again, affecting their bottom line.

>> so steve, you know, obviously eyeballs usually equal dollars and the fewer people watching, there's fewer -- less money around and your third chart gets into that, how media spending has been shrinking too. >> that comes back to what's happening to these companies as a result of all of this. so cable television, direct broadcast television, you can see half of the revenues essentially have disappeared on an inflation-adjusted basis over a ten-year period. home video which is the business of dvds almost gone. spending on adjusted for inflation is back to the levels of 1982, but -- and streaming is up by this amount, $27 billion, but streaming is losing a lot of money for these companies. so when you cut through it, again on an inflation-adjusted basis, their revenues have -- the revenues of this industry have gone down by 36%,

$60 billion of lost revenue, and all of that translates into stock prices that are nothing great. so the s&p 500 since 2015 has a bit more than doubled, and these companies are essentially right back where they started from. the writers and directors have questions about their residuals and how they get paid in general, but the media companies have their own set of issues which is part of why this strike is proving so intractable. >> as far as these numbers go, you're saying streaming is terrible for the media companies as far as their long-term -- their long-term revenue streams and their long-term viability? >> well, so far streaming has been a huge money loser. a fair amount of revenue as i showed you, but a lot of profit losses because there are so many of them and they're so competitive, and they've spent

so much money on product. over time that should rationalize as some of them drop out, merge, and consolidate, but it's not going to be like the good old days where you had a few television networks that functioned as an oligopoly and were able to make profits because they didn't compete that heavily. these streams services will be losing money for a good while to come. coming up, will hurd is our guest this morning. we'll talk to him about the state of the race ahead on "morning joe." e state of the race ahead on "morning joe." ♪ ♪ ♪♪ voltaren. the joy of movement. ♪♪

♪ (upbeat music) ♪ ( ♪♪ ) constant contact's advanced automation lets you send the right message at the right time, every time. ( ♪♪ ) constant contact. helping the small stand tall. moderate to severe eczema still disrupts my skin. despite treatment it disrupts my skin with itch. it disrupts my skin with rash. but now, i can disrupt eczema with rinvoq. rinvoq is not a steroid, topical, or injection. it's one pill, once a day. many taking rinvoq saw clear or almost-clear skin while some saw up to 100% clear skin. and, they felt dramatic and fast itch relief

some as early as 2 days. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal, cancers including lymphoma and skin cancer, death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq, as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. disrupt the itch and rash of eczema. talk to your doctor about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save. i was told my small business wouldn't qualify for an erc tax refund. you should get a second opinion from innovation refunds at no upfront cost. sometimes you need a second opinion. all these walls gotta go! ah ah ah! i'd love a second opinion. take the first step to see if your small business qualifies. your record label is taking off. but so is your sound engineer. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates

matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire the first time you made a sale online with godaddy was also the first time you heard of a town named dinosaur, colorado. we just got an order from dinosaur, colorado. start an easy to build, powerful website for free with a partner that always puts you first. start for free at godaddy.com nexium 24hr prevents heartburn acid before it begins. get all-day and all-night heartburn acid prevention with just one pill a day. choose acid prevention. choose nexium.

remarkable. as an audience member, there's so many different ways to watch this, aren't there? >> yeah. you could be on the dance floor where you're going to get moved around as if you're in a club and you'll be expected to dance sometimes. then there's galleries along the side, there's a mezzanine, there's a vip area. >> that sounds fascinating. thank you so much. it's always great having you here. you can catch "here lies love" at manhattan's broadway theater. we'll be right back with more "morning joe." right back with "morning joe."

somedays, i cover up because of my moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. now i feel free to bare my skin, thanks to skyrizi. ♪(uplifting music)♪ ♪nothing is everything♪ i'm celebrating my clearer skin... my way. with skyrizi, 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months. in another study, most people had 90% clearer skin, even at 5 years. and skyrizi is just 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses.

serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine, or plan to. thanks to clearer skin with skyrizi - this is my moment. there's nothing on my skin and that means everything! ♪nothing is everything♪ now's the time. ask your doctor about skyrizi, the #1 dermatologist-prescribed biologic in psoriasis. learn how abbvie could help you save.

the senate judiciary committee is expected to vote today on a supreme court code of ethics. the measure is based on codes of conduct that judges in lower courts have to sign. it would establish new rules requiring supreme court justices to disclose any and all expenses paid, travel or luxury gifts they receive. it would also require the justices to recuse themselves from cases linked to people or organizations that gave them certain kinds of gifts or external income. the associated press reports the judges would have to submit a written public statement if they decide not to recuse themselves on certain cases. the bill would also create a process from enforcing the new rules for panels of lower court

judges to review any alleged misconduct. it is unlikely to pass in the full senate, needing 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. >> i don't understand why we would be against that. why don't we have senator dick durbin of illinois and sheldon whitehouse of rhode island. senator durbin, i'm just a dumb country lawyer. it seems to me if propublica is showing that justice thomas and his wife got hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of gifts, that neil gorsuch is trying to sell a house for two years and then magically a couple of weeks after he becomes a justice, it sells two weeks later to a law firm that has business before that committee and you got justice alito going

on trips and not disclosing it. i'm serious here. who could be against a set of rules just making sure these justices lay out to the american people, the billionaires who are funding them? >> joe, let me tell you something. this bill senator whitehouse has worked on for a long time that gets down to the basics. do the nine members of the supreme court deserve special treatment, treatment not given to any other judge? i think the american people get this loud and clear. i think that's why the opinion of the court and its integrity is at an all time low. we tried to reach out to the chief justice and say take the leadership, resolve this problem, restore the integrity of the court. he refused to come before the committee and has declined our invitation to be part of this

process. that's why we're moving forward on the bills today. >> i don't understand. how could any republican be against this, especially when you have reports that the federalist society is getting money to ginni thomas along with clarence thomas getting these benefits from billionaires. i don't understand what republican could be against a set of ethics rules for the supreme court that apply to all other federal judges? >> it's hard to understand, because the standards we're trying to set for the supreme court are, in fact, the same standards that apply to all other federal judges and the same standards that apply to members of congress and to senior executive officials. so that should be pretty straightforward. indeed on some of this in the past we've actually had republican support. i think it's only when the supreme court got into deep, deep, deep trouble that the republican political arm had to

rally around it and protect it. frankly, i think it's something of a tell that the republican party in the senate is defending the indefensible. in some respects it's evidence of how politicized this court is. >> senator durbin, can you simply explain the rules that you all are proposing and why you're proposing them? what events led up to this moment? >> what led up to this moment as i mentioned is through reporting of these gifts that have been given and procedures taken by members of the court that are entirely inconsistent with standards for every other federal judge. i might add as an aside here, the federal judges i've spoken to since these issues have become public are not very happy about being lumped in with the supreme court justices who are asking for this special treatment. but a code of conduct, a system

for complaints against members of the court, disclosure requirement, recusal from court cases where there's a conflict of interest, these are the fundamentals that apply to all over federal judges except for the nine supreme court justices. >> senator whitehouse, we hear all the time that chief justice roberts is an institutionalist, that he cares so very deeply about the reputation of the highest court in the land. yet, he's refusing to even discuss this with you and your colleagues in the senate. how do you explain that? and if he doesn't change course, how damaging do you feel it is to the reputation of himself and his court? >> well, i think in terms of trying to solve this within the supreme court, he runs into vociferous objections by thomas and alito, and he has to explain to the public why he doesn't move forward anyway. on the other side, he could move forward through the judicial conference, which is the administrative body of the

judiciary through which he chairs. i think he knows there's more that needs to be done that signals that the judicial conference might be prepared to do more. i hope he rises to the occasion in either working through his colleagues on the supreme court or his colleagues on the judicial conference take the necessary steps. we feel it's important to move forward now since known of that has yet happened. >> you know, senator durbin, more reporting is going to come out from propublica and other media outlets. there's more there and it's coming. and the question is, why would the supreme court block this when as we're putting up right now for our viewers, the supreme court has its lowest approval rating ever. the american people have less trust in the united states supreme court than ever before in its history.

so i don't understand why won't they step forward and do something about this before it is forced upon them? >> there are several ways to interpret it. the supreme court does not have an army. the authority that they have, the power they have within our democracy is based on the public belief in their integrity and honesty. that has been called into question by these disclosures about several different justices. i hope chief justice robert is moving forward on this. this morning's "wall street journal" suggests that he tried without success. but the increasing negative publicity is proof that he can't wait any longer. that's why we're moving forward in the judiciary committee. >> thank you both very much for being on this morning. we appreciate it. we're two minutes into the fourth hour of "morning joe." joining us for the hour is

former white house director of communications to president obama jennifer palmieri. we're learning more about the charges against former president trump, potential charges. >> yeah. we're getting a little bit of a window into that target letter. two attorneys with direct knowledge of the matter say special counsel jack smith mentioned three federal statutes, deprivation of rights under color of law, conspiracy to defraud the united states and witness tampering. warnings against witness tampering is something we heard from then-congresswoman liz cheney during the january 6th hearing. >> after our last hearing, president trump tried to call a witness in our investigation, a witness you have not yet seen in these hearings. that person declined to answer or respond to president trump's call and instead alerted their lawyer to the call.

their lawyer alerted us. this committee has supplied that information to the department of justice. let me say one more time. we will take any effort to influence witness testimony very seriously. >> so noteworthy and again we're just getting reports of this letter about incitement of a riot in the capitol. we've been noting this morning what house speaker kevin mccarthy said way back then in january of 2021 and how he has responded this week to the news of this potential new indictment against donald trump. >> the president bears responsibility for wednesday's attack on congress by mob rioters. he should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding. make no mistake, those who are responsible for wednesday's chaos will be brought to

justice. >> after january 6th, you said donald trump bears some responsibility for the attack on the capitol. if he is found criminally responsible, will you respect the results? >> i don't see how he could be found criminally responsible. what criminal activity did he do? he told people to be peaceful. >> so of course this follows a pattern of behavior we've seen from speaker mccarthy defending donald trump at every turn. he took the trip down to mar-a-lago after january 6th to rehabilitate donald trump. it appears there is nothing, whether the mar-a-lago documents case, whether the 2020 election, the attempted coup, the attack on the united states capitol, whether we're talking about georgia, whether we're talking about e. jean carroll, there is nothing that will drive a wedge

between speaker mccarthy and donald trump. >> recall that minority liter mitch mcconnell also when he said that when he was arguing for acquittal in the impeachment trial, he said there's a criminal justice system, they can pursue this through other ways. now the senators are saying this is rigged by the biden justice department. despite everything that's happened on capitol hill, there is an argument being made to republican voters that this is a problem and it's happening on the air in iowa and new hampshire and south carolina. i don't know that this is going to be determinative in any way, but there are groups running ads talking about trump's electability and that he's too divisive, he can't get things done. you see some of the presidential

candidates start to mirror this argument. nikki haley talked about when she said it's unfair, it's terrible that the biden administration is pursuing this against trump, but she said it's going to mean more chaos, more controversy, trying to lean into the notion of trump as having this electability problem or not being able to govern effectively. i saw an ad that's running in iowa and new hampshire, a man said, i love trump, i loved everything that he did, but my sister stopped inviting me to thanksgiving dinner, and if he is elected, i don't think he's going to be able to get a lot done. i'm skeptical these are not candidates making these arguments. these are ads being run by either the koch enterprise or another group called win it back. these are super pacs. but be aware in the early primary states -- and i'm not

even sure how much early primary states are going to matter given the early lead trump has, people are trying to make the argument that what's happening in the criminal justice system is a problem for trump even if they're not saying it out loud. >> it certainly lines up with what we're hearing. i don't think these organizations are coming up with this blindly. i think they're tapping into a feeling of, okay, maybe people who voted for trump in the past, die-hard trump supporters are never going to change. they're never going to admit or change or see what is happening with this candidate, but they can't agree on being exhausted by everything that he has brought to the table, maybe some of it is unfair, maybe some of it is truly in their minds a conspiracy theory that they believe, but it's exhausting. i mean, we're hearing it in just conversations we're having with people that we have known over the years who have supported trump, who are just very tired

of all the chaos. >> tired of the chaos. tired of one thing after another after another about donald trump. there's a growing realization, at least among the people that we talk to that voted for trump twice, that he can't win in 2024. in new york despite a jury back in may founding trump liable for sexual abuse and not rape, the jury found trump did rape e. jean carroll. >> the jury handed down that verdict during a civil trial between the writer and the former president, awarding carroll $5 million in damages. his lawyer argued he was not found liable for rape, like carroll alleges. yesterday judge louis kaplan

denied that request saying the way new york law defines rape is much narrower than how it's commonly defined by some dictionaries and other criminal statutes. he writes, the finding that ms. carroll failed to prove that she was raped within the meaning of the new york penal law does not mean that she failed to prove that mr. trump raped her, as many people commonly understand the word rape. indeed, as the evidence that the trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that mr. trump, in fact, did exactly that. wow. attorneys for trump have not responded to requests for comment. >> and following up on what we were talking about, again, you have republicans that are exhausted by the fact that they have a guy running for president who stole nuclear secrets from the government and took it down

to his beach club in mar-a-lago, sold military secrets on how to invade iran in case that ever needed to be done, again, refused to turn it back. now you've got a judge in new york state saying the jury effectively found that donald trump is a rapist. this, again, just add that to the exhaustion that republican voters should be feeling right now even if some aren't. >> some are. >> every one of these cases backward looking where the country would like to move forward. let's get past 2020. let's get out of the egomania that surrounds donald trump. i've got another one. this time in the hush money criminal case involving stormy daniels, a judge denied the former president's request to move the manhattan case against him from new york to federal court. trump argued the alleged hush money payments were connected to his duties as president.

the judge not buying it, instead ruling trump's lawyers failed to meet the legal requirement for a change of venue. the judge wrote trump failed to show the conduct charged by the indictment is for or related to any act performed by or for the president under color of the official acts of a president. the evidence overwhelmingly suggests the matter was purely a personal item of the president, a coverup of an embarrassing event. a spokesperson for trump said this case belongs in a federal court. we will continue to pursue all legal avenues to move it there. trump, who pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records, is set to stand trial in manhattan as early as next spring. so that's that case. let's turn now to former texas congressman and republican presidential candidate will hurd. so you are in this race in part to unseat donald trump because

you have been very outspoken about him on a number of fronts. what is your sense of the fatigue among republicans? if you look at polling, he is a strong frontrunner. he's up by 30 points right now over his nearest challenger ron desantis. there are plenty of people who are apparently not tired of it, but what's your sense of the desire of some republicans to move on? >> thanks for having me on. thanks for noting it. too many times people say there's no candidates in this race that are not criticizing donald trump. here's what we know. first off, we should know that national polling doesn't reflect whether people are going to go out and vote 26 weeks from now. and here's what i'm hearing on the ground. today i'm in new hampshire. a lot of people are saying that they think donald trump is boring. he's talking about the same things. he's looking backwards. he's not looking forward.

these are people that voted for donald trump twice and they recognize that he has so much baggage. they also recognize you shouldn't keep secrets in your hotel and that by doing that, you spit in the face of the men and women putting themselves in harm's way every single day keeping us safe. so folks recognize that if we elect donald trump as the gop nominee, then we are giving four more years to joe biden and that when we talk about his baggage, we can't talk about other problems going on. there was just a report today about president biden's infrastructure deal. 60% of the funds are going to funding companies that are overseas, including china. that doesn't make any sense, but we can't talk about that because we're talking about donald trump's attempts to stay in office and abuse his position. >> and when you talk about intelligence officers being put

in harm's way because of classified documents at mar-a-lago, you speak from experience. you served as a clandestine officer in the cia. i'm curious at what point you believe donald trump disqualified himself. there have been so many stops along the way, but at what point did you decide this man should not be president of the united states again? >> i decided he shouldn't be president of the united states before he was running. i've been intellectually consistent on this issue. there were things that when he was in office, things that he signed, legislation that i helped create and helped pass, but this is something that i have not been supportive of donald trump since the very beginning. and here's ultimately my problem. the country is facing generational defining challenges. the chinese government is trying to surpass us as a global super power. we have new technologies like

artificial intelligence which is going to upend every single industry. we can have artificial intelligence lead to good jobs, not unemployment. our kids, when it comes to math, science and reading are performing at the lowest level they have this entire century. these are real problems that need to be addressed and the only way we're going to address this is by doing it together. that's how i passed legislation when i was in the house. these are the kind of debates we need on the debate stage. if your viewers want to see someone that's not talking about donald trump, go to hurd for america dotcom. the best way to get rid of donald trump forever is to beat him in a primary, and that's what we're trying to do. >> you mentioned your frustration that the race can't be also policy discussions because it's so dominated by donald trump. let's talk policy. you mentioned china. what would be your approach to

china in terms of potentially defending taiwan, but also on economic issues in a moment of real tension between washington and beijing. what's your plan? >> first and foremost, the way that we deal with a country that's four times our size and and economy that can potentially beat us is we have to have friends. we have to reinstill these global alliances. we have to make sure western europe is on board with us. when you have someone like the french president going to beijing, speaking to an american news outlet and telling america please don't make france choose between china and the united states, that's a problem. so we need to have our allies in order to deal with china and also deliver consequences when the chinese government does things that are counter to the international rules and laws they've agreed to.

we also need to be doing that in our own western hemisphere. the fact that the chinese government is increasing its footprint in cuba, if they put hyper sonic missiles in cuba, that means it can hit cuba or washington, d.c. why have we failed in cuba? because we haven't worked with our allies in the western hemisphere. this is something that donald trump was terrible at and joe biden is not doing much better. when it comes to the economy, first and foremost when it comes to artificial intelligence, this is something that's going to upend every industry. we need to make sure a.i. should follow the law. let's not carve it out and make the mistake we've made in other areas. i also think we should see the government go to a two-year or potentially four-year budget cycles. everybody knows when it comes to the government, if you don't use

it, you lose it. that makes you have inefficient funding. those are just a couple of examples of things i would be doing on day one. >> all right. also, i want to get your position on a number of issues that are super important to people across the country, and that would be guns and abortion. what do you suggest would be the best solution pertaining to guns, given the epidemic of mass shootings this country is experiencing? and if you could leave, mental health out of your answer, we all agree mental health is a huge component of this, but i would like to hear the gun side of this from you? >> sure. you asked about abortion. if a 15-week -- if congress put a 15-week ban on my desk, that's something i would find. the other thing i think we should be focusing on is neo natal health and maternal health. the fact that black women in the united states, you know, when

they're in childbirth are dying at rates we're seeing in the developing world, that's unacceptable. when it comes to gun violence, i've been very clear. i think i'm the only republican that's running for president that has outlined things we should do. as you all know, i represented uvalde when i was in congress. i had an nra a-rating when i was in congress, but i also listened to groups like moms demand action. most americans agree we should have universal background checks. it's simple, straightforward. it should be done. it's something i voted for when i was in congress. another thing people also believe is that you should increase the age to purchase a high-caliber, high-capacity rifle to the same age you would have to be in order to get a handgun. that's 21. these are two things that most americans would agree with. i know you said leave out mental

health, but that's important. we always talk about it and both sides do agree on it, but do we know what numbers to call if you see these things? like, let's actually move forward on some of those actions. these are some of the things i have been supportive of. here's the scary trend. half of our teenagers in the united states of america are afraid to go to school because they're afraid of getting shot. again, if these are the kinds of debates that y'all want to see, i need folks helping me hit those marks to get on the debate stage. go to hurd for america dotcom and give at least $1. >> let's talk about the economy. there are positive things happening right now. jobless numbers are really low, inflation is down, manufacturing is up. 3 out of 4 americans actually

say they think their economic situation is good or very good right now. yet, there is this disconnect on the numbers. i know a lot of that has to do with inflation, that it's been higher over the past couple years than it has been in 30 years. what else would you do as president to instill confidence in the american people and let them know just how strong and powerful the u.s. economy is year in and year out? >> absolutely. one trend that i think people are feeling and have been feeling is that the average cost of goods and services over these first 23 years of this century has increased three times as much as average salaries. so this is not any one individual administration. this is multiple administrations. so partly, the role of the executive branch in using fiscal

policy to help the economy, it's deal with the national debt. everybody says that, we can't spend more money than we make. i think it starts with what i said earlier about how many years a budget and appropriations are done for. i think, two, this issue of regulation and streamlining regulations. one of the things why we have a lack of trust in our institutions is because our institutions have been failing or take too long. this is where i spend a lot of time on a.i. i held the first hearing on a.i. in congress. i wrote the first national strategy on a.i. i served on the board of one of the most important a.i. companies in the world. the federal government should be using a.i. in the government to improve citizen-facing services. it shouldn't take months to get a va appointment. it shouldn't take months to get your passport renewed. it should be able to be done in minutes.

these are the kinds of things we can do to streamline government and also streamline regulation so that we can have this economy that's been the most powerful economy in the world continue to help us keep up. >> texas congressman and republican presidential candidate will hurd, thank you very much for coming on the show this morning. we appreciate it. coming up, republican nor ted cruz of texas has a new target. >> china? rush? >> the barbie movie. we'll hear why he's so upset ahead on "morning joe." >> barbie? >> yeah. >> really? >> mm-hm. >> yeah. >> really? >> mm-hm

i was stuck. unresolved depression symptoms were in my way. i needed more from my antidepressant. vraylar helped give it a lift. adding vraylar to an antidepressant... ...is clinically proven to help relieve overall depression symptoms... ...better than an antidepressant alone. and in vraylar clinical studies, most saw no substantial impact on weight. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report unusual changes in behavior or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, as these may be life-threatening, or uncontrolled muscle movements, which may be permanent. high blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death, weight gain, and high cholesterol may occur. movement dysfunction and restlessness are common side effects. stomach and sleep issues, dizziness, increased appetite, and fatigue are also common. side effects may not appear for several weeks. i didn't have to change my treatment. i just gave it a lift.

ask about vraylar and learn how abbvie could help you save. your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire trying to control my asthma felt anything but normal. ♪ ♪ enough was enough. i talked to an asthma specialist and found out my severe asthma is driven by eosinophils, a type of asthma nucala can help control. now, fewer asthma attacks and less oral steroids that's my nunormal with nucala. nucala is a once-monthly add-on injection for severe eosinophilic asthma. nucala is not for sudden breathing problems. allergic reactions can occur. get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. infections that can cause shingles have occurred. don't stop steroids unless told by your doctor.

tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. may cause headache, injection site reactions, back pain, and fatigue. talk to your asthma specialist to see if once-monthly nucala may be right for you. and learn about savings at nucala.com there's more to your life than asthma. find your nunormal with nucala.

look at that beautiful shot

of los angeles this morning. is that a bug? >> looks like a spider going up and down. >> i think there's a spider on the camera. anywho, welcome back to "morning joe". for the past two weeks republican senator ted cruz has been speaking out against the new barbie movie. >> no, he has not! has he really? >> i mean, what could be wrong with the new barbie movie? >> i mean, i don't get it. is he talking about the aesthetics of it all, that it's just a little too surreal? >> i don't know. what i'm hearing is he's upset about a crudely drawn world map in the film. last night on fox news, he explained -- [ laughter ] >> you are kidding me! >> yeah. he doesn't like this. >> are you kidding me? >> nope, i'm not. this is his beef with warner

brothers, the distributor of the film. >> the map is drawn like in crayons. it's roughly a map of the world, but china -- you know, asia is just the big crayon box. but then right to the east of where china is are the nine dashes. to anyone who's not really focused on geopolitics, those lines don't mean anything, but what those lines indicate is the communist party of china puts out official maps with those nine dashes and they are asserting sovereignty over the entire south china sea. they're saying all of that is china's. obviously the little girls going to see barbie are not going to have any idea what those dashes mean. these are really designed for the eyes of the chinese they want to make money selling the movie in china. >> is that real?

>> i don't think so. here's the deal. and let's give senator cruz credit here. >> we have to? >> yeah, in this case. willie and i have often, in the past when we've done his faux populism, he of princeton and harvard, we would start playing sarah mclaughlin and say, you know, bad acting is heartbreaking and give money to senator cruz to help him become a better actor. i've got to say, willie, he pulls off satire extraordinarily well. what makes this multilayered genius is that barbie of course itself is a satire. so you have senator cruz delivering a satire of critique against a satire.

like this is multilevel. i mean, this is like christopher nolan inception, this stuff, where you're going layer after layer after layer. this is perhaps the kindest reading of this, because nobody believes that any united states senator would use their position to attack crayons and barbie. >> yeah. well, you know, joe, i think he's onto something. i was walking past the theater at 67th and broadway yesterday. there were a group of girls weeping on the corner. they said we've just come out of an early screening of barbie. we loved it until we saw the nine dash line of the south china sea drawn in crayon behind barbie, and it totally ruined the experience. ted cruz has a podcast, so this is podcast ted cruz where he has to come up with a new outrage of

the day to feed the audience. he is one of 100 united states senator who is presumably has more important things to deal with and worry about. by the way, warner brothers had to put out a statement saying this is more than a child-like crayon drawing. this was drawn by an imaginary character barbie, who was a doll in crayon. ted cruz sees outrage at every turn. >> what willie also saw yesterday and called me about, he said those little 9-year-old girls crying and weeping saying we just wanted to go to a movie and not have somebody's geopolitical abuse shoved at us. those same little girls, they're very defiant and wiping tears from their eyes, they said today we are all taiwanese. it was very moving. it was very moving.

i just wish -- >> i don't think they said that. >> really? >> really. [ laughter ] >> well, i can't believe that a united states senator said what he said about barbie. >> i heard ted cruz is criticizing the barbie movie. i figured maybe it's the depiction of ken or he had concern about american masculinity or something. you honestly can't make this up. you know who's crushing barbie this morning? gretchen whitmer. she has apparently made some kind of deal with mattell. i just saw she has a governor barbie, the 49th governor of the state of michigan. there are some politicians who have figured out how to take this moment of empowerment for women, not make it satire and make it work for them.

>> my god. we're going to move on now. the united states' conference of mayors recently came out with a survey showing the dire state of resources for america's mayors when it comes to mental health. nearly all of the mayors surveyed said resident requests for mental health services have increased significantly in recent years. however, over 70% of mayors say their residents do not have access to the health services they need to treat their mental health needs. joining us now, the president of the u.s. conference of mayors, hillary sheebee, mayor of reno, nevada. i'm just glad mayors are talking about something that's important. what are you hearing from the mayors? what do they want and need for their cities on mental health? >> yeah. well, we have been on the hill all this week talking about what

we think as mayors is the number one crisis in this country and that is mental illness and addiction. it truly is frightening what we're seeing, and the policies we have put in place have completely failed us. we shouldn't have to have our loved ones arrested to get them mental health help. we shouldn't be using our jails as mental health hospitals. mayors right now are really sounding the alarm, and we think this is the number one crisis in our country right now. we are not seeing these resources come down to our cities where we are the hardest hit and the most impacted. the fact that we allow people to die on our streets when we are the greatest country of all is absolutely inhumane, because we don't have any place to take them. so we have been on the hill, we have been speaking to our representatives and saying that cities need help. but we have a plan.

mayors are incredibly quick. we work on these issues all the time. we see them 24/7. we are just trying to sound the alarm and say this is not going to get better if we don't address this mental health issue that we have and the failing infrastructure. we have no infrastructure to address this crisis. so mayors are at the forefront and we're sounding the alarm. >> tell us a little bit more about what you need. what sort of assistance do you need to make these plans work? there's only so much you can do on your own. >> that's very true. we're also asking for transparency. so when that federal money comes down, a lot of time we see it

staying at the state level, and then it takes a long time to get it into the hands of cities and mayors. that's totally unacceptable. for instance, i've been working on a 24/7 mental health crisis center. it's taken me six years to get that money from the state. we've asked our lawmakers, we want accountability when it comes to getting that money into the hands of cities where we need it the most. you are seeing that we're using our jails as mental health hospitals. that is totally unacceptable. i always say that hospitals are for broken bones, not broken brains. it's affecting us at ground zero. we need that funding, but it stays typically at the state and the counties and never ever gets to the cities. we've asked them for transparency. the other thing we are asking for and in the '90s, how when we

were seeing such high rates of crime, president clinton came in and said we need 100,000 cops to deal with this crisis. well, mayors are saying we need a hundred thousand mental health clinicians to deal with this crisis. that's what we're asking for. how do we attract all these clinicians when we're seeing so many people leave the health care industry? so we've got to work on that. the bigger issue too, we've got to rebuild this infrastructure. where do we take our most sickest that are living on our streets? because there is no place to take them. i think people think there is a place to take them. so we've got to rebuild and accept that we have failed dramatically on these policies, not to mention one size doesn't fit all, because there's been this rhetoric that if we just house everyone, then they will be fine and this will magically go away. that is not the case. not to mention we've got to get

strict on drugs. we're seeing how social media can be incredibly detrimental. these are the kinds of issues we're facing in cities, and we are sounding the alarm that this is problematic. mayors are ready to jump in and this is what we're going after. >> we appreciate what you're doing. u.s. conference of mayors president hillary sheebee of reno, nevada, thank you very much. coming up here on "morning joe," conversation with two of the stars of one of the summer's most anticipated films oppenheimer. matt damon and emily blunt are next on "morning joe." emily ble next on "morning joe." i'm your overly competitive brother. check. psych! and i'm about to steal this game from you just like i stole kelly carter in high school. you got no game dude, that's a foul!

and now you're ready to settle the score. game over. and if you don't have the right home insurance coverage, well, you could end up paying for all this yourself. so get allstate, and be better protected from mayhem, yeah, like me. thanks, bro. take a lap, rookie. real mature. first, there's an idea and you do something about it for the first time with godaddy. then before you know it, (it is a life changer...) you make your first sale. small business first. never stopped coming. (we did it!) and you have a partner that always puts you first way. (no way!) start today at godaddy.com. i've struggled with generalized myasthenia gravis. but the picture started changing when i started on vyvgart. vyvgart is for adults with generalized myasthenia gravis who are anti-achr antibody positive.

in a clinical trial, vyvgart significantly improved most participants' ability to do daily activities when added to their current gmg treatment. most participants taking vyvgart also had less muscle weakness. and your vyvgart treatment schedule is designed just for you. in a clinical study, the most common side effects included urinary and respiratory tract infections, and headache. vyvgart may increase the risk of infection. tell your doctor if you have a history of infections or symptoms of an infection. vyvgart can cause allergic reactions. available as vyvgart for iv infusion and now as vyvgart hytrulo for subcutaneous injection. additional side effects for vyvgart hytrulo may include injection site reactions. talk to your neurologist about vyvgart.

sleepovers just aren't what they used to be. may include injection site reactions. a house full of screens? basically no hiccups? you guys have no idea how good you've got it. how old are you? like, 80? back in my day, it was scary stories and flashlights. we don't get scared. oh, really? mom can see your search history. that's what i thought. introducing the next generation 10g network. only from xfinity.

44 past the hour.

one of the summer's biggest films opens in theaters tomorrow. some of the reviews of "oppenheimer" so far have used the words brilliant, staggering and even the best film of the century. the stellar cast includes emily blunt, who portrayed robert oppenheimer's wife kitty, and matt damon, who brings to life the man who led the manhattan project, general leslie grove. joe sat down with emily and matt before the actors strike began to discuss their characters and the immersive experience of starring in writer/director christopher nolan's most ambitious film yet. >> you guys were all together. wes anderson apparently same thing, it's camp-like. >> it is. >> talk about how much fun that was but also how it made the film so much better.

>> we were all in the middle of the new mexico desert in this one hotel and we were all in these cabins next to each other. it was awesome. it was like summer camp because we could all have dinner together. except for cillian who went home and ate an almond and had a bath. >> he doesn't have a lot to lose, but whatever he had, he lost. >> he was gaunt. >> yeah. >> incredibly disciplined. we invited him to dinner every night. the whole cast would go and eat and he would not be there. >> the tom brady of acting. >> in the full sense, yeah. >> somebody who wasn't disciplined was kitty. >> kitty, yeah. >> kitty in the first half of the movie you're holding either martinis or screaming babies. but something remarkable happens the second half. this betrayed wife becomes his fiercest defender. what a force of nature she was considering the time that she

lived. >> she really was a monumental presence in his life and his intellectual confidant in huge ways and not a natural mother. >> i think that was obvious. take my baby, please. >> will you take this child. i'm not good at this. but yet, i had a lot of empathy for that. there were many women who sort of went to waste at the ironing board back then. i think she was meant for greater things and i think drove herself insane with isolation and loneliness of living in los alamos with nothing else to do but drink and have children. >> we live in the same apartment building. >> does she drive you to drink? >> yeah, like a screaming child and a martini. >> kitty had a complex

relationship, but also the general had a really complex relationship with oppenheimer. oppenheimer obviously loved the community of scientists. the general obviously needed to be all about compartmentalization. >> there's this natural tension between the military. i'm the general running the project and the scientist, because we're obsessed with compartmentalization and need to know and obviously you don't want this stuff getting out. we're worried about spies, we're worried about russia. the scientist takes the absolute opposite approach. they're trying to find the truth. the way you do that is you share information. so there was this natural tension between the military and the scientists. grove felt like he was herding cats.

>> it's like a buddy movie if the buddy movie was moving towards an atomic bomb. >> there's a chance that when we push that button, we destroy the world? >> the chances are near zero. >> near zero? >> what do you want? >> zero would be nice. >> they figured out how to respect each other, how to appreciate each other. >> they did. grove was a really sharp guy. he went to m.i.t. he knew what was going on and he understood the science. so i think he obviously had a deep respect for oppenheimer's intellect and really it was a masterful call putting him in charge of the project. >> let's talk about the cast. this is like a how the west was won cast. you're holding a martini and a baby for half the movie.

rami malek, i don't know if christopher nolan knew this, but he won an academy award. he held a clipboard for like two hours before delivering that extraordinary scene and before you delivered your extraordinary scene. it was actors that were all -- >> well, i think just the willingness of everybody to show up and be a part of this type of excellence, it's what chris invites. it's what he's known for, and i think all of us would have shown up to do a scene. >> his level of attention to detail is just really -- it's fun to be around. it's, you know, he's just so particular about everything, and the research, the amount of work that has gone into the script itself, i read it. i was like this is one of the best things i've ever read in my life. >> it's also very dense, very morally complex, kind of like a thriller. >> he kind of trojan horses

these other dramas into this buy optic. it doesn't feel like a biopic. i think it's cillian's ability to play the diversity of the character and the fact that his intention was like dancing between rain drops at the end as this thing became bigger than him and he lost control over, you know, what happens to it, what happens to this creation now. he loses power over that, and you do, you feel for him because you've seen the trauma of living with a brain like that. you've watched it. >> talking about the complexities of living with that man. there's a moment where he says when they're asking do i really want kitty to testify for you. he goes kitty and i are grown-ups. we've walked through fire together. again, a very complex relationship you usually don't see. >> and his belief in her when everyone else is sort of just seeing the deterioration, you know. they had this belief in each other. she thought he was just remarkable.

i think he thought she was too in many ways. i just think other people's perception of her was at a different point. >> wow. tomorrow on "morning joe," see joe's sit down with cillian murphy who plays oppenheimer and robert downey j r who plays louis straus. >> amazing interviews. >> amazing movie, amaing acting, amazing writing, directing by christopher nolan. "the new york times," they get it right, they call this staggering and just talks about christopher nolan's remarkable achievement. it really was -- >> and also an incredible partnership with his wife in putting together this. >> i mean, emma thompson -- >> what a team. >> we talked with him yesterday, the fact that he comes up --

okay. listen, everything's going to be going backwards. it is a challenge for everybody here, what a remarkable team and a real family affair with the nolans. >> we'll be right back with more "morning joe." more "morning joe." i'm your overly competitive brother. check. psych! and i'm about to steal this game from you just like i stole kelly carter in high school. you got no game dude, that's a foul! and now you're ready to settle the score. game over. and if you don't have the right home insurance coverage, well, you could end up paying for all this yourself. so get allstate, and be better protected from mayhem, yeah, like me. thanks, bro. take a lap, rookie. real mature.

my husband and i have never been more active. take a lap, rookie. shingles doesn't care. i go to spin classes with my coworkers. good for you, shingles doesn't care. because no matter how healthy you feel, your risk of shingles sharply increases after age 50. but shingrix protects.

proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. shingles doesn't care but, shingrix protects. shingrix is now zero dollars for almost everyone. ask your doctor about shingrix today.

all right, welcome back to "morning joe." this is -- we've been talking about exhaustion that has built up for trump supporters, but i think more importantly because donald trump's ahead right now pretty comfortably in the republican side, let's look at what's happening with the people that are going to actually decide this election. quinnipiac's poll out shows that in the general election you have joe biden up by 5 percentage points. i suspect, though, when you start look -- mika when you start looking at, again, the suburbs that are going to decide where this goes, they're even more exhausted by donald trump,

even the republicans who voted for him in the past. >> yeah, jen, we were talking a lot this morning about just the exhaustion factor. listen to these key phrases. hush money to a porn star, rape, stealing classified documents, stealing an election, inciting a riot. there may be trump supporters that believe conspiracy theories and want to look at the facts, but the common denominator with all of these stories that are in the narrative is donald trump. it's exhausting. >> and when you step back and look at the enormity of even the criminal justice, these cases that are coming against him, it just sort of brings home the gravity of the situation for what kind of threat that that presidency, his possible presidency poses. that poll shows him -- i know when you get into certain states, the battleground states, those numbers it's not a five point lead for biden. that makes democrats nervous. on the republican side, like

let's for a minute make the argument that maybe some of these republican presidential candidates are playing this correctly or at least let's look at how they are looking at it, like nikki haley is saying too bad that he's getting indicted, but there's going to be more chaos. it means more confusion. there are ads running in these early states that are going after trump's electability argument. i'm still skeptical but maybe, maybe all of this starts to weigh on, you know, trump's inevitability in and the early primary states matter. it's possible somebody else emerges. >> at this point, though, willie it's unlikely. only hutchinson and christie have even taken it to trump on the attack. others are still playing it very safe. governor desantis struggling for a message here. right now it is still donald trump's party. you have to assume that he's the nominee at this moment. >> and guys, we've heard ron

desantis is attempting a reset of his campaign, a new media strategy, firing some people. as we saw two days ago, that strategy does not include any direct criticism of donald trump, the man he's trying to catch. >> there you go. that does it for us this morning. ana cabrera picks up the coverage right now. right now on "ana cabrera reports," the grand jury investigating donald trump meets again today as the possibility of yet another criminal indictment swirls around the former president. the witness expected to go before that panel in washington. plus, more extreme weather, in a summer already defined by extreme weather, from a suspected tornado tearing up a pfizer factory in north carolina to kentucky, a state still dealing with high temps where nearly a foot of water fell from the sky in just 24 hours, surrounding and swamping