MS NOW Highlights - May 7

0:01 We have some breaking news to tell you about.

0:04 We are able to report that FBI director Cash Patel is in quote panic mode.

0:08 We have that brand new reporting breaking moments

0:10 ago from our colleagues Carol Lenig and Kendallian.

0:13 It's about the turmoil inside the FBI right

0:15 now after a string of deeply embarrassing and rather

0:18 alarming stories about Cash Patel and his tenure

0:21 as the head of the country's top law enforcement agency.

0:25 from that new reporting.

0:26 Quote, "Cash Patel has ordered the polygraphing of more than

0:29 two dozen former and current members of his security detail

0:33 and other staff and has been described as in panic

0:35 mode to save his job and find leakers among his team.

0:38 That is according to two people briefed on the development."

0:42 Cash Patel has walled himself off from some

0:44 senior bureau leaders this week in the wake of multiple

0:47 media reports that raised red flags about his leadership.

0:50 What's more, Patel has reportedly avoided meeting

0:53 with operational leaders at the FBI this week, raising fears that Patel is out

0:58 of the loop on important investigations and threats.

1:00 A spokesperson for the FBI declined to comment about the polygraph tests,

1:05 but he denied that Cash Patel was walled off from senior staff at the FBI.

1:09 I want to bring in senior investigative reporter Carol Lenick, who's by on that.

1:14 Mark and Blissa are still here.

1:15 Um, Carol Len, it doesn't sound like someone who's been defamed, does it?

1:21 Well, um I'm not a lawyer.

1:23 I just play one on TV.

1:25 But as a [laughter] reporter, Nicole, [sighs and gasps] um you know,

1:29 this is a person hunting for leakers pretty actively,

1:33 and I think you've raised this point before, which is a smart one.

1:38 How do you claim you're defamed,

1:40 but also hunt for people who released information

1:44 that you believe maybe is sensitive or is somehow protected?

1:48 you know, as we reported at MS Now a couple of I

1:52 can't remember if it was two days ago or a day,

1:56 but it was basically a finding that Patel had ordered this investigation

2:02 into the leaks or the sources to an Atlantic magazine piece that described how

2:08 FBI agents were super super worried about the leadership of the bureau because

2:14 of Patel allegedly engaging in drinking to excess on a pretty regular basis.

2:19 and having to reschedu meetings in the mornings

2:22 after these quote unquote alcohol-fueled events.

2:25 We also then learned because once you report one story,

2:30 more people want to tell you more about other things that disturb them.

2:34 We learned that Patel has ordered the polygraph of all of these agents,

2:39 a very large group who used to travel with him and who travel

2:43 with him now to try to find out who may be talking to reporters.

2:48 This is sending a real chill through the FBI.

2:51 But even more worrisome to them, Nicole,

2:54 is the way in which Patel has not agreed to meet

2:58 with lots and lots of other operational leaders in the bureau.

3:02 Uh this worries people because there's a regular

3:06 sort of line of threats and investigations

3:09 that the bureau director needs to be briefed on and needs some input on.

3:14 Of course, there are some decision points that he

3:17 must be involved in and this is worrying them.

3:20 Uh, I agree that we should emphasize that the FBI spokesperson, Ben Williamson,

3:25 said that Cash is having meetings with senior leaders,

3:30 but he wasn't extremely specific about those he's not meeting with.

3:35 Um, I'm going to do something I don't always do.

3:37 I would like to read the piece.

3:39 It is it is new since I've been on the air.

3:41 Um, but I think it's important for our viewers

3:43 to to hear what you're reporting right now exclusively.

3:46 FBI director Cash Patel has ordered the polygraphing of more

3:49 than two dozen former and current members of his security

3:52 detail and other staff has been described as in panic

3:55 mode to save his job and find leakers among his team.

3:58 That's according to two people briefed on that development.

4:01 Patel has walled himself off as we've

4:03 been discussing from some senior bureau leaders

4:06 this week in the wake of multiple media

4:08 reports that raised red flags about his leadership.

4:10 That's according to three people familiar with his recent actions.

4:14 Two of the people told MS Now

4:16 that the director ordered the polygraphing this week

4:19 of the former and current security detail

4:21 members as well as several information technology staff.

4:24 I want to stop here and and just you know we don't focus

4:28 in on this but this is a hallmark of the Atlantic reporting as well.

4:31 This is deeply sourced.

4:32 Every line has a minimum of two in some instances three sources.

4:38 um just talk about um that level of corroboration.

4:43 You know, it's nice of you to ask because I

4:47 think this highlights something you may not intend to highlight,

4:51 but think about what it must be like to work in the FBI or in law enforcement.

4:58 And as we have described in our reporting,

5:00 to feel that the bureau is in danger because of who is directing it.

5:05 and think about what it must be like to see colleagues and hear

5:08 colleagues are being polygraphed or or maybe even former colleagues or friends,

5:13 people who've been fired and then still be willing to talk to me and to Ken.

5:19 Um so I'm grateful to the sources who continue to share

5:24 information with us and and actually to other reporters as well.

5:28 Um I mean come to us first, but yeah, I mean I think it's pretty impressive.

5:32 I think it's just really pretty impressive that people uh feel this information

5:37 needs to get out and and take some risks to do so.

5:42 Um the corroboration is important.

5:44 I thought the Atlantic's corroboration was really impressive as well.

5:48 A very deeply reported piece of work.

5:50 I wasn't involved in it obviously,

5:52 but they spent a lot of time and energy and confirmed

5:56 to their their you know solid view of the threshold.

6:00 They confirmed something that a lot of reporters, including including me,

6:04 had been hearing about for a while and trying to confirm.

6:08 This idea that he had to be roused

6:11 in the morning by agents who were concerned that he

6:14 might be quite ill or or worse as a result

6:18 of alcohol that he had drunk the night before.

6:21 Um, I want to read a little bit more from the reporting.

6:26 Um, the FBI director demanded the polygraph

6:29 examinations to determine if any members

6:31 of the team that accompanies him on all his travels or staff who

6:35 have access to sensitive details about

6:37 his decisions have communicated with reporters according

6:40 to the people who asked to speak anonymously due to threat of retribution.

6:44 Um, now there is nothing sensitive in um in his travels.

6:50 He actually posts a lot on social media.

6:54 He had cameras in the locker room when he traveled

6:57 to the Milan Olympics and guzzled beer in front of him.

7:00 Um what is it is it fear that gets

7:04 them to even carry out an investigation into at least

7:08 [music] two reporters allegedly um Miss Fitzpatrick and the New

7:12 York Times reporter who wrote about his girlfriend.

7:15 Yeah.

7:16 So, as we reported in the case

7:20 of the investigation opened into the Atlantic reporter,

7:24 sorry, I lost my voice there for a second,

7:28 agents and sources told uh my colleague Kendallian in, you know,

7:32 pretty sympathetic tone that, you know,

7:35 we're damned if we do, we're damned if we don't.

7:37 If we don't open this probe, and I'm paraphrasing a a little here,

7:40 if we don't open this probe,

7:42 we're the agents are fearful they're going to be fired.

7:45 In the case of the New York Times reporter Elizabeth Williamson,

7:48 a former colleague of mine and a great reporter,

7:51 um it appears from the New York Times,

7:54 very good reporting that that was a case where agents were asked to investigate

7:59 and were able to sort of tamp

8:01 that down by saying the investigation was not warranted.

8:04 Apparently, we've moved past that place in a very few number of weeks.

8:09 And if you'll grant me the liberty, Nicole,

8:12 I want to emphasize one other thing about polygraphing.

8:15 Uh, in the course of reporting this story today,

8:18 I learned something new that I'd never heard before,

8:21 which was that Cash did Cash Patel,

8:25 the director, engaged in another mass polygraphing event um when

8:30 there was a report that he had requested a gun.

8:33 And apparently an agent had mentioned this on a call with other agents

8:38 and that made him sort of subject number one or suspect number one.

8:43 I actually don't know the name of that agent,

8:46 but um it led to the polygraphing of dozens of agents

8:49 to try to figure out who had revealed information from this call.

8:54 Let let me just ask you too to do to explain the normal use of the poly.

9:01 I mean, a a polygraph is a tool that the FBI sometimes uses at an entry point,

9:06 but it is not it is not like a um you know, like like re-upping your IT credits.

9:12 Like it is not a tool that any agent is

9:16 subjected to in a leak investigation by their own organization.

9:19 just speak about how outside the norm,

9:22 how sort of North Korea adjacent this practice is

9:26 at the FBI as an ongoing management tool from its leader.

9:31 You know, if there were I want to be sort of sober about this.

9:36 If there were a leak of classified information

9:38 at the Justice Department or at the FBI,

9:42 and I know of cases like this about which I was reporting at the time,

9:48 there would be great concern about bringing in the circle of people

9:53 who had access to this information and asking them in an interview,

9:58 did you communicate with a reporter about this?

10:02 It would not on first blush be a polygraph.

10:06 Um but you know there is a presumption inside the government in the justice

10:11 department and the FBI that no one is going to lie when asked that question.

10:17 No one.

10:17 Um I don't know what the circumstances are today

10:20 but I I know about cases I wrote about at the time and there is a view that if

10:26 you're brought into that room and you've talked to a reporter,

10:29 you are going to own up to it.

10:32 A polygraph is exceptionally rare but really

10:35 really rare in the leak of information as you described that is not classified

10:40 that is about what is the director doing?

10:43 What is the director ordering in the case of an investigation of looking

10:48 at the contacts and sources of a reporter engaged in normal news gathering.

10:52 It is not in any way something that's been used

10:57 when information is just simply unflattering to a senior leader.

11:02 Good evening from New York.

11:04 I'm Chris Hayes.

11:04 Today we are both closer to war and closer

11:06 to peace than we've ever been in the war in Iran.

11:09 If I asked you right now,

11:10 what is the status of that war or of the ceasefire or both?

11:13 What would you say?

11:15 Frankly, we're having a pretty hard time

11:17 keeping track and it is literally our jobs.

11:19 This afternoon around 4 p.m.

11:20 the New York Times reported that the US and Thrron are negotiating a one-page

11:25 plan to reopen the Street of Hormuz and end the war for 30 days.

11:29 Again, we're in a temporary ceasefire right now.

11:31 That's according to three Iranian officials.

11:33 Now, notice I say Iranian officials because at this point,

11:37 they're kind of the more trustworthy party

11:39 in talking about whether we're having negotiations, at least at this point.

11:43 So then an hour later, US officials said, "We were striking Iran." Actually,

11:48 apparently in self-defense after Iran fired on US

11:51 Navy ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

11:53 Trump said our strikes were just a quote love tap.

11:57 Also, Iran might be laying out new stricter

11:59 rules to impose on passage in the straight.

12:02 So to summarize, we are striking Iran.

12:04 Iran is striking us.

12:06 The straight of Hormuz is closed,

12:08 but apparently we are not at war and the ceasefire holds.

12:12 It is, as it has been from the beginning when he announced the war

12:15 in the middle of the night with his baseball cap on from his golf palace,

12:20 an incoherent clown show of mismanagement and misinformation by the man

12:25 who made the whole ridiculous mess to begin with.

12:28 From day one, he has been making daily announcements,

12:31 each one contradicting the one before, each one more wacky than the last.

12:35 And if anyone ever had the time to put them all together,

12:38 you would really get a sense of just

12:41 how disjointed and chaotic and confused the commander-in-chief is.

12:44 Well, actually, we do have the time to put them all together.

12:47 And we thought it would be helpful to take

12:49 a brief journey through the insane ups and downs

12:52 of the war so far as told through

12:54 the truth social proclamations of one President Donald J.

12:57 Trump.

12:57 You'll remember the tough talk from the early days of the war.

13:01 March 6th, there will be no deal with Iran except unconditional surrender.

13:05 And then he added that his goal is to make Iran great again.

13:09 Mega and it was working.

13:11 The very next day, March 7th, Iran, which is being beat to hell,

13:15 has apologized and surrendered to its Middle East neighbors.

13:18 Okay, white flag.

13:20 War is over.

13:21 Okay, not so fast.

13:22 March 9th.

13:23 If Iran does anything that stops the flow of oil within the straight of Hormuse,

13:26 they will be hit by the United States of America

13:29 20 times harder than they have been hit thus far.

13:33 Death, fire, and fury will rain upon them.

13:36 So, I guess war is back on.

13:38 March 10th, 4:07 p.m.

13:40 If Iran has put out any mines in the Hormu Strait,

13:43 and we have no reports of them doing so, we want them removed immediately.

13:46 Okay, red line there, no mines.

13:49 Then literally 13 minutes later,

13:51 I'm pleased to report that within the last few hours,

13:54 we have hit and completely destroyed 10 inactive

13:56 mine laying boats and/or ships with more to follow.

14:00 March 14th, Trump announced NATO would join.

14:03 Many countries, especially those who are affected

14:05 by Iran's attempted closure of the Hormone Strait,

14:08 will be sending warships in conjunction with the United

14:10 States of America to keep the strait open and safe.

14:14 Adding later, "This should have always been a team effort, and now it will be.

14:19 3 days later, the United States has been informed by most of our NATO allies

14:23 that they don't want to get involved

14:25 with our military operation against the terrorist regime of Iran.

14:28 We will no longer need or desire the NATO country's assistance.

14:33 We never did.

14:34 So, to reiterate, we didn't need their help and we did again.

14:39 Now, March 20th, the Hormone Strait will have to be

14:42 guarded and policed as necessary by other nations who use it.

14:46 In other words, we're out.

14:47 not just a sort of coalition of all of us.

14:50 We're out.

14:50 Three days later, a breakthrough negotiation.

14:52 I am pleased to report the United States of America and the country

14:56 of Iran have had over the last two days very good and productive conversations.

15:00 Three days after that, things hit a snag.

15:04 The Iranian negotiators are very different and strange.

15:08 [laughter] Okay, April [snorts] 1st, Iran's new regime president has just asked

15:13 United States of America for a ceasefire.

15:15 One day later, it is time for Iran to make a deal before it is too late.

15:20 There's nothing left of what still could become a great country.

15:23 April 5th, open the effing straight,

15:24 you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in hell.

15:27 April 7th in the morning, a whole civilization will die tonight,

15:31 never to be brought back again.

15:32 April 7th, in the evening,

15:34 I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of 2 weeks.

15:37 This will be a double-sided ceasefire.

15:39 We received a 10-point proposal from Iran and believe

15:42 it is a workable basis on which to negotiate.

15:45 Just after midnight, it was a big day for world peace.

15:48 Then the next day, there are reports Iran is

15:51 charging fees to tankers through going through the Hormu Strait.

15:54 They better not be.

15:55 April 10th, the Iranians don't seem to realize they have no cards.

15:59 April 17th, Iran has just announced the Straight

16:01 of Iran is fully open and ready for full passage.

16:05 Thank you.

16:05 A great and brilliant day for the world.

16:08 Straight of Iran.

16:09 April 19th, two days later,

16:11 Iran recently announced that they were closing the street.

16:16 [laughter] Well, yeah, went on like that until May 3rd.

16:19 This past Sunday, Trump had a new tactic for opening the straight,

16:23 which was always open, which we didn't need, which we were going to open,

16:26 which we decided not to open, which our allies wouldn't help us open,

16:29 that no one cares about whether it's open.

16:32 Again, he returned to this idea of a coalition of the willing, if you will.

16:37 Project Freedom will begin Monday morning, May 4th.

16:41 Monday morning, Project Freedom is expanding its ranks.

16:44 Perhaps it's time for South Korea to come and join the mission.

16:47 Come on in, fellas.

16:48 The water's fine.

16:50 Tuesday, Project Freedom will be paused for a short period of time.

16:55 That was all within 48 hours.

16:57 Honestly, we could go on and on for 42 minutes for the whole show.

17:01 There are hundreds of posts and you can trust exactly none of them.

17:04 All of them sort of contradicting each other.

17:07 All of them in that same sort of deranged register.

17:11 Just today, the Washington Post reported on a confidential

17:15 CIA report which completely contradicts and undermines

17:19 the strategic rationale of the administration's claims

17:21 that Iran is on the verge of collapse.

17:23 It says Iran can survive our own naval blockade

17:26 of their blockade for three or four more months.

17:29 that Iran still has about 75% of its mobile

17:32 launchers and 70% of its missiles and are building more.

17:37 The fact of the matter is this.

17:41 Trump has us losing a war to Iran

17:44 he never should have started in the first place.

17:48 And no amount of increasingly frantic posting can change that fact.

17:53 It is day 68 of Trump's war in Iran.

17:57 And the situation in the Strait of Hormuz seems balanced on a knife's edge.

18:01 In a statement earlier today,

18:03 US Central Command said forces responded in self-defense

18:06 after Iran fired at three separate Navy destroyers,

18:10 adding, quote, "Sentcom does not seek escalation." Afterwards,

18:14 President Donald Trump posted in part the following.

18:17 "We'll knock them out a lot harder and a lot more violently in the future if

18:22 they don't get their deal signed fast." Three

18:25 senior Iranian officials told the New York Times

18:28 that Tran and Washington are discussing a one-page

18:31 plan for both sides to reopen the Straight

18:33 of Hormuz and end hostilities for 30 days

18:36 while they try to reach a comprehensive deal.

18:39 And the New York Times is also

18:41 reporting tonight that Trump's announcement that the US

18:43 military would escort ships through the strait

18:46 angered Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman,

18:49 who denied US access to Saudi airspace and American bases in the country.

18:53 The US blockade has remained in place.

18:56 The Washington Post is reporting that US intelligence

18:59 shows Iran can withstand this pressure for months.

19:02 With that, let's get smarter with help of our leadoff panel tonight.

19:06 Peter Baker, chief White House correspondent

19:08 for the New York Times, Michael Crowley,

19:10 a diplomatic correspondent also with the Times,

19:12 and Evo Dalder, former US ambassador to NATO.

19:15 He is now a senior fellow at the Harvard Belelfford Center.

19:18 Gang, [snorts] I am so happy you're here.

19:20 We need the best reporting.

19:22 We need the best analysis.

19:23 This is serious stuff.

19:24 So, Evo, let's start with you.

19:26 We've got both sides firing at each other while

19:29 there is this one-page proposal to reopen the street.

19:32 Tell us where things truly stand.

19:35 Well, if only we knew uh in some ways because every uh hour, frankly,

19:40 is a different moment, a different story, a different deal on the one hand.

19:46 We're close to a deal.

19:47 In fact, the deal's done.

19:49 Everybody is has signed on to the deal.

19:51 and then the next moment we're shooting at each other.

19:54 Uh I think it I think we are in a state

19:57 of other confusion certainly in Washington perhaps less so in Thrron.

20:01 Uh and that is what's dangerous uh and and leads to escalation.

20:06 I think what's happening is that the United States particularly President

20:10 Trump desperately wants to find a way out of this war.

20:14 He doesn't want to escalate.

20:15 He doesn't want to find a a a new round of fighting.

20:19 He didn't respond when the Iranians shot at the uh at the UAE

20:24 and the uh uh energy facilities that were attacked by the Iranians.

20:29 He didn't do anything.

20:30 And I think that's one of the reasons the Saudis were so upset.

20:34 Um and yet we we we're not going to get the deal that the president wants.

20:39 The the uranium is not going to be handed over for nothing.

20:42 The enrichment is not going to be ending for nothing.

20:45 Uh, and I and we're on a standoff and at some point one

20:48 of the two sides is going to blink and and and I don't know who,

20:52 but my money would be on Donald Trump

20:55 rather than on the Iranian leadership at this point.

20:58 Peter, what are you hearing from the White House tonight?

21:00 Is there concern that the ceasefire could fall apart?

21:02 Well, there's concern, but I think they seem very determined at this point

21:07 to maintain the ceasefire even as there's plenty of fire, right?

21:11 You know, missiles are flying, boats are being Can we just Can you just Hold on.

21:16 Can you just say that again because that's absolutely

21:18 absurd and we need to just punctuate where we are.

21:21 Just say it again.

21:23 It's a ceasefire with lots of fire going on.

21:26 You know, [laughter] now it's relatively modest

21:28 fire compared to what we saw earlier.

21:30 And so they're able to play it down a little bit,

21:33 but they're determined to maintain the idea anyway that they're in a ceasefire.

21:36 and they're try and they're trying to basically find a path

21:39 to get out of this as Ambassador Dalder just talked about.

21:42 And so if you get all worked up about some of the relatively small uh

21:47 you know violations of what we would

21:49 normally consider to be violations of a ceasefire

21:52 then you you put the pressure on yourself to then return to a state

21:56 of more wholesome uh you know wholesome

21:58 attacks which they don't want to do, right?

22:00 They don't want to get back to where they were just a couple weeks ago.

22:03 They're trying to find a path out of this this one-page

22:07 idea uh is a way to get there.

22:10 But it's it's so remarkably uh you know general at this point.

22:14 The idea that they would somehow end a war based on terms

22:17 that you could put on a single sheet of paper is pretty remarkable.

22:21 Obviously the details really matter.

22:23 The reason why Trump got out of the Obama deal with uh

22:26 Iran was because he didn't think it was a good enough deal.

22:30 Well, what kind of deal are you going to get

22:32 with a one-page set of terms that doesn't have any kind of verification,

22:35 doesn't have any kind of specifics to it that in fact

22:38 really leaves all the difficult conversations uh for the future.

22:42 Michael, I was excited you were coming on tonight and then

22:46 I saw your reporting and I got really excited because you've

22:50 got this information about Trump's announcement on the military escorting ships

22:54 through the through the strait has angered the Saudi crown prince NBS.

22:59 Tell us the real story here because you know

23:02 who doesn't want to I don't want to say piss.

23:05 You know who doesn't want to tick off NBS?

23:07 Jared Kushner.

23:08 That's his biggest investor.

23:09 You have got enormous US corporations.

23:11 You've got investors all over the US

23:14 and their daddy investor in the Middle East is MBS.

23:17 Him mad at the US is not good for any of them.

23:21 Yeah, thanks Stephanie.

23:22 And let me be sure to nod to my colleagues

23:26 who co-authored that story with me with their great reporting.

23:29 It wasn't just me, but I'm happy to talk to you about our work,

23:32 which uh reports that, you know,

23:35 President Trump announced this plan on Saturday to uh conduct what he called,

23:41 he depicted as a humanitarian mission for uh US uh the US military to escort

23:47 ships and their crews out of uh the Persian Gulf through the straight of Hormuz,

23:52 many of whom had been stranded there for weeks.

23:56 Uh and this operation lasted for all of not

24:00 even 24 hours before the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Muhammad bin Salman,

24:05 uh denied the United States the use of uh

24:09 Saudi territory and airspace to support this operation.

24:12 Now, you might say, well, hey, that was a a maritime operation uh using uh

24:18 navy ships to escort uh commercial tankers on the water.

24:22 But the key here is that you needed really substantial air support,

24:27 fighter jets, attack helicopters,

24:29 uh you needed the airspace uh around that waterway.

24:33 And uh the Saudi crown prince uh was not happy with the president's plan.

24:38 Um and you know, among the things we know was that a sense in Saudi Arabia

24:44 that it was just not clearly thought through

24:47 and that it involved more uh risk than likely benefit.

24:51 And the larger context here is that the Saudi crown prince although uh

24:55 the my colleagues at the times have reported uh that MBS Muhammad bin Salman

25:00 was just weeks ago urging President Trump to continue bombing Iran uh quite

25:06 forcefully and essentially finish the job hopefully

25:09 finish off the clerical regime in Tan.

25:12 Uh he's now kind of changed course I think uh because it's become

25:16 clear that that regime is uh going to be very hard to dislodge.

25:20 It's dug in.

25:21 It's growing more hardline by most accounts.

25:23 And um so the Saudi crown prince is now actually eager to get this thing wrapped

25:28 up and has been supporting uh the US

25:31 Iranian peace talks uh through the Saudi ally Pakistan.

25:34 And in fact uh I'm told that the Saudi

25:37 foreign minister has been talking to the Iranian foreign minister.

25:40 So, uh, NBS is now in more of a deescalatory frame of mind and appears to have

25:47 seen this Trump plan as not well thought

25:50 out and prone to further escalation with the Iranians.

25:54 The American ships of course being relatively easy

25:56 targets for the Iranians if they wanted to attack.

25:59 Uh, and so basically said um, no, we're not in for this.

26:02 We didn't sign up for this.

26:04 And, uh, you know, I'll just conclude by saying it's quite remarkable.

26:08 I mean uh the the US Saudi military relationship has been quite strong

26:12 for a while and particularly under President Trump

26:14 as you know he's cultivated a very close

26:17 relationship with all of the Gulf Arab leaders

26:19 particularly Muhammad bin Salman and for the Saudis

26:21 to kind of uh pull the rug out from under us in that situation.

26:24 I know uh through the reporting of my colleagues

26:27 in particular it left US military officials

26:29 quite stunned and I spoke to several analysts

26:31 today who who were kind of shocked by this.

26:34 Um, in conclusion, I'd just say uh we have reported the airspace is now open,

26:38 but it's not clear whether the Saudis will

26:41 allow the airspace to be used for that operation.

26:43 So, the airspace is open,

26:45 but we're not quite back to where President Trump wanted things to be.

26:47 And this is a very dramatic subplot right now.

26:50 MS Now's Fallon Gallagher was inside that courtroom.

26:54 Also here, Rachel Van Landingham,

26:56 retired Lieutenant Colonel from the US Air Force,

26:58 former JAG, and professor of law at Southwestern Law School.

27:02 Good to have both of you there.

27:04 So, Fallon, take us inside that courtroom.

27:07 What stood out to you in these arguments?

27:10 Yeah, Chris, the key question during today's

27:12 arguments was really whether those First Amendment restrictions

27:15 that can apply to active duty service

27:17 members also apply to retirees like Senator Kelly.

27:20 Now, at this point, a lower court

27:22 has preliminarily ruled that they do not apply.

27:25 And this uh court of appeals, this three court panel,

27:28 a majority of them appear inclined to side with that lower court.

27:32 and with Senator Kelly.

27:33 Now, Hegsth and the Pentagon have argued that those restrictions do apply,

27:38 that the senator engaged in that he was counseling disobedience,

27:41 in their words, when he engaged in that video where he

27:45 told service members that they can refuse to obey illegal orders.

27:48 Now, uh Senator Kelly has said that the Department

27:51 of Defense is acting in what they're calling textbook retaliation.

27:54 And I want you to take a listen to what he had to say outside of court.

28:01 According to them, anytime a retired veteran says

28:04 something that the Secretary of Defense doesn't like, they can be punished.

28:08 So, the people who have given the most in service

28:13 to this country wouldn't be free to say what they believe.

28:18 It's absurd and it's outrageous.

28:22 It is an outrageous violation of our constitutional rights.

28:30 Now inside the courtroom,

28:32 the judges had really sharp questionings for the Department of Justice.

28:35 One of the judges immediat uh repeatedly reminded

28:38 him that at West Point and the Naval Academy,

28:42 it is textbook teaching to all cadetses that you can refuse illegal orders.

28:46 That was a current that came throughout this entire hearing.

28:48 And there was another interesting line of questioning

28:51 towards the end where one of the judges,

28:53 one of the sharpest questioners during the entire hearing,

28:55 had a line of questioning to the Department

28:58 of uh Defense's attorney where she asked him

29:01 repeatedly if the senator wants to be able

29:03 to speak freely and practice his First Amendment rights,

29:06 would he have needed to discharge himself

29:08 from the military as opposed to retire?

29:10 And the Department of Defense attorney couldn't answer

29:12 that question in a straight way that satisfied the judge.

29:15 Now, there was no ruling from here today,

29:17 but we expect a written opinion in the coming weeks.

29:20 Chris, thank you so much for that.

29:23 Well, Rachel, uh, Senator Kelly told Punch Bowl News, quote,

29:26 "My expectation is we win in the circuit court

29:29 and I also expect them to probably appeal again

29:32 and it might go to the Supreme Court." Based

29:35 on what you heard today, what do you think?

29:38 Well, I think Senator Kelly is right.

29:39 I do think there's a strong chance this will go

29:42 to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court will resoundingly

29:45 side with Senator Kelly and the millions of military retirees

29:48 like me that maintain our first amendment right to speech.

29:52 Um Senator Kelly is a mere pensioner as the Supreme

29:55 Court has called military retirees receiving pay for his past service.

29:59 So while military members do have restricted

30:02 first amendment liberties while on active duty,

30:04 of course, because of the the nexus

30:07 to good order and discipline and obedience to command,

30:10 military retirees are civilians um who who enjoy

30:13 the paniply of first amendment protections and they should.

30:16 We need to hear from our veterans and what

30:18 the Secretary of Defense is trying to do

30:20 now really risks chilling the speech of millions

30:23 of individuals who have honorably served their country.

30:26 So indeed, Rachel, uh, central to today's argument,

30:29 what this ruling could mean for military retirees and if

30:33 the judge sides with the Defense Department and Secretary Hegath,

30:37 you mentioned the chilling effect it could have on free speech.

30:40 But for people who believe it's important for them to stand up

30:44 for what they believe in, automatically they lose their rank and pay.

30:50 Well, the Secretary of Defense would have

30:53 to go through um some kind of procedure

30:55 such as the military code of the milit the uniform code of military justice.

30:59 Military criminal law technically does still

31:01 apply to military retirees like myself,

31:03 but no court has ever found that the unique military speech crimes apply to us.

31:08 So, he would have to try to court marshall each one

31:10 of us that has said things such as words contemptuous against elected officials.

31:15 I have spoken about President Trump in words that are quite contemptuous.

31:18 So, he would have to actually court marshall me, right?

31:21 Because that's the only venue.

31:22 But what he's trying to do against Senator Kelly,

31:25 he threatened to court marshall him,

31:26 but there really is no probable cause that he committed a crime.

31:29 Senator Kelly did the same thing I did as a as a uh

31:33 professor and lawyer and military officer

31:36 at the United States Air Force Academy, which has trained cadets that you have

31:39 a legal duty to disobey uh unlawful orders.

31:42 It's not just that you can,

31:44 it's that you must disobey unlawful orders that you know that are unlawful.

31:48 And so um he so that the idea that se

31:51 that senator Kelly even committed any kind of military crime is ludicrous.

31:55 So what senate the secretary is trying to do is

31:58 instead to take a backdoor maneuver and reduce his retirement

32:02 pay which is clearly not allowed by federal law because

32:05 retirement pay is based purely on conduct while on active duty.

32:09 And so Secretary Hexath is going to lose um either way.

32:12 Um and but we do need the courts to continue their strong and staunch

32:17 defense of the rule of law and of first amendment protections for retirees.

32:23 MS now's Kendallian following this for us.

32:25 Sam Stein, managing editor of the bull work and an MS

32:29 now contributor and Chris Olirri is a former senior FBI official,

32:33 senior VP for global operations at the Sufan Group

32:36 and now an MS now national security and intelligence analyst.

32:40 So, Ken, tell us more about Smith, who like Obama,

32:44 expressed serious concern about this erosion of independence at DOJ.

32:48 Yes.

32:48 And it's worth remembering, Chris,

32:50 that Jack Smith is a nonpartisan career prosecutor.

32:54 He's been branded as a partisan by Donald Trump and his allies,

32:57 but that's not really his background.

32:59 And and he's using some very strong language here,

33:01 saying the Justice Department has been corrupted.

33:03 But I have to tell you, Chris,

33:05 that's no different from the conversations I have almost every

33:09 day with current and former Justice Department and FBI officials.

33:12 This is a universal view and really transcends partisanship.

33:16 And the thing that's notable here is that you're hearing Jack

33:19 [clears throat] Smith say it and you're hearing Barack Obama say it,

33:22 but there are a lot of other people

33:24 who you're not hearing from, including Merrick Garland,

33:26 the former attorney general, Chris Ray, the former FBI director,

33:29 Lisa Monaco, for example, the deputy attorney general,

33:32 who who I'm sure hold the same uh views about what's going

33:35 on, but they are in private law practice or they are with private companies,

33:39 and they're not willing to stick their neck

33:41 out and say what they think is happening.

33:43 and and there's a lot of lower level people that most

33:45 people have never heard of who aren't saying anything either.

33:47 It's hard for us to even get folks to go on the record and be quoted

33:51 in stories that we write every day about

33:53 crazy things that are happening at the DOJ.

33:55 So, that to me is what's notable about this.

33:58 Jack Smith is out there because he's doing essentially public interest law.

34:01 He he's not at a big law firm and not he doesn't have government contracts.

34:04 But there are a lot of other people who think the same way,

34:07 who are remaining silent right now as the Justice Department is

34:11 being transformed in a way that we haven't seen in modern history.

34:14 Chris and Chris, I want to play another brief

34:17 clip from that video obtained by the New York Times.

34:21 We have a department that fails to investigate cases because they might

34:28 uncover facts that are inconvenient for narratives

34:31 the president would like to press.

34:34 Even though, as Ken just pointed out, there are a lot of people who

34:37 for their own reasons are not speaking out publicly.

34:40 Are you hearing that kind of thing behind

34:42 the scenes as you as you talk to people privately?

34:46 Yes.

34:46 Uh so I hear, you know,

34:48 from current and former agents uh in the FBI and uh former, you know,

34:53 prosecutors from the Department of Justice this exact thing

34:56 that both Jack Smith and and President Obama are highlighting.

35:00 Uh, you know, the issue is the acting attorney general right now is

35:05 the personal lawyer of the president and he's still conducting himself that way.

35:10 He's not working for the people.

35:12 He's not the the people's lawyer.

35:14 He's not working on behalf of the republic.

35:16 He's working on behalf of the president and their agenda.

35:19 And then equally, we have Cash Patel,

35:22 the completely unqualified director of the FBI

35:25 who's carrying out this campaign as well.

35:28 So what's happening is we're going against, you know,

35:32 political adversaries or perceived political adversaries

35:34 of the president and of, you know, his network.

35:38 Um, and we're not going against

35:40 the real criminals that are threatening our republic.

35:42 And and the issue is at the end of the day,

35:46 the the country is less safe because we have unqualified sickopants running

35:51 the Department of Justice and the FBI and we're not actually being protected.

35:57 Sam, uh, Republicans actually did spend

35:59 years accusing the Biden DOJ of politization,

36:01 and now you've got Democrats arguing exactly the same thing about Trump's DOJ,

36:06 but I wonder if you think that this resonates politically.

36:10 Would it be useful, for example, um,

36:13 for people running for office on the Democratic side

36:16 to make the case that we just heard from Chris, we're less safe because of this?

36:23 Yeah, I think that that certainly resonates politically.

36:26 I do think that um the larger uh

36:28 political resonance is about matters of corruption, frankly,

36:31 and and that can be seen in in in in the not

36:35 just the prosecutions that uh the DOJ currently is pursuing under Trump,

36:40 uh the vindictiveness of it, but also in the other side of the coin,

36:44 which is the partisan commutations that Trump has

36:46 doled out while uh president the second time around.

36:49 This is also a component of the justice department.

36:52 The pardon attorney at DOJ is a mega ally of Trump.

36:56 Uh and they've given real favors and leniency to people who are wellconed.

37:00 Uh it's created sort of this pardon industrial complex where

37:03 you can just basically buy clemency uh from this administration.

37:06 And I think this all gets kind of wrapped

37:09 together in this idea that if you're well-connected,

37:12 close to President Trump or a political ally or if you're rich, frankly,

37:16 uh you will have the benefits of the Justice Department at your disposal.

37:19 If you are not, if you are political adversary of President Trump,

37:24 uh you will be given the law.

37:26 And I think that is the politically resonant message for Democrats this cycle.

37:30 Case in point, Ken, uh, Democratic State Senator Louise Lucas,

37:33 who helped lead Virginia's redistricting referendum,

37:36 suggests that she is being targeted by DOJ,

37:40 saying that the Trump administration's raid of her offices just

37:43 yesterday was an effort to intimidate her and silence her.

37:48 What do we know and not know about this investigation?

37:54 If this is a case in point, Chris, that's the interesting thing here.

37:57 and it underscores the problem with what's happening.

38:00 This is an investigation that began in the Biden

38:02 administration and from what our reporting tells us, there is some legitimacy.

38:06 This is a bribery corruption case and there and there's some reason

38:10 that the FBI uh is looking into this political this public official in Virginia.

38:15 Uh but the problem is since all

38:18 of this other stuff is happening that these cases

38:21 that are clearly retaliatory and thin are

38:24 happening to other opponents of the administration.

38:26 When something like this happens, nobody knows whether it's legitimate or not.

38:30 We did have reporting that Lindseay Halligan,

38:32 the former US attorney in the Eastern

38:33 District of Virginia who was a Donald Trump

38:35 lawyer was trying to push this case forward before it was ready uh a while back.

38:39 And so we just don't know whether this is on the level or not.

38:43 Uh but I would we have to be cautious.

38:46 We just because someone says they're

38:47 being targeted by the Justice Department unfairly.

38:49 Criminal defense have said that for years both from both parties.

38:53 The problem is that now we don't know whether

38:56 it's true because of the actions of this justice department.

38:59 Chris and Chris the administration of course

39:01 will argue investigations like this are legitimate.

39:04 So, um, to Ken's point, how do you even distinguish between

39:09 what's aggressive anti-corruption enforcement and weaponized prosecution?

39:15 You reenter the FBI and the Department of Justice

39:18 back in the middle without any partisan influence and bring

39:22 in professionals who are committed to the Constitution and the service

39:27 of the citizens of this nation running those organizations.

39:30 Listen, the men and women who still make up the overwhelming majority

39:34 of the ranks of the FBI are doing the right thing every day.

39:39 So, it's it's tough that they're being misrepresented

39:42 either as partisan against Democrats or partisan against Republicans.

39:46 Um, I will tell you uh if

39:49 this investigation did start during the Biden administration,

39:52 it started with, you know, credible facts.

39:55 Um, was it pressured to accelerate uh in recent days or or weeks or months?

40:01 It's tough to say, but the the corrective action is bring

40:05 the FBI and DOJ back into uh a nonpartisan, you know, arena.

40:09 Allow them to be trusted by the American people and do their job.

40:14 Meanwhile, Chris, I want to ask you about new reporting in the Atlantic

40:18 that details an incident in which the FBI director Cash Patel

40:21 bought at least one case of his personalized bourbon to the FBI's

40:26 training facility in Quantico for a training seminar with UFC athletes in March.

40:31 According to The Atlantic, at least at one point,

40:34 at least one bottle went missing, which caused the director to quote,

40:39 "lose his mind." According to clients of Kurt Asusak,

40:43 a retired agent who's assisted the FBI with legal issues, he told The Atlantic,

40:49 multiple agents contacted him for legal guidance after Patel began

40:53 threatening to polygraph and prosecute his staff over the missing bottle.

40:57 Is this the kind of environment that, to your knowledge,

41:01 agents are at least reportedly dealing with?

41:04 This is the exact environment that agents

41:07 are dealing with uh every day, every week.

41:10 Um, that incident I heard about from multiple contacts.

41:13 Uh, I applaud The Atlantic for not backing down after, uh, you know,

41:18 they were threatened with a lawsuit, uh, or they have been sued.

41:23 Um, and that, you know, the FBI has denied all of their reporting,

41:26 but all of the reporting that they've put out,

41:29 um, I have heard from other people,

41:31 as have other great journalists like Ken and Carol and others.

41:35 So the problem is this is the standard going on from Cash Patel right now.

41:40 This is just one more data point of why he's unqualified to be the director

41:45 of the FBI and why the country is

41:47 less safe every day he remains in that position.

41:50 Sam, that Atlantic article was published by Sarah

41:52 Fitzpatrick just hours after MS now learned that she

41:55 is under investigation by the FBI for a different

41:58 story that she wrote last month about Patel.

42:01 What message does it send though that she's still doing her job

42:05 despite the pressure that clearly she must be feeling from the FBI?

42:08 Well, I love it.

42:10 I I I applaud her.

42:11 Um I'm grateful that The Atlantic has stood

42:14 by her and continue to publish uh this work.

42:18 It it's proof that um you know, good journalism is important,

42:23 is worth fighting for, is worth subscribing to.

42:27 Uh and uh you know the administration obviously doesn't like the reporting.

42:31 Uh the fact that they are suing the Atlantic over it is ridiculous.

42:35 The fact that they apparently have been uh uh

42:38 investigating her even though they they've denied all the accusations.

42:41 Why would you investigate the leakster if you say

42:43 they're all factually made up and doesn't quite compute?

42:46 So anyways, I I just am very proud of you for doing this.

42:49 I will just note for the record that bourbon

42:52 bottle over my shoulder is not from Cash Patel.

42:54 That's my own.

42:55 I didn't get bought off by the FBI director.

42:58 Uh, does it have an your label, your private label on it?

43:01 You know, I don't I don't see a label on it right now,

43:04 and I'm not going to put a label on it,

43:06 and I'm not going to drink it on air either.

43:08 Uh, I just wanted to be clear, it's not from Cash Patel.

43:11 Well, we're also noting that uh Chris's shot is very tight.

43:13 I don't know what's on the table beh Oh, there is a bourbon bottle there.

43:17 Look at that.

43:17 There there's all kinds of bourbon bottles,

43:19 but they're they were gifted from legitimate units um

43:23 and not from an illegitimate director of the FBI.

43:26 New polling showing President Trump and the Republican party is

43:30 in a difficult position with voters ahead of this year's midterms.

43:35 The latest NPR PBS Marrist poll shows just 37% approve

43:40 of the job Trump is doing compared to 59% who disapprove.

43:45 That's Trump's highest disapproval rating ever recorded

43:48 by Marrist throughout both of his terms.

43:52 The poll also finds 61% of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling

43:57 of the economy when it comes to the rising cost of gas.

44:02 63% say they blame President Trump a great deal or a good

44:07 amount for the current increases in prices at the pump.

44:11 And if the 2026 midterms were held today,

44:14 the poll shows 52% of voters would cast a ballot

44:18 for the Democratic congressional candidate versus

44:21 42% who would choose a Republican.

44:24 Let's bring in MS Now national affairs analyst John Hileman.

44:29 He's partner and chief political columnist at Puck.

44:31 And the Washington Post, David Ignatius is still with us as well.

44:36 Well, John Helman, uh, these numbers, um,

44:38 match other polls that have come out recently,

44:41 not looking good, and I think the, um,

44:44 war in Iran might be overarching here in terms

44:48 of its impact on the American economy and the global economy.

44:52 Yeah, Mika, I mean, you know, this is the first thing we always tell people

44:55 when we talk about political polling is to uh, don't take one poll.

44:58 Look at the trend lines, make sure that you're not,

45:01 you know, seeing some dramatic number that's an outlier.

45:04 And your and your point is exactly right.

45:06 What we've seen over the course of the last couple months and really

45:09 the trend lines over the course of the entire uh Trump 2.0 administration,

45:13 but but in specifically in these last couple

45:15 months since the start of the war in Iran,

45:18 uh it's it's there's a cumulative effect that's happening here.

45:21 But the numbers are now consistent.

45:23 And and the first the headline number on Donald Trump's approval rating,

45:26 he's in the 30s now.

45:27 There's not a lot there's not there's not an argument about that.

45:31 He's not, you know, some polls say 41, 42.

45:34 Every every major national credible poll has

45:36 Donald Trump uh somewhere in the the mid30s.

45:39 Uh some get down uh a little bit lower than that.

45:44 Um and that's a brutal number historically speaking for any president to be

45:48 in the 30s uh and for the president's party heading into a midterm.

45:52 And then the second thing that you that you highlighted

45:54 there in this Maris poll uh is the generic ballot numbers.

45:57 And you know, we talk a lot about how uh although Republicans,

46:01 President Trump and Republicans are very unpopular,

46:03 doesn't seem to have accrewed that much

46:05 to the to the benefit generically of the Democratic brand,

46:09 which is still has a lot of uh negative associations for people.

46:12 But we now are seeing in this Maris poll a doubledigit

46:16 uh a double-digit congressional generic

46:19 ballot margin between the Republicans, Democrats.

46:22 And again, if you were thinking about warning

46:24 signs for a party in a midterm election,

46:26 a president under with his approval rating in the 30s,

46:29 a president with his disapproval rating uh in getting into the lower 60s,

46:34 uh and then a double-digit congressional generic ballot numbers.

46:38 That is a triple uh crown of badness

46:41 for uh the Republican party as we head towards November.

46:45 And it's something I've been saying all year long, but people,

46:48 you know, talk about how long it is to the to the midterms.

46:51 They always say, "Well, we got five more months,

46:54 six more months." Memorial Day, guys.

46:56 It's Memorial Day.

46:57 Stuff gets locked in and it's hard to turn things around,

47:01 especially when you have a party that's not legislating uh and has not

47:04 been legislating very effectively for the whole of the last uh 15 16 months.

47:09 But the economic numbers and the perceptions of the economy

47:12 uh are going to get locked in real quick.

47:14 And there's are are very close to being entirely locked in.

47:17 And I I think the Republican party, you know,

47:20 once you turn the corner on Memorial Day,

47:22 there is almost nothing that the part is going to be able to do to change

47:26 a lot of these perceptions that have been acrewing

47:28 over the course of these last 15 16 months,

47:31 which again paints a very grim picture

47:33 for de for Republicans in in November, Memorial Day.

47:35 Now, at this point, just two weeks away, uh John Halman,

47:39 it is a dangerous proposition uh to try to get inside President Trump's head.

47:43 So I won't ask you to do that.

47:45 But it is remarkable how so much he

47:48 is doing is almost actively working against Republican interests.

47:51 Like every whether it's the war or some of his legacy defining moves,

47:55 you know, it's prices are rising.

47:57 He seems out of touch.

47:59 He's not doing anything to help the plight of your everyday Americans.

48:03 Republicans behind the scenes whisper their worries,

48:05 but they're not doing anything to to sort of change that narrative.

48:08 Um they're not standing up to him in the conflict.

48:10 And then I'm struck by the events of the last few days

48:13 where the White House ballroom is something that even President Trump suggested,

48:18 hey, all right, we'll have private donors pay for that.

48:21 Like, you know, we won't ask the American people to do it.

48:24 [clears throat] And now suddenly Republicans on the Hill are rushing to ask

48:28 to try to get him a billion dollars of taxpayer money to build the ballroom.

48:34 I mean, they're handing Democrats a gift.

48:37 Yeah, I mean Jonathan I literally as you started down the path

48:42 of this question I was thinking about

48:44 the ballroom because you know the the mantra

48:46 that Democrats have adopted not maybe as aggressively as they could should

48:50 and will you know is this three C's of corruption uh chaos and costs.

48:56 Um the the the ballroom is the kind

48:59 of vivid uh image and symbol that really cuts through.

49:04 It's not a political story.

49:05 It's a story that every American understands.

49:08 Uh it's easy to understand.

49:09 It gets a lot of coverage outside of political media.

49:12 Uh and it has all three of those components in it.

49:15 And and what I mean by that is that it is

49:18 a uh it is a corruption question for a lot of people.

49:22 First of all, this notion that the president is is is doing things uh

49:27 that are kind of representative of a kind of concern with oligarchs and elites

49:33 and billionaires and millionaires that he's out

49:35 of touch with them and that [clears throat]

49:37 in some way all this kind of self-deing that we've seen at the White House.

49:40 That's one thing that they look at when they see

49:42 the the the White House uh the the the East Wing.

49:45 The the other thing is the chaos element of it, which is being told,

49:49 u hey, we're not going to knock down the east wing.

49:51 Don't worry about it.

49:52 We're just going to do a little renovation.

49:53 And then they see the bulldozers come in and knock down the entire east wing.

49:56 But well, but maybe that's not so great,

49:58 but you're not going to have to pay for it.

50:00 Now, they're being told that they're going to have to pay for it.

50:02 So, it feels chaotic to them.

50:03 And then in the context of costs, you know,

50:06 I I I this is not at a an empirical uh fully data driven point,

50:11 but I have started to notice uh something where the you know,

50:15 people talk about gas prices.

50:16 I and and bet I bet Mike Barticle is going to agree with me about this.

50:20 I I have, you know, I live now up in upstate New York most of the time.

50:23 I'm in purple America here and I if I go to the if I go to the drugstore,

50:28 if I go to the supermarket,

50:29 I'm seeing something I've haven't seen really ever before,

50:33 which is all of a sudden everybody's uh clipping coupons again.

50:37 And and you're I I'm standing in line at the drugstore.

50:40 I was at the grocery store yesterday and people

50:42 are digging around in their pockets pulling out coupons.

50:44 And it's not just senior citizens who are the normal coupon cutters.

50:48 It's like people in their 40s who are kind of look like yepies

50:51 and are kind of embarrassed that they're having to reach into their pocket.

50:55 And this all loops back to Laamir to your point which is you put

50:59 all those things together uh the sense of of kind of being out of touch,

51:04 rising costs, chaos, and the the the symbolism of the White House ballroom.

51:09 It is, I think, a brutal and devastating thing.

51:12 And I think Republicans are so confused

51:14 at this point that they think in some way

51:18 that making this a the justifying it in terms

51:21 of national security is the only way out.

51:23 And if you justify it in those terms, well,

51:26 of course, the public's going to have to pay for it.

51:28 And that is just a bonkers way of thinking about this politically.

51:32 You know, ma, to John's point, one of the points he raised, uh,

51:36 there's nothing more glaring than to be

51:39 putting gas in your car alongside someone,

51:41 you know, across from you in another bay,

51:44 a guy driving a pickup truck who works hard for a living

51:47 and is putting his gas in his pickup and he's looking at those numbers

51:50 roll up and he's furious about the cost of gas and he

51:54 has a Trump bumper sticker on the back of his pickup truck.

51:57 The irony, the irony of being deceived

52:05 by people they voted for is really impactful.

52:16 And meanwhile,