‘Actors in a reality show presidency’: MS NOW hosts react to Trump's 'clown car' Cabinet

[0:00] So first, they got rid of Gregory Bovino, the little guy who lives in a shoe, who was [0:06] inexplicably promoted well beyond his job title to lead Donald Trump's chaotic, violent, [0:13] trigger-happy, inept paramilitary invasions of multiple U.S. cities. [0:18] They got rid of him. [0:19] Then they got rid of Kristi Noem, the Secretary of Homeland Security. [0:23] Also, technically, they also got rid, at the same time, they got rid of the guy who didn't [0:29] formally work for the Department of Homeland Security, but nevertheless, he was there [0:33] every day and at all of her events, sitting or standing right next to her, and he was [0:39] definitely, definitely, definitely not her boyfriend, because she is super happily married. [0:45] Then, of course, we immediately got some quite unexpected news about that aforementioned marriage, [0:51] and then we got the multimillion-dollar luxury private jet that she and her not-boyfriend [0:57] procured with taxpayer funds for what they said would be high-profile deportations. [1:03] The private jet with the bar and the queen-size bed. [1:07] Then we learned that the Homeland Security Department would not be keeping that jet after all. [1:12] The White House instead would be taking it, and now it was going to be used by other cabinet [1:16] members and also, for some reason, by Melania Trump. [1:19] Investigations into the not-boyfriend of Kristi Noem, demanding payments from companies with [1:27] Homeland Security contracts, reportedly continue. [1:30] The not-boyfriend, of course, denies all wrongdoing. [1:33] But then they got rid of the attorney general. [1:35] She only barely made it a year. [1:38] In that time, she did reduce the U.S. Department of Justice to a smoking hulk. [1:43] But apparently, she was just getting started when they got rid of her. [1:47] She had just moved into some general's house, because the true mark of making it in the upper [1:53] echelons of this administration is that you're allowed to essentially loot from the U.S. military. [1:58] You're allowed to just take over military housing for yourself, because, hey, some of it's quite [2:02] nice. But right after she got moved into some general's house, Attorney General Pam Bondi was out. [2:12] Then they got rid of the director of ICE, following reports that he'd had to be hospitalized, [2:17] not once, but twice since taking the job because of stress. [2:22] Plus, another incident in which his security detail reportedly retrieved a portable defibrillator [2:28] from a nearby office because he was freaking out so hard they were sure they were going to have [2:32] to shock him. [2:34] Last week, the head of ICE, Todd Lyons, found himself unable to answer basic questions from [2:40] Democratic Congresswoman Lauren Underwood of Illinois as she pressed him on why so many people [2:46] have been dying in ICE custody. He could not answer her basic questions about those deaths, [2:51] even basic questions about why those deaths weren't being investigated. [2:56] And then as soon as that, I'm sure, very stressful hearing was over, we learned that he's out, too. [3:03] He has resigned and he will be gone next month. [3:07] Well, now, today, another one down. The Secretary of Labor is out. And where do you want to start [3:15] with this one? In January, the New York Post was first to report on a complaint about Trump's [3:21] labor secretary that had been made to the department's inspector general. And I got to tell you, [3:25] the New York Post has since done a ton of groundbreaking reporting on this scandal at Trump's [3:30] Labor Department. But because it's the New York Post and I'm going to show you some of their [3:35] reporting, I feel like I just have to mention at the outset that they do decide to decorate [3:39] much of their reporting on this scandal with photos of Trump's labor secretary in a bikini. [3:45] Like, I mean, not every article, but a lot of their articles about this just randomly have [3:50] pictures of her in a bikini. And I don't, I just, it's, I get, that's just kind of a business model [3:56] over there. But the reporting is what it is. Trump's labor secretary, Lori Chavez de Reimer, [4:04] faced allegations of drinking in the office during the workday and of taking staff members to strip [4:11] clubs and of taking personal trips at taxpayer expense. She was accused of pursuing a sexual [4:17] relationship with a member of her security detail. That member of her security detail was then put on [4:22] leave. Then he resigned. Then her chief of staff was forced out. Then her deputy chief of staff was [4:27] forced out. Then her director of advance was forced out. Then we learned that her husband, [4:32] hey, there's a husband. He was banned from going inside the labor department's headquarters building. [4:40] That, that, that ban on him entering the building came after two labor department staff members [4:45] accused him, the secretary's husband, of sexually assaulting them at the labor department headquarters [4:52] building. The husband denies wrongdoing, but then the hits just kept coming. Last week, [4:58] the New York Times was first to report on Trump's labor secretary allegedly sending text messages to [5:04] her employees during the workday, telling them to bring her wine. The Times says it has reviewed the [5:12] messages and that they're part of an inspector general investigation. We here at MSNOW have not [5:17] reviewed the messages and have not independently confirmed this reporting. But this is what the [5:22] Times says, quote, in one text message, Ms. Chavez de Reimer asked a staff member to bring Rosé to her [5:29] hotel room. The messages are undated, but a picture of the menu in the text message exchange suggests it [5:36] comes from a hotel bar in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, where the labor secretary went on an official [5:41] visit last July. She asked, quote, do they sell by the bottle? And it wasn't just the, the wine, [5:51] the alleged day drinking, and having labor department employees bring her wine for day [5:57] drinking. This is also from the Times, quote, Ms. Chavez de Reimer's husband and father exchanged text [6:06] messages with young female staff members at the labor department. Some of the young women were instructed [6:12] by the labor secretary herself to, quote, pay attention, to, quote, pay attention to her husband and [6:22] father. In an April 2025 exchange provided to investigators, Ms. Chavez de Reimer's father wrote [6:29] to a young female labor department staff member, quote, hearing you are in town, wishing you would [6:36] let me know. I could have made some excuses to get out and show you around. Please keep this private. [6:42] The young female labor department staff member responded, quote, will do. No need to worry. She [6:50] apologized to him for not reaching out. He responded, quote, when are you leaving and where are you [6:56] staying? This is the labor secretary's father. She allegedly told her young female staffers that [7:07] they needed to, quote, pay attention to him. When are you leaving and where are you staying? Three labor [7:17] department staff members have filed civil rights complaints against Trump's labor secretary and the [7:21] department describing a hostile work environment. But now Trump's labor secretary is out too. [7:28] As of tonight, Trump labor secretary, Lori Chavez de Reimer is out of her job. Her lawyer told us here [7:34] at MSNOW tonight, quote, Secretary Chavez de Reimer did not resign due to findings that she violated the [7:40] law. Her decision to leave office was personal. You know, personally, I think it's got a sting that I don't [7:50] think they ever gave her a general's house. I mean, not like everybody else in the cabinet. I don't think she [7:56] ever got one, not even like an admiral's house. But now she's out as well. That said, the FBI director still has [8:05] his job. The deputy director of the FBI, the podcaster guy, they got rid of him. But the other podcaster guy is [8:14] still there in the director's job after learning about director Kash Patel assigning the FBI SWAT team to be [8:21] personal bodyguards for his girlfriend after director Kash Patel flew the FBI private jet to the Olympics so the [8:29] taxpayers could pay for him to go to Italy and chug beer in the hockey team's locker room. FBI director [8:37] Kash Patel has now filed a lawsuit and a demand for two hundred and fifty million dollars against the [8:42] Atlantic magazine following the Atlantic reporting this weekend on what reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick [8:47] described as his, quote, conspicuous inebriation. Quote, several officials told me that Patel's drinking [8:56] has been a recurring source of concern across the government. They said he is known to drink to the [9:01] point of obvious intoxication in many cases at the private club Neds in Washington, D.C., while in the [9:08] presence of White House and other administration staff. Patel is also known to drink to excess at the [9:13] Poodle Room in Las Vegas, where he frequently spends parts of his weekends. Early in his tenure, meetings and [9:19] briefings had to be rescheduled for later in the day as a result of his alcohol-fueled nights, said [9:26] six current and former officials and others familiar with Patel's schedule. Quote, on multiple [9:32] occasions in the past year, members of Patel's security detail had difficulty waking him because [9:39] he was seemingly intoxicated, according to information supplied to Justice Department and [9:44] White House officials. A request for breaching equipment, normally used by SWAT and hostage rescue [9:50] teams to quickly gain entry into buildings, was made last year because Director Kash Patel had been [9:56] unreachable behind locked doors, according to multiple people familiar with the request. [10:02] Some of Patel's colleagues at the FBI worry his personal behavior has become a threat to public [10:06] safety. FBI officials and others in the administration have privately questioned whether [10:11] alcohol played a role, for example, in the multiple instances in which Patel has shared inaccurate [10:18] information with the public about active law enforcement investigations, including following the murder of Charlie [10:24] Kirk. The Atlantic says its reporter spoke with more than two dozen sources for this story. MS now has [10:32] not independently verified these allegations. Mr. Patel has denied all wrongdoing. He's now suing the [10:38] Atlantic over this story, calling it malicious and defamatory. But for now, at least, he remains in his job at [10:48] the FBI with the speculative odds on how quickly podcaster Kash Patel might be fired from that job, [10:54] hinging somewhat on the question of how much alcohol remains in the news about Trump's FBI director, [11:02] since President Donald Trump is somewhat famously averse to drunkenness. Hey, Pete Hegseth, [11:10] still on the job as defense secretary, as the supposed ceasefire in Iran comes to an end. [11:16] Good evening from New York. I'm Chris Hayes. Well, the tenure of the worst secretary of Homeland [11:22] and security since the agency was formed has come to an end. In spectacular and humiliating fashion. [11:29] Kristi Noem, and we assume her special government friend, Corey Lewandowski, are out. [11:34] Fired today on Truth Social by Donald Trump, quote, [11:37] the current secretary, Kristi Noem, who has served us well and has had numerous and spectacular results, [11:42] especially on the border, will be moving to be special envoy for the shield of the Americas, [11:47] a thing I didn't know existed until today. Our new security initiative in the western hemisphere, [11:52] we are announcing on Saturday in Doral, Florida. I thank Kristi for her service at Homeland. [11:58] He also announced her replacement. That would be current Oklahoma senator Mark Wayne Mullen, [12:02] the guy who has been all over cable news in the past week for some reason, [12:06] although we all know who else watches a lot of cable news. He may be no better, [12:10] but tonight is for reflecting on the end of Kristi Noem's ignominious cabinet career. [12:15] She made it 14 months, almost exactly as long as cricket, the dear departed dog she bragged about [12:22] shooting in her memoir. Kristi Noem's tenure is ending in complete humiliation. You can see from [12:28] the look on her face this week, as she was grilled by members of both parties, she very much looked [12:33] like someone who knew she was in danger of losing her job. And you could be forgiven for finding it all [12:39] satisfying considering just how corrupt and vile DHS has been under Noem's watch from defending the [12:47] violence and mass raids and kidnappings that have come to dominate headlines for a year [12:52] to posing in the Salvadoran gulag where she deported hundreds of men with zero process using them as [12:59] props as they rotted behind her while the gold Rolex on her wrist glinted in the light to staging [13:06] elaborate photo ops of herself armed and on fast boats and joining raids to create social media [13:12] content to slandering Renee Good and Alex Freddie, Americans who were shot and killed in broad daylight [13:19] on camera by her masked agents. A slander that she didn't even have the decency to take back [13:26] yesterday under questioning from House Judiciary Member Jamie Raskin. You stated the conclusion two hours [13:34] after they were killed that they were domestic terrorists. I wanted to give you an opportunity [13:38] to correct the record, not just for their family, but for everybody in America who believes in the [13:42] truth and fairness and honesty. In every situation, as facts come out, we relate. You know, your acting [13:48] ICE director Todd Lyons came before Congress. He said he had no knowledge whatsoever that Alex [13:54] Freddie and Randy Good were domestic terrorists. None. This is your guy. He said that. He admitted that that [14:01] was wrong. Why won't you admit it? I will tell you the investigation is still ongoing and will. So do you [14:06] regret speaking before the investigation? I would say that in those situations. You regret that? [14:11] It's seen on the ground. We relay information to the American people that they're asking for. And as [14:16] the things change, situations change. People were asking you whether they were domestic terrorists [14:21] and you decided that they were before the investigation? As we learn more, we don't want to say anything to [14:26] their families. I did. I said condolences. For what? How about an apology for what you said about [14:33] their loved ones? My heart is with them and we will continue to stand with them as they get a complete [14:38] investigation into these situations. All right. But it appears why all of those things contributed [14:43] to her termination and they really did. It wasn't any of those things specifically that actually was the [14:49] thing that got known fire, the straw that broke the camel's proverbial back. It wasn't because she oversaw [14:55] multiple Americans, multiple Americans being shot and killed, not just Renee Goode and Alex Preddy, [15:00] including one we just found out about in Texas many months after the fact because DHS apparently hit it. [15:06] And it wasn't because so many people have died under the custody of ICE, the organization that she [15:13] manages. That includes a Haitian man who died in an Arizona detention center Monday after officials denied him [15:19] any treatment for a tooth infection for weeks, according to his brother. [15:26] Noam was not even fired over the $70 million Boeing 737 MAX 8 luxury jet that she reportedly used for [15:33] private travel along with the special government employee acting as her de facto number two, Corey Lewandowski. [15:41] Does however appear to have something to do with that now notorious $220 million DHS media contract [15:47] for Noam to cut a series of ads like this. Anyone who searches for freedom can always find a home here, [15:55] but that freedom is a precious thing and we defend it vigorously. You cross the border illegally, [16:01] we'll find you. Break our laws, we'll punish you. Harm American citizens, there will be consequences. [16:09] But if you come here the right way, your American dream can be as big as these endless skies. [16:15] From President Trump and me, welcome home. [16:17] Oh, I'm sorry, is that you there? Sorry, you just caught me on my horse amidst this gorgeous view. [16:25] Nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in taxpayer money was set aside for that kind of stuff. And as Pro [16:31] Republica reported last summer, most of it went in a no-bid process to a Republican consulting firm with, [16:38] you guessed it, long-standing ties to Noam and her aides. Lewandowski worked extensively with the firm. [16:44] In fact, the CEO of that firm is married to Noam's recently departed DHS spokeswoman. Who'd have [16:49] thunk? Noam spent the last two days on the Hill insisting to members of commerce. She did not have [16:54] anything to do with the contract personally. And anyway, it had the president's blessing. [16:59] The president approved ahead of time you spending $220 million running TV ads across [17:08] the country in which you are featured prominently. Yes, sir. We went through the legal processes. [17:13] Did it correct? Did the president know you were going to do this? Yes. [17:16] Did the president know you were going to do this? Yes. [17:20] That may have been the thing. That was her stepping on the landmine. It appears, [17:24] at least. That's the story. This morning, [17:26] Reuters got Trump on the phone and he told them, quote, I never knew anything about it. [17:30] Reuters went on to say shortly after the president commented then, [17:32] he posted to Truth Social that Noam would be replaced. Apparently suggesting he had approved [17:37] her wildly corrupt, self-clorifying propaganda campaign. Well, that was it. That was a bridge [17:42] too far. Who's telling the truth? Who knows? Donald Trump, Kristi Noam. Still, what is clear is Trump [17:48] pays attention to the news and public opinion. And both were bad for Noam. As one White House official [17:53] made quite clear to Fox News reporter Peter Doocy in a text today. What I am about to read is both [18:00] spicy and not subtle. The text reads as follows. It was time. Replacing Kristi was based on the [18:06] culmination of her many unfortunate leadership mishaps, including the fallout in Minnesota, [18:11] the $200 million ad campaign, the allegations of infidelity, the mismanagement of her staff, [18:17] and her constant feuding with the heads of other agencies, including CBP and ICE. [18:22] Kristi's drama sadly overshadowed and distracted from the administration's extremely popular immigration [18:28] agenda, which will continue full force. Now, of course, we have not independently confirmed [18:34] that reporting from Doocy, son of Doocy, but it is useful here because it is all spin. [18:39] The White House knows they had a problem. That's a testament to, first of all, really good [18:45] accountability reporting. I mean, investigative pieces in ProPublica and Wall Street Journal, [18:49] as well as local and independent outlets. I mean, local papers did an incredible job in Los [18:54] Angeles and Chicago and Minnesota, across the country, tracking DHS, documenting its activities, [19:01] and combined with that, thanks to public outcry and organizing and protests and dissent [19:09] from ordinary Americans against those activities. I mean, think about this, right? Remember when they [19:15] sent all those people to the gulag in El Salvador? Hundreds of illegally disappeared men. [19:20] They got released from that SICOT camp in Salvador, even though they, Kristi Noem said they'd never be [19:28] released. And then they deployed to Los Angeles and Chicago, and DHS had to roll back its operations [19:33] in both those places. It had to admit defeat Minneapolis, greatly reduce its surge there, [19:38] although there are still many, many more agents than Tom Homan said there would be. We have our eyes on [19:42] that. But they lost a bunch. And now the person who oversaw those losses, well, she's gotten just a little [19:51] bit of a comeuppance. Maryland Congressman Jamie Raskin serves as the ranking member on the Judiciary [19:57] Committee, where he led yesterday's grilling of Kristi Noem, and he joins me now. First, [20:01] Congressman, your reaction to the news? Well, there's a little bit of exhilaration [20:09] and satisfaction that we were able to move things in this way. Of course, none of it brings back [20:17] Rene Good or Alex Preddy. And she's done profound damage that we still need to be working on. I mean, [20:28] there have been dozens of injuries and deaths under her leadership of ICE, [20:35] and we need to turn that situation around. I mean, it is a clear and present danger to the lives of [20:39] a lot of people who are being swept up in their dragnet policies. But also, [20:45] $220 million for a PR ad contract? When I first saw it, Chris, I thought it was $220,000, [20:55] which sounds like the kind of ad PR contracts I've heard about before. Even that one's pretty handsome. [21:00] But $220 million, like that corrupt bargain deal needs to be investigated from top to bottom, [21:07] as my colleague Joe Neguse was saying yesterday in questioning. We need to investigate the entire [21:11] thing. And the taxpayers have got to get their money back. But it is riddled with corruption [21:18] over there. And then, you know, I raised the question yesterday of dozens of cases where [21:22] federal judges have castigated the Department of Homeland Security for lying in affidavits and [21:30] testimony before the court. All of that has got to end. All of that's got to stop. I mean, [21:35] if you just trade one corrupt mega-clone for another, that's not progress. But if Senator [21:41] Mullen can come in and actually begin by saying, no, these two victims of ICE killings were not [21:48] domestic terrorists and that will never happen again, OK, that will be some progress. And we'd [21:53] like to see it. Yeah. I mean, on that, [21:57] you're obviously in the House and not in the Senate. The Senate will have to confirm [22:00] Mark May Mullen. And, you know, it's generally the rule, as I'm sure you would agree. And as I've [22:06] observed over my journalistic career, that fellow senators get pretty wide berth in that body. [22:12] They're all part of the club. But it does seem to me, if you're sort of speaking to your colleagues [22:17] over in the Senate, we're going to confirm him. All the things you said, this does seem like a bigger [22:21] opportunity now for actual congressional oversight, just even in the confirmation hearings, [22:27] which is all of the things you've said should be precisely at issue before anyone's just going to [22:33] say, yeah, go get him, Mark Wayne. Yeah. His confirmation comes in the immediate aftermath [22:41] of both chambers of Congress being totally absorbed with the details of her tenure. And so everybody in [22:48] the Senate will have just been through this. His confirmation hearing should be essentially [22:52] a continuation of Secretary Noem's questioning. And he should talk about what he's going to do [22:59] to make a radical break from what has taken place before and to disavow and recant so many of the [23:05] things she just said. In terms of getting to the bottom of all this, that you mentioned, [23:12] Joe Neguse, this is the ProPublica, which again has done great accountability reporting on this, [23:16] that she misled Congress about the top, her top aides role in DHS contracts. I mean, she said [23:21] Lewandowski had nothing to do with it. And then they're able to produce a contract that Lewandowski signed. [23:27] He's the signature on the contract, her special government employee friend with benefits. [23:31] So it seems to me that while there has been a lot of reporting and clearly there's some whistleblowers in [23:36] DHS, I'm not convinced. And I wonder if you are, that we know the full scope of precisely what went on [23:42] in DHS for 14 months, precisely who got which contracts under which conditions, [23:47] and whether there's anything else that hasn't been reported that we should probably know about. [23:53] That's absolutely right. And there's tremendous interest in what Lewandowski's role was and [23:58] how much he participated in decisions about federal government contracts, including that $220 million [24:05] ad by contract. You know, I'm a little less interested in the salacious personal stuff. [24:11] It almost doesn't make much difference to me what their personal relationship was. But his public [24:17] role is fair game. And we need to be investigating that and getting to the bottom of it. And what kind [24:23] of personnel practices are taking place in the Trump administration? Seems to me that the whole [24:29] administration has a staff infection. We start tonight with a major shakeup at the Department of [24:36] Justice. President Trump has fired Attorney General Pamela Jo Bondi after just a 14-month tenure leading [24:45] the DOJ. Bondi is now the second member of Trump's Cabinet to be forced out in the second term. [24:52] Bondi reportedly ended up in the president's crosshairs for a couple of reasons, principally, [24:58] her handling of the DOJ's Epstein files. We'll have more on that later. Also an issue was her failure to [25:05] successfully prosecute the president's political foes. Let's take a look at how some of that played [25:10] out. Trump putting extraordinary pressure on his Attorney General Pam Bondi, publicly calling on her [25:18] to use the power of the Justice Department to prosecute his political enemies. Notable cases include [25:24] two failed attempts to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James. Today's ruling means, [25:28] at least for now, both cases will be dismissed. Federal charges have been dropped against [25:32] Mayor Raz Baraka following his arrest outside an ICE facility. Bondi is the one who installed [25:38] Lindsay Halligan as the interim U.S. Attorney. That has been invalidated. Both Halligan and Bondi [25:44] should be disbarred. Those are just some of the many cases that the DOJ has tried without success to [25:53] pursue. Here are some more. Judges have pushed back in each case, saying that the challenges themselves [26:00] lack legal merit. And with any government shakeup, it seems that breaking up is hard to do. Bondi [26:08] reportedly did not want to leave her post at DOJ. The New York Times reports that she spent much of [26:14] yesterday making her case to stay in the Cabinet. Bondi, however, released a statement saying otherwise. [26:22] She wrote, quote, that she is thrilled to be moving to the private sector and will continue fighting for [26:28] President Trump. Trump announced the shakeup in a Truth Social post, writing that Deputy AG Todd Blanche [26:36] will serve as acting attorney general until a new AG is nominated. Blanche, who was once Trump's [26:43] personal lawyer, is not without controversy himself. Last year, he conducted a much-discussed interview with [26:50] Jeffrey Epstein's convicted associate Ghislaine Maxwell. In the wake of that interview, [26:55] Maxwell was transferred without explanation to a minimum security prison. Last week, Blanche was [27:02] at CPAC, where we got a sense of the new acting AG's priorities. Take a listen. [27:10] I represented President Trump in the Manhattan DA case and in Jack Smith's prosecutions. Why is there [27:17] objection to sending ICE officers to polling places? Illegals can't vote. We see our most activist judges [27:25] that we lose to every single day. There's a lot of ways that we can work within that to get [27:32] some of our cases where we want them to be. MSNOW reports that the president is considering [27:39] a short list of candidates to replace Bondi, and the list includes EPA head Lee Zeldin, Republican Senator [27:46] Eric Schmidt, and U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, who is currently overseeing a controversial case [27:52] against Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. Joining me now to discuss all of this is Molly [27:58] Jong-Fast, New York Times opinion writer and the host of the Fast Politics podcast. Also with us is [28:04] Andrew Weissman, former FBI general counsel, former Mueller prosecutor, and an MSNOW legal contributor. [28:11] Andrew, let's start with you. AG Pamela Jo Bondi is now out. What's your reaction? [28:17] So I think there's a temptation in these kinds of stories to focus on the person who was fired. [28:26] What did they do right? What did they do wrong? And I think that in this instance, that is going to be [28:33] going straight for the capillaries. I think Xi is a symptom of what is going on in the White House and [28:41] specifically the Oval Office. This Department of Justice was a plaything to Donald Trump. And moving [28:50] the deck chairs around, shifting who is in charge, is not going to change the policies and practices [28:58] that are so antithetical to the rule of law. So while she is out, I think that is really not the story. [29:06] I think they'll, I don't see them putting anyone else in who's going to adhere to the [29:13] long-time values of the Department of Justice under Republican and Democratic administrations [29:19] of being independent of the White House about who gets charged and who does not get charged. [29:27] Molly, what's your take on this? So Andrew has basically said that the whole corpus is rotted. It [29:32] doesn't matter who's at the head. What's your take? That's a fundamental indictment of the Department [29:37] of Justice. And from someone who knows what the Department of Justice is supposed to look like. [29:41] Um, I would say what's meaningful about this is not so much that she's gone, but how she's gone. [29:47] Remember, Donald Trump made a real point in Trump 2.0 of not firing people. And he would, [29:52] even Kristi Noem was moved to a really great fake job, right? The Shields of America. [29:58] Which sounded like something from the Marvel universe. Yes. But apparently it's a real thing. [30:02] Right. A real thing that they clearly made up. But, um, you know, so I do think it's important [30:07] that this really happened. They did not move her. They just fired her. He fired her via tweet. [30:13] You know, we're already seeing leaking, right? She spent yesterday. How do we know she spent yesterday [30:18] begging for her job because someone leaked it? So we're already seeing leaking. And remember, [30:23] one of the reasons why Trump tried not to fire people this time is because when he did last time, [30:27] all anyone did was leak. So the fact that he has done this, done this so quickly, [30:33] did not give her a fake job. I mean, even Mike Walls got another job. Yeah. [30:37] So I think that is very meaningful. Look, I don't know how he gets someone Senate confirmed again. [30:43] I guess he's going to have to take another senator. But the actual movement and this sort of inability to [30:48] keep someone, I think that's meaningful. So, Andrew, going back to your bigger point about [30:54] the rot at the DOJ, one of the reasons the president was apparently so frustrated with [30:59] Bondi was that she had not done enough in his view to secure wins against his perceived enemies. Given [31:07] that so much of her tenure was spent trying unsuccessfully to prosecute the president's [31:12] perceived enemies, what's the nature of the legacy that she leaves behind? And what will her successor, [31:18] have to achieve going forward to live up to this president's expectations? [31:22] Well, I sort of view that as the president being unwilling to look in the mirror and understand [31:30] that he had unrealistic expectations, saying that, oh, she's not effective because she wasn't able to [31:39] reindict and then reindict again Letitia James, or to indict six members of Congress for doing the [31:46] unspeakable, which is speaking the truth and doing so protected by the First Amendment. Those are not [31:53] failings of the attorney general, other than the attorney general should never have approved them. [31:58] But another attorney general is not going to do any better. The problem is the president, [32:04] not the attorney general. I mean, obviously, the attorney general should not be subservient. They are [32:09] professional. They should be saying no. But it's really, to me, is the president thinking, [32:15] oh, there is no such thing as a rule of law. And if I can just get somebody more effective, [32:20] they can sort of trample on the rule of law better than Pam Bondi did. And I think that ignores the fact [32:26] that you have grand jurors and you have judges in the system and they can push back and have pushed back [32:33] on illegal practices. That's a great point, Molly. I mean, it wasn't that Pamela Joe Bondi [32:39] didn't try to launch these prosecutions. It's that judges were like, no, that won't fly, [32:43] or jurors would say, like, we're not going to issue a bill in that case. [32:48] The New York Times reports, though, that this particular attorney general was a real loyalist. [32:54] According to The New York Times, Bondi was, quote, like a radio built to pick up only one channel, [33:00] tune to Mr. Trump's demands. Ms. Bondi gained and maintained her position through her attentiveness, [33:05] loyalty and obedience. And that makes her uniquely vulnerable to shifts in the president's opinion. [33:12] Well, I mean, what to say? Well, this is the Trump 2.0 problem, right? [33:18] This is a cabinet filled with people who have their jobs because of their fealty to Trump and not much [33:23] else. I think it's very hard for women to do MAGA. We've seen this again and again. This is [33:30] something I think we've talked about. We've talked about this. Yeah, because part of MAGA is this rage, [33:36] is this ability like Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings, this ability to turn a [33:41] question on a questioner, to sort of be so angry. Yeah. And American women, our culture has not [33:48] embraced the angry woman as of yet. And MAGA is this hypersexualized Mar-a-Lago face, you know, [33:54] a certain aesthetic, which really runs contrary to pushing back against a questioner quite that way. [34:01] Well, let me push on this. It strikes me that the only two people who have yet to be ousted [34:07] from this cabinet are women. And there weren't a lot of women to begin with. And there's some [34:12] rumblings that maybe the third will be Tulsi Gabbard, the DNI, head of DNI. What does that say [34:20] about this administration's interest in protecting and defending women, letting women have a real seat [34:26] at the table, as it were? Yeah. Remember in Trump 1.0, where they couldn't, [34:30] they didn't have enough women and they kept bringing in like they have Ivanka. I mean, [34:35] everyone here is like a non-playing character except for Trump. So everybody has been sort of put in [34:41] there because they're actors. And that he even says that, you know, that he was impressed with Pete [34:46] Hegseth because of the way he was on television. You know, these people are actors in sort of [34:51] Trump's, you know, reality show presidency. Andrew, the DOJ has obviously much changed after [35:02] Bondi's tenure. Is there any hope that this ship will write? What will need to happen, [35:07] whether it's in the next attorney general's tenure or even beyond that, to make the Department of [35:12] Justice the entity that we have always known it to be in both Republican and Democrat presidents past? [35:19] That's a nice, that's a nice small question there. I mean, that is a huge, huge issue. [35:24] Please answer it in one minute. [35:25] Yes. So first, don't have any hope for Todd Blanch. In many ways, this is not just the firing of Pam [35:34] Bondi, but it's the snubbing of Todd Blanch. I mean, the normal process would have been to [35:39] elevate him and propose that he will be the next attorney general. And so essentially, [35:46] the sins that we've been talking about that are against her are against him as well. And so also, [35:53] I can't imagine a confirmation hearing for him because it would be very much a bloodbath and would [36:00] put front and center issues like Epstein, which we'll talk about. And so another Justice Department [36:09] is really going to have a hard time because once you've broken those norms, there are going to be [36:14] people who really think that that's something you can do. OK, so I don't know. I feel like things [36:23] always happen on a Friday. Big stories break on a Friday. And as I just mentioned with Chris, [36:28] but in case you haven't seen it, there is some breaking news, this absolutely bonkers story [36:33] that just posted tonight concerning, well, the clown car of people who make up Trump's cabinet. [36:38] And I mean, this time, it's really focused on FBI Director Kash Patel. And it's an explosive [36:43] news story in The Atlantic that just posted. It cites dozens of FBI sources, which is a big deal. [36:48] It's a lot of sources in this story detailing new allegations about Patel, including some sources [36:55] who say Patel is frequently drunk on the job, regularly absent from work, and paranoid about [37:01] getting fired. And there's quite an anecdote about that we're going to talk about. And I'm just going [37:05] to read you a few of the key passages, because I think that will tell you everything you need to [37:09] know about this story. Here's one. Several officials told The Atlantic that Patel's drinking has been a [37:14] recurring source of concern across the government. Early in his tenure, meetings and briefings had to be [37:19] rescheduled for later in the day. As a result of his alcohol-fueled nights, six current and former [37:25] officials and others familiar with Patel's schedule told The Atlantic, as a sidebar, not normal, [37:31] ever in two administrations. Again, back to the quote. On multiple occasions in the past year, [37:37] members of his security detail had difficulty waking Patel because he was seemingly intoxicated. [37:43] This was Chris was just referencing. And that's according to information supplied to Justice [37:47] Department and White House officials. A request for breaching equipment, normally used by SWAT and [37:54] hostage rescue teams to quickly gain entry into buildings, was made last year because Patel had [37:59] been unreachable behind locked doors, according to multiple people familiar with the request. [38:05] Multiple officials also tell The Atlantic that Patel is deeply concerned that his job is in [38:10] jeopardy. Well, that's understandable. And one incident earlier this month, Patel struggled to log [38:16] into an internal computer system. He quickly became convinced that he had been locked out [38:21] and he panicked, frantically calling aides and allies to announce that he had been fired by the [38:26] White House, according to nine people familiar with his outreach. Nine people. Now, the access problem [38:33] turned out to, quote, have been a technical error and it was quickly resolved. And that's according to [38:37] two people familiar with the matter. Now, I should note, MSNOW has not independently verified any of this [38:43] reporting. We've reached out to the FBI for comment. And if we get a response over the next hour, [38:48] I will surely let you know as soon as we get a response. But I should note, the FBI responded [38:53] to The Atlantic with a graceful and eloquent statement attributed to Patel. And here's what [38:58] he said. Print it. All false. I'll see you in court. Bring your checkbook. Graceful, eloquent. [39:04] Okay. Joining me now is the reporter who broke that story, staff writer for The Atlantic, Sarah Fitzpatrick. [39:10] First of all, Sarah, I'm so grateful you could be here because we saw this story and we reached out [39:14] and we were like, can you come talk to us about it? And here you are. I want to talk to you about [39:18] all the details of this bombshell report. I just skimmed the story, the top, the service there, [39:23] I should say. But first, I just want to give you an opportunity to respond to this reaction to your [39:26] piece because Patel's advisor, Erica Knight, called your piece fabricated stories. She said that every [39:33] serious DC reporter passed on, Sarah Fitzpatrick and Jeffrey Goldberg printed it anyway. Lawsuit is [39:39] being filed. What do you say to that? I say that I am a very careful, very diligent, [39:44] award-winning investigative reporter with a history of award-winning work across multiple [39:49] organizations. You and I, in fact, have worked together previously. I stand by every word of [39:53] this reporting. We have excellent attorneys and it is a surprising statement, but a very telling [40:00] statement, I believe. And I would also note, we reached out for comment to the White House and to [40:06] the Justice Department, neither of which disputed anything. We gave multiple opportunities, [40:11] including 19 detailed, detailed questions. So we stand by every word. And look, this is telling [40:20] because there are so many people. You alluded to it earlier. These are not the types of people [40:25] who are willing to speak out outside of the FBI, especially right now because Kash Patel is going [40:33] after people with polygraphs in a way that has never happened at the bureau. So for it to be this [40:38] level of alarm, this is people genuinely concerned that America is a danger as a result of this conduct. [40:45] And I feel, you know, a real responsibility to take care of that reporting incredibly carefully. And [40:51] the Atlantic is nothing but diligent. And we have amazing lawyers and amazing editors. And I stand [40:56] by every word. I'm not surprised in any way by their response. I will say, and as you said, you [41:03] note and I noted nine sources for the opening anecdote of the story as well. Let's get into some [41:09] of the details about this, because Patel's excessive drinking seems to be what is alarming [41:14] a lot of the sources. And here there are multiple anecdotes that refer to that. That's [41:18] understandable. They're moving meetings. People couldn't wake him. What more have you heard about [41:22] the extent of his drinking habits and how it seems to be affecting his ability to serve as FBI director? [41:29] The key point is that this is happening in places in which it is public. There are lots and lots of [41:34] people around who are seeing it, who are hearing about it, who are learning about it. For example, [41:39] we have video of Patel chugging a beer to excess on video. We've all seen it. Everybody's seen it. [41:46] Yes. And I and I think it speaks to, you know, he was on official travel at that time. There were [41:52] ongoing threats in the United States at that time. So, you know, it is a very, very clear pattern [41:58] that has occurred in multiple locations over a long period of time. And it's [42:02] that pattern which is giving everyone pause. These are not one off events. [42:05] One of this, I just read this story, but we have to come back to it because [42:10] the excerpt I just read, just remind people, a request for breaching equipment normally used by [42:15] SWAT and hostage rescue teams to quickly gain entry into buildings was made last year because [42:20] Patel had been unreachable behind locked doors, according to multiple people familiar with this [42:25] request. I find that, I mean, I've traveled with two presidents. I've worked in the government. I've [42:30] worked in the State Department. Shocking. Really, people should feel shocked by that. This is not a 22 year [42:38] old who's irresponsible, who's on a trip and should be behaving better. This is the FBI director. Can you tell us [42:44] more just about that scene or paint it for people who have not yet read your story? [42:47] I think the really most important thing here is that most national security officials at this [42:52] caliber or even several layers below, those types of people sleep with their phones on their chest. [42:58] They are so concerned because they need to be reachable immediately because there are life or [43:03] death decisions that have to be made quickly. There may be threats in which they need to be moved [43:08] quickly. And so this timing aspect, the ability to reach that person quickly and make sure that they [43:14] are responsive. I think this is a request that was not made lightly. And I think that's the fact that it [43:22] was made and that it was well known, I think because of that level of concern really tells you about, you [43:30] know, the kind of larger picture here. And look, you have the FBI is you and I both know so many people that [43:36] have given their lives to this organization. This is a place protecting are still giving their lives. [43:40] Are still giving their lives. Yes. And and the threats have never been higher. The risks have [43:45] never been higher. And so you have a group of people that have have totally like the biggest fear would [43:51] be that something could happen to this person. And I think they take that responsibility incredibly [43:56] seriously. But that's not that goes beyond the entire organization. You have an organization that is [44:01] dependent on this person being available, being cogent and being able to quickly respond to multiple [44:07] things all at the same time. The opening anecdote of the story was incredibly striking for a number of [44:14] reasons. I mean, because his you described this freak out in which he Patel was intoxicated. He thinks [44:21] he was locked out of an FBI. To be clear, he wasn't. He was not in that case. It just broke summer. I'm [44:27] trying to remember that all the details of it. Thank you for correcting me there. But he thought he was [44:30] locked out of an FBI computer system. He grew incredibly paranoid, thought he was going to be [44:36] fired. It turned out to be a technical issue. Talk about that level of paranoia, what that tells you, [44:42] why it was important to kind of lead with that anecdote in the story. The anecdote was just [44:45] incredibly telling for a couple of reasons. One is that it set off such a panic within the FBI [44:51] and within Washington. It set off a panic in Congress. The White House was fielding calls. I mean, [44:57] there was a real under lack of understanding about who was in charge at a given moment, [45:01] which, as you know, as a former member of government is an incredibly important who is [45:06] in charge at a given moment. But I also think it speaks to character and impulsivity and the ability [45:13] to be in a stressful situation and think about what those next steps are. And I think it is also [45:19] emblematic of other occasions that we have seen that are very public in which information has been [45:24] shared by the FBI director, which was not yet that went beyond what the investigation was ready to [45:32] make public at that time and that later had to be walked back. And in multiple cases that we have [45:36] seen, all very publicly reported, the fact that this has impacted the investigation, this has impacted [45:42] their ability to pursue people that were potentially mass shooters or other things of that nature. [45:50] So I think it's just it's a very it is an exam. It was a very telling anecdote, but it's not unusual [45:57] for those that are familiar with his behavior and his temperament. Erratic is not what you want [46:02] in that job, but they need stability. And it's that that's what you need in that job. [46:07] But also remember that, you know, there's a bit of an irony here, which is that the whole one of the [46:12] major purposes within our legal system is that the FBI comes in often when you are in court [46:16] and comes in and they are providing the information swearing that it is fact under law. There's so [46:23] much work that goes on into putting a fact into the public record in lawsuit. And so, again, the jumping [46:30] ahead of of waiting for verification is just incredibly telling because every other FBI employee, if they [46:37] were to make that same mistake, would be fired. Incredible. That's what they're taught through their whole [46:42] careers is to operate in that manner. Patel's been now in office for 14 months. He clearly almost [46:48] almost 14 months trying to hold on to this job. Why do you think he's still there? It's interesting. [46:54] I think that he has a very close at times a very close relationship with the president. [46:58] And the president views the Justice Department as a means to go after his political perceived [47:05] political enemies and punish them either by harassment, you know, expensive legal suits, [47:11] by firing them from jobs, believing that there are deep state people within the just within the national [47:17] security and the justice system. So I think that Patel has been very willing to take those requests, [47:24] those orders that come directly from the president and use the resources of the FBI to to direct them [47:31] towards those kinds of personal projects of the president. And that's really, really important [47:36] here because you only have so many people, you only have so much time and you have to decide as the FBI [47:42] director, are you pulling people away from following a terrorist? Are you pulling people away from [47:48] monitoring people who are abusing children? Are you pulling people away from other crimes that are [47:54] really, really significant and kept massive harm? And I spoke to so many officials who said to me, [48:00] this is what I worry about at night. I cannot sleep at night because I'm worried that I may have pulled [48:05] something away from somewhere and I've had to re reorganize something and people may be harmed as [48:10] a result. And so I think that was the really sobering thing that stuck with me throughout this reporting [48:15] that I would want every American watching to really think about because we are at a moment of [48:20] unprecedented threats. That is not an overstatement. We have unprecedented threats and we only have, [48:26] we have to make sure that our resources are used accordingly. Sarah Fitzpatrick, this is a really [48:31] incredible story. Everybody should read it just to understand who's running our government right [48:36] now. Thank you so much for hustling your way over here and helping really give us more more meat on [48:41] the bones of the piece. Thank you again. Thanks for having me. Breaking tonight, Trump Labor Secretary [48:46] Lori, Lori Chavez-Doremer has resigned following a year tainted by scandal. At least two female staffers [48:53] had accused the secretary's husband of sexual assault. There was an ongoing investigation [48:58] into Chavez-Doremer's own conduct where, among other issues, she was accused of having an affair [49:04] with a security guard and drinking on the job. The Labor Department and White House had both denied [49:09] those allegations. But new tonight, Chavez-Doremer was previously scheduled to be interviewed by the Labor [49:14] Department Inspector General about those allegations in the coming days. A source familiar with the matter [49:20] tells MS Now. That timing, Michael, that is something. That timing is something. And so let's clear the [49:27] decks. This is a story and a headline that the Trump administration doesn't want to have to deal with, [49:32] along with all the other things they're dealing with, because it's the kind of distraction that [49:36] Trump just doesn't want to have to answer to. I find it very interesting. I also find this collage [49:40] is sort of running. Let's just put this up. This is what they're dealing with in this department. [49:45] You have New York Post's IG probe on covers. Labor Secretary Laurie Chavez-Doremer's office [49:50] booze stash and strip club visit with subordinates. Even I never did that. I just, you know, we only [49:56] go that. Daily Beast, Trump's married labor boss accused of booze-filled fleeing with staffer. [50:03] The New Republic Trump labor security caught using government funds for a birthday party. Secretary, [50:09] husband and father sent personal texts to her young female staffers. What the hell is going [50:14] on in this department? And the fact that it's been allowed to happen for this long, I mean, [50:19] any one of these headlines when they initially posted should have been enough. But it says a lot [50:26] about this administration that it takes an accumulation of things. So it really, for me, [50:30] it's like, okay, why now? After, you know, the first one wasn't enough? What was the motivation? [50:37] Because of that IG probe. Because of the IG probe. [50:40] Well, and it's unclear if she's still going to go in for that interview tomorrow and whether or not, [50:45] actually, the OIG will complete it in its entirety now that she is leaving. But in case they don't, [50:53] reporters have been on it. Let's actually read from the New York Times, who have been [50:57] doing some incredible reporting on her conduct and the conduct of her family members. In one text message, [51:04] Chavez de Remmer asked a staff member to bring Rosé to her hotel room. Do they sell by the bottle? [51:10] She asked. The staff member responded that they did, but were out of Rosé. She responded with another [51:16] selection. How about the Josh Savvy B? But we're getting a statement from her attorney, who says [51:25] that she didn't resign due to findings that she violated the law. Her decision to leave the office [51:30] was personal. I keep thinking, Michael, about just the opportunity cost of having folks in these roles [51:37] who are not laser focused. Like, there's the behavior piece of these, right? And there's the [51:41] part that is not befitting of the office. But there's also the fact that here you have an [51:46] administration that came to power in part because they made an argument to the American people [51:50] about the economy and about affordability. You are running the labor department. You actually have [51:58] access to one of the key agencies that would be tasked with tackling these issues. And it seems [52:05] that you were focused on everything but. Yeah, but that's the administration. I mean, [52:10] they are everything everywhere all at once. No one's paying attention to any of it. [52:14] And so you have these secretaries from Kash Patel and his sort of woo-woo at the Olympics. [52:20] Why does he behave that way? Because he feels he has license to behave that way. [52:24] No other person in the job would behave that way in a very public setting like that. [52:28] Why is the secretary making these types of requests? And why is her husband, [52:32] you know, sort of, you know, prowling the staff? Because there is a license that's accepted to do [52:38] that. You had the presidential candidate at one point in Donald Trump claiming what he could do with [52:44] women and didn't pay a political price for it. You know, when you can feel you can grab people any [52:49] way you want, come up on them however you want. Yeah, this is an attitude that's permissive. [52:54] Everything happens from the top down. The president of the United States, I don't know if you can [52:58] figure this out, Donald, you set the tone. And so you reinforce that by the people you hire, [53:03] number one, and then what you allow them to get away with for the time that they're allowed to get [53:08] away with it. The fact remains, as you report, Jackie, this is happening now because the IG is [53:15] stepping in. But not according to Chavez-Doremer, whose attorney released this statement. Secretary [53:20] Chavez-Doremer did not resign due to findings that she violated the law. Her decision to leave office [53:25] was personal. It was notable to me, Jackie, though, that if you think about this administration and [53:30] you think about who it is that has already been seeing the door in that cabinet, can we just pull [53:33] up that full screen really quickly? Pam Bondi, Kristi Noem, Lori Chavez-Doremer, notice anything [53:39] about those three have in common? All the ladies.