MS NOW Highlights - August 14

[0:00] Marie Antoinette is choking on her cake today because in Donald Trump's world it's cake or [0:05] brazen grift and corruption for him and his billionaire buddies and the gallows for the [0:09] little guy. New reporting by the New York Times finds that even as Donald Trump is issuing [0:14] pardons to his wealthy friends and donors at rates we've never seen before for crimes like [0:19] wire fraud, bank fraud, insider trading and money laundering, Donald Trump is devoting his energy [0:26] to targeting small dollar fraud. The Times writes this, quote, as the White House expands its war on [0:32] fraud, the Justice Department announced criminal charges in recent days against a new symbol of [0:37] that battle, a food truck in Santa Ana, California. The new emphasis on small dollar fraud comes as [0:44] the administration has issued pardons and commutations to white collar convicts pulled back from pursuing [0:51] criminal cases against multinational corporations and dropped high profile charges against wealthy [0:58] executives. One former federal prosecutor telling the New York Times that a food truck, quote, is not [1:04] the kind of case you would typically see federal law enforcement resources being poured into and that's [1:10] resources being pulled from other areas. We're not seeing an increase in fraud prosecutions involving [1:16] public companies, investment frauds and the more traditional Wall Street prosecutions typically [1:22] pursued by the Justice Department. Donald Trump letting his friends and donors off the hook isn't just [1:28] making his friends and donors richer, it's making all of us poorer in the process. In one analysis by the [1:35] California governor's office earlier this year, they find that, quote, victims in the public won't get back [1:40] the nearly two billion dollars that courts had ordered those criminals to pay as part of their [1:46] sentences or were considering ordering when the pardons came in. And the Trump administration isn't [1:52] stopping there. Axios reports this. The Treasury Department this week scrapped a key part of the federal [1:58] anti-corruption law, the Corporate Transparency Act, that required anonymous shell companies and other [2:04] firms to disclose their owners. All of this is a part of Donald Trump's effort to transform the [2:10] American economy. As one writer in The Atlantic puts it, quote, his administration has worked [2:16] relentlessly to topple America's anti-corruption infrastructure, eliminating task forces dedicated [2:22] to combating dirty money, killing the enforcement of anti-bribery statutes and gutting efforts to force [2:29] the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share of taxes, among countless other measures. The demolition [2:36] of the Corporate Transparency Act is just the latest and most dramatic move to cater to the president's [2:42] deep pocketed buddies and fellow cronies. But it surely won't be the last. Donald Trump working [2:47] overtime to transform America into country by and for the oligarchs is where we begin today with some [2:54] of our favorite experts and friends. Former assistant special agent in charge at the FBI, national security [3:00] and intelligence analyst Michael Feinberg is here. Also joining us, PUC News senior political columnist [3:05] and national affairs analyst John Heilman is here. Also joining us, former Department of Justice pardon [3:10] attorney Liz Oyer is here. She's now the host of the podcast, Is This Really Legal? Michael Feinberg, [3:17] I start with you. It is extraordinary when you take all this reporting together because you could look at [3:25] one pardon and it could be a massive example of white collar crime or fraud of the defrauding of [3:35] investors made off style. But you take all these things next to each other and it is a clear, [3:41] it is a deliberate, it is a brazen, it is a deeply politically unpopular, it is a very anti-capitalistic [3:50] policy to fold into your economy, corruption, fraud and criminality. And I wonder what you make of the [4:00] long and short term damage being done. The damage is immense. And unfortunately, like so many things [4:07] that this administration is doing, undoing it will take orders of magnitude longer than it took to [4:15] destroy. Look, there's a couple things going on here. The first and most obvious one is that this [4:23] administration pursues policies to benefit the socioeconomic class to which most of the policymakers [4:31] belong. But I'm going to say the quiet part out loud here. If you look at the sort of small scale [4:38] fraud they are now solely pursuing, whether it's against daycares in Minneapolis or food trucks in [4:46] Southern California, I'm willing to bet that if you did another sort of demographic breakdown and [4:52] analysis, you would find that this is just one more piece of the administration's general preference to [5:00] go after minorities at the expense of going after people who are actually damaging the country. [5:07] The notion that you would go after a daycare or a food truck or something else with a relatively [5:16] small economic footprint and no tentacles that reach into other criminal organizations while giving [5:24] a pass to major corporations that might actually be committing large scale fraud or enabling embezzlement [5:33] money laundering is insane. And I can't find any legitimate motive for it. [5:43] What can you say about all of the capabilities that are being either purged from the Department of [5:52] Justice, redirected inside the Department of Justice, and how long it takes to sort of get those wheels [5:58] grinding again in these kinds of complicated investigations? I mean, Enron becomes such a [6:04] flashpoint because it's so hard to topple and take on a company like Enron. Just talk about all of the [6:09] brain drain. [6:11] Yeah, let's not forget, when Enron was prosecuted, it required the establishment of a specialized task force [6:19] involving multiple government agencies that spent years sorting through the detritus and dregs of that [6:27] company in order to make an effective prosecution and get justice, or at least as much justice as [6:34] could be gotten for its victims. That's going to be exponentially more difficult the next time [6:40] something like that happens. Because this Department of Justice, whether we're talking about the main RFK [6:48] building or its criminal investigative subcomponents like the FBI, they've jettisoned literally centuries [6:57] of cumulative subject matter expertise and experience. You can't just replace a toughened, [7:08] experienced prosecutor or a seasoned investigator with somebody who just graduated from law school or [7:16] Quantico. Becoming experienced by necessity involves having experiences. And when you're pushing people [7:24] out, simply because you want to replace them with loyalists, you lose all that. And it's going to take [7:32] years to rebuild. [7:34] Liz, I wanted to set up the gutting of the sort of corporate fraud investigation unit next to the [7:45] pardons. Because taken together, they really are this two sides of the coin, right? It's not just [7:52] criminal conduct on a scale, vast enough to damage countless ordinary people, not being investigated. [8:01] It's the people who were investigated, who were convicted by juries of their peers, or who settled [8:08] acknowledging guilt, being pardoned if they happen to be political allies. [8:12] Yeah, the pardon power has become completely corrupted under Donald Trump. Essentially, [8:19] he has wielded it to decide that the laws don't apply to certain types of people in whom he sees [8:25] something of himself. He has actually granted pardons now to three corporations, which is literally [8:31] unprecedented. There is no known example of any other president actually pardoning a corporation. [8:37] He has also used the pardon power primarily to benefit wealthy individuals who have committed large scale [8:44] financial crimes and who owe tremendous amounts of money either to the victims of their crimes or to [8:50] taxpayers. Donald Trump has walked away from prosecutions of those individuals using the pardon power and his [8:57] justice department has repeatedly dismissed major cases against wealthy individuals. The most recent example of that [9:05] that I've been following is an individual named Gotam Adani, who is one of the wealthiest men in the world. [9:11] This week, charges were dismissed related to foreign bribery and fraud. His net worth is over $80 billion. [9:20] And he apparently, according to reporting by numerous outlets, offered the Justice Department $10 billion, [9:26] said that he would invest $10 billion in the United States in exchange for these charges being dismissed. [9:32] The prosecutors said that's not why they ultimately dismissed them. But at the end of the day, [9:36] the charges were dismissed against this incredibly wealthy individual over the objections of career [9:40] prosecutors and investigators and seemingly only because he had the ability to support and assist [9:47] Donald Trump in his political agenda in some way, which is a total corruption and abuse of the [9:52] discretion of the Justice Department. Let's weigh in on Michael Feinberg's point about the cases that do [9:59] seem to be getting department resources and leading to investigations and prosecutions are, in this [10:07] example, a food truck. Another example that J.D. Vance talks about a lot is, I think, daycares in the [10:13] state of Minnesota. Talk about the things that are being targeted. [10:18] Yeah, the prosecutorial priorities of this administration are just overtly entrenching disparities that have long [10:24] existed in the federal criminal justice system. I was a federal public defender for about 10 years and [10:30] the majority of my clients were low income people of color. And those people have always experienced the [10:37] unfairness of the criminal justice system because of disproportionate targeting with prosecutions and [10:43] because of having less resources to defend those cases. This administration has essentially doubled down on [10:49] those disparities, which other administrations have tried to alleviate and ameliorate through [10:55] prosecutorial policies. But Donald Trump does not care one bit about who he is targeting disproportionately [11:03] and how his prosecution policies affect communities of color, low income communities, communities with [11:10] large immigrant populations. I mean, those are the people that he ultimately does not care about at the [11:16] end of the day. And he is pursuing political objectives by disproportionately prosecuting people [11:21] in those communities while wealthy white business owners and people who look like Donald Trump [11:28] are going free for very serious crimes that have very serious consequences for their victims. [11:34] As we mentioned a bit earlier, we are tracking breaking news at the U.S. Supreme Court. President [11:40] Trump is asking justices to allow him to continue construction on the White House ballroom. [11:45] MSNOW's Fallon Gallagher enters our group chat unexpectedly. Fallon, we were expecting this to [11:52] happen. You may not have been expecting to cover it just now. So walk us through what's going on. [11:57] Yeah, this is one of the least surprising emergency applications that we've gotten from this [12:01] president. He, of course, signaled last week after the appeals court upheld a lower court's block on the [12:06] ballroom that he would appeal to the Supreme Court. He filed this emergency application today. [12:11] This comes one week after the appeals court in a 2-1 ruling upheld the lower court orders block. [12:16] And that block specifically bars all above ground ballroom construction, [12:21] but allows below ground national security related construction to continue. [12:25] Now, what's really interesting here is that once this case got to the appeals process, [12:29] the Trump administration shifted to making this more about national security. Of course, [12:33] this came shortly after that shooting that happened at the White House correspondence dinner. [12:37] They're now citing other things that have happened since, including the foiled terror [12:41] plot on the UFC fight at the White House. And of course, this is really interesting. And [12:45] specifically in this Supreme Court application, they're now citing that July 8th incident, [12:49] which caused him to switch Air Force Ones in that catering cart. They're saying that this ballroom [12:54] is critical for his national security, the ballroom itself. But the hitch here is that this has always [13:00] been about congressional authorization. And that is what every single court has said at each step of [13:04] the way. He can have his ballroom as long as he gets that proper congressional authorization. [13:09] But now this is going to be a question for the Supreme Court to decide. [13:12] And Fallon, what do we know about the potential timeline here for the justices? [13:18] Yeah, this moves fast. So this is one of those emergency applications. Sometimes they'll rule, [13:22] they might deny it right away. I would expect this one, they'll set some sort of briefing. They'll [13:26] request a response from the plaintiffs in this case. That usually takes about a week or so. They'll [13:31] set a deadline for that. Usually then the administration will reply. And then after that, [13:35] they can rule at any time. Sometimes that ruling will come within hours of that final response. [13:39] Sometimes it takes a while. I want to remind you that we are still waiting for the Supreme Court [13:43] to rule on an emergency case involving the president's elections executive order that [13:47] would order that citizenship list for people to receive mail ballots. That's been fully briefed [13:52] for over a week now. And we still haven't gotten a ruling on that. So it is flexible, [13:56] but much faster than a typical Supreme Court case. Of course, those come on regular decision days. [14:00] So this could happen at any time. A masterful pivot, Fallon. Thank you so much for [14:06] the deep dive on that after you've been cuffing Luigi Mangione all morning. David, national [14:11] security concern, the ballroom, much ado about a ballroom. The judge in the beginning of this case [14:16] is allowing the construction of a bunker for the president. There was one before, you know, [14:21] the East Wing was torn down. And so that national security problem is being addressed. And I just [14:26] want to say more broadly, what the president is doing here is just pushing back against every other [14:31] branch of the American government. He sort of lost at the Supreme Court earlier on a variety of issues, [14:37] and he keeps going back at the court and expecting them to rule in his behavior in his favor. And just [14:41] lastly, and I'm sorry, it's pedantic and but like social studies, if the president wants to build a [14:47] ballroom, he can go to Congress and they can enact a bill. He had a majority. He had the big, [14:52] beautiful bill. He chose not to include it. That's the way our, you know, three co-equal branches of [14:58] government work under American democracy. So I think it's a false argument that this is [15:03] about national security. This is about the president wanting to build his ballroom [15:07] without Congress. Yeah, exactly. As Fallon said, this is about congressional authorization. I do [15:12] want to get to more information that we're learning about Trump, the Trump administration's no bid [15:17] contracts. The New York Times is reporting that starting last fall, the Department of Homeland Security [15:22] spent over $460 million in no bid contracts on 10 airplanes, their used airplanes. The Times says, [15:30] quote, that was an enormous price tag. But the department said it had no time to consider [15:36] other offers. The planes were needed urgently for deportation flights. But since then, [15:40] the department has barely used this new fleet for deportations or anything else. David, [15:47] quickly give us your take on this purchase. Fantastic reporting by the New York Times. [15:52] I'll always cheer for journalists. And you just have this contradiction, and I want to let others [15:56] weigh in on this, where you have a Republican president in not engaging in capitalistic competitive [16:01] bidding. Simply, you know, no, you know, these direct bids, the same thing happened with the [16:06] reflecting pool. It was a no bid contract, a contractor, you know, he had worked with before [16:12] privately. The Mar-a-Lago pool guy. And they did a terrible job. Okay, so Tim, and internal [16:19] by the way, that was who he gave the contract to was his pool guy. It's Republicans wasting taxpayer [16:24] money. And the Democrats have done that in the past to be to be fair. And the Democrats didn't run [16:29] the Pentagon well in terms of drones. I meant to say that earlier. But it's astonishing that a [16:33] Republican president is engaging in so much of this. Well, and the thing that ties all these things [16:37] together is Trump uses national security slash national emergency to justify acting unilaterally, [16:44] whether it's imposing tariffs, or deporting migrants from US streets, or building a ballroom [16:49] that is a vanity project. Whatever it is, he understands that it allows him, in theory, [16:54] to override congressional powers of the purse and powers of approval. That's why he's doing it. [17:00] And secondly, again, they're very poor stewards of American taxpayer dollars in this administration. [17:06] Those DHS jets, I'm assuming that contract was entered into during Kristi Noem's tenure. [17:12] We know that she spent flagrantly for things that maybe you shouldn't be spending on when [17:17] you're running a federal agency, just like Kash Patel, just like the president. They're not [17:23] responsible with other people's money. And they're not managing the government effectively [17:26] through it. And they're using national security as a blanket for allowing them to say they can do [17:31] whatever they want to. Lizzie, this is clearly not the first time we've seen a no-bid contract. [17:35] You mentioned the Mar-a-Lago pool guy. But there's also the $7 billion for 11 icebreaker ships. We [17:41] also saw the fiasco with the reflecting pool. We have seen this with the ballroom itself. [17:49] The no-bid contract for the ballroom is valued at $500 million. What is going on here? [17:55] You know, why is the Trump administration circumventing the normal process whereby [17:59] corporations would bid out for the privilege of building these things? [18:04] Because it wants to. Because money matters to them on a more personal granular level. I mean, [18:11] Tim has written about the president for decades. This is a little bit like, I don't know, a child [18:18] who keeps coming out of the bedroom, coming up with other reasons to stay awake. Like, [18:22] Mommy, I want one more glass of water. Can I have a snack? Can I have one more story? [18:26] We're familiar with this paradigm. We're familiar with this paradigm. [18:28] It feels triggering. You're supposed to go to Congress. [18:31] There are entire wings of the federal government dedicated to procurement. But even back to the [18:36] very beginning of this term, if you look at Doge, for example, you know, all of these agencies [18:42] have inspectors general. They have auditing processes. I am not saying those processes are [18:47] perfect in any way, shape or form. But the administration just doesn't want to follow [18:51] those rules. Charlie, at the end of the day, you know, we can talk about how ludicrous this seems, [18:56] but for Americans out there, how does it impact taxpayers? Do we know? Well, I mean, [19:04] they're watching how the money is being spent. So, you know, in the beginning, we had Doge, which was, [19:08] you know, slashing all these programs because we were fiscal conservatives, right? [19:12] And then what do we see now? By the way, one of the words I think that we need to [19:17] resurrect in the English language is boondoggle, wasteful, expensive, completely unnecessary. [19:23] And everything you have described is a massive boondoggle. And as Tim points out, how ironic that [19:29] it's taking place under a Republican administration. But whether you're talking about the reflecting pond, [19:34] whether you're talking about the white elephant Arctic, you know, our Arctic ships, whether you're [19:40] talking about, you know, all of these, you know, DHS deportation planes. And by the way, [19:45] you showed a picture of a luxury business jet. That was we taxpayers had to pay for that in order [19:50] to deport migrants. What you have is this split screen where you're talking about people's economic [19:58] anxiety in their daily lives. And then they're looking at Washington, D.C. Is Donald Trump draining [20:03] the swamp or is he just filling it up with one vanity project after another one wasteful boondoggle [20:10] after another? So, again, this is one of those things where you hope that voters are going to [20:15] connect the dots between now and the midterms. Yeah. Are people paying attention to this? People [20:22] are struggling out there to pay for gas, to pay for rent. We have been hammering that point. [20:28] Are people paying attention to no bid contracts? I mean, obviously, we're here reporting on it. [20:33] It's important. But, Charlie, you know, what will the implications be for Republicans? And are they [20:38] going to get questions about this as we head into the midterms? Well, they ought to. Reporters [20:43] ought to ask questions about this. This ought to be in ads. And the fact is that the average voter, [20:48] even the average MAGA voter, can understand something like they spend $464 million on planes that are [20:55] just sitting there. They can understand spending billions of dollars on icebreakers that have no [21:00] actual purposes. You know, in my conversations, when you say, how do you feel about spending $900 [21:06] million on a new ballroom or spending millions of dollars on the reflecting pond? People understand [21:12] waste and these numbers are comprehensible. So here's again, you know, another job for Democrats. [21:18] Bring it up. Talk about it. Challenge the Republicans when they claim that they are fiscally [21:23] conservative. Challenge them when they claim that they are prudent. They're prudent, you know, [21:31] handlers of public wealth. Because these are all vulnerabilities. And they go to this whole [21:37] question of, is Donald Trump, does he think about people like you? Is he concerned about your problems? [21:44] Or is, as Maggie Haberman has reported, does he spend 70% of his time thinking about monuments about [21:51] himself rather than how to improve your life? MS now spoke exclusively with the wife of a sailor [22:00] who actually jumped off the ship last week. She says he was in the water for about an hour before [22:05] he was rescued and then medically evacuated off the ship. The wife said she was not contacted by Navy [22:12] officials about the incident until four days after it happened. She learned about what she described as a [22:20] suicide attempt after one of her husband's friends on the ship messaged her that someone from his squadron [22:27] went overboard, she said. Later, that friend told her it was indeed her husband, according to messages [22:34] reviewed by MS now. Now, the wife said she had not been able to stay in regular communication with her [22:41] husband, who is a 19 year old aircraft mechanic on his first deployment because the internet signal on [22:49] the ship was unable and unstable and inconsistent. She said when they did talk, he expressed that he was [22:56] homesick and exhausted. She shared the last text exchanges she had with her husband on July 21st. [23:03] And in them, he writes, I think the boat is finally getting to me. He went on to write, I'm really [23:09] trying to not feel negative or hopeless. But between the Wi Fi and not knowing when I will come home and [23:16] not knowing what is happening back at home. It's really getting to me. I don't think I can do another [23:20] deployment after this. And I don't even know if I can finish this deployment. Here is some context about [23:28] the strain on the service members. The Lincoln left its home port of San Diego on November 21st. [23:35] The ship has only stopped twice, once in Guam in December and on July 7th, when it briefly pulled [23:43] into Oman, keeping the crew at sea for more than 200 continuous days. The Wall Street Journal has new [23:52] reporting. The U.S. military is preparing to replace the U.S. Abraham Lincoln with the USS [23:57] George Washington, which has been operating in the South China Sea. But officials at the paper, [24:04] this paper spoke to did not give any timeline for when that could happen. I mean, the promises have [24:10] been made. The promises have been broken twice now. I mean, think about this week. It's been nine months. [24:18] It's been nine months since the Lincoln pulled out of San Diego and what was supposed to be [24:23] a routine seven month cruise. And here they still sit. 5,000 sailors and Marines, hundreds of days [24:33] at sea. And that's a record broken that I guarantee you from my years on the Armed Services Committee, [24:41] I can tell you that breaks the morale of American servicemen and women. And in doing that, [24:48] it dangerously undermines the armed forces of the United States military. Two times. [24:56] Two times, Pete Hegseth's Pentagon promised them, you're almost home. And twice, Hegseth's promise [25:06] was broken. Again, the thing I learned on the Armed Services Committee is readiness isn't limited to [25:14] weapon systems. It's sailors and Marines that are forced to sleep under moldy conditions. Marines and [25:24] sailors forced to drink contaminated water to continue working with no days off to be separated [25:32] from their children, their spouses, their parents and their loved ones longer than any military leader [25:38] would ever willingly permit. We've seen it. I mean, Pete Hegseth's cartoonish celebration of war, [25:48] his advocacy of these endless wars, these constant invasions, his continued failure to plan ahead, [25:56] whether it's on munitions or whether it's on deployments. It's left the U.S. Navy with too [26:03] few carriers to send in relief, while the most exhausted ship continues its endless mission in [26:11] this avoidable war. And while Pete Hegseth dithers, morale bleeds American readiness. American readiness will [26:22] bleed into the next conflict, into the next crisis, into the next war that Pete Hegseth begs for. [26:30] Meanwhile, the Lincolns battered an exhausted crew. They, they continue standing watch and they're [26:37] doing their job and they're doing the job that was asked of them. Even if the secretary of defense [26:43] that they ultimately answer to is simply not. Let's bring in the co-host of our 8am hour staff [26:50] writer at the Atlantic, Jonathan Lemire, opinion writer at the New York Times, Mara Gay, CEO and co-founder of [26:56] Axios Jim VandeHei and managing editor at the Bulwark, Sam Stein. [27:02] General Mayor, how long is Donald Trump going to allow this guy to remain secretary of defense? You [27:08] look at the munitions crisis. They lie about it. He yells at people in the press when they tell the [27:14] truth. He thinks he can scream and yell and lie and bluster. He's kicked out any real reporters from [27:21] the Pentagon, but he can't run from the truth. This guy doesn't know how to do deployments. He doesn't [27:26] know how to manage munitions. He doesn't know how to have his military, the greatest military on the [27:32] face of the earth fight a war that he begged the president to get into. John, how much longer is the [27:41] president going to dither and allow this guy to make him look weak and ineffective? Pete Hegseth [27:49] only has a handful of defenders in the White House, but he still has President Trump. To your question, [27:54] Joe, we know and have reported in the last couple of weeks, Trump's frustration with Hegseth has grown. [28:00] White House officials continue to insist that Hegseth's job is safe, but we know how it works with this [28:06] president. You're safe until you're not. And as these unending bad headlines add up about the state of [28:12] the war, in particular, the military's preparedness and the state of that aircraft carrier, one has to [28:19] wonder how much longer Trump's patience will last. And we should note the munitions crisis. We've discussed at [28:26] length this week about the defense, these interceptors. They're down significantly. Right [28:31] now, U.S. does not believe we have the ability to adequately defend our bases and allies in the [28:37] region. I mean, and don't even mention, like, Asia, were there to be an incident there. Also, [28:42] Washington Post reporting the U.S. military has lost roughly 25 percent of its Reaper drones. So that's [28:47] another piece of the arsenal that's been depleted because of this war. And Joe and Mika, just yesterday, [28:54] Secretary Hegseth, we're talking about this aircraft carrier having record long deployment. Just [28:59] yesterday, he was asked about how long this naval blockade might go on. And he says, we can hold it [29:05] as long as we need to. And then he used the word indefinitely, suggesting that this naval blockade [29:12] and therefore assets of the U.S. Navy could be in that region indefinitely. So the very sort of [29:19] forever war that President Trump repeatedly campaigned against over the last decade, [29:25] his secretary of defense right now floating that idea that there could be a forever war [29:31] in the Middle East now. And as Jonathan just mentioned, there's new reporting this morning [29:36] on the depletion of United States weapons stockpiles amid the Iran war. The Washington Post cites three [29:44] officials familiar with the matter who say the U.S. military has lost roughly 25 percent of its Reaper [29:51] drones. The aircraft which are used to conduct surveillance and targeted strikes have seen heavy [29:57] use around the Strait of Hormuz, but are seen as easy targets for Iran's military and its regional [30:04] proxies. The Reaper can cost between 30 and 50 million dollars, with the potential taxpayer cost of recent [30:11] losses coming in at one point three billion dollars for that weapons system alone. The aircraft is [30:19] just one in a long list of U.S. weapons and munitions drained by this war. Meanwhile, the Trump [30:27] administration continues to emphasize economic pressure on Iran. Here's what Treasury Secretary [30:32] Scott Besant told Newsmax last night. Watch this space for more announcements coming next week, [30:41] because we are going to apply measures like have never been seen in the history of economic [30:51] isolation on a country. It will be a combination of economic isolation like the world has never seen [30:59] before and the continued blockade in the Strait of Hormuz that will keep anything from going in or out of [31:07] the Iranian ports. So glad. So glad he was all right after being put on the decoy plane. Yeah. [31:15] Um, so I make the cut for the no, uh, bakery truck. No, he didn't. Um, so, so anyway, uh, Jim Van [31:23] Dei, uh, going back to the armed service committee and what we always obsessed over all the time, uh, [31:29] Democrats and Republicans alike on the armed service committee was there. The American military's [31:33] ability to fight a two front war. We had, we, we always felt that we had to have enough munitions. [31:38] We had enough, have enough weapons. We had enough, had enough carrier groups. We had to be prepared [31:44] to fight a two front war. The United States has been fighting this one front war. Mainly [31:51] we're the side that shooting with, with, without them shooting back that much. And we're talking about [31:57] Iran, not China, not Russia. We're talking about Iran. And yet we didn't even plan for this. We're [32:03] running out of munitions. Uh, we we've got troops on rotations that are going to crush morale. [32:09] That's going to crush readiness. That's going to bleed into the next conflict. What's going on here? [32:16] Again, we've talked about this for a month. This was all foreseen and foreseeable. The president [32:23] was warned by all of his advisors that all the scenarios we keep talking about on this show [32:28] could and would likely happen that the Iranian regime wouldn't just buckle, [32:33] that it would fight back, that they're not motivated by worrying about economic sanctions. [32:38] Their economy has already collapsed. So then when you go into this war and you send these wobbly [32:44] signals about whether it's working or not working, imagine being the secretary of Navy trying to figure [32:49] out, okay, when do I have to rotate deployments? Imagine being the commander of that ship. One day, [32:54] it seems like it's done. The next day, it seems like we'll be there forever. Then the obvious [32:58] outgrowth of that is what you talked about at the top of the show. My dad loves the saying prior [33:04] planning prevents piss poor products. Same thing with performance. And you're seeing it because there [33:09] isn't a plan. There's no direction to give these. And he likes Hegseth. Yes, there's a lot of people [33:14] around him who don't like the defense secretary. He likes him because he does not push back, [33:19] because he defends everything that the president does, that he says it's always part of the plan, [33:23] that he'll go after the press, that he'll purge people that don't look like him outside of the [33:28] military, regardless of what their qualifications are. He's doing what he was asked to do. [33:35] Kentucky's Democratic Governor Andy Beshear is joining us now. Mr. Governor, I appreciate you're [33:40] making time to talk to us. You just heard the Vice President J.D. Vance say the keeping gas prices [33:44] down. That's the number one goal in the Iran war. He says the number two goal is ensuring Iran never gets [33:50] a nuclear weapon. Governor Beshear, are you clear on what the administration's objective is here? [33:58] No, and neither is the administration. If the goal is cheap gas, they cause the price of gasoline. [34:05] They started this war with Iran. Before Trump and Vance's decision, the Strait of Hormuz was open. [34:11] Iran didn't think that it could control it in the way that it currently is. All they've done is created [34:17] a stronger Iran, skyrocketed the price, not just of gasoline, but of diesel. So every farmer in [34:23] America is also feeling it. And the American people, just with the cost of everything being [34:29] so high, need to know the price of gas you see every day is 100 percent the president's fault. [34:36] And sir, among those who should be pushing for answers on Iran, of course, your senior senator, [34:40] Kentucky senior senator Mitch McConnell. It was last Thursday, now eight days ago that he was released [34:46] from rehab. Have you received any new information on his condition or how soon he will be back to work [34:52] on behalf of the people of Kentucky? I've received absolutely nothing. And that's the same that the [34:59] people of Kentucky have received. This is why the Senate feels broken. These guys don't think that [35:06] they have a boss when the people of Kentucky are their boss. They don't feel like they're accountable [35:11] whatsoever. It's Mitch McConnell not showing up for work for two months and refusing to call into [35:17] one new show or create one video for the constituents that he's supposed to serve. But then it's also the [35:23] Republican leadership. John Thune saying it's not his job to determine if Mitch McConnell even has the [35:29] capacity to continue, that that's somehow just between the people of Kentucky and him. And while Mitch [35:35] McConnell won't show up for his job, Congress won't do their job. They won't stop the president from [35:42] unlawful tariffs that are raising the price of groceries. They won't push back on this war of [35:47] choice in Iran, which has skyrocketed the price of gasoline. They won't stop these terrible cuts to [35:54] food assistance and have actually supported the president in the big, ugly bill that's shuttering [36:00] rural hospitals. Mitch McConnell won't show up for his job, but I really wish Congress would do theirs. [36:05] You've said there's only so much that you can do here, but have you done everything in your power [36:11] to sort of move the ball forward on this to try to force this situation? I have. And let me first [36:17] make sure I say, I hope Mitch McConnell is okay. I've known him most of my entire life. I want him [36:24] to get better, but I just believe he has a responsibility to talk to the people of Kentucky. And I don't think [36:30] that's asking a lot. He could call into your show for a couple minutes. He could call into Fox News. [36:36] I don't really care where he does, but just give the people some reassurance and shut down [36:41] any and all of these conspiracies. But what we've learned is for a vacancy to occur in the Senate, [36:49] the Senate itself has to declare that vacancy. If a governor could just claim someone doesn't have [36:54] capacity and call an election, imagine how many times in the past that would have happened. So a state [37:00] officer can't just unilaterally do that to a federal officer. But I just think that this is, [37:06] it's bigger than just Mitch McConnell, though I think he's ruining his legacy by this. It's about [37:12] a Congress and Republican leadership that think that they don't answer to the people of their states [37:18] and certainly aren't doing their constitutional duty to be a separate, independent branch of government [37:24] and a check on this out of control president. Should there be new legislation on congressional [37:29] term limits? Yes, we need more than that. We need to fix the darn government constitutional amendment [37:36] because way too much is broken. The first part should be to outlaw this partisan gerrymandering we [37:42] are seeing all over the country and enshrine part of the Voting Rights Act right there in the Constitution. [37:47] So no rogue Supreme Court can can ever do what this one has done. Do you support what the Democratic, [37:53] what Democrats in states like California have done in response? Oh, I do because they didn't have a [37:59] choice. You know, we can't unilaterally disarm, but let's have a constitutional amendment where it [38:03] never happens again, where neither party can do it. Let's set those term limits and not just term [38:09] limits for Congress. Let's set them for the Supreme Court too. So you can't game when somebody steps [38:14] out and trying to put someone in that'll serve for a period of time. Let's overturn Citizens United. [38:19] Let's actually fix the problems with government. Governor, let me ask you, chair of the Democratic [38:25] Governors Association right now. We're three months to the midterms, even less than that, as you know [38:29] well. Obviously, there is broad disapproval of the way Donald Trump has handled his time in office this [38:35] second term. But Democrats, according to recent polling, the number has their approval as a party at [38:40] roughly 40, 41 percent right now. What do you believe is the cause of that? Well, the overall [38:48] Democratic brand polls poorly, but our individual candidates, especially for governor, poll really [38:55] well. And that's because they are folks that get things done. They work to lower prices. They work to [39:00] expand health care. They work to have safe roads and bridges. They work every day to provide better [39:07] public safety for their people. We try to bring new jobs to our states with better wages. Democratic [39:14] governors get things done, and we're going to win races in places that people aren't expecting. [39:19] We're going to win in Iowa and turn it blue. Amy Acton in Ohio is running a great race. Jocelyn [39:26] Benson is going to make sure Gretchen Whitmer has a Democratic successor. Just great candidates all [39:33] over the country that are running really good races and are going to win. You were talking about some [39:37] governor's races and the impact of Democratic governors or potential Democratic governors in [39:42] some of those states. I want to ask you about some of the other other places, including the Senate races, [39:47] Michigan, Abdul Al-Sayed, obviously a much more progressive candidate than Haley Stevens, who he beat for [39:52] the Senate nomination there right now. There are concerns within the party about this division between the [39:59] the progressive and more moderate wings. Do you worry that some of those more progressive, those [40:04] farther left candidates right now will alienate independence in states, including yours? [40:10] Well, everybody out there has to get out and earn it. You have to win an election. You don't just get [40:17] it because of the party that you're a part of. And the Democratic Party needs to be a big tent party [40:22] where people can have disagreements on how to reach a solution. But let me tell you, [40:27] differences within the Democratic Party are a lot smaller than the differences [40:31] between the Democratic Party and this current Trump-run Republican Party. Whether you're a [40:36] progressive or a moderate, and I really hate those labels, you believe that every child should have [40:42] enough to eat. You believe that every child should get a good education. You want people to be able to [40:47] see a doctor when they're sick. Compare that to the Republicans, whose big, ugly bill has torn food [40:54] assistance away from 11,000 Kentucky kids. 11,000 kids in my state are going hungry that weren't [41:00] before this Republican Party. You see rural hospitals shuttering all over the United States because of [41:06] what they've done. So I don't agree with some of the policy proposals of some candidates that are [41:12] running, but at least they want to fix the problems that are out there while Republicans are only making [41:17] them worse. Andy Beshear, Governor, I appreciate you sticking around for a couple more seconds. [41:21] There's so much to talk about with you. And one of those major issues that has been resonant around [41:25] the country, certainly it's an issue that's top of mind for you, is the idea of data centers right [41:30] now. You signed an executive order just this week to rein them in. You said the Trump administration [41:36] kept you out of the loop last month on what was a $100 billion data center campus on federal land [41:44] in your state. How will a data center like that impact Kentuckians? [41:49] Well, I still haven't received a briefing on that project, though I believe one is being [41:54] scheduled in the coming weeks. And so my comments were, I don't know. And let me just say, if you're [41:59] going to do $100 billion project in a state, you probably ought to go see the governor. The governor [42:04] runs the cabinets that do all the environmental permitting. You can't operate without an air and a water [42:09] permit. They run all the cabinets that do the inspections of the buildings before you can [42:14] actually open. So if you're going to invest $100 billion to build something, you probably ought to [42:20] go talk to the person in charge of that state. But when it comes to data centers generally, I believe [42:27] that these are intensely local decisions. There are some communities that could believe the benefits [42:33] outweigh the detriments. But what I wanted to make sure is that Kentuckians are protected when they are [42:40] trying to make that decision. So I signed an EO that said we are not going to approve any data center that [42:45] raises electricity prices by one penny. They are not welcome. They have to pay for all of their own [42:51] electricity. Number two, they've got to pay their fair share of taxes, because you're not creating a huge number [42:58] of jobs, but you could double the budget of some school systems. And so that's something a local [43:03] community might want to consider, but only if they're not trying to negotiate their way out of [43:08] paying their fair share. Number three, it can't impact the environment detrimentally. They need [43:14] to fix those issues. But finally, go into the local community and actually establish a relationship. [43:21] These investments are huge. They're enormous. But some of these companies are treating them like [43:26] they're warehouses. This is going to be an important town wherever you are, an important county. [43:31] Treat them like it. If I can, one final question before I let you go here. I know I don't expect [43:37] you as it relates to 2028 to make a formal announcement here about whether you do plan [43:41] to run or not. But is it fair to those who are keeping a close eye on the Kentucky Democratic [43:46] Governor Andy Beshear that we will know by the start of 2027 whether you are in or out? [43:52] I don't have any timeline, but I'll say this. I will not leave a broken country to my kids [43:59] or anyone else's. I don't know exactly what that looks like. But I will tell you, I thought after [44:04] my 2023 reelection, I was done. But I cannot leave a country so divided. I cannot leave a country where [44:15] the president is attacking public education. I can't leave a country where a president has unlawful tariffs [44:22] that are attacks on the American people. And I worry that our kids are starting to think that [44:27] this president's actions are normal. So I'm going to be in this fight one way or another, making sure [44:33] that we can provide the same type of stable United States of America that is the leader of the free [44:39] world and not the bully on the playground to our kids and grandkids. Governor Andy Beshear, [44:44] the Democratic governor of the great state of Kentucky. Governor, I started my career in Lexington, [44:48] Kentucky there, 27 News First. I got plenty of old friends still in your community. So please say [44:53] hi to everybody there. I hope next time we can have this conversation in person. I appreciate your time. [44:58] I'll do it. And congratulations on the show. I'm grateful for you and for your time today. Thanks so much.