MSNBC Live : The Weeknight 4/15/2026 — MS NOW News Trump Today Apr 15, 2026

[0:00] and welcome to the weeknight. I'm Michael Steele with Simone Sanders Townsend and Alicia Menendez. [0:05] Breaking tonight, Republicans are coming to the defense of Trump as he escalates his relentless [0:10] attacks on the Pope. In moments, Senator Richard Blumenthal is with us. Also breaking new details [0:16] on the Trump administration's attempt to rewrite history on the president's efforts to overturn the [0:21] 2020 election. Yes, we are still talking about this. This as it also looks to undermine the [0:27] next election. Mark Elias will join us. And later, the president threatens the Federal Reserve chair [0:32] again, and his Justice Department appears to take new steps in its baseless investigation of Jerome [0:37] Powell. Norm Eisen is at the table. But we begin with breaking news on Donald Trump's deeply unpopular [0:44] war with Iran. MSNOW confirms a second round of high-stakes peace talks between the U.S. and Iran [0:50] will likely unfold next week, most likely in Pakistan. That is according to two Pakistani officials. [0:57] The White House says future talks are in the works, but no date is on the books yet. [1:02] Meanwhile, today on Capitol Hill, Senate Republicans blocked Democrats from passing a war powers [1:07] resolution. This was the fourth attempt by Senate Democrats to rein in Trump's unauthorized war [1:13] of choice. As for the president, his erratic behavior continues with troubling new attacks [1:19] on the Pope. Last night, he name-checked Pope Leo online, pushing back against the pontiff's [1:25] criticism of the war. And rather than caution the president, the White House's resident Catholic, [1:30] J.D. Vance, escalated those attacks, telling a crowd of young conservatives that Pope Leo should [1:36] be, quote, careful when talking about theology. And here's House Speaker Mike Johnson defending both [1:42] Trump and Vance. [1:44] A pontiff or any religious leader can say anything they want. But obviously, if you wade into political [1:51] waters, I think you should expect some political response. It is a very well-settled matter of [1:56] Christian theology. There's something called the just war doctrine. There's a time to every purpose [2:00] under heaven. [2:01] I don't know what the hell that is, because when you go and look at the catechism of the Roman Catholic [2:09] Church, and I could specifically cite for you, Mr. Speaker, section 2307 to 2317, it lays out [2:17] exactly the framing for a just war. And there's nothing about it under heaven or anything like [2:22] that. What it specifically refers to is the idea that this is a moral framework. And it's this concept [2:31] called use ad bellum, which means right to go to war. And what it requires, all these things have to [2:38] be met. And this is what the pope has been trying to get folks to understand. Just cause, typically [2:43] self-defense against aggression. Legitimate authority declared by proper political authority. [2:49] Hmm, Congress, right intention, not revenge, conquest or domination. Last resort, all peaceful [2:57] options are exhausted. Probability of success, not futile bloodshed. And certainly proportionality, [3:05] expected good outweighs the harm. The other part is called use in bellow, which means right conduct [3:13] in war. And that speaks specifically to how you behave, how you conduct the war. You must protect [3:19] civilians, no intentional targeting. And proportionality, force use must match the objective. [3:25] Folks, this is not this war. This is why presidents in the past have gone before the American people [3:31] to talk on touch on all these things, because that core thread that the speaker clearly doesn't [3:37] understand as he refers to it. It's nice to use the two words, but you need to know what they mean [3:42] when they're put together. You know, the speaker fashions himself a religious man. He and his wife [3:48] used to have a podcast up until he became the speaker. When they people started looking at the podcast, [3:52] there was some weird, you know, what going on on that podcast. I encourage people to go look it up. [3:55] I think some of the archives are on YouTube, but he fashions himself a religious man, yet could not [4:00] even bring himself to adequately defend the Pope. Like, to be very clear, what the United States [4:06] government is currently involved in, our leaders, we are not serious people. This is not how a serious [4:10] nation behaves. And they are treating this one-sided back and forth with the Pope, because it is one-sided. [4:15] It's like a shakedown. These are mob tactics. Like, who tries to shake down the Pope? Who gets in a fight [4:21] with the Pope? Who does that? I, I, you mean it as a rhetorical question. Correct, because obviously [4:27] we see who is, who, we, we see what's happening. Like, the Pope is not some cable news guest you can [4:33] berate down with, like, your talking points. Um, but I, I think to zoom out, because for folks that [4:38] are like, look, I'm not Catholic. This has nothing to do with me. They believe they is in the federal [4:42] government. They is in the vice president, the president, the people that work for them believe [4:46] that they are above reproach, that nobody can check them, that no one is allowed to speak up or speak [4:50] back or speak out. They want you to just shut up and listen, shut and shut up and do your job, [4:55] whatever your job may be. Dribble the church, whatever, insert whatever you think. And I, [4:59] I believe that Americans should be very concerned because the president of the United States thinks [5:04] he can shake down the Pope. Okay. If he thinks that the Pope needs to bend the knee, what do you, [5:08] what the hell do you think they think about you? I just want to say that I think part of the reason [5:11] they are willing to defend the president vis-a-vis the Pope is because it's a lot easier than [5:16] defending the actual war. Let's, let's bring in Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of [5:20] Connecticut. He serves on the Senate Armed Services and Homeland Security Committee. Senator, [5:25] it is good to see you. Thank you for being with us. I mean, Senator, what do you think about this [5:29] Pope shakedown? Well, I entered this debate with a lot of humility as a non-Catholic, but first and [5:37] foremost, what rings in my ears is the Pope's declaration. I do not fear the Trump administration. [5:43] And what he's preaching here is essentially peace. In my faith, shalom, peace is one of the highest [5:52] values there is. And I admire his moral compass. Obviously, I, I'm not a Catholic, but we need [6:01] these pillars of morality in a world that is so tumultuously cast with division and frankly, [6:12] immorality. And I think he brings attention to the fact that in this war, lives have been lost. [6:19] People have been maimed and injured. We talk a lot about the economic cost, [6:23] Straits of Hormuz, increasing the price of aluminum and fuel and food. But there is a moral [6:29] principle at stake here. Senator, I really appreciate you saying there because you put a really fine [6:34] point on what I was trying to convey at the beginning there, because at the end of the day, [6:39] what the Speaker of the House does not get by just by, by his words of what he said is that you [6:44] can fight a just war unjustly. And, and, and that's still morally wrong. And that's exactly what [6:52] the pontiff is trying to convey. I think your framing of that is consistent with this idea [6:57] of Augustine, of Hippo. And I think the Augustinian Pope would know a little bit about Augustine [7:02] who created the framing around just war along with Thomas Aquinas. So there is this moral code [7:08] that's in place here. And so I appreciate your acknowledging that because it's an important [7:12] piece. I want to get a little bit granular on the politics though, because I'm really curious [7:17] as this whole thing is unfolding right now with respect to the, the, the war powers resolution and [7:26] the fact that members of my party, um, who would fall over the, all over themselves in the past, [7:32] uh, to require as they did with George Bush coming to the Congress and laying out exactly what your [7:38] plan is for the Iraq war, et cetera, et cetera. Um, now find themselves sitting in cop closets and [7:43] corners with their thumb, uh, in their mouth, uh, trying to figure out exactly what, uh, the next move [7:49] would be, uh, waiting on Donald Trump to tell them. So I was curious today to see this go down yet again, [7:55] um, the fact that Senator Fetterman seemingly agrees that the Congress has no role here and that, [8:04] you know, this concept that, well, we want to support our troops. Well, dammit, that has nothing [8:09] to do with the war powers resolution. The war powers resolutions, you can clarify for a senator, [8:14] does not impede on the defense department to execute, uh, the, the plan on the ground or in the [8:21] air or in the sea. What it does say is that the Congress, uh, requires the president to account [8:28] for the actions that he wants to take militarily. In fact, Michael, I think you're absolutely right. [8:34] The war powers resolution actually supports our troops because the founders wanted Congress to be [8:41] required to approve a declaration of war because they wanted the American people to support troops [8:47] when they went into war. We should not be putting our sons and daughters in harm's way without the [8:54] president going to the American people and getting their support. And it's a matter of law, but it's [9:00] also, again, a matter of fundamental morality and values, you know, which again brings us back to the [9:07] hope and other moral leaders in our world. Right now, the American people are very, very much opposed [9:17] this war growing more so by the day and supporting the troops means we want to save their lives [9:22] without subjecting them to danger and risk without a clear objective and strategy and end game. [9:29] So today, Senate Republicans largely rejected this war powers resolution with the DNC called, um, [9:36] writing a permission slip for the president's war of choice. I wonder if you agree with that [9:41] characterization, but I also want to talk to you about the timeline because you're joining us on April 15th. [9:45] Happy tax day to you and all who celebrate. Um, your colleagues, Republican colleagues are fixated [9:51] on April 29th as the day when they're finally going to do something. Let me read you some reporting from [9:57] the Associated Press and then you and I can talk about it. Senate Republicans reject effort to halter [10:01] on war, but some eye future war powers vote. After the 60 day or 90 day deadline, it's time to fish or cut [10:08] bait, said Republican Senator Tom Tillis of North Carolina. Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, [10:14] has been talking to colleagues about putting together a resolution that would authorize the [10:17] war beyond that time period. Republican senators, John Curtis of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine [10:22] have also said they would like to see congressional action. Um, what is supposed to happen in the next [10:29] two weeks? And what is the danger of giving this president two more weeks with that permission [10:35] slip to continue unabated and unchecked by Congress? Well, we're going to bring back the war powers [10:42] resolution. I hope next week we're going to do it again and again and again and again. We're going [10:48] to hold Republicans accountable. It's more than just speeches on the floor. The American people [10:52] are going to begin watching. You know, all three of you know, having been veterans of this process, [10:59] that the name of the game is often repetition. And after a certain point, things break through. [11:06] So this war powers resolution is necessary to do now. And fortunately, maybe there'll be more peace [11:13] talks in Pakistan. Maybe Lebanon and Israel and Hezbollah will have a truce. Maybe the truce that we [11:21] see or the ceasefire in Iran will hold for a little while longer if there are talks. But I can tell you [11:28] from conversations I've just had with Republican colleagues on the floor of the United States [11:33] Senate, their patience is fraying. They may not budge on this vote or maybe even next week. [11:40] But John Curtis of Utah says he's not going to vote for more funds unless there is a vote on the war. [11:48] And that view is reflective of a number of others. I never predict what Republican colleagues can do. [11:57] You and I have talked about in the past. I'm never optimistic, but we're going to hold them [12:02] accountable through these repeated votes. You know, Senator, I just want to go back to your [12:07] point that you made about the founders, because I do think it's a very important one. The framers of [12:12] our constitution, they designed a system not actually for a rational leader. They designed a [12:18] system that took into account an irrational leader. I would argue maybe not as irrational as the one we have [12:23] right now, but very rational. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, they just came from a monarchy. [12:29] They have seen, they saw what happened when one leader had all of the power to take a country to [12:36] war based on personal grievance, impulse or insult. So this, I'm just, people out here that are a little [12:44] frustrated that it seems like everybody else can see very plainly what Congress needs to do here. [12:50] Yet all of the senators and all of the members of Congress, namely your Republican colleagues, [12:56] don't seem to see it that way. They are more concerned with their fealty to the president at [12:59] this point than their duty to the American people in our constitution. [13:04] They're going to begin to recognize the president's taking them down a path that is going to lead to [13:11] disaster in November. The American people are fed up with the rising prices that they see, [13:19] and we're facing literally a shockwave in global crisis that is going to send a tsunami of price [13:29] increases rippling through the world economy. And it's going to hit America, even though the stock [13:34] market rose today by very impressive amounts. The American people live at the grocery store when [13:43] they pay their rent, when they put clothing on their children and food on the table. And there's bad [13:51] news for them ahead. Unfortunately, if this blockade continues, and my Republican colleagues fail [13:56] to act as they must. And you're right about the founders. You know, the monarch could draft them, [14:03] could put them into chains if they failed to do what he said in taking up arms on his side. [14:09] And the army behind George Washington was fighting for freedom. And when they finished, [14:18] they didn't want war to be declared without the American people being behind it. [14:23] Senator, we have one more for you before we let you go. And it really kind of [14:27] loops all of what we've talked about together. When you're looking at the American people consuming [14:35] the behavior of the administration, the policies or lack thereof that are affecting their daily lives, [14:43] and certainly the role that the Congress may or may not be playing is or is not playing. [14:49] I was struck by Donald Trump on Fox News talking about this war. And again, Americans are consuming [14:57] this. And this kind of feeds into the last point you made about how they then evaluate and assess [15:01] what they do with their vote in November. Let's take a quick listen to talking about the war and [15:07] whether or not it's over. Well, you keep saying was. Is this war over? [15:14] I think it's close to over. Yeah. I mean, I view it as very close to over. You know what? [15:20] If I pulled up stakes right now, it would take them 20 years to rebuild that country. [15:26] And we're not finished. We'll see what happens. I think they want to make a deal very badly. [15:30] And we see why our allies and the American people are not aligned with this administration, [15:36] because we don't know where we're going. We're rudderless right now. [15:40] Rudderless is exactly right. You know, it's easier to get into war than to get out of it. And [15:46] the great wars in the world history have often resulted from miscalculation [15:54] and misjudgment about the intentions of opponents. Donald Trump has gravely miscalculated the will of [16:01] the Iranian regime and even of the Iranian people. They're fighting for their survival and they're [16:08] not going to go away as quickly or easily as he thought at the beginning when he wanted to secure [16:15] uranium and change the regime and destroy the drones and fast boats. He hasn't achieved any of [16:23] those shifting and contradictory objectives because they can't be achieved at 30,000 feet. And so the [16:31] great fear I continue to have is that out of desperation, he will put our sons and daughters [16:36] on the ground at risk with massive casualties. Senator Richard Blumenthal, thank you, sir, [16:43] for being with us. In just a moment, breaking news, the Trump administration now attempting to rewrite [16:48] history on the president's first impeachment. Mark Elias is going to join us. And later, [16:52] Trump's retribution campaign against Fed Chair Jerome Powell. It never went away. Now the president [16:57] is threatening to fire him once again for not caving to his demands. You're watching The Weeknight. [17:02] Breaking just moments ago, MS Now has just confirmed Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard [17:18] referred the whistleblower whose complaint led to the first impeachment of President Trump [17:22] and the inspector general who deemed their complaint credible for possible criminal prosecution [17:28] by the Trump Justice Department. The move comes days after Gabbard released documents alleging a [17:33] conspiracy behind Trump's first impeachment. Except, folks, the documents prove no such thing, [17:38] okay? Also today, the Justice Department that will review this criminal referral is the same one [17:45] that just asked a federal appeals court to throw out the seditious conspiracy convictions of Proud Boys [17:50] and Oath Keepers who were sentenced for leading far-right extremist groups and attacking the Capitol [17:55] on January 6. Now, Trump had already commuted the sentences of these leaders, but this move would go a [18:01] step further and erase the convictions. In both instances, the administration, it is not just trying [18:08] to sanitize the past. It is laying the groundwork for future efforts to undermine elections, and we need [18:14] to be very clear about that. Joining us now is Mark Elias, someone who is extremely clear, the founder of [18:19] Democracy Docket and chair of the Elias Law Group. Mark Elias, what is the DNI doing here? [18:24] They're doing Donald Trump's bidding. I mean, they are doing exactly what Simone said. [18:28] They are trying to weaponize the government against Donald Trump's political opponents, [18:34] right? So that's the breaking news now, is that, you know, a Department of Justice that has [18:39] gone after Donald Trump's enemies is now going to only go after more of their enemies. You know, [18:43] the acting attorney general has gone so far as to say that it's the president's duty to have the [18:48] Department of Justice go after his enemies and that Americans should be happy. Those are his words, [18:52] not mine. So that's part of it. The second part is what Simone said, which is that they are laying [18:57] the predicate. They are laying the foundation to say that when they claim that Democrats are [19:05] interfering with the election or foreign governments are interfering with the elections, [19:09] that we are to believe them and we are to allow the executive branch to do whatever they deem [19:15] necessary, including seizing ballots, including taking over voting equipment. And we all need to [19:20] be aware of that. Mark, the first part, to put an exclamation point on what you just said, [19:27] is largely what we see Tulsi Gabbard doing under Trump's instructions. It's trying to erase history [19:34] as well as elevating the chilling effect on those inside the government who are noble public servants [19:42] to the extent that there are any remaining after the purge by this administration, who would in the [19:48] future serve as whistleblowers on the behavior of this administration. It just struck me that the [19:55] people who are doing all the criming are the ones going after the folks who aren't. And that to me [20:00] is very telling. I want to go in a very different direction with you for the moment as you and me [20:05] have a little sidebar lawyer to lawyer on this point. I find it intriguing that when you listen [20:13] to the words of Donald Trump, Tulsi Gabbard, Russell Vaught, all of them, every last one of the [20:19] idiocracy, when they talk about January 6th, when they talk about the voting being fraudulent or mail [20:31] in ballots being fraudulent, they say all this stuff has happened. And yet, at what point, at what point [20:41] did the conspiracy come together to do all of this? Do you know, people, how involved and detailed [20:49] it would have had to have been for organs of the government to prosecute and put into place all [20:56] of these various things? I mean, this is the part of the lunacy here, that they want us to believe [21:02] this grand conspiracy now justifies them going back and rewriting that history, right, erasing the [21:10] criminality of the individuals involved because of this conspiracy by the deep state. And yet, [21:17] this happened under his government. It was his Justice Department, his FBI, his DNI, his NSA. [21:27] All of these people were under his control. You mean none of them in all that time leading up to 2020 [21:35] could see this conspiracy unfolding? Not a text, not an email, not a telephone call, not a lot of, [21:41] not a letter, not, you know, clandestine meetings at Starbucks? Come on. [21:46] No, you're exactly right. I mean, the last point you made is, is to me, the most important one is [21:52] that, you know, Donald Trump acts as if somehow he was the victim of the Biden administration. [21:57] Let us just remember that, as you point out, Donald Trump was president when all of this was [22:02] happening, right? And by the way, the thing that he was impeached over, there's a transcript of the [22:07] call. Like, you don't have to listen. You don't have to listen to any witness. You don't have to listen to a [22:12] whistleblower. All you have to do is read the transcript. And you can see what he was doing [22:16] with Vladimir Zelensky on that phone call. So it is like, you know, he needs to start by, like, [22:22] saying, set aside the transcript and then believe that my entire administration was the deep state [22:29] against me. But look, this is the reason why to turn to the recent news out of Hungary. I think we [22:35] need to take partial comfort, but not complete comfort. Like, yes, it shows that people, if they are [22:40] determined, can show up and vote and turn out a dictator. However, Donald Trump's movement is [22:47] quite different than Orbán's was. Orbán's was a nationalist movement, a terrible nationalist [22:54] movement, but a nationalist movement. Donald Trump's is a Trump movement. It is about him. It's not about [22:59] the country. It's not about America first. It's about Donald Trump first. And core to that is the [23:05] belief that Donald Trump is always the victim. He is the victim of elections. He's the victim of foreign [23:10] governments. He's the victim of the deep state in his own administration. He is always the victim. [23:15] And that makes him a lot more dangerous in many respects and is the reason why we all need to stay [23:21] on guard. You know, Mark, I don't think you move to try to rewrite the conditions or the history of [23:29] January 6th unless you need those conditions right now. I don't think you move to install people who were [23:36] election deniers in the government unless you want those people to act on their actions in official [23:44] capacities. I don't I don't think you dismantle accountability unless accountability is actually [23:50] a threat to what's happening here. We often talk about how this is about this upcoming midterm. This [23:54] is from ProPublica about the president's effort to take over the midterm elections. The people we [24:00] identified as resisting attempts to overturn the 2020 results have been replaced by roughly two dozen, [24:06] that's 24 people Trump has installed in positions that could affect elections. Ten of them actively [24:12] working to reverse the 2020 vote and the rest are associates of such people. These are the folks [24:17] inside the government right now. Yeah, look, Simone, you and I see eye to eye on this completely. [24:24] And I'll add a couple of things. You don't seize the ballots in Fulton County just because you want [24:30] the ballots from 2020, but rather you do it because you're planning for 2026. You don't subpoena [24:36] ballot images from Maricopa County from 2020, except that you also want to know how to do that for [24:42] 2026. A Republican sheriff in California doesn't see 650,000 ballots from a referendum that took place [24:52] last year, which was a landslide, unless you are trying to figure out how to do it for 2026. Donald [24:58] Trump doesn't issue an executive order saying that he is going to create a list of who is eligible to [25:04] vote by mail and send it to the Postal Service and say, you cannot allow any other person to mail their [25:09] ballots if they're not on my list. You don't do that unless you care about the 2026 election. You [25:15] don't start to lie about foreign interference unless you are setting the predicate to lie about [25:21] foreign interference in 2026. So, Simone, I agree with you. And one of the great tragedies of this [25:26] time is how few people are recognizing that what Donald Trump is doing is not just relitigating [25:33] history. He is laying the groundwork for the future. [25:36] I think the groundwork for the future and the question, of course, is who is going to be around [25:41] him. I want you to take a listen to a conversation and interview that NBC's Laura Jarrett had [25:46] with acting AG Todd Blanche. [25:48] Every single person in this administration, me included, and obviously Attorney General Bondi as [25:55] well, we serve at the pleasure of the president. And that's true of any administration. And so [25:59] the president has the right and the duty and the obligation to make sure that he has folks that [26:06] that he wants. And the president may choose somebody besides me to be the attorney general [26:11] today. I can't speak to to his thinking. I can't speak to what happened the past year. [26:17] All I can say is that we have a very defined mission that we've been trying to execute and [26:23] will continue to execute. If the president of the United States says, go steal me an election and [26:29] you serve at the pleasure of the president, what does that then mean for a democracy? [26:33] Well, I mean, what it means is that you either have honor and dignity and you resign or you do [26:39] what Todd Blanche is saying he would do. I mean, Todd Blanche has been very clear and it makes him [26:43] a extraordinarily dangerous liar. You know, you all have interviewed a lot of politicians and I say [26:50] this with due respect and affection for many of them, but there's a way politicians lie. And that's [26:55] the way that Pam Bondi lied. She would say, no, I am not doing the bidding of the president. I would [27:00] never do a political prosecution. Todd Blanche, the criminal defense lawyer, different, whole [27:05] different mentality. His job is to take inconvenient facts and not deny them, but rather make them seem [27:11] like they're good facts. Like, yes, of course, my client had a bloody knife in his hand. Who would [27:16] innocent person wouldn't have the bloody knife in his hand? And so what he says is, of course, we would [27:21] do what the president says, Alicia, that's a good thing. That's democracy, right? So he embraces it [27:29] as if doing the president's bidding to go after his political opponents, to undermine free and fair [27:36] elections, as if that is a virtue instead of the totalitarian actions of an authoritarian. [27:43] Clock it, Mark Elias, as we like to say. Thank you very much for your time tonight, sir. We will see [27:48] you again soon. After the break, the Trump Justice Department, well, it looks like it's continuing [27:53] the investigation into Fed Chair Jerome Powell, despite a judge telling officials. Donald Trump [27:58] is once again threatening to fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, who has been in the president's [28:04] crosshairs since refusing his pressure campaign to lower interest rates. Powell has also been the [28:10] target of a stalled criminal investigation involving renovations to the renovations to the agency's [28:15] headquarters. That investigation has faced several legal setbacks. But yesterday, despite those [28:22] setbacks, prosecutors from the office of U.S. Attorney Janine Pirro tried to survey the site [28:29] unannounced. Here's Trump on the investigation. So you're not going to drop the probe? [28:36] Oh, I'm not. I have to find out. And he said he's not leaving if, you know. [28:41] Well, then I'll have to fire him. OK, if he's not leaving on time, I've held back firing him. [28:47] I've wanted to fire him. But I hate to be controversial. [28:53] There's that. Powell's term as Fed Chair is set to end one month from today. But a key Republican [28:59] senator is holding up the confirmation of his replacement until the investigation into Powell [29:04] is over. And until that replacement is confirmed, Powell says he's staying. [29:09] Joining us at the table, Norm Eisen, former White House ethics czar in the Obama administration [29:14] and co-founder of the Democracy Defenders Fund. [29:18] This is part of the president's continued attempt to bring one of the last, one of the few guardrails [29:27] we have left of independence when it comes to our economy under political control. And it is not [29:31] a coincidence. Gas prices are rising, Norm. The economic outlook is not looking rosy. The narrative [29:37] is not good. Trump cannot spin away the reality of the situation that people are seeing in this [29:42] country when they go to the grocery store, when they try to buy anything, where it comes to how [29:47] they live, where they live, their rent. And so they want control of the economic narrative because they [29:52] think it will serve them politically. I would like to take them to the 1970s. Nixon tried that. [29:56] Didn't work out too well. But whatever. What do I know? This is crazy, but they're doing it and [30:01] they're going to continue to do it. Who's going to stop them? It's both crazy and illegal. Very privileged [30:09] to represent another Fed governor with a wonderful team of lawyers, Lisa Cook. We litigated her case, [30:17] the similarly illegitimate effort to investigate her, to fire her. It's the same pattern. The court said [30:24] no. That matter has gone to the Supreme Court, where the bench was extremely dubious, to say the least, [30:35] Simone. So what you're seeing is the continued frustration as the rule of law and the guardrails [30:44] hold back these impulses. There's a reason we have Fed independents. That's been a benchmark [30:52] of American prosperity and really important to the world. And the United States has benefited as a result. [31:02] So this latest effort won't work. Of course, what's different is we've got the Article I Congress, [31:09] which is so often supine. Senator Tillis is saying, no, I won't go along with it either. I want to confirm [31:18] your new nominee while Jerome Powell's under investigation. So clearly the president's [31:24] thought pattern here is, I get Powell out of the way and I get exactly what I want because I put in [31:30] a loyalist and they do my bidding. The problem for the president is that that is not how the Fed works. [31:36] This is some reporting that caught my eye. Mr. Trump said he would only pick a chair who supported [31:41] lower rates. But Mr. Warsh, who is, of course, who he is likely to nominate, is likely to face pushback [31:46] if he pursues that, at least in the coming months, given the economic impact of the war in Iran. [31:52] Policy decisions are made by a 12-person committee made up of the seven members of the Board of [31:57] Governors, the president of the Federal Reserve of New York, and a rotating set of four presidents [32:02] from the regional bank. So when he hits that impasse, what happens then? [32:05] Well, there will be more frustration, more proclamations that he doesn't want to be controversial. [32:14] Remember who nominated Jerome Powell? Donald Trump in his first term. Economic policy is not something [32:23] that we can afford to make into a partisan football. The prosperity of the American people [32:33] is riding on this. With soaring costs already, are we going to cut rates and increase inflation? [32:40] So I really have to salute the chairman, who has been absolutely steadfast in the face of these [32:51] pressures, and the courts, including judges appointed by Donald Trump himself, who show no indication [33:00] of allowing this kind of attack, an unfortunate attack on the Fed, to take place. [33:07] So let's play with the political football just a little bit, because since you've got one, [33:11] let's play with it. Here we go. So here's the thing. Very much to what Alicia just laid out, [33:17] how the mechanisms that are in place within the institution operate, meaning that they have, [33:24] in their regard, their own little checks and balance system. There are this Board of Governors, [33:28] or this number here, certain number there, you're rotating folks in and out, right? You don't know [33:34] what you're going to get. But the one constant is exactly what you both talked about, and that is [33:38] the threat of where the economy is. On the sidelines is the Republican Senate, in particular, [33:46] who will take the nomination of Mr. Warsh to be the next Fed chair. So why don't Tim Scott, [33:54] who's head of the banking committee? Just advance the ball. Just advance the ball. I mean, seriously, [34:01] this all goes away, Mr. Trump, if Senate Republicans do your bidding. Now, they do, [34:08] they want to do his bidding on other stuff. What is the holdup here? Why are we suddenly now saying, [34:15] oh, brakes? And that's because they know the exact same thing you just said. The moment you take your [34:22] foot off the economy, take the brake off, guess what happened? We all crash. And they know by the [34:31] time you get to November, if you get a chairman in there in May, by the time we get to November and [34:36] they've dropped interest rates, inflation, which is 3.3 percent announced last week, will be close [34:43] to 5, if not more. Well, and again, because these issues should not be partisan issues, [34:51] we do have to salute Senator Tom Tillis, who, like Judge James Bosberg here, who said there's no basis [34:59] to investigate Chairman Powell. Senator Tillis has said he will not allow this nomination to move. He's [35:06] making a point until the criminal investigation, which is completely groundless. I saw the U.S. [35:13] attorney, Gene Pirro, was complaining about construction cost overruns. Anybody who's ever done [35:19] construction has had a cost overrun. They have to make the whole country. [35:24] Of Trump projects? I mean, come on. Also, the taxpayers aren't paying for the reconstruction, [35:29] which is an important point. So Senator Tillis, responsible of the president's own party, has said [35:37] no. You know, it's not fair to Chairman Powell to, as so many others have been targeted, it's not fair [35:45] to target him. There's no basis to do it. It's wrong. And I'm not going to move, Mr. Warsh, until this [35:51] matter is resolved. Now, why they sent those assistant U.S. attorneys to the construction site [35:58] you know, it's, it really is the game that you're trying to be the attorney. Yeah, it's just [36:04] political drama. Can I just go back to one thing you said earlier? You said Jerome Powell has been [36:07] steadfast against, in the face against Trump and the threats. He has been steadfast for himself. [36:13] Lisa Cook, like you were one of her attorneys. The attack on Lisa Cook was not just about Lisa Cook. [36:18] It was in fact about the independence of the Fed. Yet Lisa Cook had to go all the way up to the [36:23] Supreme Court because the Fed put out a mealy mouth statement when she was attacked the first time. [36:27] Well, I'm going to let the court record speak for all that. But I do think it says volumes that Lisa [36:38] Cook, unlike many others in Washington, Dr. Cook continued in that job. She came to the meetings, [36:45] she was accepted, and the Fed has really abided by the rule of law. But if you want more about it, [36:54] we filed a big pile of legal papers, and we're confident in the success on the merits there. And [37:00] Dr. Cook is another hero of this country, like Chairman Powell, who just, like so many others, like [37:06] Tish James, Jim Comey, they've come for them, and the courts are holding up, the guardrails are holding up. [37:13] We like to track that. We've tracked the authoritarianism and the pushback now. You do [37:19] feel a sense the tide is turning, that the pushback, and let me say this is such a great story because [37:26] Republicans are doing it, Michael. Republicans, Jerome Powell, Tom Tillis, standing up to the [37:33] president. Well, we appreciate that. And Ms. Cook, got one here. Norm Eisen, thanks very much. [37:40] Really appreciate you. When we return, it's tax day. Yeah, baby. Got till midnight to get that [37:46] thing stamped and in the mail. And despite Donald Trump's promises, fast-rising gas prices are putting [37:51] a damper on those huge refunds he claimed Americans would be getting. Y'all doing the math right now, [37:57] right? We're going to talk about it, right? He was getting for Americans. [38:02] Next year, you will also see the results of the largest tax cuts in American history [38:08] that were really accomplished through our great, big, beautiful bill. And next spring is projected [38:15] to be the largest tax refund season of all time. Well, fast forward to today, and here's the reality. [38:22] Spiking gas prices from Trump's war with Iran are going to eat into those promised refunds. That's [38:26] according to the Associated Press. Worth noting, lower and middle-income households will be hit even [38:32] harder because they're likely to receive lower refunds while spending just as much on gas. [38:37] That's a critical part of this because the math does not math. I'm thinking of a number of [38:44] elderly individuals whose taxes I'm familiar with, and they have to pay for the first time in about [38:50] four or five years because a combination of benefits that were increased that they got. [38:56] In addition to, remember, this administration infused a lot of cash through Social Security and [39:03] other programs, that then was treated as income. And so, yeah, you think you got a big refund, [39:10] but if you're not in that top 1%, you won't see it coupled additionally with the cost of price of gas. [39:16] Yeah. Today, Republicans on the Hill were trying to rebrand the one big, beautiful bill as the [39:22] working families tax cut bill. And I'm like, that ain't what it was called. This was not a working [39:28] family tax cut. People do not. People think their taxes are too high. A Fox News poll on April 8th [39:34] said 70% think their taxes are too high. A Gallup news poll taken April 10th says 59% think they're [39:42] too high. Alicia, the taxes are too damn high, okay? Like, it's crazy. [39:45] They're too damn high at a time when you also have cost of living increasing. And here's the thing. [39:50] There was a possibility that he went into November and gas prices could have been higher due to global [39:56] factors. That's not what happened here. What happened here is he made a choice, a choice he did not have [40:02] to make to attack Iran. And that is why we now have these gas prices. So he owns this economy. He shot [40:09] himself in the foot. And yes, he will pay the political price for that. But Americans are now paying [40:15] a very material price for it at home. That is such an important point because it really speaks to the [40:21] reality that, as we just noted a moment ago, inflation is down 3.3%. And it's not just... [40:27] Beef is up 15%. Beef is up 15%. But it's also not just what you're paying at the federal level or [40:34] whatever you may be getting there. But it's the state and the local taxes as well. The pressure is [40:38] always downward on the little guy, the little gal who is trying to make it from day to day. [40:43] This is not a working class president. May I say that? I always appreciate a rebound. Coming up on All In, [40:49] Chris is going to sit down with Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia.