'OUTRAGEOUS assault on free speech' Trump’s call to fire Kimmel takes a turn

[0:00] This was an event dedicated to freedom of speech that was supposed to bring together members of [0:07] both parties with members of the press. And in a certain way, it did, because the [0:13] fact that they just unified, I saw a room that was just totally unified. It was in one way, [0:19] very beautiful. For a moment, some thought there might be a reset. In the hours following the [0:27] shooting at Saturday's White House Correspondents' Dinner, Trump struck a somewhat somber tone. [0:33] But then within 24 hours, Trump reverted back to usual form, and any restraint seemed short-lived. [0:40] He was back in a combative posture by Sunday. In an interview with CBS 60 Minutes, [0:45] Trump repeatedly attacked the anchor, Nora O'Donnell, personally, and the media more broadly, [0:51] for the act of asking straightforward questions about the shooting suspect. [0:55] He writes this quote, [0:57] Administration officials, they are targets. And he also wrote this, [1:02] I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his [1:08] crimes. What's your reaction to that? [1:09] Well, I was waiting for you to read that, because I knew you would, because you're horrible people. [1:15] You should be ashamed of yourself reading that. You're a disgrace. But go ahead, [1:19] let's finish the interview. [1:20] The other thing that he wrote in the end. [1:22] You're a disgrace. I'm not a king. What I am, if I was a king, I wouldn't be dealing with you. [1:26] We have some great people in the press, some very fair people, and people that are just on my side. [1:31] But for the most part, it's a very liberal or very progressive, let's use the word liberal, [1:35] liberal press. [1:36] You'll recall that in the days leading up to the White House Correspondents' Dinner, [1:41] the reporting suggested Trump had already planned to lash out against the press. [1:46] According to the Daily Beast, quote, [1:47] Donald Trump will launch a revenge attack on the White House media when he confronts them [1:52] in person at a Washington dinner on Saturday night, then flee before there can be revenge. [1:58] The event was, of course, evacuated before any such speech could take place. [2:02] In his remarks following that evacuation, Trump admitted he had planned to be inappropriate [2:07] and rough. [2:09] I was all set to really rip it. And I said to my people, this would be the most inappropriate [2:16] speech ever made if I said that. So I'll have to save it. I don't know if I could ever be as [2:21] rough as I was going to be tonight. [2:24] And Trump already announcing that he wants to reschedule the event, [2:27] though organizers aren't so sure that's going to be possible. [2:30] Earlier today, Press Secretary Caroline Levitt blamed Democrats and the media. [2:37] This political violence stems from a systemic demonization of him and his supporters [2:41] by commentators, yes, by elected members of the Democrat Party and even some in the media. [2:50] Missing from that press conference, any moment of self-reflection from the press secretary [2:55] serving a president who has described political opponents as garbage, scum, demonic, animals, [3:02] the enemy within and low IQ, whose election related conspiracy theories have led to death [3:08] threats against election workers, whose administration pushed rumors that Haitians [3:13] were eating cats and dogs. This as Trump is now reviving his feud with late night host [3:18] Jimmy Kimmel, calling for ABC to fire Jimmy Kimmel over a segment that aired Thursday night [3:24] in which Kimmel staged a parody White House correspondence dinner, roasting the president [3:28] and the administration as comedians have done at past events. Here's the portion that Trump and [3:34] the first lady seem to be referring to. [3:36] Our first lady Melania is here. Look at Melania. So beautiful. Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an [3:45] expectant widow. You know, Melania's birthday is on Sunday. That's right. She's planning to celebrate [3:54] at home the same way she always does, looking out a window and whispering, what have I done? [4:00] That joke was obviously written and performed before the events of Saturday night, but it's [4:05] now landing, of course, in a very different political and social environment. Trump calling [4:10] for ABC and Disney to immediately fire Kimmel, calling the segment, quote, far beyond the pale. [4:16] This so-called White House press secretary wants to lecture America and lecture us about civility. [4:25] Get lost. Clean up your own house before you have anything to say to us about the language that [4:32] we use. That was Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries responding to Caroline Levitt's criticism after [4:39] Saturday's shooting. And joining me now is David Folkenflik, media correspondent for NPR and Molly [4:44] Jong Fast, contributing opinion writer with The New York Times and MSNOW political analyst. It's great to [4:50] have both of you guys. So, Molly, I want to start with you. You were at the dinner for part of that [4:55] evening. But you weren't there when the shooting unfolded. But you have a sense of the room, the [5:02] history of this event, the tension, of course, leading up to that night. When you see the president's [5:10] rhetoric that we've seen, and there have been shifts in it just in the past 48 hours, what is the [5:15] impression that you are left with here? Is there a serious grappling with the nature of political [5:21] violence and everyone's role in it right now? Well, I think there are two problems that are [5:27] separate. One is the problem of the White House Correspondents' Dinner, which is, at best, looks [5:33] very—the optics on it are pretty terrible, and they always have been pretty dicey. The idea that you have [5:40] members of the government and journalists and, you know, and lobbyists and all sorts of D.C. swamp [5:49] all together in a room very dressed up. And then I think it's worth realizing, like, we are in a very [5:56] heightened moment in American political life. And people are mad. But people are mad at journalists [6:03] and politicians and everyone. And so I think it's important to sort of pull back and say none of this [6:10] is happening in a vacuum. And the—I think that the anger that the American people have towards [6:15] politicians is also sort of spilling out on journalists and why it's so important that things [6:21] like the White House Correspondents' Dinner probably don't happen anymore. And that, you know, we raise that [6:26] money for those scholarships in other ways. Because I think that as much—you know, our job is to cover [6:32] these people. And at this moment, it really needs to be as clean as possible. And I think that even [6:39] just the mere optics of the dinner are so distracting. And—and I think they really undermine the fundamental [6:46] premise of what we're supposed to be doing. I—I understand. We—you and I talked yesterday, [6:50] um, when—I think so many people were still in shock. I was sitting with Eugene in our D.C. bureau, [6:56] who was there, um, and who also has—has put—poured so much of himself into planning this dinner, [7:02] and to mentoring young journalists, and to the incredible things that this dinner is supposed to [7:06] represent that people want it to be. But there is this tension right now between what we want it to [7:11] be, what it traditionally has felt like, and just the reality of the moment that we're all living in. [7:16] Um, David, for you, how have you processed the—the imagery, the symbolism of that night? You know, [7:25] one of the things Molly pointed out to me yesterday was just that there is the—the gratitude, of course, [7:31] everyone is safe. But there is also the reality, too, that we as journalists, we—we've covered so many [7:37] shootings at which poor school children in Uvalde didn't have Secret Service people leaping over [7:42] tables to rescue them. Um, and—and we and our colleagues did. Um, and I guess after you see [7:49] it and you experience and you understand something like this, what obligation do we have as, um, as an [7:56] industry, as a profession moving forward? Well, there's a lot of jumbled emotions. I don't think we have to [8:04] create a hierarchy of tragedies to acknowledge both the, uh, the terrible language one feels even [8:11] unrelated, uh, to what happened to folks at Uvalde or, uh, uh, at other school shootings or other [8:19] mass shootings, uh, as well as acknowledging the, the, the terror and the terribleness of what occurred [8:24] on Saturday night. I was not present. Um, I don't think we've seen the president fully grapple with [8:32] what it is to be engaged in political rhetoric, which is, uh, in some ways, uh, inciting or affirming the [8:40] idea of violence or at least violent political rhetoric as part of everyday norm in public life. [8:47] I think there is something to what Molly's talking about with the question of this very, uh, this very [8:52] event. Uh, I haven't gone in over two decades. I don't blame those who do. I think it can be useful [8:57] as well as fun, but I do think that there's a time where there's a lack of trust in the elites in [9:03] American society, you know, sometimes so-called elites, sometimes actually, but powerful figures in [9:08] media and commerce and business and entertainment and politics, the highest level of politics altogether [9:15] on this night. Um, you know, one, one was desperately hoping and gratified that there would be no actual, [9:23] uh, violent acts occurred. And the one officer who was shot was protected by his protective gear, [9:27] as we understand. Uh, but this is the moment where I think, you know, it would be useful to, [9:33] for a rhetoric to be ratcheted down in all parts. And yet the idea that somehow some columnist [9:38] somewhere, some blogger, somebody on Substack, somebody on cable news, on any of the networks, [9:43] whatever flavor or variety you like is responsible for this seems to me to be wide of the mark. [9:49] I just think that there's far too much, uh, a violent political rhetoric in public life right now. [9:54] And I think it's become very accepted in kind of the conversational vernacular of podcasting and [9:59] blogging and posting online and, you know, getting, uh, things viral on TikTok and everywhere else. [10:06] Uh, and at the same time, you know, you, you, you've seen that filter down from the top and top [10:10] echelons of government. And I think that I don't know that I blame that for what occurred Saturday [10:16] night, but I sure would feel a lot more comfortable if the people in prominent positions in all of [10:21] these institutions would behave themselves in a way one would want to see emulated rather than [10:25] avoided. Well, speaking of some of those implications and people in prominent positions, [10:30] Molly, I want you to listen to some of acting attorney general Todd Blanche's remarks earlier, [10:34] implying the reporters critical of the president may have a role here in all of this. [10:42] Many people in this room, if we're going to be honest about it, have done it, [10:46] has done as well. They're just as guilty as a lot of people on X. When you have, [10:50] when you have reporters, when you have media, media, just being overly critical and calling the [10:55] president horrible names for no reason and without evidence, without proof, it shouldn't surprise us [11:02] that this type of rhetoric takes place. [11:04] Molly, are the people in that room, the reporters we know and we work with, are they just as guilty [11:10] as a lot of people on X? I mean, we're at the very beginning of this investigation in the first [11:14] place. I mean, there are so many problems here. I mean, one is that we do have a First Amendment [11:21] and the idea that speech is somehow violence is, you know, pretty nutty. And remember, like, [11:28] we're in a country that has a major mass shooting and gun problems. So, like, [11:33] that would be where I would start if I wanted to stop violence. Like, that seems like a very easy [11:39] one. But the second thing I would say is, like, he is standing next to a woman who was a host on Fox [11:46] News, OK? And there are numerous members in this administration who have been on Fox News. [11:54] The Trump administration is once again going after a certain late-night comedian, [12:00] ramping up pressure on Jimmy Kimmel, ABC, and ABC's parent company, Disney, [12:05] in an unprecedented push that critics warn is about retribution more so than any real policy. [12:11] Today, federal regulators ordering a review of all station licenses owned by ABC. The Times calling the [12:19] FCC's action an extraordinary move as it intensifies efforts to punish major media outlets for their [12:26] coverage. It comes just a day after Trump renewed calls for ABC to fire Kimmel over a parody of the [12:33] White House Correspondents' Dinner. That segment aired two days before the events of Saturday. Here's the [12:39] portion that Trump and the First Lady objected to. Our First Lady Melania is here. Look at Melania, [12:47] so beautiful. Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow. You know, Melania's birthday is [12:54] on Sunday. That's right. She's, uh, planning to celebrate at home the same way she always does, [13:01] looking out a window and whispering, what have I done? Last night, Kimmel returned to his show [13:08] and defended the joke while also condemning political violence. It was a pretend roast. I said, [13:15] our First Lady Melania is here. Look at her so beautiful. Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an [13:20] expectant widow, which obviously was a joke about their age difference and the look of joy we see [13:30] on her face every time they're together. He's almost 80 and she's younger than I am. It was not [13:36] by any stretch of the definition a call to assassination. And they know that. I've been very [13:41] vocal for many years speaking out against gun violence in particular. [13:45] This is round two for Trump and Kimmel. ABC pulled Kimmel from the airwaves for six days [13:52] back in September. It followed pressure from the Trump administration over Kimmel's comments [13:56] about the killing of Charlie Kirk. His suspension faced massive backlash. Hollywood heavyweights like [14:02] Tom Hanks, Meryl Streep, and Jennifer Aniston all backing Kimmel. Many people showed their support [14:08] by canceling their Disney Plus accounts too. And it's not just Kimmel. The president likes to take [14:13] credit for the cancellation of Stephen Colbert's show. In his second term, he's gone after a whole [14:18] range of networks, newspapers, and media figures from the Times and CBS to the Wall Street Journal, BBC, [14:24] Disney, and more. Joining me now is Jason Selvig, actor, comedian, and one half of the political comedy [14:31] duo, The Good Liars. Jason, it's good to have you. I think I remember talking to you around the first [14:38] Jimmy Kimmel versus Trump battle royale. And there was this joke on Twitter about how much resentment [14:46] some people had over the fact that this administration had put them in a position [14:50] where they were having to say things like, protect Jimmy Kimmel. I stand with Jimmy Kimmel. [14:54] I stand with Jimmy Kimmel. And I guess I'm back there again today. Are you surprised? [15:02] I don't, I mean, am I surprised? No. I mean, Donald Trump has like an enemies list. We know that. [15:08] I guess I'm surprised with just the reaction of the American people after the first round of this. [15:14] Trump is using the federal government to go after late night comedians. It's so silly. It's all [15:21] because he can't take a joke. I mean, these comedians are making fun of him. He's the president [15:26] of the United States. Late night comedians always make fun of the president. And he is so sensitive [15:33] that when these, the crowd laughs at him, he, he can't take it. And look, I'm on Jimmy Kimmel's side. [15:40] Like he is making jokes about somebody who should be made fun of like Donald Trump. [15:46] He acts like he's this big, tough alpha guy. And then he puts his name on buildings, [15:52] his face on buildings, his face on passports, coins, the Trump cards. But then he picks a fight [15:59] with a late night comedian, several late night comedians over jokes being told about him. And I [16:05] do think it's a little strange that he, Donald Trump has been harsher on Jimmy Kimmel than he [16:12] has on Jelaine Maxwell. He's had worse things to say about Jimmy Kimmel than Jelaine Maxwell. [16:18] He wished her well in 2020 and kind of like brushes off the questions about pardoning her. [16:22] It's a very odd thing. It's very odd use of presidential power to be like, [16:27] this is the major problem with the country right now. Late night comedians, [16:30] even though gas prices are over $4 a gallon. It's very, very strange. [16:34] So I have to ask then, so, you know, you work in this space, you are a comedian, [16:38] and you are very much in the political fray. I mean, you go to Donald Trump's events. [16:43] Have you found yourself over the course of the last year, like self-censoring, editing a joke? [16:49] Because I mean, he, even though it's funny, I guess, to laugh at it, he's trying this whole thing [16:55] again. It's probably actually going to like give Kimmel another boost and bump and add another tail [17:01] to his career. But like, he is trying to persecute comedians in this environment. [17:06] No. And it's very strange that he's doing that. This is the use of presidential power. It's like, [17:11] we've got the midterms coming up right now. And he thinks that the biggest issue is late night [17:17] comedians and building a big ballroom. Like that's his pitch right now, which is very, [17:21] very strange. But me personally, like, I don't, I'm, I think Donald Trump, he's, [17:27] he's surrounded by people who are trying to protect his ego, like more than anything. [17:32] And I think that's funny. And I think it should be made fun of. So I don't think it's like, [17:37] this is like a heroic thing, but I think most comedians are looking at this now more with Donald [17:41] Trump and rolling their eyes at him being like, we're doing this again. And I think all the polls [17:46] are showing that the American public kind of feel the same way, but they're like, this is what you're [17:50] doing with your time. We're at war right now. And this is what you're doing with your time. It's [17:54] very, very strange. Well, it did not stop Attorney General Blanche and Kash Patel from coming forward [18:00] today about a seashell post by James Comey. I know, I know, I know. Taking a picture of that [18:05] and putting it on there. Meanwhile, there were right wing pundits who had 86, 46 and posted that [18:13] before. And I don't know, are they going to go after them too for threats against Joe Biden? [18:18] I'm not holding my breath for that. What do you think it says about who we [18:22] are as a country right now? When you have this story of the sort of comedians under the microscope [18:28] right now, at the same time, after what happened on Saturday, we have a country like awash in [18:36] conspiracy theory. And I ask you about those two things in connection, because to me, it sort of [18:41] reads as people are trying to escape into these different spaces, whether that is a joke, [18:45] or whether that is like this rejection that the world and our reality could be this crazy, [18:51] that instead you are going to live with a tinfoil hat on. And I'm curious if you see all these things [18:55] as connected too. I mean, I think it is all connected with everyone losing their minds a [18:59] little bit right now. And I think it's, you know, we've gone to a lot of Trump rallies and we talked [19:06] to people who would say conspiracy theories like JFK Jr. is alive and well. Sometimes JFK Sr. is alive and well. [19:11] Biden was replaced by a body double. Somebody said Biden was replaced by Jim Carrey. [19:16] The greatest hits. [19:16] Yeah, the greatest hits. But now I think we're seeing some stuff on the left where [19:21] it's the jumping to the conclusion of it and then accepting that as fact before [19:26] seeing the actual facts. And I think that's a little scary because to jump to that conclusion [19:31] within a few minutes of a news story breaking, that's not healthy. I think you want to take everything in [19:37] and think about like what actually happened and see the facts of it before you jump to a conclusion [19:44] and say some outlandish conspiracy theory is true. So in a way it like reminds me a little bit of [19:50] stuff that I've seen at Trump rallies when you see some of the really out there conspiracy theories on [19:54] the left. Donald Trump is trying to get late night comedian Jimmy Kimmel taken off the air again. [20:01] Today, Trump's SEC Chairman Brendan Carr took the unprecedented step of threatening [20:06] Disney's broadcast licenses by bringing them under an early review. The Trump administration claims [20:12] this is part of its investigation into diversity, equity, inclusion at Disney, but it's widely [20:18] understood as retaliation for this joke that Jimmy Kimmel made last Thursday, two days before the [20:24] White House Correspondents' Dinner. [20:25] Of course, our First Lady Melania is here. Look at Melania, so beautiful. Mrs. Trump, you have a glow [20:33] like an expectant widow. Yesterday, the First Lady put out a statement demanding Kimmel be fired. [20:40] Here's how Kimmel responded on his show last night. Obviously was a joke about their age difference [20:49] and the look of joy we see on her face every time they're together. It was a very light roast joke [20:54] about the fact that he's almost 80 and she's younger than I am. It was not [20:58] by any stretch of the definition a call to assassination and they know that. I've been [21:04] very vocal for many years speaking out against gun violence in particular, but I understand that [21:09] the First Lady had a stressful experience over the weekend and probably every weekend is pretty [21:14] stressful in that house and also I agree that hateful and violent rhetoric is something we should [21:19] reject. I do and I think a great place to start to dial that back would be to have a conversation with [21:25] your husband about it because it should point out Donald Trump is allowed to say whatever he wants [21:37] to say as are you and as am I as are all of us because under the First Amendment we have as Americans [21:43] a right to free speech. Anna Gomez serves as a commissioner of the FCC. She was appointed by Joe [21:49] Biden in 2023. She's spoken out about and against today's decision and she joins me now. [21:55] Commissioner, it's good to have you on the program. Obviously, the FCC is a bipartisan, [21:58] structurally bipartisan entity with a majority appointed by the sitting president, the chair, [22:05] Brendan Carr, obviously appointed by Trump. Can you just start with what technically happened today? [22:10] Because my understanding is in the past, there's been what we might call jawboning. There might be [22:15] threats. We're going to block this. But there was actually like a regulatory action taken today. What [22:21] was it? Yes. Hi, it's good to be with you. Well, what we saw today was the White House called for the [22:28] silencing of a vocal critic and the FCC answered that call. What the FCC did today was it issued an [22:35] order to renew, to start the renewal process for Disney-owned local broadcast stations. [22:44] And that renewal process is years in advance of when that was supposed to happen. But this is all just [22:52] as an excuse in order to retaliate against voices that this administration opposes. [22:59] The last time this happened, in some respects, I would say one of the mistakes Brendan Carr made from [23:06] my reading on it, other than the substance, was to explicitly say what he was doing. And I'll play you [23:12] what he said the last time they tried to cancel Kimmel about the role that he was going to play. [23:19] Take a listen. This is the chair of the FCC. [23:20] Frankly, when you see stuff like this, I mean, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. [23:27] These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or there's [23:35] going to be additional work for the FCC ahead. Basically saying, look, get rid of Kimmel or [23:41] we're going to come after you regulatorily. Today, this is all cloaked in some DEI investigation. [23:47] Do you credit that at all? Or is this obviously pretextual? [23:50] Oh, this is an outrageous assault on the freedom of speech by this FCC in order to retaliate against [23:59] Disney and against the critics of this administration. It is unprecedented, it is unlawful, [24:06] and it is bound to fail. So Disney should push back because Disney has the First Amendment on its [24:12] side and it will win against this FCC action. [24:15] What do you mean by that? When you say it's bound to fail, like there's regulatory steps, [24:20] there's a court. What is a recourse here for a corporation that's obviously been targeted for [24:26] protected speech? [24:26] Yes. There is a process that this renewal process that the FCC goes through. And the FCC is clearly [24:37] trying to target Disney to actually harm it. And it will go through this process. It's a years-long [24:45] process that involves various levels of review, including a final vote by the commission if, [24:51] in fact, the commission decides not to renew these local broadcaster licenses. Then it goes to court [24:58] because Disney would presumably appeal such an action. And it's important to note that through all [25:06] of this time, ABC will still be able to operate its licenses. So this threat is really just about the [25:15] process and about putting Disney through the pain of having to defend its licenses and its local licenses. [25:23] And I just want to point out to you, there really is a rich irony here that this is an action taken to [25:30] retaliate against a bit about an event that is about honoring freedom of speech, [25:37] but is instead being used as an excuse to curtail that very freedom. And it's absolutely antithetical [25:42] to what our First Amendment is all about. [25:44] The FCC, like other boards, right, the Federal Elections Commission and a bunch of other ones, [25:52] you know, they have these kind of structures where they're bipartisan, but there's a majority. [25:58] I mean, what is your relationship with Brendan Carr like? I mean, when you see this, [26:01] can you call him up and be like, this is ridiculous? This is wrong? Why are you doing this? [26:05] Well, I don't talk about my conversations with my colleagues. But yes, we are a board, [26:14] a bipartisan board. There's only three of us right now. There's two vacancies. And we work on matters [26:23] together. We often actually agree. There's a lot that the FCC does that doesn't involve curtailing [26:29] the freedom of speech, but instead involves valid goals like protecting national security or making [26:36] sure that we have a spectrum needed for new and innovative services. And so we work together to [26:43] make sure that we can advance the public interest in general, pursuant to what Congress tells us to do. [26:51] What Congress explicitly told us not to do is to censor broadcasters. [26:55] How important is it to you for the free speech in this country and the liberties that all of us as [27:04] Americans, I think, are proud of or aspire to, that this not be allowed to work in this case? [27:10] It is so important for our democracy that we not allow this administration to weaponize the FCC or any [27:19] of its other agencies under its control to curtail our freedoms. And freedom of speech is so important. [27:26] Freedom of the press, of course, the fourth estate is so important to hold power to account. [27:30] And so it's really important that the broadcasters push back against this, because as we have learned, [27:37] capitulation does not lead to protection for that particular broadcaster. We've seen already how this [27:44] administration has tried to retaliate against broadcasters and how it continues to come back to [27:49] demand more. So we are at an inflection point right now. Broadcasters can make a decision. [27:55] They can push to protect the freedom of speech or they can surrender it. So I am happy to see that [28:03] Disney has said that it will, in fact, fight this and it should fight this because it will win. [28:09] Anna Gomez, Commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission, thank you so much [28:14] for making some time for us today. Thank you. [28:17] Trump's attempt to use this attack to justify his ballroom is clearly absurd. But again, [28:25] it's just one of several pet projects Trump is laser focused on right now. As I mentioned, [28:29] Trump is also now using the attack in his never ending effort to get comedian Jimmy Kimmel taken [28:35] off the air. And today, Trump's FCC director ordered a new review of the licenses for ABC Disney over this [28:41] joke Kimmel made the two days prior to the White House Correspondent Center, where he pretended he [28:45] was hosting the event. And of course, our First Lady Melania is here. Look at Melania. So beautiful. [28:53] Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow. Now, again, Kimmel made that joke on Thursday, [29:02] in part because they weren't going to have a comedian at the dinner two days before anyone knew that a [29:06] gunman would show up at the White House Correspondent Center. And it's clear that the joke is about Trump's [29:11] age. There's a 24 year age gap difference between Trump and Melania. It's not a call for violence [29:18] against the president because Donald Trump is always ready and willing to underscore the absurdity [29:22] of his own actions. He literally made a similar joke himself just today at his event with King [29:27] Charles while talking about the length of his parents' marriage. They were married for 63 years. [29:37] And excuse me, if you don't mind, that's a record we won't be able to match, darling. I'm sorry. [29:44] Just not going to work out that way. We'll do well, but we're not going to do that well. 63 years. [29:52] It's basically just a different joke about his age. And Jimmy Kimmel told a version of it before [29:57] we knew there would be an attack on the White House Correspondent Center. No reasonable person [30:01] would think Kimmel was somehow calling for political violence, just like no reasonable [30:05] person would think Caroline Levitt was talking about actual gunshots when she said this right [30:10] before the Correspondent Center took place. I will tell you, this speech tonight will be [30:17] classic Donald J. Trump. It'll be funny. It'll be entertaining. There will be some shots fired [30:23] tonight in the room. So everyone should tune in. I mean, by their standards, maybe the FCC [30:30] chairman should investigate. I'm obviously kidding. But that's really the logic they're using to go [30:36] after Jimmy Kimmel. And if you think that's a stretch of sweep, because the Trump administration [30:40] has put a lot of imagination into using this moment to go after another one of Trump's perceived [30:45] enemies. Today, the Trump administration once again decided to indict former FBI Director James [30:50] Comey. And you may remember that Trump's first attempt to indict Comey for lying to Congress [30:55] fell apart thanks to thin evidence and the incompetence of Trump's handpicked prosecutor. So you [31:00] would think that Trump's Justice Department would make sure they had something really, [31:04] really strong to charge Comey with the second time around, right? Well, behold, this is the crime [31:11] that the Trump administration claims Comey committed. This social media post of seashells [31:16] that spell out 86-47. 86 is, of course, restaurant jargon for cancel and order. And Donald Trump is the [31:24] 47th president. So naturally, the Trump administration had determined that this social media post represents [31:29] a direct threat to end Donald Trump's life. Seriously, that is their argument. [31:35] Now, James Comey has said explicitly that he did not intend this as a threat against the president's [31:40] life. And let's be honest, no right minded person would interpret this as a threat against the [31:44] president's life. During the Biden administration, conservative influencers were posting 86-46. He was, [31:50] of course, the 46th president to express their discontent with the president and nobody prosecuted them. [31:56] Conservative T-shirt vendors even sold impeach Biden T-shirts that said 86-46 on them. You can still buy [32:03] them on Amazon today. But the Trump administration, the Justice Department says that this Instagram [32:09] post from James Comey is a legitimate threat against Trump's life. And they say they're ready to take [32:15] that argument into a U.S. courtroom. How will you prove intent when, as the director had acknowledged, [32:25] Mr. Comey said he did not associate 86 with doing harm and he took it down promptly, said it was political [32:31] speech, not an intent to harm the president. How do you prove intent in any case? You prove intent [32:36] with witnesses, with documents, with the defendant himself to the extent to the extent it's appropriate. [32:42] And that's how we'll improve intent in this case. Witnesses and documents? What witnesses [32:49] and documents? There are no witnesses and documents mentioned in the DOJ's two-page indictment. [32:54] All of this, we're talking about seashells on a beach. All of this is just so ridiculous. [32:59] We know what this is really about because Donald Trump has already tried to get James Comey [33:03] indicted for something completely different. I mean, how stupid do they think the American people [33:08] are? Does anyone really believe James Comey was threatening Donald Trump's life with an [33:12] Instagram post of some seashells? Does anyone really believe that Jimmy Kimmel was threatening [33:17] Trump's life in a comedy sketch on live TV two days before the White House Correspondents' Dinner? [33:23] Does anyone really believe that Trump has spent the last few months fixating on drapes and finishes [33:27] for his big ballroom renovation because he was so concerned about national security? [33:33] This is all just a blatant attempt to use a real attack as pretext for the stuff Trump [33:37] already wanted to do. I mean, this is the second time he's gone after both Kimmel and Comey. The [33:42] question now is, how should we respond to a president using real threats of violence [33:47] to indulge his own obsessions? The New York Times noted in looking [33:53] at this case how this could play out for ABC, saying it is extremely difficult for the government [33:59] to take away a station's right to broadcast. It must be able to make a convincing case that the [34:06] stations had shown a pattern of violating rules and regulations. And that speaks to what you were [34:11] saying just now. Even if the FCC ultimately decides to block the renewal of ABC station licenses, [34:17] the network would have ample recourse in the courts and it would be able to continue to broadcast as [34:22] the fight played out. So that becomes an expense for them, which, you know, they have to calculate [34:29] they want to go through. I suspect they would. I don't see them backing down. But there's also, [34:34] because they would be continued to broadcast, the Jimmy Kimmels of the world will still be on the air. [34:40] And so you have these narratives that would continue that they're trying to [34:45] squash. Yeah, but I think, you know, you really put your finger on it, which is, [34:49] I don't think this is actually about ultimately getting the license. I think it is actually about [34:56] harassing a company so that other companies will think twice about speech and will, you know, [35:03] might censor themselves more. Disney has a lot of resources. Other companies have less resources. [35:09] So I think the truth of all of this is when we step back, we should recognize that [35:13] this administration is using the FCC to do the vendetta bidding of the president of the United [35:21] States. It is using an arm of the administration that is supposed to actually be conscious of our [35:28] First Amendment rights and totally quashing them. So basically attacking an institution, [35:34] trying to punish Disney for the speech of a comedian. This is something that, you know, [35:39] we wouldn't be surprised if it happened in Putin's Russia or would have happened in Orban's Hungary, [35:44] that people rose up there against this kind of action. And we should do the same here. [35:50] New in Donald Trump's crackdown on freedom of speech today, making an explicit threat against [35:56] comedian Jimmy Kimmel asking when Disney would fire him and that it, quote, better be soon. [36:01] That following a new FCC investigation of ABC and Disney with their broadcasting licenses [36:09] at risk. Bloomberg reporting, quote, although the license review order cites potential workplace [36:16] discrimination as the reason for scrutiny, people familiar with the matter said it was precipitated [36:21] by President Donald Trump's plea for ABC to fire late night host Jimmy Kimmel. FCC chair [36:27] Brendan Carr was asked about the investigation today. Watch. And then will the Jimmy Kimmel or [36:34] that all or any speech issues be part of this review? Is it solely restricted to DEI, [36:39] the license, the early license reviews? Our DEI review is going to continue and it's [36:44] going to be part of that. Disney, as part of the filing, is going to have to come in and demonstrate [36:48] that they've been operating in the public interest. Now, that's not exactly a clear denial, [36:55] as critics believe that Trump is using the levers of government to punish Kimmel. [37:00] You'll recall this is Kimmel's second clash with Trump and the FCC after he was suspended and then [37:05] reinstated last fall after public outcry, both times because Trump didn't like Kimmel's jokes. [37:12] But Kimmel is not backing down. [37:14] Our first couple, Donald and Melania, who lately have seemed closer than ever, and I like to think I [37:21] played a part in that. Maybe get him one of those bricks that locks him out of his phone between [37:28] hours of midnight and six. Now, this latest Kimmel conflict, [37:32] part of Trump's broad attempts to crack down on freedom of expression in this country, [37:36] as the Atlantic reports, quote, in marshalling regulatory power against ABC and Disney, [37:42] FCC chair Carr has given the White House another way to extend control over the media. [37:47] All of this as a new global report shows that press freedom in the United States is declining. [37:53] The annual World Press Freedom Index from the organization Reporters Without Borders [37:58] is now ranking the United States at 64, sliding down seven spots. [38:04] Their report signing Donald Trump's leadership as a key factor in their ranking, [38:09] turning his, quote, repeated attacks on the press and journalists into a systemic policy. [38:14] Joining me now is David Litt, former speechwriter for President Obama and author of the [38:19] Word Salad Substack and Christina Greer, political science professor at Fordham University. It's [38:24] great to have both of you with us. So the last time, David, that Donald Trump went up against Jimmy [38:29] Kimmel, he lost. There was a moment of pause. No doubt there was a lot of pressure that was leveled [38:35] against ABC and Disney by the affiliates and others. But in the end, we can say for now, freedom of speech [38:42] prevailed. Jimmy Kimmel was reinstated. How do you see it playing out this time? [38:45] Well, I don't want to make predictions, especially about the future. But what I will say is it feels [38:52] like with the Iran war going poorly, the Trump administration has decided to open a second front [38:57] and redo the war with Jimmy Kimmel. And I think that this is a president who always needs grievance. [39:03] He always needs someone to bully. But I think what's really interesting this time is Disney last time [39:08] around caved immediately. And then they kind of uncaved after a public outcry. We'll see what happens. [39:13] But this time around, Disney is not, as Trump is complaining about, firing Jimmy Kimmel right off [39:18] the bat. And so what you see is maybe, maybe a sign that some of these corporations are starting to [39:24] weigh this out and say, hey, this is more bluster than we thought. And the cost of cooperating with [39:30] this guy is actually higher than the cost of going along with it. Yeah, for the most part, [39:35] Christina, the companies have been going along with Trump. When you think of like the settlements [39:39] that have been made, when you hear Pete Hexeth talking about he can't wait for Larry Ellison to [39:45] own CNN so he can get favorable coverage of the Iran war. So how do you read this moment in time? [39:52] The U.S. is sliding down that press freedom index, 64, sliding down, seven from last year. But at the [39:59] same time, we're seeing this, as they described it, systemic policy to attack the media. [40:03] Right. So really quickly, Eamon, it's Israel and U.S. war on Iran. Like, and I think that that's part of [40:11] the issue that this administration is really frustrated with because so many Americans are [40:15] recognizing there is no leadership and guidance in this administration. Trump 2.0 is just off the [40:23] rails. And so to David's point, a lot of Americans are saying, you're focusing on all the wrong things. [40:28] You're attacking Jimmy Kimmel on ABC and demanding essentially shakedowns. What about my gas prices? [40:33] Right. What about housing? What about what's going on at the grocery store? So this misguided [40:39] 2.0 administration is really, I think, frustrating a lot of Trump supporters. And if we think about the [40:45] three branches of government, we've seen Trump sort of take over the executive in a dictatorial sense. [40:51] We've seen him bully Congress into essentially a feckless institution, even though it's unified [40:56] government. We've seen the courts essentially acquiesce and give him whatever he wants. [40:59] So if we have this sort of fourth arm, that's the media. He wants to take over that as well. [41:04] And I think slowly but surely he's eroded quite a bit. We've seen CBS acquiesce in many ways, [41:09] you know, lots of other institutions. But I think some are saying, we can't give you everything you [41:14] want because this is it's actually quite ridiculous that we would fire someone for a joke that was made [41:19] well before an incident on Saturday. Yeah, he wasn't. He didn't even know about the incident, [41:23] obviously. And so that was the whole issue here. Stephen Miller hosted, sorry, Stephen Miller's [41:29] wife on her podcast yesterday hosted Brendan Carr. And it's interesting to see how the FCC has evolved [41:35] here. I don't think most Americans knew about the FCC a couple of years ago, and yet somehow [41:39] has become weaponized by Donald Trump in his kind of pursuit of controlling the media. Take a listen to [41:44] what he said. Look at the changes over the last couple of years that I think are attributable [41:51] to Trump running at the fake news media. You've got NPR defunded. You've got PBS defunded. You've [41:57] got CBS having new ownership. CNN is getting new ownership. So it's a big ship to turn. But I think [42:05] things are heading in the right direction. So he's saying the quiet part out loud, [42:09] right? I mean, I guess I, you know, for us in the media who are following this, [42:14] it is an attempt by the administration to take control of the media one way or the other. [42:18] Brendan Carr, the chair of this FCC commission, came out and explicitly said what this was all [42:24] about. Yeah. Well, first of all, let me say, it's amazing to me that what used to be the party of [42:29] small government is now the party of, you know, who the chair of the Federal Communications Commission [42:34] is, right? Like that is government interference on a level. They're also buying Spirit Airlines and [42:38] taking control of that. But that's another issue. Well, I think it's the same issue. All of these [42:42] things coming together where Trump and his administration say, we want government control. We want our [42:47] hands in everything. And as you pointed out, right, they're not even ashamed to admit it. [42:52] They're not even pretending they're doing something different right now. And I think that is, on one [42:57] hand, it is incredibly dangerous. And on the other hand, I do think that something that gives me a lot [43:01] of hope is the American people don't like it. Fundamentally, we don't want government in our lives [43:08] in that way. And interestingly, it's not just Republicans or Democrats who are saying so. [43:13] Most Americans feel like that. So a very important point. Most Americans are saying they don't like [43:18] it. The question is, what guardrails do we have? What should be done to make sure that another Brendan [43:25] Carr, if we survive this one, if our democracy survives it, if our media landscape survives what [43:30] he's doing with Donald Trump, comes out on this, the other side with a stronger, more vibrant, [43:35] more independent media landscape? Yeah, I think if and when the Democrats take control of the House [43:39] and possibly even the Senate because of the draconian policies that we're seeing out of [43:43] the Trump administration, they're going to have to figure out ways to shore up and secure [43:48] certain institutions. We've realized during the first and second integration of Donald Trump, [43:53] so many things that we thought were hard and fast laws, even, or rules, are just gentlemen's [43:59] agreements. There are norms that most people followed, but he's thrown them out of the window. [44:04] And so when so many Democrats and independents are clamoring for a party that is not just against [44:09] Donald Trump, but a party that wants to do something, these are some of the things that [44:13] Democrats can say they're going to do to protect our media, to protect the flow of information, [44:17] to make sure that we can't have another Republican or whomever come after Donald Trump and try and take [44:23] away civil rights and civil liberties. You brought up the way the Trump administration is potentially [44:28] trying to shift the narrative away from the Iran war. Take a listen to how he talked about [44:32] in the Oval Office today, the Iran war. Watch. I see it in a stupid CNN, which I only watch because [44:39] you have to watch a little bit of the enemy. So I watch it for a very short period, but you have to, [44:43] you know, you have to be smart. And if you see CNN, you think they're winning the war. [44:49] If you read the New York Times, it's actually seditious, in my opinion. [44:56] So him calling the media enemy of the people is nothing new, him referring to it there as the [45:03] enemy is nothing new. But using the word seditious to describe what the New York Times is doing [45:09] seems to be at another threshold that has been crossed. [45:12] Yeah. I mean, we were here on Saturday night and, you know, during the coverage of that. [45:20] And in the wake of that assassination attempt, you saw predictably Trump and other Republicans [45:26] saying we've got to turn down, tone down the rhetoric and saying it's Democrats who are, you know, [45:30] demonizing their opponents. Now, I agree political violence is wrong and we the rhetoric that encourages [45:36] it is bad. But to call media organizations like the New York Times seditious just a few days after [45:43] telling people to tone down the rhetoric, we're not surprised by the hypocrisy anymore, but we should [45:48] still be outraged by it.