transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:01] As President Trump continues implementing his ambitious agenda, follow along with the MS NOW Newsletter, Project 47. You'll get weekly updates sent straight to your inbox, with expert analysis on the administration's latest actions and how they're affecting the American people.

Speaker 2:
[00:17] The American people are basically telling the President that they are not okay with any of this.

Speaker 1:
[00:22] Sign up for the Project 47 Newsletter at ms.now slash project 47.

Speaker 3:
[00:34] Well, listen, thank you so much.

Speaker 4:
[00:35] Thank you so much, Mr. President.

Speaker 5:
[00:36] We really appreciate it.

Speaker 6:
[00:37] Guys.

Speaker 5:
[00:38] Anyway, it's a great honor to be with you.

Speaker 7:
[00:40] Thank you, sir. Good luck to you.

Speaker 3:
[00:42] And, yeah, I just appreciate you giving me your time today, Donald Trump.

Speaker 5:
[00:47] Thank you so much. Good luck with your situation. This is going to be the most important election in the history of our country, I believe.

Speaker 8:
[00:54] I believe that, too.

Speaker 9:
[00:55] And I wish you the best of luck.

Speaker 5:
[00:57] Thank you very much.

Speaker 1:
[00:59] Thank you so much.

Speaker 5:
[01:00] Thank you very much.

Speaker 10:
[01:03] The cliches don't do it justice. Hook, line and sinker. Those bros were in. Trump had them. Hi again, everybody. It's now 5 o'clock in New York. Life comes at you fast, especially when you help make Donald Trump president because ever since really those interviews and ever since his reelection, every single one of those podcast bros you just heard from, really important voices, whatever you think of them personally or morally or ethically, they are really important. They speak to a lot of men, a lot of young men, a lot of our kids and maybe your grandkids. Every one of those men speak to a not insignificant number of Americans. Every one of them now has turned on Trump. And I don't know their motives. We can talk about that at length, but every single one of them has expressed a personal sense of betrayal and disapproval, particularly when it comes to the war with Iran. But for some of them had happened before that with the Epstein files. And on that story, Semaphore reports this quote. Of the 14 long-form bro podcasts Trump appeared on during his 2024 presidential campaign, eight of the hosts have questioned or criticized the war, while just two have endorsed it. We showed you the end of Theovon's interview with Donald Trump during the campaign, one seen by more viewers in Pennsylvania has people. Well, here's Theovon this week talking about Donald Trump's threat to wipe out Iran's entire civilization.

Speaker 3:
[02:38] I mean, that's just on Easter. That's unbelievable. You know, when people are hoping for something new, literally on the day when people are hoping and are believing with their hearts as much as they can, and are celebrating something new, a rebirth, a resurrection, a possibility to write that is it's diabolical. It's insane.

Speaker 10:
[03:05] We've been tracking commentary like that, not just from him. That was Theovon, but from his podcast, Bros in Arms, if you will, Joe Rogan, who also matters a lot in how young men vote and whether or not they vote, who also endorsed Donald Trump. He has famously been mad at him lately. That's why they're getting back together, a reunion at this interaction at a recent UFC event has been so closely scrutinized and why it was disorienting to some to see Joe Rogan right back at the White House days later when Trump signed an executive order to speed up a federal review of psychedelic drugs intended to treat mental illness. Joe Rogan described what led up to that event and in doing so might have revealed just how desperately Donald Trump needs Joe Rogan back on his political side.

Speaker 7:
[03:57] And I said how effective it is and I said, you know, and it's been held up for so long. And he said, what are you looking for? You looking for FDA approval? He goes, it sounds good to me. He said, let's do it. And so literally sees me at the UFC the next day, shakes my hand and says, it's done. Wow. That's what he was saying. That's so funny. I was like, I said, thank you. Sorry. It wasn't like he was mad at me at all.

Speaker 6:
[04:16] People jump on these, like, conclusions, like.

Speaker 7:
[04:19] Well, that's okay. You know, you're allowed to. But this is the truth. That's that's exactly what happened. He came to me and he.

Speaker 10:
[04:27] We're in the president bypasses an entire agency designed to make sure drugs are safe to make Joe Rogan happy. That's where we are in this story. Remember what Semaphore reported and called Long Form Bro podcasts are really sort of a subgenre of a larger conservative media ecosystem that we've paid attention to for a long time. But those personalities aren't alone in their critiques. Here's former Fox News anchor Megan Kelly yesterday.

Speaker 11:
[05:00] I think many of us just like Trump. We like his personality. But then the other truth of it is there are aspects of his personality which are obviously not good and that we've mostly just chosen to overlook. He's not a moral man. He's obviously not the greatest husband in the world. And he's extremely petty and thin skinned. Was one of his most loyal supporters because they don't support this war and getting in bed with people who hate him and have hated him from the beginning.

Speaker 10:
[05:35] I have to say, F-bomb Megan is my favorite Megan. But Megan likes the personality of someone who said, quote, there was blood coming out of her, coming out of her everywhere. And again, not qualified to assess how you would like a person's personality who said that about you. But there's that. Now, to be clear, it would be insane and foolish and stupid and a betrayal of your trust in us to suggest that any of these figures are allies of ours in protecting American democracy. They are not. Nor are they truth tellers. Not even now. But they knew Trump was all of the things they are saying now to their followers for years. Tucker Carlson called him a, quote, demonic force. We covered them here on this show because they are political bellweathers, more than most. And they are attacking Donald Trump right now because they can. These are not people who do the right thing even when it's hard. These are people who do and say the thing that sells their stuff to the most people. And lo and behold, ding, ding, ding, that, ladies and gentlemen, is the beginning of the end for the brand that is Donald Trump. Trump is now the dog food that the dog won't eat. And not even Megyn Kelly and her F-bombs, or Joe Rogan and his newly approved psychedelic drugs can force it down Fido's throat. Hashtag sad. That's where we start the hour. Charlie Sykes is here. He's the author of the newsletter To the Contrary. And with me for the hour, senior political analyst, contributing host on Pod Save America, host of the podcast Runaway Country, Alex Wagner is here. Alex, I start with you. Your thoughts on this surreal moment from, I feel like we're at the bottom of the looking glass looking up. I want some of the Joe Rogan psychedelic drugs, I think. Yeah.

Speaker 12:
[07:23] There's not enough psilocybin in the world to fast track to get some of these guys back on Trump's side. I'll just say side note, hashtag Nicolle is my favorite, Nicolle. That was a barn burner, sis. But I got to say, look, it is, what is the phrase that comes to mind? Rats off a sinking ship. That's what's happening. And these are people, we think of bro podcasters, I guess, as not leaders, but just in the middle of a zeitgeist. They are expressions of Trump's cratering support among young people, among white people, among Latinos, among black men. I mean, he's got a 30% approval rating among young white men. He has lost 16% of his approval from Latinos just in the last year. This is someone who is hemorrhaging support, who is bleeding out among the coalition that brought him back into the White House, purely based on mistakes of his own making, and mistakes as being too euphemistic about it. Just catastrophic failures, disavowals of the very principles upon which he rode back into office. So yeah, I mean, I think it's good that you have people like Tucker and Theo and Meghan saying the things that they say, but I just part of me, the very small ethically alarmed part of me that still exists in these Trump years, also understands that this is convenient for all of these people, right? Like Tucker Carlson, is he running for office? Is this a way for him to curry favor with people who might want to, who will ultimately see the tatters in which Donald Trump leaves the country but want to stay in the MAGA universe? Meghan Kelly, I mean, nobody knows more about being thin-skinned and opportunistic than Meghan Kelly. I don't think Democrats can take a lot of this podcast criticism to the bank. I still think that there's work to do to get some of these folks who listen to these programs on the Democratic side of the aisle. But I do think the skepticism and the criticism is expressive of a larger and significant issue that Trump is having with the electorate writ large.

Speaker 10:
[09:25] I think, Charlie, too, it's the contrast between where we were a year ago. Where Trump played such a dominant figure in our politics, the culture felt irretrievable. Trump has now lost his slice of the culture.

Speaker 13:
[09:41] Yeah, I think there's no question about that. Look, I can't get over Meghan Kelly saying that she really likes Donald Trump's personality. I think we have to think about this. Look, you know, it is true that rodents traditionally do not want to go down with a sinking ship. And I think you put your finger on it. You know, you described the people who listen to the podcasters as the followers. But remember that story of the French Revolution, where maybe it's an apocryphal story, where the leader says, there goes my people, I need to catch up with them because I am their leader. You know, a lot of these podcasters have a sense of what's happening with their audience. And they are sensing the fact that people are breaking with Trump, they're disillusioned with Trump, they're rolling their eyes at Trump. And so they're following where their audience is going because yes, it's true that he's got a podcast problem, but he's got a young voter problem, a woman problem. He's losing support among Latinos, non-white voters, white working class voters, white voters without college educations. And the podcasters, look, we're not dealing with really deep thinkers here, right? I mean, the fact that they were all suckered by Donald Trump back in 2024 is probably a little bit of a tell. They're kind of cheap dates, but they do know where their audience is headed, and none of them want to be left behind. So I do think that what you are seeing is that they are in many ways, kind of a symptom of this cultural collapse of Trumpism that's happening rather rapidly and in real time.

Speaker 10:
[11:10] Yeah, I mean, Alex, I accept Heilman's mantra that politics are downstream from culture, and you and I both have sons. I mean, I think when you start to see young men consuming culture, you become more attuned to the sort of pipeline into politics. And no one is listening to Theobon and Joe Rogan for that Trump interview, right? It didn't happen one time, but they are consuming all the other stuff. And when it doesn't sort of lead you down and land on to Trump, I think the question is, what does the 65% of Americans who are not approving of the job Trump is doing, what fills the void? Now, some of it is your content, right, the things that you're creating. I think Democrats and the pro-democracy side has done a very good job making their party seem almost as fun. But the other piece of it is, does it influence who the Democrats pick? I mean, does it make Mark Kelly or Wes Moore, or people who are just more modern and more fluent in politics, policy, and culture, more appealing choices, as they look for people to sort of carry the message into the midterms and beyond?

Speaker 12:
[12:17] I mean, it's hard to answer that question right now, but I think Trump sort of awoke a craving for authenticity, and his was an unvarnished rudeness, but it was pure it. And I think if there's a lesson for Democrats, more than any particular policy prescription or any particular political experience, the next person the party selects to be its nominee, if not its actual leader, has got to be fully themselves. They have got to be fully authentically who they say they are, because that's the thing that I think culture sniffs out. And one of the things that was so appealing to Trump, I think in terms of the zeitgeist and the culture in the bro, the manosphere, was that he was a completely self-actualized person insofar as he was unabashed, you know? And he remains unabashed. He's also delusional and a malignant narcissist. But the man was unapologetic. And I think Democrats, if there's a page to take from the Trump playbook, it's that, less than any. I mean, it's hard to know what kind of figure that person will cut. But I do think what we've learned in the 21st century is you have to be uncensored and all in on whatever it is that you're proposing.

Speaker 10:
[13:39] I don't want to denigrate any of these hosts' intelligence. I mean, they do grasp policy. And I want to show you Theo Vaughan's take on the war in Iran, Charlie.

Speaker 3:
[13:52] And what American is this helping? Besides the war, the industrial war complex, what American, what hard work, what guy who's trying to take care of his family, or a single mother who's a nurse who's going to work and has to get home and get to her kids' ballgame and has to be both parents? What farmer is this helping? What regular person is this helping? I just don't know. I don't understand. So yeah, that's what our president's up to, and it's f***ing baffling.

Speaker 10:
[14:35] And again, I can't resist the desire to edit that a guy isn't the only one over there at war. There are a lot of women there too. Women have lost their lives. Among the 13 that have lost their lives, they include women. But I take the point that this is the ultimate betrayal because this was the explicit promise to Theo Vonn, his fellow podcast bros, and all their legions of listeners, that Trump was safe if for no other reason he would not send any of us to war.

Speaker 13:
[15:08] Yeah. I mean, that one's the red line, but you'll notice that he also is picking up on the larger theme that, you know, Donald Trump says, you know, I am the voice of the Forgotten American. You know, I am for you, and the other side is for, you know, somebody else. You know, what he's saying here, and I think this is something that others need to pick up on, is that this has become a perfect illustration that Donald Trump is off on his own, that he's not doing, he's not focusing on the problems of everyday Americans. You know, your previous hour, you know, was talking about all the people, all the grifting, the people, in fact, who are profiting from this war, while Americans are looking around going, I can't afford to go to the grocery store, fill up my car with gas. And where is Donald Trump? Donald Trump at one time did have that reptilian instinct about public opinion. He's now in a phase where it's kind of the YOLO phase, where he just doesn't seem to give a shit about domestic politics, or how it appears. He and his failed sons are out there, and they're going to griff for everything they can possibly stuff into their pockets at a time of war. And I think that's sort of that contrast between your golden ballroom, your big arches, your pointless war, the bailouts of airlines, the bailouts of your Arab cronies and everything, while Americans are actually going, well, didn't you say you were on our side and you were going to lower the cost of living? And so I think all of that feels like it's coming together. And even the podcasters, the podfellas who were shilling for him in 2024 figured, I can't convince my audience this makes any sense. I'm not able to convince people that this war makes sense or that this guy is really not off-bubble in the way he is behaving recently.

Speaker 10:
[17:06] You know, I look at the brand and I come back to, you know, why this matters, just to test myself, right? To make sure that this is the story that I think it is. And Alex, I think to your point about why he's here, right? Why are we covering him? Like, what is it, year 77 of, like, leading with today, Donald Trump destroyed, insert the institution, yesterday was the FBI, the day before it was DOJ, last week it was the Pentagon, today it's the Navy. I mean, the why is because millions of people chose him two out of three times, Republicans chose him three times. And I think if you look at, if you pull the thread forward, I take your point, you know, the why for Meghan and Tucker is interesting too, because I think they're looking to replace it. I think they're going to take all the wrong lessons, right? That the right can be bought, that they're looking for someone who maybe, I mean, I think they are millionaires multiple times over. I mean, Meghan is just from the NBC deal. I mean, I want a deal like that, a show that I do for 10 months and then move to my basement. But the idea that they are looking to inherit a coalition is so cynical. And Tim Miller made this point, before everyone plays Tucker's apology and tries to figure out if he means it, he doesn't mean it because we know that in 2020, Tucker described Donald Trump as demonic. So I think the warnings about why this matters, it matters because it's a sign of Trump's profound weakness. It matters because it turns out young men are an important voting block. They may have tilted the election against Harris and for Donald Trump in the second term, but it also matters for what the right is building next.

Speaker 12:
[18:50] Yeah, I would just say, Tucker's saying he didn't intentionally mislead the American public. I believe saying privately that you think Trump is a disaster for American democracy and demonic in disposition and then going and stumping for the man as he seeks reelection in 2024 is the dictionary definition of intentionally misleading the American public. But I digress. Nicolle, we have someone in the Oval Office right now who is probably, I mean, I think it's feasible that Trump has never actually filled up a car with a tank of gas. I think it is possible that the man may never have gone grocery shopping. No, really. And it's like, of course he's out of touch. Of course he's out of touch. He's a malignant narcissist. But he literally has no basic understanding of the extraordinary economic pain that he has thrust this country into it. And not only does he have no understanding, he has no mechanism by which to express empathy or concern. He wants to, I mean, I talked to interview Derek Thompson from formerly of the Atlantic, now of Substack, about this. He's like a toddler, a child that just wants to walk away from the mess he's created. And guess what? He cannot. Those gas prices are up across the country in 1000 point font. Everybody sees what those numbers are. And it is a colossal, it is a catastrophe of his own creation. He may never have been to a gas station, but man, he's gonna know a lot more about them as time goes on.

Speaker 10:
[20:14] Yeah, I mean, and yeah, all of that. I love the idea of font because you know, there's a call somewhere where he's like, can you just make the numbers smaller?

Speaker 12:
[20:25] Yes.

Speaker 10:
[20:25] I can see them from my plane. Charlie Sykes, let's do this again. Thank you for starting us off this hour. Thank you. When we come back another day, another dodge by a Trump cabinet secretary over his connections to Jeffrey Epstein, after saying he has, quote, nothing to hide, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick isn't exactly acting like that's the case. That story is next and later. There's growing outrage over media outlets like CBS News, bringing members of the Trump administration, an administration that routinely targets reporters and journalists and tramples on the rights of a free press, to the White House Correspondents Dinner as their guests, an event meant to celebrate the First Amendment and honor aspiring journalists and journalism students. We'll have that conversation later in the hour. Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.

Speaker 8:
[21:16] Hey everyone, it's Chris Hayes. This week on my podcast, Why Is This Happening? Cryptocurrency and the Golden Age of Scams.

Speaker 9:
[21:23] Crypto markets operate 24-7, not like the regulated financial markets. And they're gamified and all these things. And so for that small percentage of the population that develop gambling addictions, this stuff is like crack cocaine. It's really, really bad.

Speaker 8:
[21:35] That's this week on Why Is This Happening? Search for Why Is This Happening? Start re-listing right now and follow.

Speaker 14:
[21:44] The American people wants to know, why did you lie about your relationship with Epstein?

Speaker 4:
[21:50] The House Oversight Committee and I have agreed. We will spend the time together.

Speaker 14:
[21:56] Reclaiming my time, I do not accept that answer. We've heard that one. We are our own committee. We have our own reason to test your credibility and veracity. Please answer the question, why did you lie to the Post?

Speaker 4:
[22:11] I have voluntarily agreed to spend the time and talk about it.

Speaker 14:
[22:16] I reclaim the time. Let the record reflect, you're dodging the question.

Speaker 10:
[22:24] No time like the present to clear up the questions swirling about your relationship with the notorious child sex trafficker, except if you're a member of Donald Trump's cabinet. That was Donald Trump's Commerce Secretary. Howard Lutnick, today again, refusing to answer lawmakers' questions about his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, claiming he will do so when he appears before another committee, the House Oversight Committee, next month as part of their Epstein probe. Lutnick has, in the past, denied any wrongdoing. And despite the attempts to evade justice at every level of the Trump administration, accountability is continuing to inch forward. The Justice Department's Inspector General Office today announced that it is reviewing the Department's compliance with the law that mandates the release of the Epstein files. I want to bring in the Congresswoman who you saw questioning Lutnick in that clip we played, Democratic Congresswoman Madeline Dean of Pennsylvania. Thank you so much for being here. It's nice to see you.

Speaker 14:
[23:18] Good to see you. Good to be with you.

Speaker 10:
[23:20] What's interesting to me is that Lutnick didn't leap at the opportunity you gave him. I mean, Lutnick is the one that said this weird thing about going to Jeffrey Epstein's private island where we know sexual abuse and assault happened from the victim's own accounts and from subsequent reporting, that Epstein said, I went in with all my kids, my wife, and my nanny, and I left with all my kids, my wife, and my nanny. Who, other than someone who thinks they might be visiting a child sex trafficker, tells the public the head count and the attendance they took on the way in and out?

Speaker 14:
[23:57] You're absolutely right. And don't forget that it was in October that he was on a podcast where he said he had, he was living next door to Epstein back in the day. And he and his wife, at the invitation of Epstein, walked over to Epstein's house and got the vibe right away that disgusting stuff was going on because they saw a massage table in what would have been a dining room apparently. And they left the house. You remember his dramatic portrayal. They left the house saying, I will never spend any more time with this guy. I don't care if it is political, philanthropic business, I'm spending no more time with this disgusting person. And then of course, he does have to admit he lied about that and went to Epstein Island and told us everybody who was there, and it was puzzling to me, he didn't have one nanny, he had nannies. It's just a stunning cast of characters.

Speaker 10:
[24:51] Do you have any reason to believe that he, I mean, no, I don't have a yacht, so I don't know how casual a trip to an island is on a yacht, but it sounds like something you have to plan ahead for. I don't know, maybe like a flight. I don't know, but do you have a sense that he didn't think it would get out? I mean, there are pictures of him and Jeffrey Epstein at Epstein's Island.

Speaker 14:
[25:12] I don't know if it's arrogance or ignorance or doesn't care. I literally spoke to the secretary after my questioning of him, and he tried to speak similarly as though what I had said didn't matter. The man has lied before our committee, before the American public. His credibility matters. He is secretary of commerce. He's lied about his closeness, his proximity to Epstein. That's what I'm saying. He was an Epstein enabler. Of course, you would think his answer to my question would have been, you know what, Representative, I want to answer your question right now. I got to get this out in the public. But of course, he dodged it. It's a continuation of the cover up. I want the American people not to be deceived by, he tried to portray it as magnanimous. He has voluntarily said he'll come before the Oversight Committee in a closed door conversation, not under oath, not with democratic questioning, not with subpoena power. Why wouldn't you want to just clear it up right now if you had nothing to do with this guy whom you called early on disgusting?

Speaker 10:
[26:23] Congresswoman, if the polls are to be believed and the momentum that we're seeing moving in Democrats' direction continues through November, what will Democrats do to sort of re-center this issue around the victims of child sex trafficking and abuse if they are in control come November?

Speaker 14:
[26:46] I'm confident we will center it around the victims. They want accountability. They want truth. They want justice. I along with other members of Congress have had the absurd task, but I take it seriously, of going over to the Department of Justice to look into the Epstein files. You know by law all of these files were supposed to have been released. And yet members of Congress like me are spending hours over there, taking a look at the files, then literally clicking to unredact that which we can redact. And I told Mr. Lutnick I had done that and searched his name. And he appears multiple times in these documents, of course. Democrats will finally, finally, and this should have been done a decade or more ago, finally get to full truth and transparency. And reveal the cover-up, the corruption, the grotesqueness of it. If you have a chance, I do want to also mention the other piece that I wanted to make sure we got on the record about Mr. Lutnick and his sons. Do you know that it appears that his sons have spent time investing in buying up tariff refunds for pennies on the dollar? So, if you, company A, spent $2 million on tariffs, we're going to pay you 20 cents on the dollars, and we will assume the right to collect your tariff money. Think of that grift. I would think that would get under the president's skin, because it's not supposed to be somebody else's sons getting the grift. They were also doing it betting against the legality of the tariffs, which of course the Supreme Court found to be unconstitutional. Think of how perverted that is, as their dad was out talking about these wonderful tariffs, taxes on American people, taxes on American businesses. Their sons were taking the bet against the American people and against Donald Trump.

Speaker 10:
[28:57] Is that legal?

Speaker 14:
[28:59] It should not be. It absolutely should not be. And of course, the notion of the family relationship and the relationship to the secretary, the secretary who had knowledge about the legal jeopardy that those tariffs were in, it should not be legal. We want to hold them to account. And I hope the president gets it. This guy's too close to Epstein and his sons are making more on the grift against your very practices.

Speaker 10:
[29:28] I mean, Alex, let me bring you in on this. There's a long history of Donald Trump loving the grift that makes his pockets full of cash and loathing the grift that makes, for example, Christina McCrory Lewandowski full of wads of cash.

Speaker 14:
[29:44] Yes.

Speaker 12:
[29:44] Yeah, what's good for me is good for me, but not for thee. Look, I think there's been an... And everybody should go to ProPublica and donate money to ProPublica, but also they've been doing incredible investigative research about the grift that's happening at all levels of this government. You have deputy defense secretaries who are handing out government defense contracts to companies that they're still financially entangled with. Pam Bondi made trades that are suspect. It is one of the casualties of the insanity of this administration, is that not nearly enough attention has been paid to the methods, and they're fairly clear in which all of these Trump administration officials, or a lion's share of them, are just self-dealing. They're there to line their pockets. And I honestly think Trump may not even understand, but he has recruited a class of people who are not here to serve the American public. They're here to serve themselves, and they see an opportunity with someone who has said quite clearly to both the domestic and international audience, we're for sale. He's communicated that to allies and enemies alike, and everybody under the stewardship of Donald Trump in his administration, I think when the chips, he better issue blanket pardons on his way out. Because I think that once the forensics are done at the end of this administration, you are going to see behavior that could be downright criminal.

Speaker 10:
[31:03] Unbelievable. Congresswoman, thank you for bringing it to our attention today, and for raising it in that hearing, and for taking time to talk to us. It's nice to see you.

Speaker 14:
[31:11] Thank you. Good to be with you both.

Speaker 10:
[31:14] When we come back, how can you celebrate the First Amendment alongside the members of an administration hell-bent on destroying it? That is the question for media outlets like CBS Today. CBS invited Pete Hegseth to be its guest at this weekend's White House Correspondents Dinner after Hegseth severely restricted press access at the Pentagon. We'll have that conversation next.

Speaker 8:
[31:40] Hey everyone, it's Chris Hayes. This week on my podcast, why is this happening, cryptocurrency and the golden age of scams?

Speaker 9:
[31:46] Crypto markets operate 24-7, not like the regulated financial markets and they're gamified and all these things. And so for that small percentage of the population that develop gambling addictions, this stuff is like crack cocaine. It's really, really bad.

Speaker 8:
[31:59] That's this week on why is this happening. Search for why is this happening. We're re-listing right now and follow.

Speaker 10:
[32:09] This weekend, when journalists gather for the annual White House Correspondents Dinner to ostensibly celebrate the First Amendment, this year will be different. They will be sitting side by side with members of the Trump administration and the architects of efforts to erode the First Amendment and First Amendment freedoms. And it's not just Donald Trump who's doing it. Donald Trump, by the way, is attending this dinner for the first time ever, breaking with his own norm-busting behavior. Every president since Calvin Coolidge has attended at least one of the dinners, and his first term Trump did not. But we've also seen perplexing decisions from some news organizations to invite the very same people who have lodged lawsuits against them, who threaten them, who attack them in ways that lead to threats of violence, who've threatened to strip their broadcast licenses, including CBS News, and our friend Oliver Darcy Reports in Status has invited Stephen Miller as a guest at its table and Pete Hegseth, who is literally at war with the Pentagon Press Corps. Donald Trump's Secretary of Defense evicted reporters from their workspaces at the Pentagon for not agreeing to his demands, which a federal judge ruled as unconstitutional and the mark of autocracy. Oliver Darcy reports that Donald Trump's Federal Communications Commission Chair, Brendan Carr, is also set to attend the dinner. Oliver reports that Carr is, quote, not with CBS, but according to Darcy's reporting, an invitation has been extended to him from CBS News' parent company, Paramount, which will have its own table at this dinner. Carr has weaponized his position against media companies, threatened to revoke licenses over coverage critical of Donald Trump, most recently the war with Iran. He publicly attacked Jimmy Kimmel just before Kimmel's suspension, and his role in Paramount's merger with Skydance Media has raised ethics concerns. I want to bring in the executive editor of deadline.com, Dominic Patton. Alex is still here. I want to do just a moment of personal disclosures before I cover this story. I'm not going and I count myself fortunate to work at a news organization that faces all of the same pressures and in some ways more than all the others in respects that choice. Your thought though, Dominic, this does feel different. Donald Trump isn't a normal president that is on the receiving end of tough coverage. Yesterday, the New York Times reported that the FBI started investigating a journalist who's reporting they didn't like about the FBI director's girlfriend. The government has raided the homes of journalists. They are constantly, Donald Trump views the settlements from ABC and CBS basically as payouts to him. He posts on his social media about them. The attacks on journalists and journalism since the war began are historic in nature in terms of their viciousness and brutality.

Speaker 6:
[35:04] Well, Alex, I will say too, I am not attending this year's White House Correspondents Dinner, though I have gone in previous years. I think that one of the things we're looking at here is you have to ask people, what is this year's White House Correspondents Dinner? It's clear that Donald Trump has decided to attend for the first time as president. Remember, he did go in 2011, when then President Barack Obama basically roasted him as he was also managing at the same time the attack on Osama Bin Laden. So a president who actually was doing his job. Donald Trump, from what we understand, is going to do a quick in and out. He's going to basically try to make fun of everyone, make them feel terrible and then leave. And when you're seeing at the same time is what's happening tonight, which I think is actually almost as important. Tonight, David Ellison, the CEO of Paramount, which today saw the shareholders of Warner Brothers Discovery overwhelmingly agree to the merger between the two companies. Now, this is one stage of many, but it's certainly a big one. David Ellison will be holding a dinner at the Trump Institute of Peace in honor of the Trump White House and CBS News White House Correspondents. Though there won't be that many CBS News White House Correspondents there. And in fact, the president of the World of the White House Correspondents Association is a CBS News Correspondent right now. But that's going to be a behind closed door private dinner. That is already, I think, telling you everything you need to know about what has become very much state media. I mean, let's just say it for what it is. We would never, at this point, mock Fox for the people they're going to invite. And they're going to invite a ton of people from the administration. That's their brand. But when you look at something like a public broadcaster like The Home of Walter Cronkite and what have you, you can tap into that legacy in a great way, or you can tap into that legacy in a help us get this deal through. And that's what this is. This is business. This is just like the discussion you had before the break, which is this is people lining their pockets on all ends, utilizing the vast powers of the federal government, in this case, the green light of mega merger that almost no one in Hollywood wants, by the way.

Speaker 10:
[37:07] Yeah. I mean, Alex, there's some really dumb spin out there that I'm sad to say some media writers seem to be buying. That they love, that Barry Weiss and Alison love all the outrage. I mean, they're still a business. And as a business undertaking, the, I'll stick with dog food, the dogs do not like the dog food they're serving in the morning and the evening. And so as business people, regardless of how they feel like they've got some of the media writers bamboozled, their businesses are failing.

Speaker 12:
[37:41] Totally. I'm in DC. I'm not going to the Correspondents Dinner. The food is terrible. The company apparently even worse. I used to work at CBS. I'm not having dinner there either. Here's what I'll say, Nicolle. If it's a business decision, usually the owners of multi-billion dollar businesses aren't this stupid. Because the reality is that we are barreling towards a midterm elections where Democrats are almost certainly going to take over the House and have subpoena power as they head up, for example, the Oversight Committee. And David Ellison can be throwing as many cocktail parties as he wants and passing around as many pigs in a blanket as he wants for the next several months. But he has made an enemy out of every single Democrat on the Hill through his behavior and his relentless currying of favor with the Trump administration. And you can bet that come January of next year, he will be asked to report to the Hill and explain his preferential treatment of the administration, the way in which the unsavory backroom negotiations that have potentially happened between Paramount and Warner Brothers and the administration. And there are going to be a lot of questions asked. Furthermore, if we look at what happened in Hungary, where they took over institutional media and made it state propaganda, once there's a new sheriff in town, as there is in Hungary, you can revoke licenses, you can shut down the state propaganda machine and say, mm-mm, you're not doing business until you restore your public service charter. And I could imagine Democrats on the Hill, especially if they take back the Senate, saying, we need to look at this merger again and maybe we need to break it up. The story is not over once Donald Trump has given his imprimatur to all of this, whatever David Ellison thinks. The reality is Washington is a place where the guard changes a lot, which is why most owners of billion-dollar corporations do not reveal themselves to be such partisan stooges so often and so obviously.

Speaker 10:
[39:32] Yeah, and just to stick to like the part of the garden, you know, they don't give any influence over, they're not planting things that people want to pick and put in their homes. I mean, the whole hungry example is so perfect because at the end of the day, the 71% of people that turned out to vote either were impervious to the propaganda or weren't consuming it. They went, I mean, the whole sort of miscalculation is that what is an attractive brand is that which is subversive. There is nothing more opposite than attractive and subversive than state-run media, and that for some reason is what Ellison is happy to hitch his giant and expensive wagon to. There's much more on this. I have a million more questions for both of you. I'm going to sneak in a quick break first. We'll all be right back on the other side.

Speaker 15:
[40:21] But it begins with not standing up for one another in Trump 1.0 when Trump was calling out reporters and being cruel to reporters. And the next reporter doesn't just repeat the question that the reporter who was chastised asked, they try to go on. That's a culture that you want to get your question answered so you're not going to stand in solidarity with the team of people that you work with every day. That has to be culturally changed.

Speaker 10:
[40:48] We're back with Alex and Dominic. Alex, that hasn't improved in 2.0. In fact, I think you could argue it's worse. The attacks on social media, especially against female journalists, are in some ways more specific, more personal, more crude. Yeah.

Speaker 12:
[41:03] I mean, I used to work in the, I was a White House reporter back in my youth, and that environment is incredibly competitive and super cutthroat. You know, you sit in the wrong seat and you can get booted in your butt. So, I don't, the Trump administration has made the pressure on people to, first of all, the scrutiny on reporters, the harassment of reporters, it has made it a very lonely and very scary job. And while that could in some ways have bred camaraderie, I think what we've seen is, you know, a competitiveness that has not resulted in a linking of arms and a defense of the fourth estate and to our great detriment, right? Like the minute the president calls a female reporter Piggy, that's when people should say, no, we're going to keep asking her question till we get a sufficient answer. Demeaning and disrespecting and otherwise trying to censor the institution that's meant to act as a check on your power is not something we stand by as members of the White House Press Association. I think there are huge questions about where we go as an institutional media and what the Trump administration has revealed about the holes in the fabric, and how to shore those up the next time autocracy comes around. Because I do think we're going to get something better in the coming years, but what have we learned?

Speaker 10:
[42:19] Yeah. Dominic, what do you hear about the influence or the million flowers that have bloomed on independent media? I mean, it seems like you've got podcast companies trying to get in on some of that action. I mean, it seems to be some curiosity, if not outright enthusiasm, on the independent media space.

Speaker 6:
[42:41] Well, I think, Nicolle, and I so admire Alex's optimism, but I also admire how Alex is now also a part of independent media, and you have obviously your podcast, and Deadline, we've been kind of at it for a while. I think that one of the things that this has all exposed is A, the White House Correspondents Dinner has been a little bit of a pageant for far too long to begin with. So let's put that out, let's just be serious about what it is and what it isn't, right? It, you know, at the same time, when you have major news incitations like CBS, and I earlier talked about Walter Cronkite, and there's a story I read earlier today about Morley Safer and footage that he showed from Vietnam of a village being burned and LBJ phoning up CBS, screaming and demanding they take it down, and they were like, no, we're playing it, and we're going to show it. They demanded they fire Morley Safer. They're like, no, we're not. He did a great job. In fact, more of that. And so I think that institutions need to stand for their people as well as each other. That has fallen aside in Trump 2.0. Perhaps it's fallen aside in America in many ways. And again, to Alex's optimism of it'll be better again, I come back to it. I know you've heard me quote him so many times, the great flamethrower known as Senator Chris Murphy, who said himself, you guys just wait until we get back in power. We're going to bust these things up. To that though, I do think that we need to look around. You quoted my great friend Oliver earlier, you know, into this piece. Independent media, voices, online newsletters, podcasts, even tweets and what have you, there are diversity of voices. And if we can harness what is the best of the angels of the Internet, and I god hope nobody ever quotes me on that, then we can actually turn this into a diverse thing where things like what are happening today with CBS, shrug and move on.

Speaker 10:
[44:28] Totally, totally. All right, to be continued with both of you, please. Dominic and Alex, thank you so much. We're gonna sneak in one more break, we'll be right back. We showed you a little bit of the brilliant Sherrilyn Eiffel in the last segment. You can listen to the entire conversation with civil rights leader Sherrilyn Eiffel on this week's episode of The Best People. You just scan the QR code on your screen right now or download it wherever you get your podcasts. We're gonna take one more break, then we'll be right back. Thank you so much for letting us into your homes tonight. We are grateful.

Speaker 16:
[45:08] Home to the Rachel Maddow Show. Morning Joe, The Briefing with Jen Saki and more voices you know and trust. MS NOW is your source for news, opinion and the world. Learn more at ms.now.