Summary
Former Trump adviser Peter Navarro arrested for refusing to comply with the subpoena from the January 6 committee; he`s the second former Trump aide to be indicted and charged with contempt of Congress. "The New York Times" reporting that on January 5th, the day before the insurrection, then Vice President Pence`s chief of staff, Marc Short, told his lead Secret Service agent that Trump was going to publicly turn against Pence and that it could create a security risk for Pence. Last week, when President Biden wrote an op-ed, announcing his decision to send advanced rocket systems and munitions to Ukraine, he also mentioned the words negotiation and negotiating several times.
Transcript
JEH JOHNSON, FORMER DHS SECRETARY: Congress need to be a lot closer to this tragedy.
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST, "ALL IN": Jeh Johnson, thank you so much for making some time tonight. I really appreciate it.
JOHNSON: Thank you.
HAYES: That does it for "ALL IN" for this week.
MSNBC PRIME starts right now with Mehdi Hasan.
Good evening, Mehdi.
MEHDI HASAN, MSNBC HOST: Good evening, and thank you, Chris.
And thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. Happy Friday.
So the year was 1996. President Bill Clinton was running for reelection. Two years earlier, Republicans have taken over the House of Representatives for the first time in over 40 years. So Democrats were focused on every single how see they could possibly win back. One seat they had their eye on was in southern California.
It was their candidate for that seat, speaking at the 1996 Democratic convention. See if he looks familiar.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETER NAVARRO, THEN-DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: It`s a great honor to be here tonight. And I`m proud to be carrying the Clinton-Gore banner for San Diego`s 49th congressional district.
Make no mistake: there are big differences between we, Democrats, and our opponents. And to gather, with President Clinton, we will protect Medicare and Social Security, and a woman`s right to choose. We will bring hope and pride and immunity and opportunity and responsibility to our future.
Thank you very much. Good luck.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HASAN: He was proud to be carrying the Clinton gold banner. In fact, First Lady Hillary Clinton personally came to San Diego to campaign for him. Still not recognizing him?
Well, he was younger than. We all could miss how times changed. He did not win that 1986 congressional race. In fact, he didn`t win any of the five races he ran in the 1990s, for various San Diego political offices, all of them as a liberal.
That gentleman`s name was Peter Navarro, the very same Peter Navarro who 20 years later would become a top official in Donald Trump`s White House, the very same Peter Navarro who was arrested today in contempt of Congress charges, the very same Peter Navarro who`s risking being sent to prison in order to protect one Donald J. Trump.
It`s a wild ride, right? How does this happen? This is a guy who once wrote and I quote, I don`t know why so many people in America hate Hillary Clinton. I found her to be one of the most gracious, intelligent perceptive, and yes, classy woman I`ve ever met.
How did he end up in Donald Trump`s White House? Well, like so many unfortunate episodes, it starts with Jared Kushner. You see, Peter Navarro`s day job was an economist. And after his many failed Democratic campaigns, he made something of a name for himself as an increasingly hysterical, unhinged even, China hawk. He published titles like "Death by China: Confronting the Dragon", and "The Coming China Wars".
And during the 2016 campaign, when Trump wanted to look tough on China, he asked his son-in-law to find him an economist. Jared Kushner literally went on Amazon, yeah, he went on Amazon, saw a book titled, "Death by China", and thought, it sounds good to me. Jared then called Navarro, and, hey, presto, Peter Navarro became Trump`s first and at that point, only economic adviser.
A new spotlight on Navarro`s scholarly work, shall we call it, was not entirely positive. The Chronicle of Higher Education went through his books and discovered that Peter Navarro had invented an imaginary friend. He repeatedly quoted a source named Ron Vara, who he described as a military veteran, and Harvard-trained economist who made seven figures in the stock market by investing in companies that do well during international crises.
Ron Vara told little scrubs of wisdom like, you`d have to be nuts to eat Chinese food. And only the Chinese can turn a leather sofa into an acid bath, a baby crib into a lethal weapon, and a cell phone battery into heart-piercing shrapnel.
But Ron Vara, wisest of the wise men, did not exist. He`s in fact just an anagram of Navarro`s name. Navarro -- Ron Vara, OK then.
Once in the Trump administration, Navarro launched a trade war with China, which devastated American farmers, and he helped led Trump`s botched coronavirus response. But after the 2020 election, he found a new project. He and former Trump advisor Steve Bannon began working on a plan to overturn the election results, and keep Donald Trump in office.
And this is not hypothesis or speculation or conjecture. This is not like something we`ve had to piece together from leaked documents and secret emails. We know Peter Navarro did this, because he has repeatedly told us all about it himself.
First, he published a book about it, describing the plan to force a delay in the certification of Joe Biden`s win, and to pressure Republican legislators in swing states to undo Biden`s victory.
[21:05:00]
And then, he repeatedly went on, calling Ari Melber`s show, to describe and even brag about the plan in detail, a plan he called, the Green Bay sweep.
Naturally, the January 6 investigation in Congress was very interested in what you have to say, so they subpoenaed Navarro for testimony. When he defied the subpoena, the House voted to refer him to the Justice Department for prosecution, for contempt of Congress.
And that was where things stood last night when Peter Navarro went back on Ari`s show again.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ARI MELBER, MSNBC HOST: So, you`re risking going potentially to jail, not to talk to them, but you are out here, talking in public. You do realize these investigators can hear you when you talk on TV.
NAVARRO: This committee, this kangaroo committee has clearly violated the separation of powers. They`re not supposed to act as judge, jury and executioner. They`re only supposed to pursue a legislative function.
MELBER: But you talk about the Green Bay sweep --
(CROSSTALK)
MELBER: When you talk about the Green Bay sweep, why can`t you talk to them about it, if you talk about it in public?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HASAN: You do realize they can hear you, right? From what we now know is that Peter Navarro appeared on Ari`s show last night, he had already been indicted by the Justice Department, just hours earlier on contempt of Congress charges, because of all the talking that Peter Navarro is happy to do about his efforts to overturn the election, he has refused to talk to the January 6th investigation in Congress. And a subpoena from Congress is not a suggestion, if you defy it, you are breaking the law.
Peter Navarro was arrested this morning in a Washington airport, as he was boarding a plane for Nashville. Out of his initial hearing today, he was outraged that federal agents intercepted him at the airport, and put him in handcuffs, instead of just calling him and inviting him down to the courthouse for a friendly chat. How dare they treat him like this, he said.
Well, as the Trump White House officials, quote, I literally helped save millions of peoples` lives, created hundreds of thousands of jobs. Yeah, that`s a direct quote. He really said that.
He also spent a lot of time trying to convince the judge that the entire January six investigation is unconstitutional. While the judge practically begged Navarro for his own safety to keep quiet, and get himself a lawyer. Navarro, the economist, is interested in representing himself.
In a lawsuit that Navarro has filed on his own against the investigation, he writes, quote, while I`m not a lawyer, I`m not without legal expertise. He was a line for the ages.
Shockingly, the judges have already told him his lawsuit makes no sense, and he needs to refile it. Navarro`s outrage over his treatment, of course, shared by many Republicans. I, particularly, appreciated Congressman Louis Gohmert`s take on the situation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. LOUIS GOHMERT (R-TX): We have a two-tier justice system that. If you are a Republican, you can`t even lie to Congress or lying to an FBI agent, or if they`re coming after you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HASAN: I remember the days when a good old-fashioned, red blooded American could lie to Congress or the FBI with impunity. What has become of this country?
To be clear, Peter Navarro is not charged with lying to Congress. He`s charged with defied a congressional subpoena. Though I can understand why Louis Gohmert would be confused, given how many other Trump officials have been charged with lying to Congress and to the FBI.
But look, whether Peter Navarro is going to be convicted on these contempt charges, whether he`s potentially going to face a year or two in prison for refusing to talk to January 6th investigators, that`s obviously of great importance to Mr. Navarro.
But for the rest of us, the question is, whether the Justice Department indict a Trump White House official, tells us any broader about the departments investigation into January 6th. Is this just a DOJ finally getting around to charging Peter Navarro for his contempt, or is this one moving piece in a much bigger picture?
Who better to ask than Barbara McQuade, former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, and now, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School. She`s also an MSNBC legal analyst.
Barb, thanks again for joining us tonight.
I want to get your reaction first, so the drama from today. Peter Navarro says the Justice Department as always being aggressive and punitive by arresting him at the airport, instead of allowing him to turn himself in. But prosecutors apparently asked for the indictment to be sealed at first because they feared he was at flight risk, if you knew they were coming.
What do you make of how this went down today?
BARBARA MCQUADE, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: Well, he`s already shown himself to be someone who does not comply with subpoenas and court orders. So the idea that if they were to ask him politely to please turn himself and, you would it would be reasonable to think that he might not comply, when you ask him to do that. So, most people don`t get the courtesy of an invitation to come in on their own. And most people get arrested.
And because he didn`t have a lawyer, it made it also more difficult to negotiate a self surrender. So, I think it was treated the way most criminals are treated when they`re charged with a crime, alleged criminals, people who are charged with crimes.
[21:10:04]
And as you point out, the Justice Department, U.S. Attorney`s Office, filed a motion with you with the judge, specifically explaining why they believed that he was either a risk of flight or risk to tamper with evidence for witnesses. And for that reason, they ask for the order to be sealed, so they can conduct arrest and bring him to court and unseal it right after that.
HASAN: I love how all these Republicans have suddenly become criminal justice and prison reformers, once all the strong people start getting arrested and put in jail.
Early this week, Barb, the Justice Department served Navarro with a grand jury subpoena, and their speculation about whether is related to the contempt case against him, or whether Navarro is being subpoenaed as a witness and a broader investigation into Trump himself.
Does this indictment today shed any light on that question?
MCQUADE: I don`t know if it does. But I do think the two are related. You note that he also complained about the service of that subpoena because the FBI, not very loudly, when they came to serve him with that subpoena --
MEHDI: How dare they!
MCQUADE: But I did notice that they requested that he come to the grand jury, and testify about the same matters that he was asked to testify about Congress, and to bring documents with him. So it`s unclear whether they were simply investigating the contempt, or if they were investigating the underlying conduct, that is the subject of his testimony in Congress. Not clear there.
But what is clear is that he defied that subpoena. He attached it to his own lawsuit that he filed earlier this week. And out of himself as a recipient of a grand jury subpoena. And the date that he was supposed to appear to testify or bring documents to the grand jury was yesterday at 9:00 a.m. Later that day, he was indicted.
So I think that at some point, the Justice Department has been trying to work with him, get him to cooperate, see if he`s willing to come in, and finally concluded it`s not happening. It`s time to treat him as a defendant, and not a witness.
HASAN: Barbara, last questions. "The New York Times" is reporting tonight that even as Navarro has been charged, the Justice Department has decided not to indict Trump`s White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows. And the White House aide Dan Scavino who`s also held in contempt of Congress, and had that case referred to the Justice Department.
"The Times" suggest this might be because Meadows and Scavino negotiated with the January six investigation, turned over some documents. Is there a meaningful difference? And you understand why a lot of people watching at home will say, oh my word, what is goal and the Justice Department doing?
MCQUADE: Yeah. You know, I don`t know the facts yet about this. But based on what I read in their statement, it sounds like they just assess the equities of the two cases to be very different, and the facts and circumstances of the two cases to be very different. Meadows was the chief of staff. Scavino`s deputy chief of staff. They are the president`s closest advisers. So a claim of executive privilege is a little stronger there.
Now, even if that executive privilege claim ultimately fails, as the Supreme Court itself, with regard to documents from the National Archives, what you have to prove in one of these cases of contempt is willful violation. That is not only did they fail to apply, but they knew that they were doing was illegal.
And I suppose that argument could be given them the great benefit of the doubt that because they thought they were negotiating in good faith, because they did turn over many things, because they didn`t believe they had at least executive privilege, it would be difficult to prove to a unanimous jury beyond reasonable doubt that they will fully defy the subpoena.
So I agree that there`s, that`s a little bit unsatisfying. But I don`t know if or done hearing the story of Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino yet. I think there`s still a possibility that they could be charged in a larger conspiracy to obstruct the election certification.
HASAN: Let us see what happens. Barbara McQuade, we`ll have to leave it there, former U.S. attorney for the eastern district of Michigan, and MSNBC legal analyst. Thank you for your time tonight.
MCQUADE: Thanks, Mehdi.
HASAN: Last week, we learned that the House committee investigating January six has had heard testimony that president Trump reacted positively to crowds on January six, chanting, hang Mike Pence!
According to an account provided to the committee, President Trump said something to the effect of, maybe Mr. Pence should be hanged.
Now, today, "The New York Times" is out with new reporting that on the day before the Capitol attack, Vice President Pence`s own chief of staff was so worried about the threat to Pence`s safety, they warned the Secret Service.
According to "The Times", Pence`s chief of staff called the vice president`s lead Secret Service agent into his office, and gave him the message, that the president was going to turn publicly against the vice president, and there could be a security risk to Mr. Pence because of it. It was the only time that top aide ever flagged a concern to the Secret Service, and that concern was the threat coming from the president of the United States.
All right, we have a lot of other news to get to tonight. This is the 100th day of the war in Ukraine, given all that is at stake. Where does this and? Where does this conflict get resolved?
We`ll get to very unique, very important perspectives, next. Don`t go away.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:19:35]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine. It is their territory. I`m not going to tell them what they should and shouldn`t do. By it appears to me that, at some point along the line, there is going to have to be a negotiated settlement here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HASAN: That was President Biden earlier today, as the war in Ukraine enters its 100th day with no end in sight. The U.S. seems to be placing new emphasis on the need for a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia.
[21:20:02]
And I am not coming to that conclusion based on the single comment from the president today. Last week, when President Biden wrote an op-ed, announcing his decision to send advanced rocket systems and munitions to Ukraine, he also mentioned the words negotiation and negotiating several times.
At one point, even said, quote: We have moved quickly to send Ukraine a significant amount of weaponry and ammunition so it can fight on the battlefield and be in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table.
Then, today CNN`s reporting this, quote, U.S. officials have in recent weeks been meeting regularly with European and British counterparts to discuss potential frameworks for a cease-fire and for ending the war through a negotiated settlement.
But at this point, neither the Ukrainians, nor the Russians -- the Russians who started this war, with their legal invasion -- appear to be backing down. So, who will blink first? How long can this go on? And how much should we, the United States, be investing in this war going forward?
Joining us now to discuss this are retired four star air force general and former NATO supreme allied commander, Philip Breedlove, and Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna from the great state of California and a member of the House Armed Services Committee.
Gentlemen, thank you both for being here tonight. We appreciate it.
Congressman Khanna, let me start with you. Western governments are proposing or at least hinting at the need for a negotiated cease-fire between Ukraine and Russia. At this moment in time, is that the right call?
REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): Well, I think the president has handled the situation absolutely correctly. Look, we have provided $40 billion of aid to Ukraine. That`s about ten times their original defense budget.
They have brilliantly fought to resist Russia. It is now off the table, that Putin is going to be able to take the country or take Kyiv. And the president is right that, ultimately, we need a negotiated settlement. But the negotiation cannot just be Zelenskyy. It also has to be Putin.
And we have to ask, what is Putin willing to do to negotiate the cease- fire?
HASAN: General Breedlove, President Biden is hinting at negotiations and that sounds kind of different to what Secretary of Defense Austin said back in April, that the goal was to weaken Russia`s military, to prevent them from doing the kinds of things it has done in Ukraine. Is that no longer the goal? Has something changed? Where are we in this war, in your view?
GEN. PHILIP BREEDLOVE, FORMER NATO SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER, EUROPE: Well, I cannot speak for the Department of Defense on what they see as the goals, nor for the president. But what we are seeing is that Russia continues to press and take land in Ukraine, and any settlement, between Ukraine and Russia, should be in Mr. Zelenskyy`s terms. He is the aggrieved nation. Their sovereignty has been violated in a horrible, criminal, inhumane way.
And what we cannot to do in the long run is once again reward bad behavior by Mr. Putin. We will just see more of it in the future if we do.
HASAN: Just to be clear, how do you define rewarding bad behavior? If there is a deal that allows Putin to keep Crimea indefinitely -- which, let`s be honest, everyone knows he is going to do -- but also allows him to, I don`t know, pretend that some of these, quote unquote, republics in the east are now autonomous. Is that something that is not acceptable? Is it up to Americans or Europeans to say what is or is not acceptable? I am just intrigued to know. Are there red lines?
BREEDLOVE: That`s up to President Zelenskyy. He needs to determine what is acceptable in his country, in his sovereign country. And that is what we should be supporting, and that`s what President Zelenskyy chooses to go for.
HASAN: Just to be clear, before I go back to the congressman, if the Ukrainians did a deal that allowed Russian to keep a bunch of Ukrainian land, you would be all right with that? Even though you think we should not reward Vladimir Putin?
BREEDLOVE: I personally would support what President Zelenskyy would want to do. But that would not be my recommendation to him. In `08, our response to Georgia was inadequate to task and in 2014, our response to Russia in Ukraine was inadequate to task. In all these cases, we rewarded bad behavior by allowing Putin to hang on to land.
If we reward that behavior here again, it`s like a two-year-old child. We will see more bad behavior in future.
HASAN: Congressman, what is your reaction to General Breedlove`s argument? Would we be rewarding him for a bad behavior with a peace deal that allows him to keep Ukrainian land? That would be in reward for a child?
KHANNA: Well, Mehdi, look, there is no doubt that Putin is to blame. He`s had a brutal invasion that is killing Ukrainians. The question is, how do we bring this to an end? The consequences that more Ukrainians are going to die, more innocent people are going to die. So, how do we have Ukrainian sovereignty protected and not more death? And not a war that last years?
I mean, Putin was brutal in Syria. He just went to year after year after year.
[21:25:02]
And that`s why I believe that President Biden is being responsible, as is President Macron, as is Italy, as is Germany, by saying, yes, we are going to stand fully, 100 percent with Ukraine. But we are also going to do everything we can to encourage negotiations and encourage Zelenskyy and Putin to talk, to explore a potential cease-fire on the terms that Zelenskyy agrees to. And ask Putin what he is trying to do -- I don`t understand how taking Mariupol is in Russia`s strategic interest. So, Putin also has to be willing to come to the table.
HASAN: General Breedlove, can I ask you about the situation on the ground 100 days into the war? Because there have been ups and downs. At the beginning of the war, some thought it would be over in four or five days, Russia would have the whole country.
Then, we were cheering the Ukrainians for their resistance, defending the country. Now we are seeing Russia again making advances in the east. President Zelenskyy saying that Ukrainians are losing 100 soldiers a day. I do not see how that is sustainable.
What is your overview of where we are right now in terms of the fighting on the ground?
BREEDLOVE: Well, in a few short words, Russia has dealt a strategic defeat in Kyiv. Then Russia was dealt another strategic defeat circa Kharkiv.
But now, we see Russia going back to its serious style, grinding demolished cities, and tearing up the civilian population ability to occupy these towns. They are describing their way to the east. Frankly, they are making some progress.
We have seen, in the last several days, a very noticeable slowdown in what Russia is doing in their attack. I think they are beginning to have some of the same supply problems that we have seen in Ukraine have in the past.
HASAN: Congressman, last word to you -- I have to ask, this is a midterm year and you are a member of Congress. How much of the current reckoning on Ukraine in Washington, D.C. is influenced by elections coming up? And by American public having a tune out of the war? And of course, the gas prices debate, which the Biden administration has tried to pin on the war in Ukraine and Vladimir Putin?
KHANNA: Look, I have been critical at times of the administration. But here I give President Biden credit. This is a moral issue. He`s rallying the Western world. I don`t think he is looking at politics and deciding with the policy here should be.
I do think he is looking at human lives. And I do think that he is looking at the fact that he does not want thousands of people in Ukraine to die. He does not want wheat shortages that don`t just hurt Americans, hurt the world. And that`s why I think he is (INAUDIBLE) negotiations and they got for Ukraine.
HASAN: Retired General Breedlove, Congressman Khanna, I appreciate you joining me tonight. A fascinating, important discussion, appreciate both of your insights.
The Biden administration has pulled off a major economic victory at home. But most Americans don`t seem to realize or recognize that. I will talk to a senior White House official that what we learned today and the administration plan to try to explain their economic success story to the voters. That`s next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:32:43]
HASAN: Here is a riddle for you. What does everyone in America who is older than age to have in common? For starters, we all have object permanence. Peek-a-boo is not quite as thrilling as it once was.
Also, we`ve all lived through one of the greatest unemployment crises in the history of this country. It seems like a distant memory now, but just two years ago, the COVID crisis was closing absolute havoc in the U.S. jobs market. The unemployment rate had jumped from 3.5 percent before the pandemic, to nearly 15 percent by April of 2020, higher than at any point during the great recession.
And the road to recovery was not expected to be a quick one. In February of last year to three weeks after President Biden took office, the Congressional Budget Office released a report, saying the number of employed people who had not report to pre-pandemic levels until 2024.
So what happened? Well, a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress passed a $1.9 trillion relief package, and then, oversaw and historic boom in job growth. In 2021, the economy added more jobs than any other year in U.S. history, yeah, in history. The economy was so up that by 2022, the Biden administration, the Federal Reserve started looking for ways to try and slow things down, as a way to tamp down on inflation, which is easy, the really slowing out a hot economy, was there was a driving us back into recession. That`s why we`re trying to tap the brakes on a car going 120 miles per hour, without spinning out into a ditch.
But even here, the Biden administration appears to be successful. Today, we`ve got the latest U.S. jobs report for the month of May. It shows job growth continuing to surpass expectations, while also slowing down slightly from previous months. The unemployment rate remains steady at 3.6 percent right around where it was before the pandemic, much earlier than people thought it would get there. The American jobs recovery of the past 18 months is not short of an incredible success.
By almost every metric the U.S. is currently doing better than any other which nation on Earth. Do we have an inflation problem? He has, but so to other countries, often worse than our own.
And yet, poll after poll shows that Americans continue to have a truly dismal view of the U.S. economy. Gallup finds an economic confidence and the U.S. is at its lowest point in over a decade.
[21:35:02]
What`s the Biden administration plan to do about that?
Joining us now is Jared Bernstein, a member of President Biden`s Council of Economic Advisers.
Jared, thanks for coming on the show tonight.
You had another very good great even jobs report today. You had the president touting on air and in print how good your economic record is compared to previous administrations, compared to other countries right now. And yet, the American public keeps telling pollsters, they think the economy is oh full. It`s worse than 2020.
It`s heading their own directions, they say. They say the trust Republicans more on the economy than they trust to. Why do you think that is?
JARED BERNSTEIN, COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS: Well, the president has addressed this head on in an op-ed that he wrote at the beginning of this week when he talked about how this issue of elevated prices and inflation in such a challenging and pervasive issue for families across the nation. He grew up in a family where prices at the pump and at the grocery where kitchen table issues. So he knows intimately walk that kitchen table discussion is all about.
The thing that we`ve been trying to emphasize, and I thought you did a great job in your introduction here, is that this inflation is taking place against the backdrop of this strongest label market by many metrics on record. The unemployment rate fell faster in 2021 than in any year on record.
You talk about the job gains, a little bit of nuance there. Manufacturing employment, which was by the way, really in trouble, in the previous administration, is growing at the fastest rate in 30 years. Go ahead, I could keep going --
HASAN: Jared -- I know you could keep going. I`m not going to push back against any real statistics, because they`re true. So when I ask you about the messaging, because that`s what this week was about. This week was about the White House pivoting, doubling down, whatever fees you want to use, on the economy.
The media has too much going on -- the media coverage of the economy has not been great. But the fact that the economy is broadly doing very well, and yet the American public disagrees with that view is surely also the result of a major messaging failure -- hold on, let me finish the question. It`s surely that result of a major messaging failure by the White House or the Democrats and Congress.
BERNSTEIN: Yeah, I think that probably could -- way too much emphasis on messaging, versus what people see when they drive down to work up twice a block, when they look up and see the price of gasoline.
But at the same time, what I want to correct is that, if you get under the hood of some of these polls you are talking about, you actually find some different responses. And we get back to the inflation point because it`s a seminal.
People have recently told surveyors from the Federal Reserve, that they judge their financial conditions as the most comfortable they`ve been in the history of that survey, that started in 2013. So people looking at their balance sheets, arguing that there are financially much more stable. And the figure prince of the American rescue plan, of President Biden`s effort, are all over. You ask people about the job market, they`ll say the same thing.
Now, on inflation, Mehdi, here is where the message that we need to get through to people. I think the president has been hammering on this, is that we are doing everything we can to help. As you see, with my age, I worked for many different White Houses. I`ve never been part of the White House who`s trying to do more to help ease inflation --
HASAN: Jared, I`m jumping in. I have to ask you about inflation. It is a huge problem.
Members of your administration now belatedly admitted it. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen recently apologized for previously saying that inflation in the U.S. is transitory or temporary. And so, I want to play something that you said on this network last October, and have your reaction on the other side. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BERNSTEIN: The consensus among economists is in fact that these instructions are transitory, so every forecast for inflation to start coming down in coming quarters.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HASAN: Do you want to join with Janet Yellen and apologize for getting that analysis wrong?
BERNSTEIN: No, when I said then was very much the case. And in fact, at the time of the Federal Reserve, of virtually every economic forecast, the Congressional Budget Office, they were all saying what I said there.
Look, I think the key question right now is what are we doing to help this crisis at the pump? I`m not going to relitigate who was right and what was wrong a year ago, I want to talk about what we`re doing now --
HASAN: I appreciate that, but Janet Yellen is the one who relitigated. It was your treasury secretary offered an apology.
BERNSTEIN: The president has articulated a three-pronged approach.
The first, by the way, Janet Yellen knows a lot about this, is letting the Federal Reserve be the Fed, without trying to interfere with their independent actions.
[21:40:00]
They are the first and foremost primary institution in the fight against inflation.
The second involves working with Congress, okay? And that means lowering the prices of drugs, health care, childcare --
(CROSSTALK)
HASAN: Were out of time. I`m going to quickly ask for the third. You said three, give us the third and we got to wrap.
BERNSTEIN: Yes, lowering the budget deficit, okay? The largest deficit reduction on record, 1.7 trillion, this fiscal year, that caused a fiscal drag which helps to slow, to ease inflationary pressures. And we did even get a chance to talk about the efforts the president is engaged in at the pump, including the largest release of oil from the Strategic Reserves --
(CROSSTALK)
HASAN: Well, you managed to just say it, and you`ve got the last word on that. Jared, we have to --
BERNSTEIN: The key message here, Mehdi, is not what`s going on a year ago. It`s what`s going on today in the fight to ease inflationary pressures on behalf of Americans.
HASAN: For the man who doesn`t want to talk about messaging, you`re pretty good at it.
Jared Bernstein, member of President Biden`s Council of Economic Advisers, thank you for your time tonight.
BERNSTEIN: Thank you, Mehdi.
HASAN: Up next, up next, whoo, up next, a major development today in the investigation into the Uvalde mass shooting. That story is next. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:45:43]
HASAN: In Uvalde, Texas, and a big development into this indication into the much police response in the mass shooting there last week. Uvalde School District Police Chief Pete Arredondo who has been criticized for a reportedly ordering police to not to enter the classroom or children were still alive with a shooter, and calling 911 for help, was reportedly not even carrying a police radio, as the massacre unfolded. That is according to State Senator Roland Gutierrez, NBC News has not independently verified this claim.
Meanwhile, three more victims of this deadly shooting were buried today. Cousins Jailah Silguero and Jayce Luevanos and their classmate Jacklyn Cazares. As their families and friends say their goodbyes, a legal fight may be growing. The father of a student killed in the shooting, in the Robb Elementary School, have filed paperwork, seeking details from Daniel Defense, the manufacturer of the assault style rifle that the gunman used.
Next week, in Washington, D.C., the House Oversight Committee will hear from the parents of victims of the Uvalde and Buffalo shootings, and a fourth grade survivors from Uvalde. That follows the House Judiciary Committee`s vote yesterday to advance a package of gun reform measures. Unsurprisingly, the vote broke down 25 to 19, with all committee Republicans voting against it.
And then, there is the Senate. Chris Murphy, the Connecticut Democratic senator tasked with finding a bipartisan solution on gun reform gave a clear-eyed update on how it`s going in an interview with "The Washington Post" today. Quote: A universal background checks bill still doesn`t have 60 votes in the Senate. I wish that weren`t true, but it is. So trying to find some common ground on an expansion of background checks or provisions to cut down on the use of our background check system.
Senator Murphy also seemed pessimistic about the possibility of federal red flag laws, think quote, I think this is much better often at the state level.
And as lawmakers try to find a compromise, people are calling attention to gun violence itself. Buffalo`s mayor marked a National Gun Violence Awareness Day with a rally on the steps of city hall, encouraging people to wear orange in solidarity with those impacted by gun violence. It`s part of an anti-violence movement, stopped by the friends and families of Hadiya Pendleton a Chicago high school student who marched in President Obama`s second inaugural parade, and was shot and killed a week later. They chose to color orange, because it`s the color that warned hunters not to shoot.
Joining us now is Manuel Oliver. His son Joaquin was one of the 17 victims tragically killed in the Parkland school shooting in 2019. He`s the cofounder of Change the Ref, a gun safety organization. He`s also taking part in the wearing orange campaign.
Mr. Oliver, thank you so much for taking the time to be here today.
I do want to start by just asking you of your reaction to the latest news from Congress. You have House Republicans on the judiciary, all of them voting against the package of gun control bills, after another school massacre. What is your message, as a parent of a child killed in a school shooting, to those Republicans in Congress?
MANUEL OLIVER, LOST SON JOAQUIN IN PARKLAND, FLORIDA: Well, this is exactly the right moment and the right time to wake up as a nation, to be disruptive, to be very offended, and to understand that we should not rely on ten votes from Republicans, and the whole nation should not be afraid because these guys are just against a better future for our kids. I think it`s something that we have to reject immediately, and we need to demand for answers right now.
HASAN: You mentioned, this is the moment. And I do have to ask the question, do you believe you`ve been campaigning on this for several years, since the tragedy in your own family -- do you believe the American public is finally in a different space, that the American political system is finally going to respond to American public opinion?
OLIVER: I think that it`s time for us to create that, to create that difference. We need to move away from our comfort zone, that allows us to stay home, and watch TV, and just see how things move by themselves. That is not going to solve the problem.
I`ve been fighting for this for the last five years. But guess what? On the one that lost the son.
[21:50:02]
A lot of viewers right now, they`ve had their happy family, and they still think that they can wait for an answer from our politicians. Waiting until November cannot be an answer. That will cost us at least 25,000 more victims.
So, we should think about people over guns. And we should start now, at least after this interview.
HASAN: Manuel, just hearing you speak, we`re so sorry for your loss, and what you had to go through, and the campaign that you`ve had to mount after the killing of your son, something you shouldn`t have had mounted.
I have to ask, last night, we discussed Joe Biden`s speech on the show. We talked about how he put the owners on Congress, because that`s where the bills have to pass. But activists say you could pull executive orders. Which would you like to see the president saying or doing in the coming days?
OLIVER: We suggested the president to open an office inside the White House with a keen, team that is just dedicated to prevent gun violence, to keep the conversation out there, every single day, 24/7.
You know, there`s a lot of organizations doing that. And we`re not in the White House. Our voices are not as loud as the voices of the leaders of the nation, that but lets everybody know that we are the most powerful country in the world.
Well, apparently, we are not. We cannot solve these problems. But ten people, more than 300 million Americans, we lay their lives in ten people that decided to vote against a safer nation.
That is unacceptable, again. And the president should open this office right now. If there`s no voting that he needs for that, it`s a needed reaction. He should be working today with these members of Congress, and Senate, in the same roundtable.
HASAN: Yeah, I do hope he is listening. Manuel Oliver, cofounder of Change the Ref. We have to leave it there. Thanks for joining us tonight. And again, we`re so sorry for your loss.
OLIVER: Thank you very much. It`s a pleasure being here.
HASAN: And while we are on the subject of policy and the gridlock in the Senate, some updates on one of the big Senate races that many determined party control of the chamber is full. Pennsylvania primary elections, two and a half weeks ago, but the Republican race there has been too close to coal ever since.
Until tonight, we got for just a couple of hours ago, that Trump`s preferred candidate, TV doctor, Mehmet Oz, who has done multiple U-turns in order to please the Donald, he will now be the Republican nominee, come November. His rival, David McCormick, conceded that race today.
On the Democratic side, Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman has cast his emergency absentee ballot from the hospital on election day, after having a stroke, and was released a few days after winning his primary race. Today, Fetterman released a statement from his cardiologist saying, that he has cardiomyopathy, which basically means his heart has trouble pumping blood efficiently, which explains why Fetterman now has a pacemaker.
Btu also the quote, the statement says, quote, if he doesn`t have told him, he should be able to campaign and serve in the U.S. Senate without a problem. It`s Fetterman versus Oz, watch this race. Watch Pennsylvania, and keep watching the show.
We`ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:57:55]
HASAN: In late July, 1985, Hollywood star Rock Hudson went public with his AIDS diagnosis. The revelation on one of Hollywood`s most masculine stars was HIV positive. And other reporting that he was gay filled newspapers for weeks.
For a lot of the country, it was when the AIDS crisis got a face, as a Hollywood friend of actor-turned-president, Ronald Reagan, and his wife Nancy, there was also hope that Hudson revealing his diagnosis might help get government assistance for the epidemic. We now know, thanks to reporting from "BuzzFeed News", the day before Hudson went public with his diagnosis, he made a private, desperate plea to the Reagan White House, via Telegram, asking him to get access to experimental medical treatment. That play ended up in front of Nancy Reagan. She turned him down. He died nine weeks later.
President Reagan wouldn`t even mention the word AIDS publicly until September of 1985. And it wasn`t until two years later in 1987 that we can actually give a speech about the epidemic. But at that point, he had already killed more than 40,000 Americans.
So, why is current First Lady Jill Biden, on Monday, in the first week of Pride Month, why is Joe Biden unveiling a new U.S. postal service stamp, honoring Nancy Reagan? And to add insult to insult, why is she going to be joined in doing that by disgraced Postmaster General, Louis DeJoy.
We`ve all been wondering why DeJoy, one of Trump`s worst appointees still in that important position, why Biden hasn`t find a way to fire him yet. And now, we have to wonder why on earth is the Biden White House giving him a platform and a podium like this one?
It`s political malpractice. Neither Nancy Reagan nor Louis DeJoy should be getting the White House literal or figurative stamps of approval, at a time like this. Hey, happy Pride Month, I guess.
That does it for us tonight. Rachel will be back here on Monday. You can catch me Sunday night, 8:00 p.m. right here on MSNBC, and streaming on Peacock during the week.
Also, this weekend, MSNBC presents the first episodes of a new series about the epic doubtful of a high powered attorney, who represented that guys from Charles Manson to Saddam Hussein. It`s called "Devils Advocate", and it airs 10:00 p.m. on Sunday, and on Peacock.
But right now, it`s time for "THE LAST WORD" with Ali Velshi in for Lawrence.
Good evening, Ali.