9/9/24: Kamala Trump First Debate, Kamala Losing In NYT Poll, Kamala Celebrates Cheney Endorsement, Israel Commercial Interrupts Ben Shapiro Tim Pool Russia Explanation, Ro Khanna Tells Kamala To Do Podcasts
01:44:01 Share

Kroger brand products exclusively at Fry's have the great taste you'll celebrate. That's why over 40 million people choose Kroger brand products, making them a true crowd pleaser. And with quality guaranteed, you'll love your choice or get your money back. Score Kroger brand products with savings you can cheer for and great taste you can't resist. Fry's, fresh for everyone.

Save on Cox Internet when you add Cox Mobile and get fiber-powered internet at home and unbeatable 5G reliability on the go. So whether you're playing a game at home Yes! Cool! or attending one live Cool! you can do more without spending more. Learn how to save at cox.com slash internet. Cox Internet is connected to the premises via coaxial cable. Cox Mobile runs on the network with unbeatable 5G reliability as measured by UCLA LLC in the U.S. to H2023. Results may vary, not an endorsement. Other restrictions apply.

Get ready for a full month of fiesta y cultura because it's time for Viva Tucson. Let's celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month como nunca antes in true Tucson style. From September 15th to October 15th, join us for comida, musica y eventos that you won't find anywhere else. Our rich history and traditions make the old pueblo the perfect place para celebrar y aprender.

Mark your calendars so you don't miss out on this celebración. Visita visittucson.org slash viva.

Hey guys, Ready or Not 2024 is here and we here at Breaking Points are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election. We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio, add staff, give you guys the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that, let's get to the show.

Good morning, everybody. Happy Monday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal? Indeed we do. Tomorrow is the big debate. Donald Trump versus Kamala Harris. Much anticipated. I'm excited about it. We're going to be here. I'll give you the whole schedule, rundown, whatever. But in the show today, we are going to be previewing that debate, their strategy, what we know about their prep, go through some of the best and worst moments from their debates and interviews of the past.

So we can do our best to predict how this might all go down. We've also got a new New York Times poll out as of yesterday that is causing quite a bit of consternation. A lot of interesting numbers there. So we'll dig into that as well. Some big endorsements coming in for Kamala Harris, Liz Cheney and her father.

Dick Cheney. So war criminals for Harris. Let's go. Tim Pool is telling his side of the story about this whole getting accidentally paid by Russians. So that's kind of interesting as he's speaking. He's also, it was on Bet Shapiro's program, interrupted by an ad for Israel. So a lot to say about that one.

Speaking of Israel, some horrific news coming out of that region. Israel's now murdered an American citizen in the West Bank. Of course, the way that the U.S. Biden administration has responded to that versus the American hostage who was killed, you know, wildly different reactions there. We also have more reporting about how the Hannibal directive was initiated on October 7th and specifically the scope.

of that directive and how many people may have been killed, Israeli citizens killed themselves by the IDF. We're also going to have Ro Khanna in studio, also helping to preview the debate, his sense of where the horse race is and want to get his reaction to the failures of the Biden-Harris administration with regard to Israel. So a lot to get into this morning. Yes, it's exciting. Now, before we get to that, just a little bit of a preview of tomorrow. We will be live

All four of us with the CounterPoints team here at the desk before and after the debate. We also will be continuing what we did in Chicago where we'll be taking questions live from our premium subscribers on Locals during the stream. So if you want to become a premium subscriber, you can become BreakingPoints.com. And that is part of the exclusive AMAs that we offer to our premium subscribers. So make sure that you go ahead and subscribe so you get access to that. Otherwise, you're going to miss out. And it genuinely was one of the most fun parts of our show in Chicago.

So that was really cool. Oh, yeah, for sure. No, this is, I mean, we'll get into it a little bit more in this block, but this debate could be extremely consequential. Yes. This race could not be tighter. What if this ends up being more consequential than the last one? Is that even humanly possible? I don't think that's possible. I'm only going to tease it. I don't know.

I need more steaks here to get me hyped up. Yes, indeed. But with all of that, there you go. BreakingPoints.com, become a premium subscriber, participate in our exclusive AMAs. Okay, let's go ahead with the debate and preview a little bit of what we can possibly expect from tomorrow night. So there's a lot that Kamala Harris wants to recreate. There's a lot that she perhaps wants to avoid. First and foremost for Kamala, arguably her best debate moment of all time was...

funnily enough, against her current president, Joe Biden, who she serves as the vice president to with the classic that little girl was me. It had all the hallmarks of a good Kamala moment. It was highly scripted. It was prepared, but it did land and it certainly took off at the time. Let's take a listen to that. We've also heard and I'm going to now direct this at Vice President Biden. I do not believe you are a racist.

And I agree with you when you commit yourself to the importance of finding common ground. But I also believe, and it's personal, and I was actually very, it was hurtful to hear you talk about the reputations of two United States senators who built their reputations and career on the segregation of race in this country. And it was not only that, but...

you also worked with them to oppose busing. And, you know, there was a little girl in California who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools. And she was bused to school every day. And that little girl was me. So,

So that was by far her best debate moment. And look, you can look back with different colored glasses. At the time, it actually did hit Biden. It was a huge media moment, number one. She sold a ton of merchandise with That Little Girl Was Me. They had it all planned out, T-shirts, mugs.

And she had a temporary polling bump. Now, it obviously all collapsed after the Tulsi Gabbard moment, only a single debate later. But we should remember that she can be effective when she wants to be, which at being highly scripted. This is another where the rules of this debate may benefit her, even though she fought against that, because Trump's mic will be muted while Kamala is speaking, meaning that a scripted moment hits.

hit and or answer may be one that she'll be able to deliver effectively. That's a best case scenario for her this time. That's a good point. That's a good point. Yeah, it's worth recalling, you know, she shot up to her highest numbers that she hit in the primary after that debate. And it actually wasn't just that moment. I remember doing the analysis with you. I was actually down in...

Was that Atlanta, that debate? Feels like it was maybe Atlanta. Anyway. It was a lifetime. It was like four lifetimes ago. Anyway, she was really good that debate. Yeah. You know, the whole debate, she was on it. That was by far her best performance. I remember afterwards saying she won the debate. She was the most effective. And...

Part of the reason why is because she, at that point going into it, she wasn't one of the front runners. She was a media favorite, but she wasn't one of the front runners. And so most of the fire from the other candidates was trained at other campaigns, at Bernie and Biden in particular. So she really sort of escaped a lot of scrutiny. So she was able to control her moments and pick her spots.

That's what made her so effective. And, you know, that did land at the time and she was able to make something of it. You know, there's a little bit of deja vu here because we're right now living through, and we'll talk more about this in the polling section, Kamala being gifted a lot of momentum and kind of squandering it. And that's kind of what happened.

happened out of that little girl was mean moment debate moment? She got a lot of momentum. The media loved her. And I remember watching her the very next morning on maybe the Today Show, one of the morning shows, and it felt like a different person. She was not able to follow up that moment with a compelling narrative about herself, with a sort of energetic response. It

felt like she retreated after that moment back into her shell, which again is sort of what we're living through right now in terms of how she's approaching this campaign. But it is a reminder that when she is prepared, and all indications are that the reporting from the New York Times, she's been holed up in a Pittsburgh hotel. They actually brought in someone to wear a Trumpian suit and do method acting to really try to capture Trump's persona and how he might approach this debate. So

It certainly seems like she's taking this seriously, like she's doing a lot of prep. And when she does that, she can be effective. - She can be, that's right. We are gonna give you the other side of the coin where she had basically a month as a candidate to prepare. And in that classic CNN interview, even with frankly the most layup question of all time, like many people don't know why you've changed your mind. Why have you changed your mind on some things? She still has not given a good response now currently

really the only interview that she's even participated in, and why she has flip-flopped on so many of the positions that she's taken in the past. Here she was in the recent Sienna interview with Dana Bash. - In 2019, you said, quote, "There is no question I'm in favor of banning fracking." Fracking, as you know, is a pretty big issue, particularly in your must-win state of Pennsylvania. - Sure. - Do you still want to ban fracking?

No, and I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020. In 2019, I believe, at a town hall, you said, you were asked, would you commit to implementing a federal ban on fracking on your first day in office? And you said, there's no question I'm in favor of banning fracking. So yes. So it changed in that campaign? In 2020, I made very clear where I stand. We are in 2024, and I've not changed that position, nor will I going forward. I kept my word, and I will keep my word.

What made you change that position at the time? Well, let's be clear. My values have not changed. I believe it is very important that we take seriously what we must do to guard against what is a clear crisis in terms of the climate. Was there some policy or scientific data that you saw that you said, oh, okay, I get it now? What I have seen is that we can

We can grow and we can increase a thriving clean energy economy without banning fracking.

It's like my values have not changed. And I think we might hear, well, it depends on Trump. It really depends on the tactic he is going to take. And we're going to talk a lot about this on the polling. Part of the problem on the flip-flopping for Kamala is I think it has sunk in on two levels. One is people either believe, as we saw in our word clouds, that she is incompetent. Or worse, they just have no idea what she believes. And if you are planting the seed—

with Trump if he can just bring up several instances of changing their mind on top of if the moderators do a decent enough job of bringing up some past positions. America, which will really pay attention very closely to Kamala for the first time tomorrow night, it's a high stakes moment where she needs to have a way better answer. And quote, just repeating my values have not changed on a loop. It's not going to satisfy the American public at this time. So

So I read that interview question a little bit different from you. I don't I think her answer is about as good. Like, what are you going to say? Oh, you mean that's what I get? Yeah. But if that's true, that's not good. It's like, yeah, you have she's got a reality issue. What the honest answer is, well, that I was running in a Democratic primary and I thought that was the best thing for me to say was that. And now I'm in a different position. And I mean, you can't say that. Right. That so you can't be honest.

So what's the best thing you can say? When I was covering her, this interview with Ryan, he was like, yeah, her values haven't changed. She wanted to be president then and she wants to be president now. You can't exactly say that. So. So, yeah, this is this is a problem for her. Now, on the other hand, obviously, Trump changes position like 85 times on abortion in the past two weeks. So it's not like he's been consistent, but.

For some reason, I think because of his style, because he says all these wild things that are like, you know, weird and crazy and unpopular or whatever, the wishy-washy flip-flop brand just doesn't stick to him in quite the same way. And this is a legitimate hit on Kama. Like, she doesn't really believe anything. She never has demonstrated that she has a consistent principle.

And it's the problem that so many Democrats get into where they're so overly cautious and focus tested that rather than illustrating to Americans that they're going to, like, you know, compromise and do things that are broadly popular, instead it demonstrates to Americans that, like, they don't really have a core. They're not going to fight for anything. They're sort of unprincipled and you can't rely on them. And that's the hole that Kamala has fallen into, I think, at this point. So, yeah, it was a—she—

came in, she prepared for that interview. She knew she was going to get that question. That was the answer she planned to give. It's not that great an answer, but what else are you going to say? I think that's actually a really good point. You know, but the problem is I come back to one of the things I loved most about the Trump 2016 campaign is when they were like, why did you donate to Democrats? He's like, I was playing the system. They're like, why didn't you pay my taxes? Like you're an idiot if you're rich and you pay your taxes. There was a level of honesty to that where for some reason that really resonated with a lot of

people. So you think she should just be like, I'm telling people what they want to hear? In a certain sense. I think she should be like, look, it was 2019. We had a lot of beliefs. A lot has changed. The person next to me is a fundamental threat to my country. I'm doing everything possible in order to win. I

I, for real, like in the way that Quentin Tarantino just said sometimes it's just about winning, some sort of cold calculus like that and a genuine honesty from a politician who we know to just be changing her answers based upon the moment, that might be enough to actually satisfy and to quell it because it's not like Trump is not guilty of the exact same thing. - Well, I think, so my suggestion for perhaps what would be closer to the truth

Because that's, I mean, that's what you're getting at is like, you know, an answer that was closer to the truth would probably land better. And there's a way you can frame pandering as a positive, like, listen, I'm responsive to where the American people are on this issue. And so, yes, when I was running then, you know, the American people were in a different place. And I've, as vice president, I've listened to them. I've heard their concerns. I've

been in those rooms where the decisions have made. And as a result of that, and as a result of, you know, the American people shifting on what they would like to see, I have also shifted because I'm responsive to the people, blah, blah, blah. That's a way to like put a positive spin on pandering, I guess, that perhaps would be... I don't think it's a bad thing. You're running against Trump. Trump said he wants to ban Bitcoin. Now he's pro-Bitcoin. Why? Because the Bitcoin people gave him a lot of money. That's basically what he said. He goes, yeah, these people have a hell of a lot of money. It's interesting. You know, that's...

Listen, that's personally one of the things I appreciate about Trump because at the very least when he's telling you the truth, he genuinely is sometimes about his own motivations. Let's get to Donald Trump then in terms of his best and worst debate moments. He has had several variations of debate.

And one of the positives around Trump is we have seen him not lately in a debate, but over the years participated in many GOP presidential debates. Now, what is it? Five presidential debates, three against Hillary Clinton, two against Joe Biden. Arguably some of his best debate performances happened in 2016 against Hillary. The most famous one being you'd be in jail when litigating the email scandal. Let's take a listen.

can fact-check him in real time. Last time at the first debate, we had millions of people fact-checking, so I expect we'll have millions more fact-checking because, you know, it is... It's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country. Because you'd be in jail. Secretary Clinton. We want to remind the audience to please not...

Talk out loud. Please do not applaud. You're just wasting time. Oh, God. We want to do a revival. Anderson Cooper said it. I forgot about that part. Short-circuiting. I mean, look, it was a great moment. It was what it lived on. It was everywhere. Virality. Clearly, she didn't know what to do. And in a certain sense, like, that's really what you want out of a presidential election.

debate. I mean, look, I've said it before, and very famously before the most consequential debate of American history, debates generally don't matter. This one, I am going to change my tune on this just because Kamala is unknown. And the more recent polling from the New York Times was actually very validating in a sense that I always have to put my faith in people. Sometimes you shouldn't. But when you look at that and you're saying the 25% or whatever of undecided voters are like, I don't know what this lady stands for. They are

paying attention. These are people who are civically engaged. They're not rotting their brains all the time. They actually are thinking about things and they're saying, okay, what does this lady believe? That is very important for Donald Trump in that moment. What he revealed about Hillary is he hit her with both the fundamental one of this woman is corrupt.

This woman believes nothing. That was a core feeling to Americans. So what he was going to try and capture in this debate, I think looking at all of this, would be instead of talking about himself, his biggest problem, is look at this woman. She believes absolutely nothing. And putting that on her and possibly shorting her, having her short circuit, that would be his best possible outcome from tomorrow night. Yeah. Trump's best moments are...

Really, they all are from 2016. Absolutely. Which raises the question of whether he still has that in him or not. Because we honestly haven't seen. I mean, look, he has far more debate experience than Kamala does. He did all those 2016 Republican primary debates. He did all those debates with Hillary Clinton. He did the one debate with Joe Biden. He's had more reps with regards to debates.

He's better on his feet. You know, I mean, that moment there with Hillary is not something you can prepare for. You just have to be like reactive in the moment. And he is a showman. He is quick on his feet, or at least he was. And, you know, we focused a lot, understandably, on Biden's decline. And by the way, we're about to show you some clips from Biden, like not that long ago and Biden in that most recent debate that are just shenanigans.

in terms of his level of decline. But we were watching, we'll probably play this in our debate preview tomorrow, we're watching him getting this basic question about childcare last week and it just was a disaster. There wasn't a single coherent sentence

that he was able to articulate. And so, listen, this is an older guy, too, who, you know, doesn't exactly have a healthy lifestyle. And it's worth asking, too, whether he still has that level of 2016 performance in him as well. So to me, that's one of the big questions is whether there's always high expectations for Trump.

coming into a debate because that was his thing, right? That was how everybody came to, you know, the Republicans came to fall in love with him. That was how he was able to defeat Hillary Clinton was these dominant debate moments. And we just haven't really seen any of those in quite a long time. So he goes in with very high expectations. And, you know, it's a real question whether he can meet the moment. And it's also he's

He may have, his advisors wanted the mics to be muted. I, you know, I'm sort of annoyed with fixating on these rules, but it does matter. They wanted the mics to be muted. That is a safe strategy for him because it kind of keeps him on the rails. However, his best moment like that, no one would have heard it

if the mic had been muted in between answers because she was still speaking. That was my point the first time around. It ended up being incredibly consequential only because it kept him out of the conversation while Biden hung himself. But my assumption going into that was Biden was going to deliver some sort of C-plus performance. And in a C-plus world, look, I mean, what's the best possible expectation for Kamala? Like a

be, right? Something like that, where realistically, given what we know about her, especially in live unscripted moments. Well, for Trump, the inability to butt in, I do think really does hurt him. Now, I mean, the reason why is because of his worst debate performance, which was the very first one, arguably, you know, his most consequential, because that ended up being the defining image of Donald Trump going into the 2020 election. We had all of the COVID hit,

craziness going on, including him himself contracting COVID, possibly having COVID the first time around, where he constantly interrupted Joe Biden multiple times in 2020. Also, for those who are watching, just watch how different Joe Biden was even in 2020 when he was arguably showing many signs of decline already. Let's take a listen to Trump. You should go out and vote

You're in voting now. Vote and let your senators know how strong you feel. Vote now. Make sure you, in fact, let people know you're a senator. I'm not going to answer the question. Why wouldn't you answer that question? Because the question is, the question is, the question is, will you shut up, man? Listen, who is on your list, Joe? This is so right. Gentlemen, I think.

This is so un-presidential. He's going to pack the court. We have ended this segment. We're going to move on to the second segment. That was really a productive segment, wasn't it? Keep yapping, man. The people understand you. I mean, look, that was by far his worst debate performance. His worst debate performance was just the interruption, the chaos. And ultimately, that's, I think, what cost him the election. If you look at the swing that happened last

of voters which had been up for grabs, a lot of white suburban voters. Many of the people wanted stasis. They wanted control. That's why they voted for Joe Biden because they did not like Donald Trump. It was not an affirmative vote for Joe Biden. So if Trump comes across as quote unquote unlikable, then I think that's going to be his worst moment. In fact, because both candidates are relatively unpopular,

with their favorability ratings compared to history, not necessarily compared to modern day. You kind of want to be the negative choice in some cases in terms of being not the other person and whoever the other person does not like more considering where we are today, especially with the, with who these two candidates and like who they are, that is not who Donald Trump wants to be. And in that sense, that's where the muting of the mics probably will help him. Yeah, definitely. Yeah, absolutely. It prohibits there, you know, being a performance like that, which

which was objectively his worst performance. Right. And, you know, and was judged to be so at the time. And, you know, it wasn't just us saying it. It was overwhelming that the audience who watched it. Yeah. Right. And you have to remember, too, I mean, at that moment, there was just such fatigue from dealing with this dude. He was the president. And you remember all those crazy COVID press conferences. Which were discontinued, actually, for several months leading up to that. I don't know if people remember.

remember, right around, what was it, July, there was a discontinuation of those daily pressers because it became such a political liability. And it is funny to think back. I mean, basically nobody cared about what the briefing room or press conferences, you know, for almost all time and afterwards. But those, the ratings for those, I remember planning my whole day around

I mean, we were covering it, obviously, but I wasn't the only one. It was tens of millions of people had nothing better to do but to watch television. Yeah, and so there was massive Trump fatigue, and then you have that performance that just reminded people, it just emphasized for people the things they hate the most about this guy. It was like, ugh, former years of this? And that's a real risk for him right now because at the moment, you know...

So there's some rose-colored glasses going on about what his term in office was like and what the vibes were like and what that felt like for people. So to have an in-your-face reminder of just how exhausting having Donald Trump as president was...

it could help remove some of those rose-colored glasses. It could really help people remember why they felt like, oh, I just can't with this guy. I just can't do another four years with him. So the mic being muted will certainly help him in that regard.

But that's a risk for him is the more time he's in front of the public, the more they recall some of the less favorable aspects of him and why he's such a divisive figure and why his favorability rating, which is, I think towards its high end right now,

Why it historically has remained relatively low is because he does have these personality traits that people just are not super psyched about. Yeah, his favorability rating is relatively high, roughly like 46% or so in the last Gallup look at who he was. I mean, that's not great. It's also not bad compared to where he's been. I've seen him dip into the low 30s. As I have said multiple times, the most unpopular thing he ever did as president was pass the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

It was the day that that Tax Cuts and Jobs Act passed, which was the single lowest day for the Trump presidency. Let's also, though, relive why Biden is no longer in the race. Because as I famously said, I was like, the Baines-Store really don't matter that much. Probably won't be that important. Famous last words.

It's fun being proven wrong. It at least makes things interesting. Biden, the moment that we all truly understood that he was cooked, roughly 10 minutes into the debate, the moment that cost him the presidency. Let's take a listen. Thank you.

Make sure that all those things we need to do, child care, elder care, making sure that we continue to strengthen our health care system, making sure that we're able to make every single solitary person eligible for what I've been able to do with the COVID, excuse me, with dealing with everything we have to do with, look, if...

We finally beat Medicare. Thank you, President Biden. President Trump? He was right. He did beat Medicare. He beat it to death.

And it was also followed by one of Trump's, you know, that was another thing. Trump was, he was disciplined in a way where the only time he even really acknowledged how Cook Biden was is he said something along the lines of, he's like, I don't even know what he said. He doesn't even know what he said. But Trump was not the focus of that debate, you know, because he watched Biden. That was it. That was, I think, roughly five to 10 minutes into the open. We beat Medicare. I mean, it became probably the most famous moment.

And that part of the crazy part was you go into it and you see it was from the beginning. It wasn't that it tailed off, you know, and previously, as you and I have watched, I think, you know, the State of the Union and others, he would have a strong 30, 45 things start to go down, hour 15, things are bad. But with Biden, you know, sundowning started at the very beginning. He blamed a jet lag, you know, even though he'd been in the country for seven days and

We don't have to litigate it all. Roughly ancient history. But it was nuts. It was truly nuts. And it does show you that when these things matter, they matter a lot. And for Kamala, it definitely matters a lot more than the average presidential candidate. The other thing is that because the focus was all on Biden, because we were all just like watching this train wreck in real time, shocked and horrified by, you know, even we'd been very, I think, realistic about the level of decline that Biden had experienced.

But they'd hidden him so much that actually seeing it, it truly was a shocking. That was a shocking moment. And that was not the only one either where you're just like, Jesus Christ, what is going on here? What are we doing? And so there was no scrutiny on Trump and Trump.

If you go back and look at his, it's not like he was, you know, really fantastic in this debate. He just had to like stand there and let Joe hang himself. In fact, it went too well for Trump in the end because I'm sure he'd much rather be running against Joe Biden still at this point, which has been quite evident.

So now he's going to have an opponent who is, you know, much younger and much more with it than that guy was. And he will have to, you know, face some scrutiny and he will have to deal with things that are uncomfortable for him, that are challenging for him as well, thinking on his feet in real time. And, you know, the bar is quite high for him. So I do think...

Mostly people feel about Donald Trump the way they're going to feel about Donald Trump. He's been not just in the public eye since he was running for president. This is a man who's been a fixture of American media and television for my entire life. So it's very unlikely you're going to have a major shift in how people feel about him. The best you can hope for if you're the Democrats is like, okay, remind people some of his less favorable traits.

But it is all on the line for Kamala Harris because people are – and the polling numbers we'll show you here in a minute that we've teased a few times, this really underscores – people really are trying to figure out, like, okay, who is this lady? How do I feel about her? The impressions of her are both positive and negative. They're very soft.

And she could, you know, she could have a stellar night where people feel like, okay, I can see this. I feel good about it. Like she's up to the task. Let's go. I like the agenda, et cetera. She could be really, really knocked off, knocked off guard, knocked off balance.

where it raises a lot more questions about, can I see this person as commander in chief? Do I really think she's ready to elevate into the position of president of the United States? So for her, it's extraordinarily consequential. And, you know, it's no surprise that she's taking it as seriously as she appears to with the debate prep sessions. Trump, on the other hand, he doesn't really do

traditional debate prep, I guess, in the way that most candidates do. Most candidates do the whole, like, we're going to be on stage. Someone's going to play the role of my opponent or opponents. We're going to like go through it like this is the real event. Trump does more of a reportedly informal, like people are just sitting around the table, kind of throwing questions at him, kind of a deal that obviously has worked for him in the past. So it's his process. And it's not that he's not taking seriously necessarily. It's just that's

the way he approaches things. - If anything, I mean, the traditional process with Kamala is indicative of a traditional politician where you want to be highly prepared, you want to feel comfortable. Trump is somebody who's very used, in fact, probably the most comfortable when the camera is on.

He's most comfortable when he's performing. So he just needs more help from the content, whereas opposed to Kamala and others, a lot of them are not natural performers in the same way that Donald Trump is. They need to feel immersed in. I mean, look, it's a weird thing. Being on camera is weird. Being on a stage against another person is also weird.

If anybody's ever participated in a high school debate or any of these other things, it takes a couple of reps to even get used to what it's like. And even then, you know, practice is very, very different from what the real thing feels like. So for Kamala, it makes sense. Now, who is she taking advice from? Let's put this up there on the screen. Caught my eye for sure. Hillary is offering Kamala some debate performance. She claims that she won all three debates against Donald Trump.

and says, quote, he can be rattled. Yeah, well, it's like, does it matter if you, quote, unquote, win a debate and you lose the election? Hmm, some people may wonder. One of her quotes here, she said, quote,

When I said he was a Russian puppet, he just sputtered on stage. I think that's an example of how you get out a fact about him that really unnerves him. Yeah, that really landed. Well, yeah, that's certainly an issue. And here's the reason why it actually is an issue is Philippe Rains, who was one of her closest advisors, who also was the person playing Trump in the debate. He is in the Kamala room prepping.

and helping and playing Donald Trump. So she is actually undergoing a traditional Clintonian camp. Look, I'll tell you this on Reigns. I wouldn't take any advice from him. I'll just put it that way. Here's the thing, too, is she has...

She is the person responsible for making this debate as consequential as it is. Because if she had done more, been less cautious, done more interviews, been out there more, then there wouldn't be so much writing on each one of these interactions. I mean, that's why the interview with Dana Bash felt like such a big deal that, you know, we had to drop a breaking news segment and cover the whole thing and every word that she said because she just—

isn't doing a lot of, you know, there's no press conferences, there's been one interview, and, you know, now we get to analyze this debate. But the scarcity of Kamala Harris extemporaneous discussion...

Makes it so that every part of it is extra scrutinized and extra impactful because it's all people have to go on in terms of her ability to perform, what she believes, etc. So she has herself raised the stakes here in terms of the import of this debate, which is that and the fact that this race could not possibly be closer. So even if the debate moves the needle like half a point,

it could be determinative. That's where we are right now in this race. The other thing that was interesting, just in terms of getting inside of Trump's brain and how he thinks about these things, let's put this true social he put up on the screen. He's obviously thinking a lot about the optics. Yes. He posted on true social, no boxes or artificial lifts will be allowed to stand on during my upcoming debate with comrade Kamala Harris. We

We had this out previously with former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg when he was in a debate and he was not allowed a, quote, lift. It would be a form of cheating. The Democrats cheat enough. You are who you are. It was determined. So Kamala is relatively short. I think she's like 5'4". Trump is what, 6'2"? He's like 6'3". He's

big. He's a big guy. I'm 6'2", and he's taller than me. So there will be quite a height disparity there, and again, he's saying about the optics. I mean, it is true. Like, what's our shortest president ever? I have to look. Come on, Sager. My history buff friend. You don't know this one? I mean, look. Well, it's also a difference in, like, the historic era versus the TV era, but...

The shortest president was James Madison. He was 5'4". Let's see. The heights of U.S. presidential candidates. The tallest president ever is Abraham Lincoln. I remember talking about this under Ron DeSantis because I was like, oh, he's 5'11". That's right. That's why he's wearing his lifts. Look, if you look at the modern era, we have...

Let's see. In terms of the modern era, I don't believe a president has been elected since like the 1940s who was shorter than 5'10". Okay. Now, to be fair, let's see. What's average U.S. male height?

This is why women can't break the glass ceiling. We need to get like a WNBA player. No, okay, but here's what's interesting. The average U.S. male height today is 5 feet 9 inches, whereas every president, yeah, it looks like in the modern era, has been over some 5 feet 10, so above average. The average U.S. female height today is 5 feet 4 inches, which is what Kamala is. That's an average height? That feels short. It does feel short. I mean, that's what I'm getting. I have not looked at the Lancet study or any of that, but that's what's showing up from the U.S.

From a little Google, little AI Google generated answer. Oh, no, that's from the CDC. Okay, so that's from the CDC. Makes sense. So, point is, he's thinking about these optics, and he's not crazy to be thinking about these optics. He's a full foot taller than her almost. Because, I mean, he will tower over her, and that was one of the other dynamics in that Hillary Clinton debate, is he was like looming over her in what was sort

of menacing way, but it was also very like commanding, dominating kind of a way. And they're not gonna, it's not a town hall, so they're not gonna be wandering around in that weird way that I actually hate with town halls. Yeah, I hate it too.

I hate it too. But, you know, he'll be a visually arresting presence, certainly. And do these things matter? I don't know. But he seems to think that they do. And he does have a sense of, like, you know, the show. That's his greatest gift. So, anyway, that's some of what's going on apparently in Trump's mind right now. Third tallest president. Oh, really? Third tallest. Wow. Abraham Lincoln, LBJ. What was Abe Lincoln? Abraham Lincoln was 6'4".

Six-four. Oh, so that's not that much taller than Trump. Yeah, and Trump is six-foot-three. People are ready for a change candidate. They want a short.

A short woman. Or I guess an average height woman. Shortest president, James Madison. Second shortest, Benjamin Harrison. Martin Van Buren. William McKinley. John Adams. John Quincy Adams. So maybe people are noticing a trend. Basically, when the only image you have of a president was a literal drawing portrait, that's when height didn't matter. In the photographic age, it looked like it mattered a lot.

And the only way to get around it is to be one of the greatest fighting generals of all time, Ulysses S. Grant, and to prove your manliness. So, look, let nobody say that it doesn't matter. I will say on a personal level, you know, when you meet Bill Clinton or Donald Trump or even Obama and all these, they feel big. I mean, Trump in particular, he's huge. Like, he's actually gigantic.

and feels that way. I remember Clinton feeling very similarly. And actually, Clinton's 62 and a half, but he's large, like kind of in stature. And so there is, look, don't let anybody say- Pre-vegan anyway. There's nothing to- Pre-vegan. Yeah, true. Very, very, very good point. He needs McDonald's to be alive. One thing that I do think is my last thought, and then we can move on to the polls and again, why this is so consequential because the polls are so tight. Um,

I do think that in terms of the expectations setting game, Kamala Harris benefits from relatively low expectations for her. I think for Trump, there's perpetually very high expectations for him because he did so make his name in the political arena in those 2016 debates. So I do think that that's an asset she has going into this. And then there's also the fact that

you know, like most of the media outside of the Fox News and the conservative ecosystem, they're going to want to see a positive from her. And perhaps people are also going to be somewhat measuring her versus the last guy who literally had to drop out of the race because the debate performance was so poor last time around. So I think that's a, you know, that's a benefit for her going in that she kind of has won the expectations game of going into this debate. Yeah, I think...

I don't know if I'd have to think because if we think about expectations though we're about to get polls isn't it a lot higher because Americans do feel like especially undecided voters feel like they don't know a lot about her so the expectations are actually quite high in that they want some clarity that would be my only like kind of

My thought is the narrative about her is like that she is this very cautious, nervous politician who's kind of bad in these situations versus so the bar, I'm talking about the bar being relatively low for her in terms of if she's able to deliver a relatively confident commanding performance against a guy who is deemed one of the best political debaters we've seen, then she will have significantly outperformed expectations for her. That's fair. And with Trump, I think what...

But the risk is, is that he just hasn't done a lot of these in a long time. And his, as you said, he's one of the best political debaters that we've seen in the modern era, his ability to capture the spotlight. So he's measured up against himself from almost eight years ago. Actually, I think literally eight years ago at this point. I mean, think about that on a personal level. Do you want to be measured against who you were eight years ago? That was a long time. Yeah. Well, especially when you're at that point in your life, you know, on that scale.

particular trajectory. So we'll see. Just a reminder, we are going to do live debate coverage with Ryan and Emily. We'll jump on the stream about an hour beforehand to do a little preview and mix it up there, do our expectations, et cetera. And then we'll cover the debate afterwards as well. So make sure to join us here. We'll be taking questions from premium subscribers. So subscribe so you can ask us questions or whatever.

Get ready for a full month of fiesta y cultura because it's time for Viva Tucson. Let's celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month como nunca antes in true Tucson style. From September 15th to October 15th, join us for comida, musica y eventos that you won't find anywhere else. Our rich history and traditions make the Old Pueblo the perfect place para celebrar y aprender.

Mark your calendars so you don't miss out on this celebración. Visita. Visit Tucson.org slash Viva. Periods. No one really loves talking about that time of the month. But at Knicks, KNIX, well, it's a lot of fun.

It's always that time of the month because as the number one leak-proof brand in America, managing your period in comfort and style is all we do. We've created an amazing line of super comfy, super leak-proof period undies you need to see and feel to believe. These underwear look, feel, and machine wash just like regular underwear, but feature hidden protection technology that can absorb from one to 14 regular tampons worth of liquid. So you feel dry, comfy,

and free all day long. Millions have already made the switch to NYX, and now you can too. Just go to NYX.com and get 15% off with promo code GET15. That's KNIX.com, promo code GET15 for 15% off life-changing period underwear. Again, that's KNIX.com, promo code GET15.

The 2024 presidential election is here. MSNBC has the in-depth coverage and analysis you need. Our reporters are on the ground. Steve Kornacki is at the big board breaking down the races. Rachel Maddow and our Decision 2024 team will provide insight as results come in. And the next day, Morning Joe will give you perspective on what it all means for the future of our country.

Watch coverage of the 2024 presidential election Tuesday, November 5th on MSNBC. Let's go ahead and get to the polls. This was big news from The New York Times. Put this up on the screen. This is considered like an A-plus pollster. When this poll comes out, Washington really reacts. And boy, did they react to this one. Understandably so, because it showed significant backsliding for Kamala Harris.

She is now losing to Donald Trump by a single point, 47 to 48. That is within the margin of error of three percentage points, but obviously not the kind of numbers that Democrats want to see right now. Their commentary here, they say Mr. Trump may have had a rough month following President Biden's departure and amid the burst of excitement that Ms. Harris brought Democrats, but

The polls suggest his support remains remarkably resilient. Let's put the next piece up on the screen. This is what we alluded to like 85 times in the last segment, which is they asked this question, very good question to ask. Do you feel like you still need to learn more about Kamala Harris or do you pretty much already know what you need to know? 28%. So nearly a third of the electorate says, I feel like I need

I need to learn more about Kamala Harris versus 71% who say they pretty much already know what they need to know. The numbers were much lower for Trump in terms of like feeling like they needed to learn more. And if you look at these crosstabs, which let me just keep it up on the screen here for a moment, just caution you with the crosstabs because it's a smaller sample. It's a much broader margin of error. So you always take these with even more grains of salt than the overall poll numbers.

But the age demographic and the demographic that really stands out in terms of needing to know more is young Americans, 18 to 29, a majority, 53% say they need to learn more. And then if you look at minority demographics, 41% of black Americans, 43% of Hispanic Americans, and 44% of non-white, non-college educated voters say they need to know more.

This underscores the danger of the strategy that they have been pursuing, which has been, we'll call it the generic Democrat strategy of like, we're going to say as little as possible. We're not even, they just put the issues page up on their website under pressure. She did give, you know, a speech about some of the things she wanted to do, but she has been very cautious in terms of, you know, going, putting herself out in front of the media,

They haven't been leaning in hard to specifics in terms of an agenda. And so you end up in this situation where instead of being Barack Obama, where everybody projects on you whatever they want to see, instead they're looking at her and going, I don't really know who you are or what you want to do. So, you know, this is the risk of...

of the strategy she's pursuing, and the last number I'll note here and then Sagar gets your take, about two thirds of those who want to know more said they were eager to learn about her policies

specifically, which is someone who cares a lot about those policies and thinks, by the way, that the things that she's announced are, by and large, good and very popular policies, you know, to me, it is very validating of she should be leaning into these populist economic pieces that she, you know, that Tim Walz is really fantastic about talking about and that she sort of latched onto here in the early days of this campaign. Well,

Well, she has a big problem of people don't know who she is and people, I mean, in a certain sense, like who is she to her own self? It's just a survivor. It's a politician. So when you don't believe a lot of these things, or even if you don't believe anything, it's very difficult to project

that onto people, which is where her past flip-flops matter a lot. We talked about some of the strategy, where it looks. Let's also put B3, please, up on the screen because this also, to me, really underscores, I mean, I've said this, America's incredibly divided place and we are

divided, especially on certain issues. If you look at where people fall on those and what they're feeling the most important about at the time of the ballot, it will likely determine who they vote for. I said likely, it doesn't always work that way. It says, regardless of how you might vote, do you trust Kamala or Trump to do a better job on each of the following issues? Abortion, 39% Trump, 54% Kamala. Massive spread, her best possible issue. Two is democracy, 45% Trump, 50% Kamala.

That doesn't mean anything, but whatever. The economy, 42. Harris, 55 Trump. I mean, look at that. That's a 13-point spread. It's nearly as big as the spread between Trump and Kamala on abortion, and it shows the huge strength for Donald Trump and one that has historically been a major predictor of success. Finally, on immigration, there's a 10-point spread, 53% Trump, 43% Kamala.

Harris. So if it is an economy immigration election, as I've said, Trump is going to win. If it's an abortion democracy election, it looks like Kamala is going to win. And on those issues specifically, it's not only where they're the most divided, I think it's also where there is the most genuine contrast. And so leaning into that on the debate stage, I think you will see quite a bit, also whenever we see, looking at

a lot of Democratic messaging. Returning though, to the beginning of this Trump and Harris neck and neck after summer upheaval, there is quite a lot to think about it. I mean, first and foremost is 48% amongst likely voters versus a common 47 is kind of extraordinary because it shows a Trump narrow lead. And if you have a narrow lead in a likely voter screen from a national level, you're cooked if this is accurate.

Because Kamala could win up to 2% of the popular vote and lose the electoral college in a massive landslide. She needs some 3.5% advantage in the national popular vote to be very, very competitive. So if we look at that and then we consider how tight things are in the swing states, I don't think we have had – I mean, we'll talk about this with Harry Entencliffe.

But this is genuinely one of the closest presidential elections of all time. And people then need to say that the stakes for every individual decision is just titanic. That's so true. Yeah, that's so true. Another part of this poll that was interesting, and by the way, the economy number is

Some other polls have shown her being very close with Trump on the economy, which is accurate. Have those sentiments shifted away from her as she has failed to really clearly and consistently articulate what her economic vision is? Because, again, if you poll the things she's talking about, the price cap on groceries and the assistance for homeowners, all these things, reducing prescription drug costs,

All of these things are very popular. I'm talking like 75, 80% popular. But, you know, it's not enough to do one speech and that's it. You have to be leaning into that and really persuade people that, no, this is my agenda. This is what I'm going to fight for. To me, we played some of the Dana Bash interview previously. Her biggest whiff in that interview, in my opinion, is when the very first question is,

what is your day one agenda? And you don't have a list of three things ready to go right there. Now, when Dana asked her again, then she comes up with a few child tax credit and a few other things. Okay, that's great. But you should know top three, hammer those home every single day so that people feel like, okay, this is your agenda. I know what you stand for. I know what you're going to fight for. And I can plan accordingly or adjust accordingly or vote accordingly. The other piece that was a big problem for her here, which again is a shift,

from some of the other polling that we've seen is, first of all, they asked, do you want to see a lot of change, a little change, or no real change from the Biden administration? And overwhelmingly voters were like, a lot of change. Then they asked, do you think that Kamala Harris represents a lot of change, a little change, not much change at all from the Biden administration? And people are much more likely to say that Donald Trump represents a major change and Kamala Harris does not.

So, again, now that may seem, you know, straightforward because she's vice president, but that is not what the polls were reflecting previously. Because she came in and she's this, you know, relatively fresh face and younger and different identity and came in with all this energy, et cetera. They're actually she was winning that. This is the change candidate sentiment. And I do think this is a change election. So.

So, you know, that also emphasizes the fact that she needs to find some ways to really more clearly distance herself from Joe Biden. I might suggest her approach to the genocide in Gaza personally would be a great place to create some arm's length distance between yourself and the incredibly unpopular and disastrous policy of the current administration. But if she wants and she needs...

To reclaim that mantle as the change candidate, she's got to do some work to convince voters that she is going to deliver for them in a way that they do not feel that Joe Biden did. There's a lot of noise in this. So previously she'd looked at his change, but it's also possible that that may never have actually – that may have been incorrect. And then if you look at a high-quality poll afterwards, people are like, no, I never felt that way.

I mean, the other problem is, and I agree completely about distancing from Biden. I mean, I'm seeing here, you know, lead story in the New York Times this morning. They say Harris's debate challenge, pushing ahead without leaving Biden behind. The problem is that- Not leave him behind. Exactly. And I'm like, no, you should leave him behind.

And in fact, if we look at previous vice presidents who have run while their current president is in office, all of them confront this challenge. Al Gore had a massive problem with, am I Bill Clinton's successor or not? He ended up leaving Clinton behind, which was a mistake if you look in retrospect, because Clinton had some 65% approval rating. Clinton took it very personally. But Al Gore was like, no, I've been your number two for eight years. It's about me now. Didn't end up working out.

Obviously. Then let's think about if we look at previous ones, obviously LBJ was a little bit different because JFK was assassinated while he was in office. But a big part of that was I'm continuing the Kennedy legacy. The lesson though is that in those instances where a vice president is running, like George H.W. Bush as well, where Reagan was relatively popular as he was coming out, it's about continuing their legacy.

This is a very, very different election where the current president is massively unpopular. And in fact, the best possible thing she could do for herself electorally is to say, we are moving on. I respect Joe Biden, but I'm not going to do it.

But I am my own person, and there are many different things that I would have done differently in office, and I would have no problem saying this to his face. Well, that's true or not, you know, whatever. But the point is that it's very clear. If only 20 – what was it, 25% were saying that they saw her as a change candidate, whereas they said some 53% said Trump is a change candidate –

Then when Americans want change, as they very often do, as they did with Biden from Trump, as they did from Trump to Obama, as they did from Obama to Bush, as they did with Bush to Clinton, and then previously from Clinton to Bush, there's clearly a lesson about what that looks like. So she needs to run as far away from him as possible, but that's very difficult when

the Biden staff is running your campaign. - That's right. - When the Biden staff, when you have to live here in Washington next to Joe Biden, when the Biden people are so angry that they were pushed out as we saw with Anita Dunn, the advisor. And so this is very, very difficult position for her to be in. And in fact, it may end up costing her the election.

The Biden team part, I think, is really critical because, I mean, they were running a disastrous, delusional campaign with Joe Biden at the helm. And it was kind of incredible to watch when Kamala comes in and is, you know, the new nominee, their initial rollout—

I think anyone would have to say was fantastic. The level of excitement and enthusiasm, which she still benefits from, I mean, the number of new donors and volunteers and all that stuff was through the roof. And now they're falling back into this very, very cautious, you know, head in the sand situation.

complacent Biden-esque strategy. And she can't afford that. You know, this isn't, you aren't in a position where you can just sort of play prevent defense and hope for the best. So, you know, when you see some head-scratching decision-making out of them, it is worth remembering that these are the same people who were up until the bitter end,

claiming that Biden was on track to win and delusional about the polling and making poor decisions there as well. So I think that's a very important point. Let's go and put the next polls up on the screen that we have some battleground polling from CBS News and YouGov. I think this is also, you know, highly rated pollster. It's tied, basically. I mean, in Michigan, she has a one point lead. In Pennsylvania, they're literally tied. In Wisconsin, she's got a two point lead. But

all within the margin of error. So you can look at the industrial Midwestern, these three states, and according to this poll, it's tied. You know, it really is

If these polls are accurate, it is as close a race as it literally possibly could be. And Harry Anton over at CNN made this point in a pretty, pretty like it landed the way he made this point. In a historic way. Yes, a historic way. It really landed the way he made this point. Let's go ahead and take a listen to what Harry Anton had to say. Most of the time, there's at least some stretch where one of the candidates is ahead by at least five points, at least three weeks ahead.

in which one candidate led by at least five points. That happened in every single campaign from 1964 to 2020. How many days have we had this campaign where one candidate was ahead by at least five points nationally? Look at this. Zero. Zero days. Zero days. The fact is this race has been consistently tight in a way that we have never seen before, Mr. Berman. Look at the 2020 final margin and average across these seven states. It was Biden plus 9.5%.

0.9 points. You don't think that could get any closer? We can, in fact, get closer. Look right now. Kamala Harris up by just 0.6 points on average. Only about half a point, six tenths of a point. My goodness gracious. Let's just say we move the current polls and let's say the result differs by them by a single percentage point. And Donald Trump is the beneficiary of it.

Look at this. If Trump outperforms his current polls by just a single point, you take that Kamala Harris win and look at this. Donald Trump gets 287 electoral votes because the bottom line is Pennsylvania would flip up here and you would also get this flip out in Nevada over here. And that, my friends, is what we're talking about. Yeah. So that's like a red wave scenario. A single point.

you shift the polls a single point and you are looking at a totally different map. Because yeah, if you look at Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, effectively, and Nevada,

every single one of them is right there in the margin of error. So one point in either direction, totally different map. And I mean, look, to consider Nate Silver right now with the big picture, this was his last forecast that just came out, I think, two days ago. He has trumpeted a 63% chance of winning the electoral college, which is extraordinary. And a lot of that is because of politics.

polling, this was prior to the New York Times poll, by the way, but already, as he said, after it came out, he goes, I actually factored a lot of this in because post-convention, the tie scenario and increasingly the 0.6 margin, that is not going to be enough. But, but as you just said, if it's off by just one, that means that

that Harris currently with a 36%, roughly in the same scenario that Trump was going into 2016. So you need to think about that as well, where a polling miss can deliver you the presidency. I'm just in my head, I'm just purely a 50-50, pure coin toss. I think that the major flagship stuff is going to matter so much

The debates, we are only going to have two. The short, short presidential run, whether Kamala continues to do interviews, and then unforced errors, as always happen, on top of major news events. And actually, things are so close that a major news event could swing the entire election, quite literally. Absolutely. A war or— Classic October surprise kind of situation. A classic October surprise, right. Yeah. No, I think that's where—especially because—

We really there's not much we could say about the polls and whether they're right, wrong, which direction, whatever it really is. That's also a coin flip, whether, you know, the OK, in 2020, they understated Trump support in 2022. They overstated Republican support. Did they fix the problems from those years? Did they need to fix the response by a state?

Literally no one knows. It's a total guessing game. So what we can say is if the polls are truly accurate, it is as close as it could possibly be. And that's where we are headed into what is, you know, I think by any definition, historically consequential debate. Could it be as consequential as actually pushing the candidate out of the race? I don't know about that. But it could end up being quite determinative, even if the shift is only by a tiny margin, because those are the margins we're talking about.

Get ready for a full month of fiesta y cultura because it's time for Viva Tucson. Let's celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month como nunca antes in true Tucson style. From September 15th to October 15th, join us for comida, musica y eventos that you won't find anywhere else. Our rich history and traditions make the Old Pueblo the perfect place para celebrar y aprender.

Mark your calendars so you don't miss out on this celebración. Visita visittucson.org slash viva. Periods. No one really loves talking about that time of the month. But at Knicks, KNIX, well, it's a good time.

It's always that time of the month because as the number one leak-proof brand in America, managing your period in comfort and style is all we do. We've created an amazing line of super comfy, super leak-proof period undies you need to see and feel to believe. These underwear look, feel, and machine wash just like regular underwear, but feature hidden protection technology that can absorb from one to 14 regular tampons worth of liquid. So you feel dry, comfy, and

and free all day long. Millions have already made the switch to NYX, and now you can too. Just go to NYX.com and get 15% off with promo code GET15. That's KNIX.com, promo code GET15 for 15% off life-changing period underwear. Again, that's KNIX.com, promo code GET15.

The 2024 presidential election is here. MSNBC has the in-depth coverage and analysis you need. Our reporters are on the ground. Steve Kornacki is at the big board breaking down the races. Rachel Maddow and our Decision 2014 will provide insight as results come in.

and the next day Morning Joe will give you perspective on what it all means for the future of our country. Watch coverage of the 2024 presidential election Tuesday, November 5th on MSNBC.

At the same time, there's been a major endorsement in American politics. The Cheney family has decided to come out and to support Kamala Harris. Here's Liz Cheney, the scion on ABC's This Week, talking about why she's decided to endorse Kamala Harris. Let's take a listen. Bottom line, why did you make this decision to support Harris and why'd you do it now?

Yeah, I, you know, I've been voting for 40 years. My first vote I ever cast was for Ronald Reagan in 1984. I've never voted for a Democrat. Wow. And it tells you, I think, the stakes in this election. You know, Donald Trump presents a challenge and a threat fundamentally to the republics.

We see it on a daily basis. Somebody who was willing to use violence in order to attempt to seize power, to stay in power. If you have many Republicans out there who are saying, well, you know, we're not going to vote for him, but we will we will write someone else in. And I think that this time around, that's not enough, that it's important to actually cast a vote for Vice President Harris.

That's right. It is not enough. And in fact, that was followed up by her father, a statement from him. Let's put this up there on the screen. Former Vice President Cheney issued the following statement in our nation's 248-year history. There has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic

than Donald Trump. He tried to steal the last election using lies and violence to keep himself in power after the voters rejected him. He can never be trusted with power again. As citizens, we have a duty to put our country above partisanship to defend our constitution. That is why I will be casting my vote for Vice President Kamala Harris. So the Cheney family is in, Crystal, and has been met overwhelmingly positively by many people. We will preview one of those. But yeah, what's your reaction here to the Cheney family?

As you said, war criminals for Harris. Object discussed. Yeah. There were white dudes for Harris. There were black women for Harris. And now there are war criminals for Harris. War criminals for Harris. That's great. I guess the problem that Dick Cheney had with Trump's attempted coup is that unlike Cheney's own efforts to steal the election, which were successful in 2000, Trump was unable to get the job done. So, you know, he's a loser in their regard. He can't even successfully, like, steal an election as they did. It's so cartoon. The most cynical, disgusting people. Well, I.

I do think that there's something to what I just said, which is Dick Cheney has no problem with stealing an election, but they need it done in the more decorous way. Well, in service of what they believe in, in service of their agenda. Trump believes a lot of the same things they believe if we're being honest about it. But it has a lot to do also with...

some of the operators in the Republican Party, like it's not the Cheney-Bush Republican Party anymore. Even though, again, the ideology is not that different. Like,

Trump's biggest accomplishment was his big tax cut for the rich. Guess what? That's what, you know, that was one of Bush's hallmarks as well. But the personnel have changed. And so he no longer has that, like, you know, power within the party that he once did. I think it's grotesque that Democrats accept this, that they I think it's foolish that they think it's a benefit to them like this.

even now, even after George W. Bush's reputation has wrongly been significantly rehabbed, Dick Cheney's really hasn't been. Like, people don't like this guy. I would hope so. I don't know why you think that this is a benefit. I think Liz Cheney's like a little bit different because she's not her father and, you know, so you can't hang all the crimes of him on her even though I find her foreign policy and worldview to be also extremely odious. But I

I can imagine some people who are college-educated former Republicans who might look at that as kind of an indicator of like, okay, you know, even Liz Cheney is saying, listen, guys, we got to vote for Kamala Harris. But even that, it's not like she's that...

that powerful of a national figure. It's not like there's a big Liz Cheney constituency out there. So I don't know. In the same way, it was perplexing to me that the Trump campaign thought it was like some, and I'm not putting them on the same level, but that it was some great coup to get RFK Jr. when I'm looking and going, this is not a popular person. I feel the same thing about Dick Cheney, just on a political level. Not only is it morally grotesque,

that you would want the support of this man, but I don't know what he brings to the table other than, you know, an unwanted news cycle about how horrific he was and your association with him is net negative, in my opinion. Maybe people have forgotten. I mean, I don't know. I mean, that's another problem, too. For me, it's like I could recite the crimes of Cheney and Bush, you know, off the top of my head easily. You could wake me up at 2 a.m. in the morning and I could do that.

But maybe people have moved on. It's been quite a long time. But if I think about what it philosophically, and this is another important point. In that same interview, John Carl was like, have you changed any of the things that you believe? And she was like, no. So like her positions have not changed. Her ideology has not changed. I'm absolutely willing to bet that about Dick Cheney as well. Yeah.

They support Kamala Harris. Now, is that something that you can distinguish? Not really. Now, does Trump support some of the same things? Yes. But on foreign policy, especially previously on the Iraq war, which both of them still support, let's be very clear about that.

that, there was a major break. And it was actually funny because I think what it all comes back to is Trump's destruction of the Jeb Bush campaign and ultimately his destruction of the Bush political dynasty, which what you were just saying was there was a machinery involved where the Bush mafia in Texas was still incredibly powerful up until 2016. But with both George P. Bush, Jeb Bush's son, losing in Texas, as well as Jeb Bush and

Eventually, his entire political ouster, all of the people who backed him, none of them eventually succeeded in a DeSantis administration. That is fundamentally maybe one of the best things Trump ever did for this country. So for Cheney, for them,

That was something that they are deeply attached to on an ideological level. But also, if you look at what these people worship more than anything, neoconservatism and the quote-unquote rules-based international order, I mean, Kamala is not far away from them on the issue that they probably care the absolute most about, which is Ukraine. So,

There is a lot of ideological consistency on their core objective, on their worldview, and then on Israel too, actually, if we think about it. And if we put those together on top of this like, quote unquote, democracy worship, it's not a lot of difference.

I think it's much more personal than ideological. Maybe. Michael Tracy, I think, made the case really well. I'll just read from some of what he said. He's like, neocons have in no way been purged from the Trump era GOP. The term neocon is not even a coherent descriptor of anything anymore. It's only ever used as a term of derision that means anyone with interventionist views I happen to dislike. And he says half the people who would have been called neocons a decade ago, they've just rebranded as MAGA. Gives Marco Rubio as an example. Tom Cotton is an absolute neocon.

You know, dyed-in-the-wool neocon, probably the most aggressive hawkish person. He was considered as Trump's vice president. Trump had John Bolton in his administration. Tracy goes on and says Trump's extreme pro-Israel positions and extreme bellicosity toward Iran exceeds what even most of the actual neocons traditionally advocated during the Bush years. Go ask Miriam Adelson whether she prefers the Trump-era GOP or the Bush-era GOP. Maybe her spending habits will answer the question. So I don't see an ideological break.

you know, it was easy to oppose the Iraq war after it was all done and dusted. Many people did. Many people who, you know, supported the Iraq war for years and years and years. By the time Trump got around to saying he opposed it, they also opposed it. It was an easy position to take. So yeah, I think it's much more personal. The Jeb Bush point is a good one. You know, like they embarrassed and humiliated him and that creates this personal beef. I think the

I think the Liz Cheney endorsement is more defensible because I think it is a defensible position to say, listen, I disagree with Kamala Harris on any number of things, but Donald Trump literally tried to steal the election January 6th. Like, we just can't have this, so we got to vote for Kamala Harris and try to move past the Trump era. The Dick Cheney one, though, again, because he actually, like, did steal an election, it's hard to see this man as any sort of beacon or scion as democracy. It just seems like it's more about...

Being pissed off about it not being his party anymore. Him not being the one who's behind the scenes pulling the levers or having the ins and his cadre of people around him. So I don't know. That's what I think. It just bugs me too with Cheney. It's like, who did more? Listen, like, be real. Who did the most damage to this country? Definitely in my lifetime, our...

from the post, let's say the post-Vietnam era. It's not even a question about Bush and Cheney. It is not a question. All of the ills that we face today have their genesis in the Bush-Cheney presidency. They cost us more dollars, lives-wise, international prestige, the financial crisis. I could go on forever. Like they are absolutely

Bush is absolutely the worst president since FDR and, in my opinion, probably second worst president of all time only because James Buchanan was worse. And so the rehabbing of these people, especially within their own lifetimes, is maddening only because they – it's one thing to rehab Nicole Wallace, although she should not.

It is one thing to rehab Ari Fleischer. It is a whole other for Cheney and Dick Cheney specifically and for George W. Bush. I just cannot count on it. So Kamala's excited about it, though, apparently. She got asked about this endorsement and how she feels about it. Let's take a listen to what she had to say.

I'm honored to have their support and I think it's an important statement right now. A lot of what

I think it's happening, and I was just talking with some folks here in Pittsburgh about it, is that people are exhausted about the division and the attempts to kind of divide us as Americans. She's honored to have the support of these respected leaders, Zagre. Talk a little bit about it, because I think your analysis of the electoral impact is a little different. I think this is nothing but bad. Bad look,

toxic, like I just see no benefit. - Okay, I would challenge it on the same RFK grounds. A lot of people who hate RFK were not gonna vote for Trump, or sorry, a lot of people who hate RFK were not gonna vote for Trump anyway. They're called Democrats. So then if you look at the only slice who is gonna help him, potential RFK voters, on balance, it's a net positive. Now, are there more people who are gonna vote against Trump because of the RFK endorsement than who will vote for him? I don't believe so. Now, same here for the Liz Cheney. Unfortunately, I live amongst these people.

I was just showing you a sign from one of my neighbors. They worship them. They like Dick Cheney. A lot of these people serve in the Bush administration. Dick Cheney, if you noticed, what did that say about where the statement was from? McLean, Virginia. These are dyed-in-the-wool, filthy rich people, net worth of $10 million or above, or aspiring members of the military-industrial complex.

Unfortunately, that white swing suburban demographic, they love Liz Cheney. They're obsessed with January 6th. They're obsessed with the New York Times. Those people actually did or were a swing demographic in 2020. So I very unfortunately do think that there's this rehabbing image and all of that that I just talked about. They view the Bush years very differently than I think you or I would or any, frankly, thinking person would. But if you're...

Let's also think about the experience of these folks. They became very rich over the last 20 years. Most people who are my age became very poor over the last 20 years. If you are poor, you became much poorer. If you're rich, you became much richer. So your kind of heuristic on that past is very different as opposed for the actual like personal stakes of this. I think on net, it unfortunately is very likely a positive. There's a lot of suburban people who like her. I just can't see anyone being swayed by a Cheney endorsement. I would hope so. I just can't see anyone positive.

I mean, listen, the people that you're describing in like, you know, this narrow slice of Northern Virginia, I mean, they're already know who they're going to vote for. That's done. So I don't know. I think that both these Cheneys very much overestimate their ability to move a single vote. I just don't think anyone cares that much. And listen, there have already been

So many Republicans, former Republicans who have come out against Trump, his own, I mean, his own previous cabinet members have overwhelmingly come out against him and said he shouldn't be in the White House again. And it doesn't really seem to move the needle. So I don't really expect it to change much. And I just think it's morally grotesque to rehab these people. So that's where I am with it. I'll disagree on that one.

Get ready for a full month of fiesta y cultura because it's time for Viva Tucson. Let's celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month como nunca antes in true Tucson style. From September 15th to October 15th, join us for comida, musica y eventos that you won't find anywhere else. Our rich history and traditions make the Old Pueblo the perfect place para celebrar y aprender.

Mark your calendars so you don't miss out on this celebración. Visita visittucson.org slash viva. Periods. No one really loves talking about that time of the month. But at Knicks, KNIX, well, it's a good time.

It's always that time of the month because as the number one leak-proof brand in America, managing your period in comfort and style is all we do. We've created an amazing line of super comfy, super leak-proof period undies you need to see and feel to believe. These underwear look, feel, and machine wash just like regular underwear, but feature hidden protection technology that can absorb from one to 14 regular tampons worth of liquid. So you feel dry, comfy, and

and free all day long. Millions have already made the switch to NYX, and now you can too. Just go to NYX.com and get 15% off with promo code GET15. That's KNIX.com, promo code GET15 for 15% off life-changing period underwear. Again, that's KNIX.com, promo code GET15.

The 2024 presidential election is here. MSNBC has the in-depth coverage and analysis you need. Our reporters are on the ground. Steve Kornacki is at the big board breaking down the races. Rachel Maddow and our Decision 2014 will provide insight as results come in.

and the next day Morning Joe will give you perspective on what it all means for the future of our country. Watch coverage of the 2024 presidential election Tuesday, November 5th on MSNBC.

Let's go over to the Tenet Media and the continuation of all of this. We finally, if you recall the details, we brought you all the news on Thursday of this massive scandal, which basically was a shell company called Tenet Media, which was run by the YouTuber and

uh, right wing personality, Lauren Chen and her husband, Liam Donovan, who according, allegedly, according to the department of justice accepted some $10 million on behalf of the Russian government and then deceived multiple other commentators, including Tim pool, Benny Johnson and Dave Rubin and paying them exorbitant rates for videos to then appear on the tenant media channel. So that's kind of the general overview of that. Uh,

Again, to reiterate, those commentators were deceived according to the Department of Justice. Now, since then, multiple of them spoke out. We brought you their statements. One of them, Tim Pool, appeared on the Ben Shapiro show to answer questions about this. Let's take a listen to his explanation.

You and I disagree, I think, on some of the elements around the Ukraine war. But the idea that that's been put forth by the media is that somehow you are being paid directly by Vladimir Putin in order to express those views and that that therefore anybody who disagrees with sort of the Democratic take or even the sort of moderate Republican take on this must be paid by Russia. That, of course, is an absurdity. And I think it is wrapped into a broader narrative that that seems to be ramping up just in time for the election, which is that Russia is going to interfere in the election on behalf of Donald Trump. I

barely even talked to Lauren. And it's kind of crazy. I've known her for a long time. So when she said that she was launching a company, she had investors. I'm like, okay. I mean, I hear that 50 times a year. And in the podcast space, we just heard that I think Travis Kelsey is getting a $100 million contract. So these numbers are, that's where they're at. I think people don't realize how big the podcasting space is and the revenue you generate from sponsorships and membership. And for all I knew, this was, you know, Lauren Chen, she works at The Blaze.

She wanted to start a company. She found investors. That was seemingly the gist of it. We only ever took money from an American corporation. The amount of money that we were offered for the show was around market value for offers we had already received. We have people tweeting at me like, give the money back or whatever it is. Like, dude, let me put it this way. We're talking to our legal team. I can say that I just announced

I've been contacted by the FBI as a victim of a potential victim in a crime. They have stated that I may have information relevant to their ongoing investigation and requested a voluntary interview. Okay.

Okay, all right. There's actually – we need to parse a couple of things, and that's why everybody was like – everybody who was saying this is an unbelievable amount. The reason it was an unbelievable amount is because it was an unbelievable amount per video, per the amount of work, and per the amount of views that it was getting. Now, I have no doubt that the Tim Pool show, even the culture war and all that, genuinely is a multimillion-dollar property if –

if, and this is the big one, ads are being placed on it and it is getting the amount of views that it is on his channel. It's very different when you're getting some 8,000 views on another channel. You also had to look at the monetization. The monetization of Tenant Media and all that clearly did not align with the numbers that he's talking about. So, for example, on the Travis Kelsey thing, 100 million. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense because it's an exclusive ad.

advertising deal over a long length of time and they own the exclusive right to place ads on that. That's why the Joe Rogan deal made sense. That's why the Call Her Daddy makes sense as well. Now, if Call Her Daddy were to retain the rights to it and then every once in a while, Alex Cooper did some shitty video for another channel and she was getting paid $100 million, that's actually a whole different story, right? And I think it

You know, anybody involved, especially, I understand. People who are listening, they don't know all this. Obviously, we're deeply immersed in it because this is our livelihood. That is why folks like me, Crystal, Cenk Uygur, and others saw the numbers and were like, this is bullshit. And we knew it immediately. Utterly preposterous. Again, we looked up the numbers last night. What is it? These videos are getting like 8,000 views on YouTube. At best, actually. Some of them are only getting like 1,200.

Now, to be fair, Tim's show actually was doing some 100K. But again, 100K is not a lot, actually, when it comes to the 100,000. Very different. If he's monetizing directly, there's premium subscriptions and all that. Sure, we could maybe get to...

that number annually. Yeah, but that's not what we're talking about. So even in the indictment, if you read the indictment, there's a part where I think it was Lauren Chen or her husband goes to, you know, Tim Pool and Dave Rubin and Benny Johnson. And it's like, OK, well, what do you need to get in order to make this worth your while? And they give their number and she goes back to the Russians and it's like, I don't think this is going to work. Like, there's no way that it's worth paying this much money. And they're like, nope, we'll do it. So even in the indictment, it's like they knew that this is not economically

And then it's also, you know, I don't know what Tim's specific interactions were with regard to this fake businessman and whatever. But he's also acting like, oh, we were just dealing with Lauren. We had no idea. Well, we know that there were Russians in the producer discord and we know that the source of the money was quite a bit of discussion. So.

I guess part of, you know, part of what this illustrates is, yeah, they think this kind of money floating around is no big deal because they're taking all kinds of like shady cash. There's a reason why Ben Shapiro defends him because of the amount of, you know, shady ads he does and the amount of dollars that he gets in. Like, they think that's fine and good and okay, whatever, but don't call yourself independent media. You know, call yourself like,

It's just another version of corporate media. When you're willing to take money from any shady source that shows up and says, hey, I'll pay you a ridiculous rate and you don't ask any questions, you just take the cash and do it. Okay, that's your prerogative. But don't go out and talk about the corruption of mainstream media. Don't pretend you're any frickin' different because ultimately you're not. If anything, your incentives are worse because when you're the one that's actually reading the ads...

Like, what a conflict of interest that is. So, yeah, we talked about the Russiagate angle. That's definitely true that the whole reason this is coming up now is because they're, like, trying to revive Russiagate or whatever. But also, this whole scheme...

With the, you know, these two individuals using pseudonyms, inventing a fake businessman, laundering money, deceiving talent, et cetera, deceiving the audiences too. Like that should be illegal. It should be prosecuted. And then on a, on a like moral level, I don't really care whether it was shady Russians or shady Ukrainians or shady random American businessman. All

All of it compromises your ethics and your principles. You want to hold yourself out as independent media and this like uncorruptible force. So to me, that's more...

Like, OK, I could believe you that, you know, you didn't know it was coming. OK, fine. But that this is the way you do business, that you'll just take this cash and you don't really care about what it is, what they want you to do, what the strings attached are. It's not independent media. I think it's a failure of due diligence more than anything.

thing, which is, again, I mean, I put this out on Twitter and my immediate reaction was I said ethics and independence actually matter more whenever ethics and integrity matter more. I mean, look, you know, their response is pharma cash goes to big business or to a

corporate media. And then thus they don't, you know, quote unquote, tell you the truth. I'm like, yeah, that's true. But if you're going to call that out, you have to hold yourself up to a higher standard. Higher standard. Right, to a higher standard. They hold themselves to a lower standard. Right. So now you're at, yeah, exactly. Like with the pharma people and all that, at least there's probably a negotiation between CNN's team and, you know, the journalists. Like in this case, when you're an owner operator, the way that you are, you and I are, the way that Ben Shapiro is, the way that Tim Pool is, the way that Dave Rubin is and all these others, you are directly, you know,

have both a financial stake and are actually negotiating the very parameters of everything that you are doing. Thus, setting standards like we do here, where we just say, no, we don't do any ad reads, keeps you from all companies. I mean, if you listen to the Ben Shapiro show, part of the reason that they make so much money is because they will read advertising both for their own in-house... I actually think it's better to read for your own in-house products

as opposed to like buying gold or some sketchy security system or like some fake technology or some fake like prepper guide. Like the amount of vetting. I mean, how many times have we seen this too? I even know people. They're like, I have this great product. You can know them, but then it will come out five years later. It's like, oh, the business was a bust. The quality control was bad. Putting your name and your imprimatur on something is very important. And

especially whenever somebody is genuinely trying to bring you the news. So I just think it's a big problem that in general, that this amount, that for the

for the due diligence based on this, it creates very perverse incentives. And it is clear that this did not happen in a vacuum. It happened in a bigger system. And that system itself is a problem. So let's get to the next part, which is highlights exactly what I'm saying, because it's not about Tim Pool. It is about the incentives of what all of this

looks like, and here we have a commercial break during the Tim Pool show with Ben Shapiro that you will find interesting. Let's take a listen. - It's frustrating to get entangled in whatever it is she's accused of being involved in. - Folks, our friends in Israel need our help now more than ever. If you're looking for a tangible way to support the Holy Land, you need to check out Artsabox,

- Artza brings the essence of Israel right to your doorstep. Every three months, you receive a carefully curated collection of authentic Israeli products, a treasure trove of handcrafted gifts, beautiful artwork, delicious foods, aromatic spices, and more. It's like taking a journey through the land of the Bible without even leaving your home. - Yeah. - He's in the middle. - I probably watched that a hundred times. - He's in the middle of giving his defense for like accidentally taking this money from Russians and they break for an Israel ad.

Yeah. I mean, that's the ecosystem. But your point is spot on, that your point is absolutely spot on. And the same reason it's gross that mainstream outlets take money from pharma or from banks or whatever, and there's a sense and probably a reality that impacts their coverage, and those are reasonable questions to ask and problems to raise,

If you're taking money from gold bugs or health supplement companies or whatever, and there's not even an illusion of an arm's length distance, you're out there shilling for it directly. That's not a conflict of interest? Like, of course it is. Of course it's reasonable for people to think that that's going to impact the way you talk about these things. So to me, this just illustrates, you know, a much deeper problem in quote-unquote independent media. And we really needed a word for it because—

If you are going about your business model this way and you're just replicating and actually amplifying all of the bad incentives and conflicts of interest and corruption of mainstream media, like you don't get to call yourself independent media and you certainly don't get to like a virtue signal and moralize about how superior you are and how much more noble and what a brave truth teller you are when you have sold out so

so hard for whoever, whatever random shady fake businessman happens to show up and say, here's 100 grand to do a single video that gets like 10,000 views. - Or any advertising, I mean, just like how is that gonna impact you? Just in the same way that CNN may feel uncomfortable criticizing an advertiser, I think that probably is, you know, is probably manifested 10 times more whenever you're directly reading ads

for said industry. Like, for example, if you're reading ads for gold, what do you think your incentive is when you're talking about the Federal Reserve? Maybe I'm wrong, okay? Maybe. But I'm just saying, having worked in larger companies and all that, I think we've talked quite a bit about leaving the Hill and part of the financial reasons why we did so. Ethically, it is very difficult to try and tell the truth in this business whenever you are getting major pressure from different areas where money is flowing in.

And that will impact your overall coverage, your mindset, whenever it comes into it. The only way to go above that is to have...

a direct premium subscription program the way that we do and to have programmatic advertising that you are not tied to. Thus, when you criticize somebody and they happen to programmatically buy ads or something, you have no interface in that transaction. - We're not even aware of what ads are running. - And if they pull out, go ahead. There's a 10 million mores that YouTube or Spotify, iHeartRadio or whatever will sell to somebody else and you have no input into that overall transaction. But yeah, it does mean you're gonna make a lot less money

And so then you need to decide what you are in this to do. That's the last thing I'll say on that. Yes, indeed.

Get ready for a full month of fiesta y cultura because it's time for Viva Tucson. Let's celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month como nunca antes in true Tucson style. From September 15th to October 15th, join us for comida, musica y eventos that you won't find anywhere else. Our rich history and traditions make the Old Pueblo the perfect place para celebrar y aprender.

Mark your calendars so you don't miss out on this celebración. Visita visittucson.org slash viva. Periods. No one really loves talking about that time of the month. But at Knicks, KNIX, well, it's a lot of fun.

It's always that time of the month because as the number one leak-proof brand in America, managing your period in comfort and style is all we do. We've created an amazing line of super comfy, super leak-proof period undies you need to see and feel to believe. These underwear look, feel, and machine wash just like regular underwear, but feature hidden protection technology that can absorb from one to 14 regular tampons worth of liquid. So you feel dry, comfy, and

and free all day long. Millions have already made the switch to NYX, and now you can too. Just go to NYX.com and get 15% off with promo code GET15.

That's KNIX.com, promo code GET15 for 15% off life-changing period underwear. Again, that's KNIX.com, promo code GET15. The 2024 presidential election is here. MSNBC has the in-depth coverage and analysis you need. Our reporters are on the ground. Steve Kornacki is at the big board breaking down the races. Rachel Maddow and our Decision 2024 team will provide insight as results come in.

And the next day, Morning Joe will give you perspective on what it all means for the future of our country. Watch coverage of the 2024 presidential election Tuesday, November 5th on MSNBC. Once again, we have some horrific news coming out of the Middle East. We can put this up on the screen. An American citizen now fatally shot, murdered by the IDF in the West Bank at a protest in

Reading from this AP article, Israeli soldiers killed an American woman demonstrating against settlements in the West Bank on Friday, according to a witness who said she was shot while posing no threat to Israeli forces. And during a moment of calm after clashes earlier in the afternoon, two Palestinian doctors said 26-year-old Asinur Ezgi Egyi of Seattle was shot in the head. The U.S. government confirmed her death, did not say whether the recent graduate of the University of Washington, who was also a Turkic

citizen had been shot by Israeli troops. So they have not, um, accepted the many eyewitness accounts of what actually unfolded. The white house said it was quote, deeply disturbed by the killing of a U S citizen and called on Israel to investigate what happened. Yeah, I'm sure we all should have a lot of confidence in what's going to come out of that investigation. Also worth keeping in mind as noted in this article that, um,

You know, Israel has now invaded the West Bank. They are effectively starting to turn the West Bank into Gaza and more than 690 Palestinians

have been killed. Let's put this next piece up on the screen. A little bit about this young woman. She went to protect Palestinian farmers from settler violence, according to a professor of hers. I know exactly what she would say right now if she were alive. She'd say, the only reason I'm in the headlines is because I have American citizenship, which I think is sadly true. We have become numb to Palestinian law. She goes on to describe her as an exceptional student and person, calling her one of the most brilliant students

that he has ever worked with. We can put this next piece up on the screen just about what went down here. We've got Haaretz reporting that according to three different eyewitnesses present at that protest, which is a recurring, ongoing protest, by the way, in the West Bank, town of Beita, against settlements in the area.

The Israeli troops shot her for no reason, and there were no clashes at the time. The Israeli government is trying to claim that she was throwing rocks, posing some sort of a risk to soldiers. Multiple eyewitnesses on the scene say that is absolutely false.

Quote,

Obviously, a horrific attack on an American citizen and also has shown a bright light on the disparate reaction of

between when Israel kills an American citizen, as happened in this instance, versus when Hamas kills an American citizen, as what happened horrifically with Hersh Goldberg Poland recently, who was an American-Israeli hostage. Let's take a listen to how Tony Blinken responded to a question about this. What's your message for Americans who are concerned that you are providing military aid to a country that is killing U.S. citizens?

And is there ever a point at which the killing of Americans in that region could lead to a change in U.S. policy of weapons provision? Michael, thank you. First, I just want to extend my deepest condolences, condolences of the United States government, to the family of Aishwarya Skiaga. We deplore this tragic loss. Now, the most important thing to do is to gather the facts, and that's exactly what we're in the process of doing.

and we are intensely focused on getting those facts. And any actions that we take are driven by the facts. So first things first, let's find out exactly what happened, and we will draw the necessary conclusions and consequences from that. As you've heard me say many times before, I have no higher priority than the safety and protection of American citizens around the world.

- Lol, yeah, literally lol. - Obviously depends very much on who those people are and who they are injured by or killed by. And you know, I mean, it's a common script at this point. Totally predictable, the language is completely passive. We extend condolences generally, we deplore this tragic loss, but there's no assignment of blame.

We don't really know. And then playing dumb, right? This is the thing you hear Matt Miller do at the podium every day. Well, we don't really know what happened to him, the little girl who was murdered. We don't really know what happened to those aid workers who were killed. We're going to gather the facts and we'll get back to you. We're asking Israel to do an investigation. And that's exactly what Tony Blinken does here. Let's gather the facts. Let's not rush to judgment when obviously you already have multiple eyewitness accounts. And who else will?

would it be that was firing on this group of protesters in the West Bank? - And to be clear, the people who were there, including another Western protester, said that the shooting took place 30 minutes after protesters had dispersed where there were no active clashes, foreign volunteers,

were observing 200 yards from the Israeli military. Quote, "There was no justification for taking that shot." The only statement right now from the NSC is that they are, quote, "Deeply disturbed by their death," and to ask Israel for more information and request an investigation into the incident. This is a citizen of the United States who was there protesting Jewish settlement.

allegedly aligned with the US foreign policy and the State Department, not only US foreign policy of this administration, the US foreign policy of every administration since what? At the very least, George W. Bush. So what does that tell us? It's very clear that there is a massive exception here when a US citizen is killed by the IDF. Would we accept this of any other peer nation? That's all I want to know. I only...

And I would have just as much outrage if France or the UK or any of these, I mean, in Turkey, there's massive outrage right now because a U.S. service member was like kidnapped on the streets and beaten up. Yes, there should be. Why is the same level of consternation not there? Well, we know why. Because there is always an Israel exception to U.S. foreign policy. And it's maddening. And Eisenhower was a Turkish and American citizen. And actually, the government of Turkey put on a far more forceful campaign.

statement and were far more outraged at the murder of one of their citizens. Put D4 up on the screen so we can see side by side the difference in reaction because you're so right. Immediately after Hersh Goldberg Poland is murdered, there was statements from every politician. Joe Biden puts out a statement. Kamala Harris puts out a statement. You know, everybody felt the need to react and they should because it's a horror.

All I'm asking is that all people be treated with the same level of care and attention. So State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller on this protester, Aisner, who was murdered by the IDF, he says, we are aware of the tragic death

just death, she wasn't killed, just death of an American citizen today in the West Bank. We offer our deepest condolences to her family and loved ones. We're urgently gathering more information about the circumstances of her death since she apparently just magically collapsed. And we'll have more to say as we learn more. We have no higher priority than the safety and security of American citizens. Bullshit. Then on the other side, you can see Biden reacting to the murder of Hersh. He says, I'm devastated and outraged.

Hearst was among the innocents brutally attacked while attending a music festival for peace in Israel on October 7th. Make no mistake, Hamas leaders will pay for these crimes and we will keep working around the clock for a deal to secure the release of the remaining hostages. You can see the outrage, you can see the visceral language, you can see the assignment of responsibility and a call for justice. All of that is present.

when it was Hirsch, a hostage who was murdered apparently by Hamas, versus in this situation when you have an American citizen murdered by the IDF. I mean, again, I'm sure no one listening to this is surprised, but it still is absolutely galling to see the way that different lives

are counted and treated completely differently, even when both of those lives are Americans. - Yeah, and that's personally what just bothers me the most about it is I just think, I felt like, well, just treat them like any other country in the world. That's it. I don't know why that's so much to ask. If any allied nation murdered a US citizen, then we would immediately ask and demand a real investigation, and there would be outcry here in America.

And, you know, Hersh Goldberg Poland, again, his murder is not just a tragedy. It is a crime. It is horrible. And that Americans rightfully resonate whenever he is murdered. But then on this, are they even told by anyone that this happened? Yeah. No. I mean, and that is why it is an outrage about that.

That double standard here. And, you know, by the way, in both cases, they're both—I even saw people were attacking her. They're like, well, she was a dual citizen. You want some news about Mr. Goldberg Poland? He was a fucking dual citizen, too. Yeah. That doesn't diminish his American citizenship. Or his humanity. Yeah, or his humanity. Yeah, that's exactly right. And there's also a deeper level here, which is—

The reason that Hersh is dead and the reason that Eisner is dead is because of a failure of Biden administration policy. Like, yes, the people who fired the bullets, of course they bear responsibility. Yes, Bibi Netanyahu. Yes, Yaya Zinwar. However, the only reason we are still in this place is because the American president has failed to change course, has failed to act, has failed to secure the end of this horror.

both of these individuals could be alive. And don't ask me. Ask the family of Hirsch. Yeah, right. Ask the hostage families. Ask the former hostages who were released, who were all out there protesting in the streets, saying this has to end. The only way we bring any of the remaining hostages home safe and sound is if we actually end this war. And right now, there's this...

reportedly, debate going on in the Biden administration over whether they're even going to continue to try their weak, pathetic, impotent attempts to gain a ceasefire deal. And it's just

Crazy making to me because I'm looking apparently Biden is like, no, we're still going to try. We're going to put forward another ceasefire proposal. We're going to keep negotiating. Other aides are like, Bibi doesn't want a deal, so it's not going to happen. They're correct about that. But both of them missed the bigger point. All you have to do is stop shipping the bombs.

All you have to do is actually force that, like, no, we're done negotiating. This is ending now, today. We're making it happen. And if you don't believe the United States of America has the ability to do that, look at Israeli military analysts who say Israel will be nowhere in this war without the massive, multiple, repeated shipments of weapons that we have provided to enable this slaughter to continue. So it's very, it's not hard to think.

figure out, just stop shipping the bombs. But that apparently is just too out there, too far off the table. They would rather risk, you know, the lives of American citizens. They would rather risk certainly the lives of every Palestinian in Gaza and now the West Bank as well. They would rather risk Kamala Harris getting elected

elected president of the United States and or Donald Trump getting back at the White House than actually following international law, following our own law and securing an end to this immediate horror. So just another utter tragedy. Same, you know, we just keep on going in the same direction. That's right. There's no change. Anyway, whatever. We got a congressman standing by, Ro Khanna. Talk about some of this in a little bit more. Let's get to it.

Get ready for a full month of fiesta y cultura because it's time for Viva Tucson. Let's celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month como nunca antes in true Tucson style. From September 15th to October 15th, join us for comida, musica y eventos that you won't find anywhere else. Our rich history and traditions make the Old Pueblo the perfect place para celebrar y aprender.

Mark your calendars so you don't miss out on this celebración. Visita visittucson.org slash viva. Periods. No one really loves talking about that time of the month. But at Knicks, KNIX, well, it's a lot.

It's always that time of the month because as the number one leak-proof brand in America, managing your period in comfort and style is all we do. We've created an amazing line of super comfy, super leak-proof period undies you need to see and feel to believe. These underwear look, feel, and machine wash just like regular underwear, but feature hidden protection technology that can absorb from one to 14 regular tampons worth of liquid. So you feel dry, comfy, and

and free all day long. Millions have already made the switch to NYX, and now you can too. Just go to NYX.com and get 15% off with promo code GET15.

That's KNIX.com, promo code GET15 for 15% off life-changing period underwear. Again, that's KNIX.com, promo code GET15. The 2024 presidential election is here. MSNBC has the in-depth coverage and analysis you need. Our reporters are on the ground. Steve Kornacki is at the big board breaking down the races. Rachel Maddow and our Decision 2024 team will provide insight as results come in.

and the next day Morning Joe will give you perspective on what it all means for the future of our country. Watch coverage of the 2024 presidential election Tuesday, November 5th on MSNBC.

All right, we're very fortunate to be joined in studio this morning by Congressman Ro Khanna of California. Great to see you, sir. Always great coming in. So we now have an issues page on the Kamala Harris for President website, and we took particular note of her language with regard to Israel, and Gazla is going to put this up on the screen so I can get your reaction to it.

She writes here, and this is the entirety of it, by the way, Vice President Harris will never hesitate to take whatever action is necessary to protect U.S. forces and interests from Iran and Iran-backed terrorist groups. Vice President Harris will always stand up for Israel's right to defend itself, and she will always ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself.

She and President Biden are working to end the war in Gaza such that Israel is secure, the hostages are released, the suffering in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can realize their right to dignity, security, freedom, and self-determination. She and President Biden are working around the clock to get a hostage deal and a ceasefire deal done. Your thoughts on her language here? Well, it's basically what she said at the convention, but the question is how? I mean, everyone wants...

the violence to end, the suffering to end, the hostages to be released. The reality is you not only have to pressure Hamas, obviously you have to pressure them to release hostages, you also have to hold Netanyahu accountable because they say, oh, we're making progress every two weeks, we're close to a ceasefire deal. Then Netanyahu the next morning goes on Fox & Friends and says, no, this is all a lie. There's no deal. We're not making progress. And until you have Netanyahu knowing that at some point

He's going to be held accountable just like Hamas is. You're not going to get any deal. And by the way, the Israeli people want that. So many of the hostage families want that. Gallant wants that. So let me let me ask you a little bit more about this. I don't know if you've seen these reports. I don't know if they're true or not, but there's apparently a debate going on in the White House right now between President Biden and some of his top advisers about whether they even continue trying to get a ceasefire deal. And

I just look at it, they keep doing the same thing over and over again of, come on guys, let's get a deal. But being completely unwilling to use the incredible leverage that the American government has, if we stop shipping the bombs, then Netanyahu is going to be not only under pressure, he's going to be forced to end the incredible horrific onslaught in Gaza. So, you know, why is this just considered so completely off the table? And also, why

One of the lines that I've heard to rationalize Kamala Harris's response here is, well, she can't really distance herself from President Biden. I don't know if I agree with that, because if anything right now, she needs a little arm length separation from him. Can't she stake out a different position here and indicate how she would have approached this in a different way that would have ended with a less disastrous result than what we've seen? Of course she can distance. I mean, Hubert Humphrey distanced himself.

from Lyndon Johnson with the Vietnam War. And Humphrey, had he done it earlier, probably would have won that election. He waited too long. The other thing is, if Harris were to distance in any way, it would actually drive administration policy because she has...

right now in my view, more power than Biden. I mean, she's the nominee. She has more say on the direction of the party. And so I think she would actually influence it. The reality is, look, there were 37 Democrats and we got so much criticism when we said, don't give a blank check to Netanyahu. We're not gonna vote for this offensive weapon aid.

And all the United States has to do as a starter is to enforce our own laws, to enforce the security assistance laws, to enforce Leahy. President Reagan did this in 1982 when there was the bombing in Lebanon. And he called bin Ockham Pagan and he said, enough.

And they listened. So this has historical precedent with Republican and Democratic presidents. And it has nothing to do with being pro-Israel or not. This is actually good for the security of Israel, as many people in Israel themselves are saying, and for the release of the hostages. Let me ask you then about that distancing from Palestinians.

Biden. We talked a lot here on the show, this New York Times poll, obviously causing a lot of consternation amongst Democrats. I would like your reaction to that and also how you would give her advice to perform on the debate stage tomorrow.

Well, I think we've got to be out there more. Go on podcasts. I mean, I'd love the vice president to come on this show or have Tim Walz here or have other surrogates. Go on all of the different media. Make your case. You know, the presidency is the most important job in the world and the hardest job to get. I don't think you get it playing prevent defense or being cautious. You've got to go out there.

and fight for it. And that I'm hopeful after the debate, the vice president will do that because she's very capable. I've known her for 20 years. She's very, very intelligent. And for some reason, she's surrounded herself with people who've said, don't be out there. I don't think that's the right advice. Do you think that's because she's inherited a lot of President Biden's staff? Like what do you, as you said, clearly, I would hope she's asking people who are, you know, have

different opinions, is she largely listening to the Biden staff? Is she soliciting newer voices, opinions, and others? What's your experience been like with that?

Well, giving her the benefit of the doubt, maybe they were trying to figure out where she pivots and where she keeps the policies. And maybe it took about a month to figure that out. And I understand it's not easy running a presidential campaign from ground zero. But she's now done that. She has a policy page. She's going to debate. So now's the time, I think, to make it clear. Here's where I stand. Here's where I would be different from President Biden on the economy, on politics.

immigration on foreign policy. Here's where I want to continue what he's doing. Uh, and it should be very clear to folks. I mean, she wants to be the change candidate and she is change in many ways in terms of her life story, in terms of who she is, but people also want to change in policy. And that's where she needs to be clear. Here are the changes that we're going to have on economic and foreign policy. So I understand you are, uh,

a bit opposed to the weird language, the weird attack on Trump and Vance. I personally have been a supporter of the weird attack because I feel like some of the previous attempts to define him, like the Biden style is very grandiose. It's very, you know, moralizing, threat to democracy, et cetera, et cetera. And it almost makes him bigger.

than he really is. Whereas the weird, like these guys are just kind of a bunch of weird freaks is very diminishing in a way that has clearly driven both him and J.D. Vance crazy. But tell me about your analysis of this, both from like a moral and a political perspective, why you don't think that that language and that framing is the right direction. Sure. Well, look, I like the framing that Vice President Harris said of he's unserious, he's frivolous, he's not taking a

the weight of what it means to be president seriously. When you call someone weird, the risk is that voters may hear that, not just that, oh, you're saying that about Donald Trump or J.D. Vance, that you're saying that about their supporters. And that's 45, 46, 47 percent of the country. Now, I don't think it's like deplorables, but there's a fine line. And what we need to do, in my view, is respect

the people who are voting for Donald Trump or JD Vance and say, we've got a better vision. We've, we've got a better vision on how to get new factories. We've got a better vision of how to help the working class with a living wage. We've got a better vision of how to lower prescription drug costs. We've got a better vision of how to strengthen America in a modern economy and in a modern world. And I, I, I guess I'm old fashioned that way. I, I still think you can persuade people, uh,

and, and win. And, and you can, uh, attack them for not being serious, but don't convey to voters that somehow they're not part of the American story. Yeah. Interesting. Uh, we were talking a little bit about men, uh, David Hogg. We were saying, uh,

put out an interesting tweet today about how young men specifically, but males, both Latino, black, largely are the margins that are driving both towards Trump or at the very least away from Kamala Harris. Number one, why do you think that is? And then what would your general advice be outside of just do podcasts or something in order to actually reach some of these people? Yeah.

Yeah. Well, there are a lot of reasons that I certainly don't have the definitive answer. As a start, I would have Bernie out there more. I mean, Bernie did very, very well with, uh, young men. I mean, unfairly, he was called the bro candidate, but he had a lot of young men who were supporting him. And I think that there's an anger at the system and a sense of wanting some bold ideas. Uh,

And if we can convey that we have a way of reforming the system, that people need more opportunities for wealth generation, I don't think we should be against Bitcoin or crypto. That's an issue for a lot of young people. I think we need to show we're a party for free speech, but we're a party that's listening to them and has a place for them. I do think going on these podcasts and trying to reach them is important.

Yeah, we would like her to do that as well. Yeah, yeah. Make sure you put in a word. You know, many Democrats believe that Donald Trump is not only a grave threat to the country, which I agree with, that he's one of the worst presidents in history. And yet, you know, you look at the New York Times poll and it's tied. Kamala Harris actually in that poll within the margin of error, losing by a point. Why in your assessment is it so, so close?

Because the American dream has slipped away for so many people. They've seen their health care costs rise, child care costs rise, college costs rise, vocational education rise, jobs no longer paying $35 an hour, massive deindustrialization. This has been going on for 50 years.

years. And to think that three and a half years of Biden was going to reverse that was impossible. No one could have reversed it. But people are still frustrated. They're angry and they see the role of big money in politics, of lobbyists, and they see an establishment that has let them down and an establishment that has gotten us in too many wars. So they want change. They've been voting for change since Barack Obama, and they haven't been getting the change they want. And I don't think people are thinking of it.

with more depth than that, other than this system isn't working for us. Our kids aren't going to have a great future. Let's try something else. Yeah, I think you're absolutely right on that. Anything else, Crystal? I think that's it, Congressman. We're always so grateful for your time. Thank you. Thank you for coming in. All right, guys, thank you so much for watching. Reminder, we will be live tomorrow for the debate, so there won't be any show in the morning. AMA during that debate stream from premium subscribers, breakingpoints.com if you want to sign up and join us.

Get ready for a full month of fiesta y cultura because it's time for Viva Tucson. Let's celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month como nunca antes in true Tucson style. From September 15th to October 15th, join us for comida, musica y eventos that you won't find anywhere else. Our rich history and traditions make the old pueblo the perfect place para celebrar y aprender.

Mark your calendars so you don't miss out on this celebración. Visita visittucson.org slash viva.

and hide a secret from everyone around her.

The next great CBS mystery, Matlock, continues with a new episode Thursday, 9, 8 central on CBS and streaming on Paramount+. Every day, our world gets a little more connected, but a little further apart. But then, there are moments that remind us to be more human.

Thank you for calling Amica Insurance. Hey, I was just in an accident. Don't worry, we'll get you taken care of. At Amica, we understand that looking out for each other isn't new or groundbreaking. It's human. Amica. Empathy is our best policy.