Trump Eyes Extended Takeover of DC Police

20:57Jason Johnson:Mayor Brandon Scott, thank you so much for what you're doing in the city of Baltimore. And thank you so much for standing up against this administration. Appreciate it. Thank you. Go Bears. Later, a new heat on RFK Jr. with a group of health experts calling for him to be removed. I'll talk to a whistleblower who in the vaccine expert next. But first, Trump meeting with Putin tomorrow, one-on-one, why some national security experts are sounding the alarm. More on that. We're back. The White House also said that the meeting with Putin will be a listening exercise for Trump.

21:33And we all know listening and exercise are Trump's two favorite things. So this should go well.

21:43Jason Johnson:A former Trump ambassador sounding the alarm about Trump's upcoming talks with Vladimir Putin. Friday's meeting about the Russia-Ukraine war is scheduled for a military base in Alaska. Reportedly, Trump and Putin are meeting one-on-one with just their translators present. Financial Times reporting today on experts who say Trump's purges have ousted top Russian analysts. Ex-Trump Ambassador Eric Rubin saying, quote, it's safe to say that Trump does not have a single policymaking person who knows Russia in Ukraine advising him. The last time Trump met one-on-one with Putin, he took his interpreter's notes and told him not to discuss the meeting with anyone, as he concealed details even from, quote, officials within his own administration.

22:30Jason Johnson:A year later in Helsinki, Trump infimously threw U.S. intelligence under the bus, siding with Putin over Russian election interference. Who do you believe? I have President Putin. He just said it's not Russia. I will say this. I don't see any reason why it would be. Today, Trump saying Putin will face, quote, severe consequences if he doesn't agree to stop the war after Friday's meeting. But declining to say what those consequences actually are. The New York Times Peter Baker asking, quote, is Trump ready to put serious pressure on his Russian counterpart? Will Mr. Putin again win over the president to his way of thinking or is their friendship really on the rocks?

23:16Jason Johnson:Joining me now is Katty Kay, U.S. special correspondent for BBC News and an MSNBC contributor. Thank you so much, Katty, for joining us this evening. So I'll start with this. I'm famous for saying I say this all the time. I don't care about court intrigue. I don't care about personal relationships. I never thought that Trump and Putin were friends. But it does seem very clear that Putin has directly lied to President Trump multiple times in one on one meetings. So going into this next one on one meeting, do you think there will be more hostility and less trust because what's happened in the past?

23:51Look, I think President Trump goes into this having expressed more frustration with Vladimir Putin than we've seen in previous encounters, right, Jason? So he has set the tone for possibly saying, OK, we're going to have certain conditions coming out of this. The question is whether, as Peter Baker says, what are the consequences if Russia doesn't stick to those conditions? And then I think importantly, are those conditions measurable? I mean, does he go into the meeting and say, OK, look, we actually do need to see that you are not attacking energy infrastructure or we do need to see that you are not attacking civilian infrastructure and then measure Vladimir Putin against those results.

24:30That would probably be quite a positive outcome from this conference. It's interesting that a lot of people around the world, particularly in Europe, were alarmed enough about the prospect of Donald Trump walking in one-on-one with Vladimir Putin without the kind of usual process of having had the National Security Council or the State Department negotiate the grounds and the terms beforehand that they summoned this emergency meeting. I mean, they were alarmed, right? Clearly, that kind of emergency meeting doesn't normally happen. So I think people are feeling a little reassured this evening that at least he listened to the European perspective.

25:06He listened to the Ukrainian perspective. But then the question is, what does Vladimir Putin do to try to woo back Donald Trump? What does he offer him to try and woo him back into that kind of friendship that Peter's talking about?

25:21Jason Johnson:Now, this is a key thing here. President Trump, after his first term, when he was out of power, he basically hollowed the Republican Party out of any actual experts when it comes to Russia, when it comes to this. He didn't want anyone around who would tell him no. The only person in his administration that might understand anything about this is Marco Rubio, who he sidelined. Melania might actually know more about Russia and Eastern Bloc companies than anybody who was actually in his administration. Is it possible, despite listening to the Europeans, Trump doesn't even know what ground rules to set?

25:53Jason Johnson:because it's not like he necessarily knows what's at stake. Is he even capable of setting standards with Putin when he's so uninformed? Look, I don't think anyone would say that Donald Trump was fascinated by details of foreign policy or domestic policy necessarily, right? He wants the win. He wants the deal. He wants the meeting. And I think it's been really interesting to watch the White House over the last couple of days lower expectations for this. I mean, Donald Trump went into this suggesting almost that he had the deal and the Nobel Prize was going to come the next day. That's changed significantly.

26:26We've heard it from Caroline Levin. We've heard her saying this is in listening mode. I think there has been a realization that he's going into this meeting and may not come out with the big deal that he had been hoping to get out of it. And then I think the question is, what is the point of the meeting? Does the meeting help the situation in Ukraine or does the meeting actually hurt the situation in Ukraine? Does Vladimir Putin manage to say to Donald Trump, look, there's all these business opportunities for the United States, for the Trump family in Russia? Does he kind of bring him back to the table that way?

26:55Does he kind of bamboozle him with flattery? And does Trump get back to his natural state, which seems to be an admiration for Vladimir Putin coming out of this meeting? And that's what the concern is about not having those experts around. The reason you want the experts around is because you want people around who understand the detail, who understand the complications, who understand the what-ifs, rather than thinking this can be just done by two men and the feeling that they have in the course of that meeting, because we know that Vladimir Putin is a master at somehow making Donald Trump feel that they are friends or people who should just do business together.

27:30And that's clearly not the situation here.

27:33Jason Johnson:And quickly here, the fact that this meeting is taking place with President Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin and Zelensky is not involved, do you think that makes it more or less likely that any deal actually occurs? Because you're basically setting this up to look like the U.S. versus Russia. and the Ukraine on the side, even though the Ukraine war is the reason the meeting's happening. Well, the interesting thing that came out of that meeting with the Europeans is they do seem to agree to a set of five principles, which include Ukraine having a say in any territorial discussions and in any ceasefire negotiations that might lead to a territorial discussion.

28:07So I don't see a meeting coming up between Vladimir Putin and Zelensky. Putin seems to have huge disdain for Zelensky. But I do think the Europeans at least feel they've got Ukraine at the table, which is as much probably as they can expect at the moment.

28:24Jason Johnson:Katty K, thank you so much for going to us tonight. Thanks. Next, heat on RFK Jr. with new calls for him to be fired. A whistleblower is here on the beat. We get back from this break. Most ice cream is good, but not Jenny's. Jenny's ice cream is more like an obsession. What you get from over two decades of tasting and tweaking and throwing it out and starting over, chasing flavors until they feel alive. That might sound crazy, and that's because it is. Jenny's. Often imitated, never duplicated, always splendid. everyone's talking about protein lately but how do you actually get enough of it muscle milk muscle milk has a great tasting new formula with no artificial sweeteners flavors or added colors it's high quality complete protein designed to support healthy muscles with fewer ingredients than the previous formula and 26 to 42 grams of protein for when you're stuck in meetings or need a post-workout recovery available in chocolate vanilla cream cookies and cream and strawberries and cream try the new great tasting muscle milk today available in stores nationwide muscle milk protein for all.

29:34There's a lot of news to cover. Money. The economic fallout from the war. Is it temporary? Power. Is this White House for sale?

29:41Jason Johnson:Politics. What is your message to the country right now? Money Power Politics with Stephanie Ruhle. Weekdays at 9 a.m. Eastern on MSNOW.

29:53Jason Johnson:Tonight, new demands from a medical watchdog group for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to be fired as head of Health and Human Services. The group Defend Public Health comprise of more than 3 ,000 health professionals, calling RFK's removal, quote, the single most important step towards improving the health of Americans. And warning that his actions undermining trust in science and vaccines are, quote, horrifying. Also today, Trump insiders are delaying the release of RFK's new report on the state of America's health. to ensure it's not riddled with broken links, misrepresented data, and studies that don't exist, like his last report.

30:33Jason Johnson:All this adds to the heat. RFK Jr. facing backlash after ousting a panel of vaccine experts and leaving the charge to cut half a billion from vaccine research. And then there is disconcerting public statements. Here's what he just said this week about trusting experts. Trusting the experts is not a feature of either science or democracy. It's a feature of totalitarianism and of religion. With science, there's always questions, and we're always encouraged to ask them. Science is always evolving.

31:13Jason Johnson:Trusting pilots isn't a feature of democracy. Ridiculous. Joining me now is Dr. Rick Bright, an immunologist and vaccine researcher who made ways for his clash with Trump in his first term. Bright had served as director of the vaccine development wing of HHS called BARDA, filing a whistleblower complaint and resigning in 2020 over the administration's COVID-19 response. Dr. Bright, thank you so much for joining us on The Beat this evening. I'll start with this. Just top line it for us. What is the impact of Kennedy cutting vaccine funding by$500 million? What does that do to the United States?

31:53Well, thanks, Jason, for having me on. But in one word, it makes us extremely vulnerable. I mean, this decision really baffles me. Operation Warp Speed was launched under President Trump. It was a pivotal turning point in the pandemic, and it backed multiple vaccine approaches. However, mRNA proved to be the fastest to develop while still meeting rigorous safety and effectiveness standards. I mean, the vaccines saved millions of lives. They helped reopen schools in our economy sooner than any other approach. Abandoning this promising technology will hamper us in responding to a next outbreak of an infectious disease, and it could be a bioterrorist attack, and it could also hamper our developments for cancer treatments.

32:37So it's really short-sighted, and it makes us extremely vulnerable for natural disease, but also for bioterrorism.

32:46Jason Johnson:So, Dr. Brewer, I think that's that's key here as a safety issue and a bioterrorism issue. Talk about the role that HHS is supposed to play in national security. Isn't it important that we have leaders there who believe in science, not just for biological attacks, but for outbreaks and foodborne illnesses and things like that? Isn't it important that we have someone who believes in science to keep us safe? Well, absolutely. We have to have leaders who believe in science and leaders who trust the scientists and trust the data that they're seeing. We cannot have leaders who package information in haphazard ways to create confusion and create misinformation.

33:31And we have to have these experts because without these experts with a lot of experience, then it does erode trust. And so what we're seeing with Secretary Kennedy is a rejection of experienced experts repeatedly in reports on the CDC panels and the FDA and others. And instead, it's being replaced with this mismatch of random data sets that are often irrelevant and often misrepresented to try to make a narrative that erodes the trust. When we don't trust the science, then we don't do what's important for us to do to protect our families and our communities. And he has done more to erode trust in science than any other secretary in our lifetime.

34:21Dr.

34:21Jason Johnson:Bright, what occurs to me is the Trump administration has never been particularly open to listening to anybody, especially when it comes to experts. There were plenty of people who had concerns about even putting RFK Jr. in this position. But I'm wondering, is there a possibility that some of his behavior could be curtailed or he could be removed if you get enough complaints from, say, the pharmaceutical industry or medical companies? Because these sorts of cuts and research and money, they also harm businesses. The business of health care in this country is being damaged by this person. Is there much of an outcry from from those industries to the administration that this guy is crazy and we need to do something different?

34:58Well, frankly, Jason, I think most industries, most companies, and most Americans are a bit confused on how to approach this administration. I mean, it seems like one day you might be on the winning side, and the next day you're on the losing side. And most of the times you're not sure which side you're on because the decisions are changing constantly. They're not backed with any science, and the players are also changing constantly. So we're not quite sure who's making decisions, who's drawing up these reports, and who's interpreting the data set. So it's really confusing. Money does talk, and honestly, in Washington, D.C., and there's a lot of lobbyists, and they do drive a lot of decisions, unfortunately, many times.

35:40But in this case, I'm not sure anyone knows where to play or how to play. And so what we go back to is trusting the science, trusting the experts, trusting the process of transparency, openness, debate, and then consensus on what the best pathway forward is. And remember, the goal is to protect Americans, to keep us safe, to keep us healthy, and to keep our country safe. And in the leadership role, whenever something bad comes our way, we need to be ready to respond and respond quickly.

36:18Jason Johnson:Dr. Rick Wright, thank you so much for joining us this evening on The Beat. Thank you, Jason. Coming up, warnings about military dangers ahead of Russia in the United States meeting. Our next guest wrote the book on nuclear war. More on that, we're back on the beat.

36:40Jason Johnson:As Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin gear up for the highly anticipated summit in Alaska on Friday, saber rattling over nuclear war is looming in the background. As Trump spars with former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev. Earlier this month, Trump positioning two U.S. nuclear submarines in response to, quote, highly provocative statements from the former president about Russia's nuclear capabilities. Trump announcing it on social media, saying, quote, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that. Medvedev in a post on X warning, quote, each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war.

37:19Jason Johnson:Two of the world's largest powers playing with innocent lives through social media jabs. You don't have to go back that far to remember the potential devastation. This month marks the 80th anniversary of the atomic bombing in Nagasaki, Japan, with thousands gathering last week to remember the day that left tens of thousands of innocent people dead. Nagasaki's mayor warning, quote, If we continue on this trajectory, we will end up thrusting ourselves into a nuclear war. Joining me now is Annie Jacobson, investigative journalist, New York Times bestselling author, and Pulitzer Prize finalist. Most recent book is Nuclear War, A Scenario.

37:58Jason Johnson:Annie, thank you so much for joining me this evening. I just want to start with this. I found this book to be horrifying. This is legit. These are the notes. This is a horrifying book. Just lay out for us, how close are we? Those of us who are in Generation X, even older, we've been living with nuclear war so long, we forget how close we're on the line. How close are we right now, given the leadership in this world? You know, we're always one button push away from nuclear annihilation. I think I make that really clear in the book. So you can't really measure how close we are in terms of rhetoric.

38:33But I think what I try to do is demonstrate that if that line is crossed, it's end game in 72 minutes.

38:41Jason Johnson:One of the most disturbing things in this book that I was reading is just how quickly all of this occurs. I just want to play this out and read this section here. As in Washington, D.C., millions of people have been incinerated on the go, melted into streets and surfaces, sucked into hurricanes of fire. People have been impaled by flying shards and crushed under buildings everywhere. Human beings are screaming and burning and hemorrhaging to death. There is no scenario where large swaths of people survive nuclear war, is there? It's just massive death on a massive scale throughout the planet. It is mass death.

39:20And thank you for reading that part of the book. You know, all of everything that I refer to is unfortunately not from Annie Jacobson's imagination. It's documented by the Defense Department, by what used to be called the Atomic Energy Commission. They're examining of what happens to people, places, and things after a nuclear bomb goes off. That's what the atmospheric tests were all about. And so, yes, it only ends one way. And that is in total nuclear annihilation. Every war game at the Pentagon, by the way, nuclear war game shows that it's why it's so dangerous when you have people like former Russian President Medeva talking about nuclear threats.

39:59Jason Johnson:And the speed at which the decisions have to be made is staggering and frightening. Once these missiles are launched, whether they were launched from North Korea or launched from Russia, it's only about seven minutes before they could hit the continental United States. And we would have to depend on primarily Donald Trump to make the decision as to whether we'd respond. You would depend upon whoever is president of the United States. And the same goes for Russia. I wanted to show how bad the problem is so that people who are in a position of effecting change can make those changes to come up with a solution.

40:32And I think you see the problem. It's not just horrific. It's literally, you know, civilization ending problem, which is why I think knowing about how bad a nuclear war would be is really critical to understanding how important it is that people stop making threats, stop talking about using tactical nuclear weapons. this is absurd.

40:56Jason Johnson:For most of us, the only thing that brought nuclear weapons back to mind was either Oppenheimer last summer or earlier this year watching Paradise on Hulu. And you see this this world ending scenario where a couple people managed to survive in a bunker, et cetera, et cetera. But what strikes me about that is Paradise seems to give us the impression that there would be large chunks of people who would survive. But from what I'm reading in your book, World temperatures would drop by 40 degrees. Crops would be destroyed. Lakes and oceans would either burn or freeze. There's not really a scenario of large groups of people surviving a nuclear attack, is there?

41:31Well, that's right. And in Paradise, they do a different scenario. They have a different, I don't want to give it away, but they have a different impetus. And the result is sort of small attacks with nuclear weapons. And so it is a different endgame. But what I show is specifically how the Pentagon would deal with being attacked with nuclear weapons. And that's where everything becomes so all or nothing.

41:57Jason Johnson:Yeah. One of the more interesting notes I saw in here is it said even our defense mechanisms against nuclear weapons are essentially shooting a bullet at a bullet. The speed at which this would occur makes it very difficult. if you had an opportunity to sit and talk to Donald Trump or even Vladimir Putin before their meeting on Friday, what is the one takeaway you'd want them to have? What's the one thing you would want them to realize or think about based on what you learned in all these interviews and what you put together in this book? That, you know, nuclear war, nuclear weapons are insane.

42:25And the result of them is not something that you can ever come back from. I have hope toward this summit, believe it or not. I may be different than others. Please, sit with us. Well, after you write a book like I did and you spend all that time interviewing defense officials who advise the president and you know the stakes and you are aware of what happens, I think, as I demonstrate in the book, you have to be hopeful about this because the stakes are just simply too high. This is the first time that two world leaders who control 90 percent of the nuclear weapons on the planet, there are 12 ,000 weapons, nuclear weapons between nine nuclear armed nations.

43:04The U.S. and Russia control about 90 percent of them. Two men in one room. I have a hopeful feeling that they're going to talk about denuclearization as the current president likes to call it.

43:18Jason Johnson:Annie Jacobson, thank you so much for joining us this evening. This is a fantastic book. I tell everyone to check it out. I'll be right back with one more thing on the beat.

43:30Jason Johnson:It is truly the end of an era, a phenomenon that started in the 1990s and shaped the early days of the internet. It's coming to an end. America Online announcing it is ending its dial-up internet service on September 30th. You might be surprised to learn that over 160 ,000 households still use the service. But at its height, the iconic you got mail alert was a staple in millions of American homes.

44:16Jason Johnson:it easier for people to live, work, and play. There has never been a better time to get online.

44:27Jason Johnson:Those familiar sounds are now a relic of the past. You better eat your Wheaties today because there's a lot of news to cover. Money. Time for the business. All eyes on the new Fed chair. The economic fallout from the war is a temporary power. The president is now a major crypto industry operator. Is this White House for sale? Politics. Is there an energy to respond to this aggressive gerrymandering? It has never been more important to be informed and engaged. Money Power Politics with Stephanie Ruhle. Weekdays at 9 a.m. Eastern on MSNOW.